Transforming brownfields into urban greenspaces: A working process for stakeholder analysis

Urban greenspaces (UGS) provide a range of ecosystem services and are instrumental in ensuring the liveability of cities. Whilst incorporating UGS in increasingly denser cities is a challenge to planners, brownfields form a latent resource with the potential of being converted into UGS. Transformation of brownfields to greenspaces, however, requires engagement of a variety of stakeholders, from providers to users. The overall aim of this study was to support effective and realistic realisations of UGS in the context of urban brownfields’ regeneration and stakeholder engagement. A working process was developed to: 1) integrate methods relevant for UGS realisation for a) identification and categorising of relevant stakeholders, b) mapping their interests and resources, c) identifying various challenges, and d) matching those challenges with the mapped resources over the timeline of UGS development; and 2) apply these methods to assess relevance and shortcomings. The methods were applied to a study site in Sweden, and data was collected using a questionnaire survey. The survey received 31 responses and the respondents’ comments indicated that the combination of several uses, especially integrated with an urban park, is preferable. Visualisation was an important component for data analysis: stakeholder categorisation was effectively visualised using a Venn diagram, and the needed mobilisation of resources among stakeholders to manage identified challenges was visualised using a timeline. The analysis demonstrates the need for collaboration between stakeholders to achieve an effective realisation of UGS and how multiple methods can be used in concert to map stakeholders, preferences, challenges, and resources for a particular site. The application at a study site provided site-specific data but the developed stakeholder categorisation, and the method for matching identified challenges with the stakeholders’ resources using a timeline, can be generalised to applications at other sites

Comparison of PFAS soil remediation alternatives at a civilian airport using cost-benefit analysis

Contamination of soil and water systems by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) due to uncontrolled use of aqueous film-forming foams (AFFFs) at firefighting training sites at civilian and military airports is a universal issue and can lead to significant human health and environmental impacts. Remediation of these sites is often complex but necessary to alleviate the PFAS burden and minimise the risks of exposure by eliminating the hotspot/source from which the PFAS spreads. This study presents a probabilistic cost-benefit analysis (CBA) for evaluating PFAS remediation alternatives, which includes monetisation of both direct costs and benefits as well as externalities. The method is applied for a case study to compare five remediation alternatives for managing PFAS contaminated soil at Stockholm Arlanda Airport in Sweden. The social profitability, or the net present value (NPV), of each remediation alternative was calculated in comparison to two reference alternatives – ‘total excavation’ of the site (Alt 0) or ‘do nothing’. Sensitivity analyses and model scenarios were tested to account for uncertainties, including small or large PFAS spreading and simulating different values for the magnitude of annual avoided cost of inaction (i.e., aggregate benefit) from PFAS remediation. In comparison to total excavation, four of the five studied remediation alternatives resulted in a positive mean NPV. Excavation and stabilization/solidification of the hotspot on-site combined with stabilization using activated carbon for the rest of site (Alt 2) had the highest NPV for both spreading scenarios, i.e., Alt 2 was the most socially profitable alternative. Simulations of the annual avoided cost of inaction enabled estimation of the breakeven point at which a remediation alternative becomes socially profitable (NPV > 0) compared to ‘do nothing’. Alt 2 had the lowest breakeven point: 7.5 and 5.75 millions of SEK/year for large and small spreading, respectively

Enhancing ecosystem services at urban brownfield sites - What value does contaminated soil have in the built environment?

