Charles B. van Rees, Matthew L. Chambers, Angela J. Catalano, Daniel X. Buhr, Andressa Vianna Mansur, Damon M. Hall, Alec Nelson, Burton Suedel, Robert J. Hawley, Brian Bledsoe, Nate Nibbelink
{"title":"堤坝后退效益的跨学科概述:支持空间规划和实施基于自然的河流解决方案","authors":"Charles B. van Rees, Matthew L. Chambers, Angela J. Catalano, Daniel X. Buhr, Andressa Vianna Mansur, Damon M. Hall, Alec Nelson, Burton Suedel, Robert J. Hawley, Brian Bledsoe, Nate Nibbelink","doi":"10.1002/wat2.1750","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Nature‐based solutions (NbS, and related concepts like natural infrastructure, Ecosystem‐based Adaptation, and green infrastructure) are increasingly recognized as multi‐benefit strategies for addressing the critical sustainability challenges of the Anthropocene, including the climate emergency and biodiversity crisis. Mainstreaming NbS in professional practice requires strategic, landscape‐level planning integrating multiple sources of benefits and their synergies and trade‐offs. Levee setbacks (LS) are among the best‐studied riverine NbS with recognized benefits for flood risk management, drought resilience, water quality management, recreational opportunities, and ecological restoration for biodiversity. Although awareness of the multifarious benefits of LS as forms of Natural Capital is growing, implementation remains ad‐hoc and opportunistic. To address this critical implementation gap for one major example of NbS, we review and synthesize literature across diverse disciplines to provide an overview of the primary social, economic, and ecological mechanisms that affect the co‐benefit delivery of LS projects. Next, to make this information relevant to NbS practitioners, we link these mechanisms to spatial metrics that can be used to approximate the relative magnitude of project benefits and costs across these mechanisms. Finally, we highlight examples of key synergies and trade‐offs among benefits that should be considered for LS planning. This synthetic approach is intended to familiarize readers with the diverse potential benefits of LS, and provide an understanding of how to select and prioritize potential sites for further study and implementation. Synergies and trade‐offs among important benefit drivers abound, and social equity concerns will be paramount in ensuring the successful implementation of LS and other NbS in the future.This article is categorized under:<jats:list list-type=\"simple\"> <jats:list-item>Engineering Water > Sustainable Engineering of Water</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Engineering Water > Planning Water</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Water and Life > Nature of Freshwater Ecosystems</jats:list-item> </jats:list>","PeriodicalId":501223,"journal":{"name":"WIREs Water","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An interdisciplinary overview of levee setback benefits: Supporting spatial planning and implementation of riverine nature‐based solutions\",\"authors\":\"Charles B. van Rees, Matthew L. Chambers, Angela J. Catalano, Daniel X. Buhr, Andressa Vianna Mansur, Damon M. Hall, Alec Nelson, Burton Suedel, Robert J. Hawley, Brian Bledsoe, Nate Nibbelink\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/wat2.1750\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Nature‐based solutions (NbS, and related concepts like natural infrastructure, Ecosystem‐based Adaptation, and green infrastructure) are increasingly recognized as multi‐benefit strategies for addressing the critical sustainability challenges of the Anthropocene, including the climate emergency and biodiversity crisis. Mainstreaming NbS in professional practice requires strategic, landscape‐level planning integrating multiple sources of benefits and their synergies and trade‐offs. Levee setbacks (LS) are among the best‐studied riverine NbS with recognized benefits for flood risk management, drought resilience, water quality management, recreational opportunities, and ecological restoration for biodiversity. Although awareness of the multifarious benefits of LS as forms of Natural Capital is growing, implementation remains ad‐hoc and opportunistic. To address this critical implementation gap for one major example of NbS, we review and synthesize literature across diverse disciplines to provide an overview