Effectiveness of small- and large-scale Nature-Based Solutions for flood mitigation: The case of Ayutthaya, Thailand.

There is growing evidence that traditional response to floods and flood-related disaster is no longer achieving desirable results. Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) represent a relatively new response towards disaster risk reduction, water security, and resilience to climate change, which has a potential to be more effective and sustainable than traditional measures. However, in practice, these measures are still being applied at a slow rate while traditional grey infrastructure remains as a preferred choice. This can be attributed to several barriers which range from political and governance to social and technological/technical. More generally, there is a lack of sufficient knowledge base to accelerate their wider acceptance and uptake. The present work provides contribution in this direction and addresses the question of effectiveness of different types of NBS (i.e., small- and large-scale NBS) and their hybrid combinations with grey infrastructure. The work has been applied on the case of Ayutthaya, Thailand. The results suggest that the effectiveness of small-scale NBS is limited to smaller rainfall events whereas the larger (or extreme) events necessitate combinations of different kinds of measures with different scales of implementation (i.e., hybrid measures).

Incorporating stakeholders' preferences into a multi-criteria framework for planning large-scale Nature-Based Solutions.

Hydro-meteorological risks are a growing issue for societies, economies and environments around the world. An effective, sustainable response to such risks and their future uncertainty requires a paradigm shift in our research and practical efforts. In this respect, Nature-Based Solutions (NBSs) offer the potential to achieve a more effective and flexible response to hydro-meteorological risks while also enhancing human well-being and biodiversity. The present paper describes a new methodology that incorporates stakeholders' preferences into a multi-criteria analysis framework, as part of a tool for selecting risk mitigation measures. The methodology has been applied to Tamnava river basin in Serbia and Nangang river basin in Taiwan within the EC-funded RECONECT project. The results highlight the importance of involving stakeholders in the early stages of projects in order to achieve successful implementation of NBSs. The methodology can assist decision-makers in formulating desirable benefits and co-benefits and can enable a systematic and transparent NBSs planning process.

Exploring trade-offs among the multiple benefits of green-blue-grey infrastructure for urban flood mitigation.

Climate change is presenting one of the main challenges to our planet. In parallel, all regions of the world are projected to urbanise further. Consequently, sustainable development challenges will be increasingly concentrated in cities. A resulting impact is the increment of expected urban flood risk in many areas around the globe. Adaptation to climate change is an opportunity to improve urban conditions through the implementation of green-blue infrastructures, which provide multiple benefits besides flood mitigation. However, this is not an easy task since urban drainage systems are complex structures. This work focuses on a method to analyse the trade-offs when different benefits are pursued in stormwater infrastructure planning. A hydrodynamic model was coupled with an evolutionary optimisation algorithm to evaluate different green-blue-grey measures combinations. This evaluation includes flood mitigation as well as the enhancement of co-benefits. We confirmed optimisation as a helpful decision-making tool to visualise trade-offs among flood management strategies. Our results show that considering co-benefits enhancement as an objective boosts the selection of green-blue infrastructure. However, flood mitigation effectiveness can be diminished when extra benefits are pursued. Finally, we proved that combining green-blue-grey measures is particularly important in urban spaces when several benefits are considered simultaneously.

Assessing the Co-Benefits of green-blue-grey infrastructure for sustainable urban flood risk management.

Green-blue infrastructures in urban spaces offer several co-benefits besides flood risk reduction, such as water savings, energy savings due to less cooling usage, air quality improvement and carbon sequestration. Traditionally, these co-benefits were not included in decision making processes for flood risk management. In this work we present a method to include the monetary analysis of these co-benefits into a cost-benefits analysis of flood risk mitigation measures. This approach was applied to a case study, comparing costs and benefits with and without co-benefits. Different intervention strategies were considered, using green, blue and grey measures and combinations of them. The results obtained illustrate the importance of assessing co-benefits when identifying best adaptation strategies to improve urban flood risk management. Otherwise green infrastructure is likely to appear less efficient than more conventional grey infrastructure. Moreover, a mix of green, blue and grey infrastructures is likely to result in the best adaptation strategy as these three alternatives tend to complement each other. Grey infrastructure has good performance at reducing the risk of flooding, whilst green infrastructure brings in multiple additional benefits that grey infrastructure cannot offer.