Urban environments are challenged with a plethora of wicked problems in the face of rapid urbanization and land use change, not least natural capital degradation and widespread land and water contamination. Brownfields, under-used sites with real or perceived contamination, are significant urban and peri-urban land resources which, with well-designed remediation and management strategies can address these concerns. Gentle remediation options (GRO) are scalable nature-based techniques which provide significant opportunities for multi-functionality: managing risks posed by contaminants and at the same time enhance ecosystem services (ES) by improving the soil ecosystem in a low-impact, cost-effective manner. GRO align with an increasing interest in taking a holistic view on soil and land management to protect and improve the soil ecosystem for direct human benefit in the form of ES as well as for its indirect, intrinsic value as a haven for biodiversity. This short review aims to present a synthesis of ideas to raise awareness for urban planners about GRO techniques as nature-based solutions which can promote green infrastructure in the urban environment

A risk management framework for Gentle Remediation Options (GRO)

Gentle Remediation Options (GRO) are remediation measures involving plants, fungi, bacteria, and soil amendments that can be applied to manage risks at contaminated sites. Several studies and decision-support tools promote the wider range of benefits provided by GRO, but there is still skepticism regarding GRO implementation. Key issues that need to be better communicated are the various risk mitigation mechanisms, the required risk reduction for an envisioned land use, and the time perspective associated with the risk mitigation mechanisms. To increase the viability and acceptance of GRO, the phytomanagement approach implies the combination of GRO with beneficial green land use, gradually reducing risks and restoring ecosystem services. To strengthen the decision basis for GRO implementation in practice, this paper proposes a framework for risk management and communication of GRO applications to support phytomanagement strategies at contaminated sites. The mapping of the risk mitigation mechanisms is done by an extensive literature review and the Swedish national soil guideline value model is used to derive the most relevant human health exposure pathways and ecological risks for generic green land use scenarios. Results indicate that most of the expected risk mitigation mechanisms are supported by literature, but that knowledge gaps still exist. The framework is demonstrated to support the identification of GRO options for the case study site given two envisioned land uses: biofuel park and allotment garden. A more easily understandable risk management framework, as proposed here, is expected to act as a communication tool to educate decision-makers, regulatory bodies and other stakeholders for better understanding of risk mitigation mechanisms and preliminary timeframes of various GRO, particularly in the early stages of a brownfield redevelopment project

The significance of planning and management of the subsurface to achieve sustainable cities

Introduction: The subsurface is the foundation upon which all cities rest. But the subsurface is not only a construction basis which provide physical space for infrastructure and the possibility to create a better surface living environment: the subsurface is a multifunctional natural resource. Apart from physical space, it provides water, energy, materials, habitats for ecosystems, support for surface life, and a repository for cultural heritage and geological archives. Currently, the subsurface is often utilised according to the “first-come-first-served” principle, which hinders possibilities to take strategic decisions on prioritisation and optimisation of competing subsurface uses, as well as fair inter- and intragenerational distribution of limited natural resources. A great disadvantage is the invisibility of the subsurface and consequently a lack of understanding of it as a multifunctional resource: the recently launched concept of geosystem services could help mitigate its underrating. Methods: In order to better acknowledge and lift forward the significance of the subsurface in achieving a sustainable future, the 17 SDGs are scrutinized in relation to the resources of subsurface, and specifically how better planning and management of the subsurface can contribute in achieving the goals. Results: Subsurface planning and management is relevant to at least seven (3, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13) out of seventeen SDGs. Although the subsurface is not explicitly mentioned in the SDGs (except for aquifers), the subsurface can significantly contribute in achieving several of these goals. Conclusions: Sound planning and management of the subsurface can support the achievement of the mapped SDGs in various ways. The subsurface must be recognised as a precious and multifunctional resource which require careful planning and sensitive management in accordance with its potential and its value to society.Grant support: Swedish Research Council Formas (942-2016-50), Swedish Rock Engineering Research Foundation (BeFo 385), Swedish Institute Visby Programme (23887/2017)

Using soil function evaluation in multi-criteria decision analysis for sustainability appraisal of remediation alternatives

