Abstract
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.
Highlights
With 70% of the world’s population likely to be living in urban areas by 2050 and with climate change making weather and natural resource distributions more volatile, reducing risks and enhancing resilience of vital infrastructures in our increasingly densely populated urban environments is of crucial concern everywhere (Ahern 2011; Staddon 2010)
In expanding our consideration of the literature, scoping studies and case studies, we further considered and focused on what we perceive to be the key challenge domains, to contribute to the continued evolution of frameworks and processes for valuing resilience to ensure value is realised through the green infrastructure’ (GI) project life cycle
In the promotion of GI, there needs to be awareness that considers social context and perception of place, as well as socio-economic factors, when establishing the value of benefits of ecosystem services to citizens (Kremer et al 2016). Examples of where this has happened include the cities of Bristol and Mexico under the 100 Resilient Cities programme, where citizen-led processes have been notably successful in delivering resilience strategies that are inclusive of previously disenfranchised residents, as well as stressing the importance of all citizens at all levels of society in policy making, respectively
Summary
With 70% of the world’s population likely to be living in urban areas by 2050 and with climate change making weather and natural resource distributions more volatile, reducing risks and enhancing resilience of vital infrastructures in our increasingly densely populated urban environments is of crucial concern everywhere (Ahern 2011; Staddon 2010). Resilience emerges out of ‘why’ things are done (to resolve an identified issue), ‘how’ things are done (can an intervention resolve multiple issues simultaneously?) and ‘who’ they are done with (direct and indirect beneficiaries or stakeholders) as well as ‘what’ things are done (the intervention itself) (Staddon et al 2017) Those working to make our cities more resilient places are increasingly focussing on the contribution of GI to socio-economic resilience; on citizens’ empowerment ( women, children and disadvantaged communities), on the encouragement of adaptive behaviours at all scales and on improving decision-making through active engagement of citizens with GI (e.g. through initiatives such as Climathon). We point to some key “ steps” that we contend are necessary to facilitate the mainstreaming of GI and hybrid “green–grey” approaches to enhancing urban resilience
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
