Contributions of green infrastructure to enhancing urban resilience

After briefly reviewing key resilience engineering perspectives and summarising some green infrastructure (GI) tools, we present the contributions that GI can make to enhancing urban resilience and maintaining critical system functionality across complex integrated social–ecological and technical systems. We then examine five key challenges for the effective implementation of GI that include (1) standards; (2) regulation; (3) socio-economic factors; (4) financeability; and (5) innovation. We highlight ways in which these challenges are being dealt with around the world, particularly through the use of approaches that are both context appropriate and socially inclusive. Although progress surmounting these challenges has been made, more needs to be done to ensure that GI approaches are inclusive and appropriate and feature equally alongside more traditional ‘grey’ infrastructure in the future of urban resilience planning. This research was undertaken for the Resilience Shift initiative to shift the approach to resilience in practice for critical infrastructure sectors. The programme aims to help practitioners involved in critical infrastructure to make decisions differently, contributing to a safer and better world.     

A value-based approach to infrastructure resilience

This paper includes the findings of MMI Thornton Tomasetti’s investigation into the measurement of resilience within infrastructure using systems thinking and focussed on value delivery. This paper provides a review of current practise across critical infrastructure sectors, based on a series of interviews undertaken with stakeholders from various UK infrastructure organisations. Gaps and opportunities were identified and an outline for a value-based approach to diagnosing, measuring and building resilience suggested. The performance of critical infrastructure sectors was also comparatively assessed using the suggested approach value metrics.     

Engineering meets institutions: an interdisciplinary approach to the management of resilience

Resilience management stretches across the decoupled domains of community, corporate, and public governance. As a result, fostering resilience needs a governance structure that supports collective actions and integrates fragmented fields with different institutional frameworks. In this study, we carry out a review of three different perspectives on resilience -engineering, social, and organizational- in order to explore resilience management in the context of governance of infrastructure systems. We discuss the common practices to address resilience of engineering systems, the need and current trend for integration of institutions into these practices through formal (e.g., policies and regulations) as well as informal mechanisms (e.g., trust, norms, and shared cognitive structures). To illustrate our theorizing, we provide three illustrative case studies. The cases highlight the barriers and enablers across the three perspectives and highlight the inter-organizational context of management of resilience. We uncovered organizational dynamics such as the necessity of establishing critical functionality through organizational capacity for stakeholder engagement, the need for diverse organizations to address institutional complexity in management of resilience, and the importance of decoupling in aligning the outcomes of resilience management practices with policies. We suggest an agenda for future research on managing practices associated with management of resilience.     

Risk management is not enough: a conceptual model for resilience and adaptation-based vulnerability assessments

The US government has focused considerable attention on enhancing our society’s ability to protect critical systems and services from disruptive events. Over the past decade, federal agencies have bolstered their efforts to identify and minimize threats using traditional risk-based approaches such as continuity of operations and disaster risk reduction processes. However, these valuable risk identification and management tools are limited because they rely upon foreseeable factor analyses of steady-state systems with predictable hazard frequencies and severities. In assessing the capability of complex adaptive systems to cope with disruptions, an overemphasis upon engineering resilience through risk management and planning for what is predictable may cloud or detract from our efforts to better understand a system’s emergent capabilities to withstand disruptions that are unforeseeable. This article contends that augmenting traditional risk approaches through the incorporation of methodologies grounded in socio-ecological system (SES) resilience principles offers a potential avenue for improving our agencies’ abilities to assess and manage both known and unknown risks. We offer a notional rationale for broadening our examination of system vulnerabilities and present a conceptual model that combines engineering and SES resilience paradigms to facilitate the identification, assessment, and management of system vulnerabilities. The Military Installation Resilience Assessment model described herein applies risk and resilience principles to evaluate whole systems, focusing on interconnections and their functionality in facilitating response and adaptation.     