Soil contamination is one of the major threats constraining proper functioning of the soil and thus provision of ecosystem services. Remedial actions typically only address the chemical soil quality by reducing total contaminant concentrations to acceptable levels guided by land use. However, emerging regulatory requirements on soil protection demand a holistic view on soil assessment in remediation projects thus accounting for a variety of soil functions. Such a view would require not only that the contamination concentrations are assessed and attended to, but also that other aspects are taking into account, thus addressing also physical and biological as well as other chemical soil quality indicators (SQIs). This study outlines how soil function assessment can be a part of a holistic sustainability appraisal of remediation alternatives using multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). The paper presents a method for practitioners for evaluating the effects of remediation alternatives on selected ecological soil functions using a suggested minimum data set (MDS) containing physical, biological and chemical SQIs. The measured SQls are transformed into sub-scores by the use of scoring curves, which allows interpretation and the integration of soil quality data into the MCDA framework. The method is demonstrated at a study site (Marieberg, Sweden) and the results give an example of how soil analyses using the suggested MDS can be used for soil function assessment and subsequent input to the MCDA framework

Session summary - The accelerating need for Urban Green Spaces (UGS) in cities and how to best accommodate it

Urban Green Spaces (UGS) are vegetated open spaces that provide a multitude of ecological functions that are essential for the physical and mental well-being of the citizens as well as for the urban environment. However, land is an extremely competitive resource in cities that are struggling to sustain the ever-growing urban population and UGS are constantly under threat of urban encroachment. Even the well spread out cities are pressured to densify by the more commonplace ‘sustainable dense urban neighbourhood’ approach that in turn, increases the pressure on open spaces such as UGS. But UGS are lacking both by quantity and quality in most cities to support the need of the citizen. Their shortage and inadequacy of UGS were made obvious during the Covid-19 pandemic when the quarantine restricted the mobility of the urban populace and made UGS an essential, and often time, the only outdoor element in everyday city life. As well as lacking in quality and quantity, the pandemic and the resulting extended quarantine also pushed forward the inherent social issues with UGS; such as their unequal distribution, access, ongoing privatisation, ‘green gentrification, etc. The session focus was on the multifaceted challenge for UGS management and governance and how to accommodate the growing necessity of UGS in cities that are heightened in a world with Covid-19

Subsurface planning: Towards a common understanding of the subsurface as a multifunctional resource

In response to powerful trends in technology, resource and land supply and demand, socioeconomics and geopolitics, cities are likely to increase use of the subsurface in the near future. Indeed, the subsurface and its appropriate use have been put forward as being of crucial importance if we are to achieve resilient and sustainable cities. In recent years, quite apart from being seen primarily as a construction basis to provide physical space for infrastructure and to create a better surface living environment, the subsurface has been recognised as a multifunctional natural resource, one which provides physical space, water, energy, materials, habitats for ecosystems, support for surface life, and a repository for cultural heritage and geological archives. Currently, the subsurface is often utilised according to the “first-come-first-served” principle, which hinders possibilities to take strategic decisions on prioritisation and optimisation of competing subsurface uses, as well as fair inter- and intragenerational distribution of limited natural resources. Taking a broad international perspective, this paper investigates the subsurface as a multifunctional resource from five focal points: (1) what professionals with different backgrounds mean when using different terms related to the subsurface; (2) how professionals describe the subsurface and its multiple resources, functions and services; (3) how planning of subsurface use is supported in policy and regulations; (4) how the subsurface is included in the planning process; and (5) frameworks that can support decision-making on responsible use of the subsurface. The study reveals that the subsurface must be recognised (not only by scientists but also by decision- and policy-makers and other stakeholders) as a precious and multifunctional resource requiring careful planning and sensitive management in accordance with its potential and its value to society. Utilisation of the different subsurface functions to yield services requires careful planning and a framework to support decision-makers in achieving a balance between utilisation and preservation, and between the subsurface functions themselves in the case of outright utilisation. Further, to facilitate the necessary change towards transdisciplinary work settings in the planning process and form a platform for knowledge exchange and capacity building, there is an urgent need for a common language, i.e. mutually understandable terminology, and a common understanding, i.e. an all-inclusive view on the subsurface as a complex multifunctional resource

