Lidia Cano Pecharroman, Christopher Williams, N. G. Nylen, M. Kiparsky
Traditional, limited purpose grey infrastructure has failed to address the world's interrelated water challenges. Improving water security will increasingly require more integrated responses. This paper examines large-scale green infrastructure (LSGI), planned natural or hybrid systems that materially affect water security at the watershed scale, as one such response. This paper examines key challenges for governing and financing LSGI, which hinder its broader use. We report on four case studies located in the United States where LSGI is being employed to improve water security. Through analysis of these case studies and related literature, we identify three themes important for LSGI governance: cost sharing, performance monitoring, and legitimization. First, we hypothesize that formal cost sharing based on the multiple benefits LSGI provides could enable wider adoption, but find that in these examples cost sharing is limited and informal. Second, our research suggests that expanding performance monitoring to encompass key secondary benefits could help clarify how the benefits and burdens of a project are distributed across stakeholders, facilitate cost sharing, and enhance project legitimacy. Finally, LSGI will require further legitimization – developing a broader perception that LSGI is an appropriate alternative or complement to grey infrastructure – to develop as a viable contributor to water security.
{"title":"How can we govern large-scale Green infrastructure for multiple water security benefits?","authors":"Lidia Cano Pecharroman, Christopher Williams, N. G. Nylen, M. Kiparsky","doi":"10.2166/bgs.2021.015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2166/bgs.2021.015","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Traditional, limited purpose grey infrastructure has failed to address the world's interrelated water challenges. Improving water security will increasingly require more integrated responses. This paper examines large-scale green infrastructure (LSGI), planned natural or hybrid systems that materially affect water security at the watershed scale, as one such response. This paper examines key challenges for governing and financing LSGI, which hinder its broader use. We report on four case studies located in the United States where LSGI is being employed to improve water security. Through analysis of these case studies and related literature, we identify three themes important for LSGI governance: cost sharing, performance monitoring, and legitimization. First, we hypothesize that formal cost sharing based on the multiple benefits LSGI provides could enable wider adoption, but find that in these examples cost sharing is limited and informal. Second, our research suggests that expanding performance monitoring to encompass key secondary benefits could help clarify how the benefits and burdens of a project are distributed across stakeholders, facilitate cost sharing, and enhance project legitimacy. Finally, LSGI will require further legitimization – developing a broader perception that LSGI is an appropriate alternative or complement to grey infrastructure – to develop as a viable contributor to water security.","PeriodicalId":9337,"journal":{"name":"Blue-Green Systems","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2021-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45635033","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：