A capabilities approach to the prioritization of critical infrastructure

As a consequence of the U.S. effort to increase infrastructure security and resilience, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and other U.S. federal agencies have identified 16 critical infrastructure sectors that are considered vital to the nation’s well-being in terms of economic security, public health, and safety. However, there remains no articulated set of values that justify this particular list of infrastructure systems or how decision-makers might prioritize investments towards one critical sector over another during a crisis. To offer a more integrated and holistic approach to critical infrastructure resilience, this research employs the capabilities approach to human development, which offers an alternative view of critical infrastructure that focuses on the services that infrastructure provides rather than its physical condition or vulnerability to threats. This service-based perspective of infrastructure emphasizes the role of infrastructure in enabling and supporting central human capabilities that build adaptive capacity and improve human well-being. We argue that the most critical infrastructure systems are those that are essential for providing and/or supporting central human capabilities. This paper examines the DHS designation of criticality from a capabilities perspective and argues for a capabilities basis for making distinctions between those systems that should be considered most critical and those that might be temporarily sacrificed. A key implication of this work is that an across sector approach is required to reorganize existing critical infrastructure efforts around the most valuable infrastructure end-services.     

Flood resilience: consolidating knowledge between and within critical infrastructure sectors

Flood resilience has been rising up the political, economic and social agendas. Taking an integrated systems approach, using the right design guidance and tools and ensuring that education is in place for all stakeholders are three themes which are intrinsically linked to delivering flood resilience. This paper reviews these themes across the academic research, policy landscape and practitioner approaches, drawing conclusions on the way forward to increase our societies resilience to floods. The term ‘flood resilience’ is being increasingly used, however, it remains to be clearly defined and implemented. The UK, USA and Australia are leading the way in considering what flood resilience really means, but our review has found few examples of action underpinned by an understanding of systems and complexity. This review investigates how performance objectives & indicators are currently interpreted in guidance documents. It provides an in-depth exploration of the methods, that although developed through European and US expertise, can be used for worldwide application. Our analysis highlights that resilience is often embedded in engineering education and frequently linked to risk. This may however, mask the importance of resilience and where it differs from risk. With £2.6 billion to be spent in the UK over the next 6 years on strengthening the country’s flood and coastal defences, this is the opportunity to rethink resilience from a systems approach, and embed that learning into education and professional development of engineers. Our conclusions indicate how consolidating flood resilience knowledge between and within critical infrastructure sectors is the way forward to deliver flood resilience engineering.     

Risk and resilience lessons from Venice

In the history of disasters in Venice, there are implications for modern times in terms of complex systems management and emerging threats, in particular from examples of risk management and resilience achieved by the Venetian state during outbreaks of the plague. In fourteenth century Venice, risk assessment the way we practice it today would fail to provide meaningful recommendations to reduce the casualty rate of the plague epidemic because the cause and transmission of the disease was not understood. Instead, a set of systemic actions across the social, economic, and transportation networks of the city taken by officials and doctors eventually slowed and arguably stopped the spread of the disease. These latter actions are an early example of what is now considered resilience management. Resilience management improves a complex system’s ability to prepare, absorb, recover, and adapt to unexpected threats and does so by address the capabilities at a system, rather than component, level. Resilience management can be a guide to addressing current issues of population growth and rising sea level in modern day Venice and across the globe. This paper calls for integration of resilience assessment in comprehensive risk and resilience management framework.     

Converging disciplinary understandings of social aspects of resilience

Resilience thinking has developed separately in the bodies of literature on social-ecological systems, and that published principally within developmental psychology and mental health on the resilience of individuals. This paper explores what these bodies of literature might learn from the other towards a more integrated and enriched understanding of both social-ecological systems and social resilience. The psychology-based literature recognises a strong set of factors that enhance the strengths of individuals and communities, but lacks a sophisticated integration of the physical environmental context. The social-ecological systems literature offers an excellent foundation in complex adaptive systems, but tends to superimpose ecological concepts of system function onto the human domain, and needs to include an array of core social science concepts that are important to a full understanding of social-ecological systems. An example on north eastern Australia suggests how a converged understanding of social resilience could assist managers to acknowledge, enhance and foster social resilience in linked social-ecological systems.     

