对基于自然的基础设施及其在缓解城市洪水风险方面的有效性进行审查

Md. Esraz‐Ul‐Zannat, Aysin Dedekorkut‐Howes, Edward Alexander Morgan
{"title":"对基于自然的基础设施及其在缓解城市洪水风险方面的有效性进行审查","authors":"Md. Esraz‐Ul‐Zannat, Aysin Dedekorkut‐Howes, Edward Alexander Morgan","doi":"10.1002/wcc.889","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Anthropogenic climate change and rapid urbanization are contributing to more frequent and intense urban flooding. There is widespread agreement that traditional gray infrastructure, a single‐purpose solution, fails to address the problem properly and contributes to adverse direct and indirect environmental impacts. As such, Nature‐based Solutions (NbS) can provide improved outcomes to flood risk management along with co‐benefits to society and the economy, as they have numerous benefits incuding often a smaller carbon footprint or even sometimes sequestering carbon. However, there is ambiguity and misconception about NbS and the uptake of NbS for flood management, which is still inadequate compared to traditional gray infrastructure. This research seeks to explore various nature‐based infrastructures including their present status of application for flood risk management to build resilience to urban flooding through a systematic literature review. The robustness of some NbS is questionable and varies across different spatial scales from plot to watershed. NbS can work stand‐alone in many cases as well as supplement traditional gray infrastructure to achieve wider benefits. The review provides a comparison of nature‐based solutions with gray infrastructure, identifies flood mitigation infrastructures that include nature‐based elements, and provides an overview of their effectiveness across different scales. The research findings should contribute to a better understanding of appropriate and diverse options of NbS, gray, and hybrid designs by policymakers and decision‐makers to enable them in effectively designing and implementing urban flood risk mitigation measures.This article is categorized under:<jats:list list-type=\"simple\"> <jats:list-item>Climate and Development &gt; Urbanization, Development, and Climate Change</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change &gt; Learning from Cases and Analogies</jats:list-item> </jats:list>","PeriodicalId":501019,"journal":{"name":"WIREs Climate Change","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A review of nature‐based infrastructures and their effectiveness for urban flood risk mitigation\",\"authors\":\"Md. Esraz‐Ul‐Zannat, Aysin Dedekorkut‐Howes, Edward Alexander Morgan\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/wcc.889\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Anthropogenic climate change and rapid urbanization are contributing to more frequent and intense urban flooding. There is widespread agreement that traditional gray infrastructure, a single‐purpose solution, fails to address the problem properly and contributes to adverse direct and indirect environmental impacts. As such, Nature‐based Solutions (NbS) can provide improved outcomes to flood risk management along with co‐benefits to society and the economy, as they have numerous benefits incuding often a smaller carbon footprint or even sometimes sequestering carbon. However, there is ambiguity and misconception about NbS and the uptake of NbS for flood management, which is still inadequate compared to traditional gray infrastructure. This research seeks to explore various nature‐based infrastructures including their present status of application for flood risk management to build resilience to urban flooding through a systematic literature review. The robustness of some NbS is questionable and varies across different spatial scales from plot to watershed. NbS can work stand‐alone in many cases as well as supplement traditional gray infrastructure to achieve wider benefits. The review provides a comparison of nature‐based solutions with gray infrastructure, identifies flood mitigation infrastructures that include nature‐based elements, and provides an overview of their effectiveness across different scales. The research findings should contribute to a better understanding of appropriate and diverse options of NbS, gray, and hybrid designs by policymakers and decision‐makers to enable them in effectively designing and implementing urban flood risk mitigation measures.This article is categorized under:<jats:list list-type=\\\"simple\\\"> <jats:list-item>Climate and Development &gt; Urbanization, Development, and Climate Change</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change &gt; Learning from Cases and Analogies</jats:list-item> </jats:list>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501019,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"WIREs Climate Change\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"WIREs Climate Change\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.889\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"WIREs Climate Change","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.889","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人为气候变化和快速城市化导致城市洪涝灾害更加频繁和严重。人们普遍认为,传统的灰色基础设施是一种单一用途的解决方案,无法妥善解决问题,还会对环境造成直接和间接的不利影响。因此,基于自然的解决方案(NbS)可以为洪水风险管理提供更好的结果,并为社会和经济带来共同利益,因为它们有许多好处,包括通常较小的碳足迹,甚至有时可以固碳。然而,人们对自然屏障和自然屏障在洪水管理中的应用还存在模糊和误解,与传统的灰色基础设施相比,自然屏障和自然屏障在洪水管理中的应用仍然不足。本研究旨在通过系统的文献综述,探索各种基于自然的基础设施,包括其在洪水风险管理中的应用现状,以建立对城市洪水的抵御能力。一些自然基础结构的稳健性值得怀疑,而且在从小区到流域的不同空间尺度上存在差异。在许多情况下,自然屏障既可以单独发挥作用,也可以作为传统灰色基础设施的补充,以实现更广泛的效益。本综述对基于自然的解决方案与灰色基础设施进行了比较,确定了包含基于自然元素的防洪减灾基础设施,并概述了它们在不同尺度上的有效性。这些研究成果将有助于政策制定者和决策者更好地理解基于自然的解决方案、灰色基础设施和混合设计的适当和多样化选择,从而有效地设计和实施城市洪水风险缓解措施:气候与发展> 城市化、发展与气候变化 脆弱性与适应气候变化> 从案例和类比中学习
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A review of nature‐based infrastructures and their effectiveness for urban flood risk mitigation
Anthropogenic climate change and rapid urbanization are contributing to more frequent and intense urban flooding. There is widespread agreement that traditional gray infrastructure, a single‐purpose solution, fails to address the problem properly and contributes to adverse direct and indirect environmental impacts. As such, Nature‐based Solutions (NbS) can provide improved outcomes to flood risk management along with co‐benefits to society and the economy, as they have numerous benefits incuding often a smaller carbon footprint or even sometimes sequestering carbon. However, there is ambiguity and misconception about NbS and the uptake of NbS for flood management, which is still inadequate compared to traditional gray infrastructure. This research seeks to explore various nature‐based infrastructures including their present status of application for flood risk management to build resilience to urban flooding through a systematic literature review. The robustness of some NbS is questionable and varies across different spatial scales from plot to watershed. NbS can work stand‐alone in many cases as well as supplement traditional gray infrastructure to achieve wider benefits. The review provides a comparison of nature‐based solutions with gray infrastructure, identifies flood mitigation infrastructures that include nature‐based elements, and provides an overview of their effectiveness across different scales. The research findings should contribute to a better understanding of appropriate and diverse options of NbS, gray, and hybrid designs by policymakers and decision‐makers to enable them in effectively designing and implementing urban flood risk mitigation measures.This article is categorized under: Climate and Development > Urbanization, Development, and Climate Change Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change > Learning from Cases and Analogies
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信