Enriching social and economic aspects in sustainability assessments of remediation strategies – Methods and implementation

Over the last decade, there has been rapid development in promoting and implementing sustainable remediation. It is now common to include at least some sustainability considerations in remediation projects. Specific challenges that have been highlighted often relate to economic and social aspects not receiving enough attention: broadening the social aspects, community and meaningful stakeholder engagement, understanding stakeholders\u27 risk perception, and a need for better estimates of site-specific economic costs and benefits. This study presents an application of the Sustainable Choice of REmediation (SCORE) framework with special focus on (1) demonstrating the working process for a broad sustainability assessment and (2) sharing the lessons learned from its application. Specific objectives are to describe (a) the types of stakeholders involved in the assessment, (b) the methods for collection of social and economic sustainability data, (c) residents\u27 perception of risks, (d) the use of the sustainability assessment results in the decision-making process, and (5) possibilities for improving the methods and working process. SCORE was applied and evaluated with input from, and together with, stakeholders at the BT Kemi industrial site in the village of Teckomatorp, south Sweden, a former pesticide production site associated with the most infamous Swedish environmental scandal. A questionnaire (n\ua0=\ua078) was used to collect input from residents regarding local acceptance and economic externalities of the remediation alternatives. Alternatives with a high degree of removal of contaminants received a high ranking in the assessment, primarily due to social and economic effects. The working process can be improved, specifically regarding workshop preparation and workshop structure. A broad representation of stakeholders and early establishment of communication channels to residents is key for robust assessment of social aspects. The information from the sustainability assessment was used in the decision-making process, not least for revising remediation options

BALANCE 4P: Balancing decisions for urban brownfield redevelopment. Technical report of the BALANCE 4P project of the SNOWMAN Network coordinated call IV.

Land take as a result of urbanization is one of the major soil threats in Europe. One of the key measures to prevent further urban sprawl and additional land take, is redevelopment of urban brownfields: underused urban areas with, in many cases, soil and groundwater pollution. The latter issue can be a bottleneck for redevelopment of brownfields instead of green fields. A difficulty for brownfield redevelopments is that in urban projects the responsibilities, tools and knowledge of subsurface engineering and urban planning and design are not integrated; they depend heavily on each other but work in sectors. The urban designer usually deals with opportunities for socio-economic benefits while the subsoil engineer deals with the technical challenges of the site. Balance 4P suggests a holistic approach to brownfield redevelopment that (i) recognizes all phases of the urban redevelopment process which are influenced by the planning conditions set by laws, regulations, policy and institutions; (ii) acknowledges multiple subsurface qualities in the brownfield redevelopment project; (iii) promotes knowledge exchange between the surface and the subsurface sectors, across disciplines within each sector, and over time, about the subsurface qualities of the specific project; (iv) focus on the urban redevelopment project by identifying strategies for redevelopment that can fulfil a good quality of the built environment; (v) assesses the three P’s (People, Planet, Profit/Prosperity) in each urban redevelopment phase; and (vi) puts the Process in focus rather than specific instruments by focusing on identification of WHO should be involved in the knowledge exchange process and HOW it can be mediated. The developed decision support framework is aimed to guide project teams willing to implement a more holistic approach in practice. The framework includes four steps carried out in iterative manner: (1) stakeholder analysis, (2) generation of redevelopment alternatives, (3) sustainability assessment of the alternatives, and (4) synthesis of the assessment results, including uncertainty analysis. The guidance describing the steps in the decision support framework and activities within each step can help to structure the decision process and provide support to project teams. The anticipated advantages of the holistic approach are redevelopment plans that allow for smart, cost-effective and sustainable solutions in the implementation process by making explicit use of subsurface information and knowledge in the planning process, and possibilities for more long-term sustainable planning with regard to the subsurface by increased awareness of the subsurface as a resource and the associated risks and possibilities