Between resistance and resilience: a study of flood risk management in the Don catchment area (UK)

The river Don catchment area in Sheffield and Rotherham offers a good place for a case study of flood risk management, given the impact of a flooding event in 2007 and the way in which local events have become entwined with national and international policy shifts. To interpret local policy, a combination of systems-based and socio-cultural theory is used. Both the theories and the case study serve to disentangle the multiple meanings of resilience. Understood in opposition to flood resistance, resilience has only limited applicability in an area such as the case study where engineering works protect employment and infrastructure. Resilience as a policy discourse also lacks political transparency and a recognition of socio-cultural influences. Underlying the shift towards resilient styles of management is an appreciation of the importance of capacity, to learn and to act. The case study identifies blockages to the realisation of that capacity.     

Developing an integrative urban resilience capacity index for plan making

Urban resilience assessment can help planners understand the status of resilience in an urban system and identify needs for improving resilience capacities. The issues related to urban resilience are complex because of multiple urban system components, threats from different sources, and uncertainty of the future. Urban resilience theories have progressed to consider an urban system as an integrated complex system; however, urban resilience assessments are inconsistent and underdeveloped in assessing an integrated urban system for different threats at various uncertainties. In an effort to address this deficiency, we propose to develop an Integrative Urban Resilience Capacity Index (IURCI) for assessing urban resilience capacity for all threats. To improve the quality of urban resilience assessment, the IURCI considers urban physical form, spatial structure, preparation for future, and performance after plan implementation to measure resilience capacities of absorption, mitigation, and adaptation. It is built in a Scenario-Based Planning Support System (SB-PSS). The SB-PSS is a framework and an open system that integrates IURCI with scenario generation, modeling, and assessment to inform the public, planners, and other stakeholders about the consequences of different planning policies and to assist them make decisions for implementing a preferred scenario.     

A tool for building community resilience? A case study of the Lewes Pound

In the last decade, “resilience” has gained increasing recognition as a theoretical framework for understanding and managing change in complex social–ecological systems. Resilience assessments are increasingly used to inform sustainability initiatives, strategies, and policies. The Lewes Pound represents a new complementary currency model in the UK, aiming to build community resilience. However, there have been no empirical studies to date assessing the socio-economic impacts of this model. This article addresses the need to understand how such currencies function by measuring whether the Lewes Pound is capable of building resilience. This is done by developing a novel framework for estimating economic, social, and environmental outcomes, which uses a mixed-methods approach. Findings suggest that complementary currencies can enhance social-ecological resilience through awareness-raising and changes in consumption. Although economic localisation – a key indicator – is lacking, there is evidence that the Lewes Pound has developed social interactions and changed consumption patterns of its users.     

Design for resilience in infrastructure distribution networks

The recognition that resilience is a critical aspect of infrastructure security has caused the national and homeland security communities to ask “How does one ensure infrastructure resilience?” Previous network resilience analysis methods have generally focused on either pre-disruption prevention investments or post-disruption recovery strategies. This paper expands on those methods by introducing a stochastic optimization model for designing network infrastructure resilience that simultaneously considers pre- and post-disruption activities. The model seeks investment–recovery combinations that minimize the overall cost to a distribution network across a set of disruption scenarios. A set of numerical experiments illustrates how changes to disruption scenarios probabilities affect the optimal resilient design investments.     

How to facilitate (or discourage) community-based research: recommendations based on a Canadian survey

The impact of the extreme heat wave that affected Melbourne, Australia, in two distinct phases in January and February 2009 was severe, with 374 (heat) and 173 (bushfire) excess deaths. Whilst the human health issues have been covered in detail in policy and academic arenas, much less attention has been paid to the adverse impacts on urban infrastructure. Analysis of this event, underpinned by participatory actor-based research, has shown that the impacts were experienced disproportionately across different infrastructure types. For water, telecommunications and airports, the impacts were relatively minor and the impact on rail transport and roads (and to a lesser extent, seaports) was of moderate significance, whereas research findings indicate that the electricity sector was found to be the most vulnerable. This paper focuses on the sectors that were worst impacted: electricity, rail and road transport. Commentary identifies the direct and indirect impacts of the heat event, including associated cascading effects, as well as considering actual and potential adaptation responses both before and after the event. Concluding, the authors reflect on the implications of the heat wave for urban resilience, emphasising the crucial importance of understanding the urban environment as a complex and interconnected system.     