of the primary social, economic, and ecological mechanisms that affect the co‐benefit delivery of LS projects. Next, to make this information relevant to NbS practitioners, we link these mechanisms to spatial metrics that can be used to approximate the relative magnitude of project benefits and costs across these mechanisms. Finally, we highlight examples of key synergies and trade‐offs among benefits that should be considered for LS planning. This synthetic approach is intended to familiarize readers with the diverse potential benefits of LS, and provide an understanding of how to select and prioritize potential sites for further study and implementation. Synergies and trade‐offs among important benefit drivers abound, and social equity concerns will be paramount in ensuring the successful implementation of LS and other NbS in the future.This article is categorized under:<jats:list list-type=\\\"simple\\\"> <jats:list-item>Engineering Water > Sustainable Engineering of Water</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Engineering Water > Planning Water</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Water and Life > Nature of Freshwater Ecosystems</jats:list-item> </jats:list>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"WIREs Water\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"WIREs Water\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1750\",\"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 Water","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1750","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
人们日益认识到,基于自然的解决方案(NbS,以及自然基础设施、基于生态系统的适应和绿色基础设施等相关概念)是应对人类世的关键可持续性挑战(包括气候紧急情况和生物多样性危机)的多效益战略。要将 NbS 纳入专业实践的主流,需要进行战略性的景观级规划,整合多种效益来源及其协同作用和权衡。堤坝后退(LS)是研究最为深入的河流 NbS 之一,其在洪水风险管理、抗旱能力、水质管理、休闲机会和生物多样性生态恢复方面的效益已得到公认。尽管人们对作为自然资本形式的 "LS "的多种益处的认识在不断提高,但其实施仍然是临时性和机会性的。为了解决这一重要的 NbS 实施差距,我们回顾并综合了不同学科的文献,概述了影响 LS 项目共同效益交付的主要社会、经济和生态机制。接下来,为了使这些信息与净减排实践者相关,我们将这些机制与空间指标联系起来,这些指标可用于近似估算这些机制中项目效益和成本的相对大小。最后,我们重点举例说明了LS规划中应考虑的效益之间的主要协同作用和权衡。这种综合方法旨在让读者熟悉 LS 的各种潜在效益,并了解如何选择和优先考虑潜在地点,以便进一步研究和实施。重要效益驱动因素之间的协同与权衡比比皆是,而社会公平问题将是确保未来成功实施 LS 和其他 NbS 的重中之重:水工程> 水的可持续工程 水工程> 水规划 水与生命> 淡水生态系统的性质
An interdisciplinary overview of levee setback benefits: Supporting spatial planning and implementation of riverine nature‐based solutions
Nature‐based solutions (NbS, and related concepts like natural infrastructure, Ecosystem‐based Adaptation, and green infrastructure) are increasingly recognized as multi‐benefit strategies for addressing the critical sustainability challenges of the Anthropocene, including the climate emergency and biodiversity crisis. Mainstreaming NbS in professional practice requires strategic, landscape‐level planning integrating multiple sources of benefits and their synergies and trade‐offs. Levee setbacks (LS) are among the best‐studied riverine NbS with recognized benefits for flood risk management, drought resilience, water quality management, recreational opportunities, and ecological restoration for biodiversity. Although awareness of the multifarious benefits of LS as forms of Natural Capital is growing, implementation remains ad‐hoc and opportunistic. To address this critical implementation gap for one major example of NbS, we review and synthesize literature across diverse disciplines to provide an overview of the primary social, economic, and ecological mechanisms that affect the co‐benefit delivery of LS projects. Next, to make this information relevant to NbS practitioners, we link these mechanisms to spatial metrics that can be used to approximate the relative magnitude of project benefits and costs across these mechanisms. Finally, we highlight examples of key synergies and trade‐offs among benefits that should be considered for LS planning. This synthetic approach is intended to familiarize readers with the diverse potential benefits of LS, and provide an understanding of how to select and prioritize potential sites for further study and implementation. Synergies and trade‐offs among important benefit drivers abound, and social equity concerns will be paramount in ensuring the successful implementation of LS and other NbS in the future.This article is categorized under:Engineering Water > Sustainable Engineering of WaterEngineering Water > Planning WaterWater and Life > Nature of Freshwater Ecosystems