Abstract
Green infrastructure (GI) has increasingly gained popularity for achieving adaptation and mitigation goals associated with climate change and extreme weather events. To continue implementing GI, financial tools are needed for upfront project capital or development costs and later for maintenance. This study’s purpose is to evaluate financing tools used in a selected GI dataset and to assess how those tools are linked to various GI technologies and other GI project characteristics like cost and size. The dataset includes over 400 GI U.S. projects, comprising a convenience sample, from the American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA). GI project characteristics were organized to answer a number of research questions using descriptive statistics. Results indicated that the number of projects and overall cost shares were mostly located in a few states. Grants were the most common financial tool with about two-thirds of the projects reporting information on financial tools receiving grant funding. Most projects reported financing from only one tool with a maximum of three tools. Projects primarily included multiple GI technologies averaging three and a maximum of nine. The most common GI technologies were bioswales, retention, rain gardens, and porous pavements. These findings are useful for decision-makers evaluating funding support for GI.
Highlights
Green infrastructure (GI) has had a very long history and has emerged as a central strategy in climate-related adaptation and mitigation to reduce adverse effects on and from infrastructure [1]
GI continues to be an important option for stormwater management and other co-benefits as indicated earlier
This article has contributed to moving this area of inquiry forward by identifying and analyzing what the financing experience has been for a relatively large set of GI projects, and what financing types are related to the types of GI the projects use
Summary
Green infrastructure (GI) has had a very long history and has emerged as a central strategy in climate-related adaptation and mitigation to reduce adverse effects on and from infrastructure [1]. The role of GI in providing these benefits as a foundation for climate-related adaptation and mitigation relates to and has roots in a number of disciplinary areas such as “nature-based” solutions and ecosystem services [12,13,14]. These functions are often performed in conjunction with urban planning, sustainability and resilience planning, and development, yet the density of many urban areas is considered likely to require special adaptations of GI approaches [3]. Infrastructure connectivity poses a complex analytical problem involving networks and numerous modeling approaches [1,16,17] and green–gray infrastructure connections are the frontier with finance potentially heavily influencing and enabling both sectors and their connections
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