Water supply,waste assimilation,and low-flow issues facing the Southeast Piedmont Interstate-85 urban archipelago

Rapidly growing cities along the Interstate-85 corridor from Atlanta, GA, to Raleigh, NC, rely on small rivers for water supply and waste assimilation. These rivers share commonalities including water supply stress during droughts, seasonally low flows for wastewater dilution, increasing drought and precipitation extremes, downstream eutrophication issues, and high regional aquatic diversity. Further challenges include rapid growth; sprawl that exacerbates water quality and infrastructure issues; water infrastructure that spans numerous counties and municipalities; and large numbers of septic systems. Holistic multi-jurisdiction cooperative water resource planning along with policy and infrastructure modifications is necessary to adapt to population growth and climate. We propose six actions to improve water infrastructure resilience: increase water-use efficiency by municipal, industrial, agricultural, and thermoelectric power sectors; adopt indirect potable reuse or closed loop systems; allow for water sharing during droughts but regulate inter-basin transfers to protect aquatic ecosystems; increase nutrient recovery and reduce discharges of carbon and nutrients in effluents; employ green infrastructure and better stormwater management to reduce nonpoint pollutant loadings and mitigate urban heat island effects; and apply the CRIDA framework to incorporate climate and hydrologic uncertainty into water planning.     

Resilience metrics for cyber systems

As federal agencies and businesses rely more on cyber infrastructure, they are increasingly vulnerable to cyber attacks that can cause damages disproportionate to the sophistication and cost to launch the attack. In response, regulatory authorities call for focusing attention on enhancing infrastructure resilience. For example, in the USA, President Obama issued an Executive Order and policy directives focusing on improving the resilience and security of cyber infrastructure to a wide range of cyber threats. Despite the national and international importance, resilience metrics to inform management decisions are still in the early stages of development. We apply the resilience matrix framework developed by Linkov et al. (Environ Sci Technol 47:10108–10110, 2013) to develop and organize effective resilience metrics for cyber systems. These metrics link national policy goals to specific system measures, such that resource allocation decisions can be translated into actionable interventions and investments. In this paper, a number of metrics have been identified and assessed using quantitative and qualitative measures found in the literature. We have proposed a generic approach and could integrate actual data, technical judgment, and literature-based measures to assess system resilience across physical, information, cognitive, and social domains.     

Turning wastewater into energy: challenges of reconfiguring regional infrastructures in the Berlin–Brandenburg region

Issues of connectivity between different infrastructure sectors have received surprisingly little attention in recent research. Despite huge interest in issues of sectoral integration surrounding the water–energy nexus, researchers have rarely considered what this might mean for the coupling of infrastructure systems for water/wastewater and energy services. Consequently, the implications of greater connectivity for the governance and socio-spatial constitution of infrastructures are largely unexplored. This paper addresses this research gap with a case study of an attempt to use treated wastewater to produce biomass for energy on degraded land in the Berlin–Brandenburg region of Germany. It takes water reuse for energy crop production as an exemplar of work at the water–energy nexus in order to explore the institutional, spatial and physical dimensions involved in connecting two infrastructure systems to this end. It argues that cross-sectoral integration reaches far beyond issues of technological compatibility, revealing often hidden but crucial differences in the institutional and spatial configuration of energy and wastewater systems. The paper draws conclusions on the broader implications of the case for understanding institutional challenges of cross-sectoral connectivity on the one hand and prospects for reconfiguring infrastructural relations between cities and rural areas on the other.     

Open data and stormwater systems in Los Angeles: applications for equitable green infrastructure

Urban stormwater systems traditionally used “grey” infrastructure to manage runoff. Contemporary designs now incorporate “green” infrastructure, which offers additional potential benefits such as urban amenities and health. Understanding how green and grey infrastructure investments are distributed across urban areas is important for new goals of promoting environmental justice in planning. In California, for instance, public investments increasingly require a percentage of funds to be spent in disadvantaged communities. Recent advancements in the availability of high-detail geographic data in cities can support prioritising investments to fulfil these multiple benefits. This paper analyses the distribution of stormwater infrastructure in Los Angeles (LA) County in relation to design criteria, urban structure and sociodemographic information. It demonstrates an approach for identifying projects that simultaneously address engineering needs and promote equity. Statistical analysis of high-detail sewer locations reveals geographic correlations with key local design parameters, urban characteristics and sociodemographic indicators. Watershed areas in LA County were identified that support multi-benefit projects, meeting dual criteria for infrastructure improvements and disadvantaged community status. As stormwater systems are increasingly designed for multi-benefit outcomes, new design frameworks can emphasise both performance and social equity.     

Herd no More: Livestock Husbandry Policies and the Environment in Israel

Livestock production in both industrial systems, where livestock are packed tightly together, and in highly traditional systems, where a shepherd follows her herd in dispersed rangelands, are cited as key contributors in some of the most acute environmental problems around the globe. Israel is one of the few countries where both of these systems exist, with surprisingly little contact between them. The environmental impact of the sectors were examined along with Israel’s public policies in the field. While historically, much attention has been placed on the contribution of the Bedouin pastoralists to desertification and erosion, this may be linked to historic misapprehension about actual impacts of goats on local rangelands as well as political motivations and concerns about losing national sovereignty over large areas of rangelands. The true environmental effects appear to be minor. A far more critical concern is water pollution caused by the industrial sector of livestock production—an issue that recently has attracted considerable government attention and investment in a successful dairy infrastructure initiative. The divisions between governmental supports for the Jewish and Arab sectors of livestock management are inconsistent with efficient environmental management. Policies should be designed to encourage Bedouin to find ways to sustainably continue their traditional livestock husbandry practises, which today are largely associated with ecological benefits and constitute a unique cultural asset for Israel and the world.     

Marshaling Adaptive Capacities within an Adaptive Management Framework to Enhance the Resiliency of Wastewater Systems

We assess adaptive capacity and adaptive management as measures of wastewater (WW) system resiliency using data from interviews with WW system managers (hereafter managers) impacted by past storms. Results suggest the most resilient WW systems are those with high adaptive capacities that employ an adaptive management approach to make ongoing adaptation investments over time. Greater amounts of generic adaptive capacities (i.e., skilled staff and good leadership) help smooth both day‐to‐day and emergency operations and provide a foundation for adaptive management. In turn, adaptive management helps managers both build more generic adaptive capacities, and develop and employ greater amounts and diversity of specific adaptive capacities (i.e., soft and/or hard adaptations) that are especially important for enhancing and sustaining resiliency. Adaptive management also enables managers to better understand their system's vulnerabilities, how those vulnerabilities change over time, and what specific actions may reduce those vulnerabilities. Finally, our work suggests WW system resilience critically depends on the capacities of the human systems for building resilience as much as or more so than relying only on physical infrastructure resilience. Our work contributes to filling an important gap in the literature by advancing our understanding of the human dimensions of infrastructure resilience and has practical implications for advancing resilience in the WW sector.     

Solid waste management in European countries: a review of systems analysis techniques

In the past few decades, solid waste management systems in Europe have involved complex and multi-faceted trade-offs among a plethora of technological alternatives, economic instruments, and regulatory frameworks. These changes resulted in various environmental, economic, social, and regulatory impacts in waste management practices which not only complicate regional policy analysis, but also reshape the paradigm of global sustainable development. Systems analysis, a discipline that harmonizes these integrated solid waste management strategies, has been uniquely providing interdisciplinary support for decision making in this area. Systems engineering models and system assessment tools, both of which enrich the analytical framework of waste management, were designed specifically to handle particular types of problems. Though how to smooth out the barriers toward achieving appropriate systems synthesis and integration of these models and tools to aid in the solid waste management schemes prevalent in European countries still remains somewhat uncertain. This paper conducts a thorough literature review of models and tools illuminating possible overlapped boundaries in waste management practices in European countries and encompassing the pros and cons of waste management practices in each member state of the European Union. Whereas the Southern European Union (EU) countries need to develop further measures to implement more integrated solid waste management and reach EU directives, the Central EU countries need models and tools with which to rationalize their technological choices and management strategies. Nevertheless, considering systems analysis models and tools in a synergistic way would certainly provide opportunities to develop better solid waste management strategies leading to conformity with current standards and foster future perspectives for both the waste management industry and government agencies in European Union.