How do we increase public understanding of the benefits provided by SUDS?

Background to researchRecent Scottish Government policy is to develop Scotland as the world’s first Hydro Nation which places more emphasis on water as central to our national identity. This agenda isincreasing the international profile of Scotland’s skills and experience in supporting the good stewardship of water resources. There is a need to increase awareness among thepublic of the benefits that water provides and how our actions can help protect and improve them. Successful legislative and policy reform have been responsible for sustainable urbandrainage systems (SUDS) becoming commonplace in Scotland. There is a deficit of understanding surrounding the multiple benefits which SUDS can offer communities such as pollutioncontrol, flood prevention, enhancement of biodiversity and wildlife habitats. Conveying an understanding of benefits to those who live within close proximity to SUDS can help lendacceptance to these innovative green technologies that are replacing traditional forms of drainage.Objectives of researchKey CREW objectives are to develop a hydro literacy programme that:(a) increases public understanding of the benefits water provides and issues involved in its management(b) increase science engagement through community outreach/public education(c) support Scottish water policy.This project was a public outreach activity that targeted primary and secondary school children located to the north of Dundee where there are excellent examples of SUDS. The key objective was to raise awareness of the Hydro Nation agenda with a scope that was twofold: explain the urban water cycle; and promote awareness and understanding of the local SUDS and related benefits. To realise these objectives we had to ensure alignment of the science, environmental, engineering and social aspects related to SUDS with the curriculum forexcellence and which contributed to general science experiences and outcomes.Key findings and recommendationsDissemination of the Hydro Nation Agenda and the benefits of SUDS were delivered to a total of 106 children (ages 3-10) and 14 adults. Based on feedback, the outreach programmeto schools was deemed an unquestionable success by the Local Authority, teachers and school children alike. This was due to a strategic approach taken for the development anddelivery of a ‘water and SUDS’ learning package that included a variety of mechanisms and activities to fit the time available and suit the knowledge level of the target audiences. Thisfacilitated engagement, enthusiasm, knowledge retention and empowerment – learning whilst also having fun. Evaluation of feedback, and with hindsight, recommendations for improvingfuture outreach initiatives to school children and local community groups include:• Timing is crucial to ensure alignment with the curriculum, particularly secondary schools.• Hands on sessions including experiments and digital technology related to local real world issues combined with local walks were powerful strategies that provided a direct and personal connection that engaged, promoted and embedded learning concepts and new terminology.• Future roll out of the initiative would be beneficial to integrate the SUDS learning package materials with current lesson plans; specifically delivery of a practical legacy teaching asset that could be up scaled/rolled out across Scotland.• The Community Group session was put together quickly with limited time. This was beneficial for the Group regarding imminent dialogue with Dundee City Council planners however a more organised session and discussion would have enhanced understanding of current best practice SUDS.<br/

A rapid review of the background to source control

Background to researchThe start of the 21st Century witnessed a revolution in drainage practices with the implementation of sustainable drainage systems (SUDS). Prior to 2000, rainfall was managed by directing it away as quickly as possible in underground pipes. Increasing pressures such as watercourse pollution, stricter environmental laws, climate change and urbanisation called for a paradigm shift with Scotland leading the way for implementing SUDS. SUDS are designed to mimic natural drainage processes, managing rainfall in stages as it drains from a development. Collectively this process is called the stormwater treatment train. The first stage is source control, with stages two and three being site and regional controls respectively. Source control principally controls and treats polluted runoff at source (where the rain falls) and if designed and implemented correctly, protect watercourses and downstream SUDS through filtration, infiltration and storage. In Scotland, site and regional control SUDS have become business as usual, however uptake of the stormwater treatment train and the use of source control SUDS in practice is less routine than would be expected.Objectives of researchThe SUDS Working Party in Scotland is an interdisciplinary stakeholder platform to discuss issues relating to the SUDS agenda and promote their use. In 2009, a consultation paper on ‘Implementing the Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Act’ set out proposals to improve the sustainable management of Scotland’s water resources. The need for increased source control measures for the mitigation of diffuse pollution and climate change effects in urban areas was identified. To assist in this aspiration, the SUDS Working Party commissioned this study via CREW to identify opportunities and barriers to increasing the uptake of source control in Scotland. This report covers phase one of a three-phase study. It focuses on tracking the evolution of source control to gain an insight into enabling factors and obstacles for successful uptake of the systems. A literature review identified source control origins, the techniques available, and options for their application.Key findings and recommendationsIn the UK, research to validate the performance of source control measures began in the early 1990’s. This was enabled by stakeholder platforms such as the SUDS Working Party and the Scottish Universities SUDS Monitoring Group. By the mid-1990s, the SUDS concept was developed which included source control and outlined water quality, quantity and biodiversity / amenity benefits of the systems. By 2000, Scottish guidance was developed and by 2006 it became law to implement SUDS in all new developments. This was quickly followed by technical standards in 2007. SUDS for roads networks were addressed in 2010. Currently, many types of source control exist, most of which have been validated by research and are commonplace. The state of the art techniques such as rain gardens, green roofs and rainwater harvesting however, have had limited uptake in Scotland.It is evident that the enabling factors for the uptake of SUDS have been the result of top down drivers such as environmental initiatives and regulation. However, clarity surrounding the definition and application of source control as part of the stormwater treatment train is becoming a barrier to its uptake by practitioners. Extensive research provided a bottom up driver to validate effectiveness of the technologies for attenuating pollutants, mitigating flooding and creating habitats. Validation of emerging innovative techniques however, such as green roofs and rain gardens for different development types is limited in Scotland and this may prove to be a barrier in the future

Source control SUDS strategic directions

Background to researchThe uptake or transition from traditional drainage to sustainable drainage (SUDS) in Scotland has happened in a relatively short timescale (less than fifteen years) with site and regional control drainage structures such as ponds and basins now considered ‘business as usual’. This rapid transition to SUDS has been facilitated by a stakeholder platform called the Sustainable Urban Drainage Scottish Working Party (SUDSWP) which has promoted their use since 1997. This has subsequently led to Scotland being regarded as a frontrunner in SUDS implementation in the UK. However the uptake of source control as part of a stormwater treatment train is less routine than expected. With the aforementioned in mind, this Phase Three Report seeks to answer the question ‘How can the national uptake of source control be encouraged and influenced by the SUDS Working Party and whether they should recast their remit’? Objectives of research Phase One of this research looked at the background to the evolution of source control in Scotland providing preliminary insight into the enabling factors and obstacles for uptake of the systems since inception in the mid 1990’s. Phase Two appraised source control delivery on a global scale providing insight to enabling factors out with Scotland and appraising current delivery in Scotland by responsible organisations. The transition pathway from traditional drainage to source control SUDS was mapped out to highlight what the key enabling (and disabling) factors were to realise the transition to date. This phase of the research, Phase Three defines the next steps including comment on optimal source control and further considerations and recommendations. This involved analysis and consolidation of the findings from Phases one and two, a workshop delivered to SUDSWP and two surveys delivered online and via telephone interviews with professionals involved in source control SUDS. These findings are used to define barriers and opportunities to inform the development of a strategy to support and encourage implementation of source control within SUDSWP remit.Key findings and recommendationsKey findings and recommendations for the SUDS Working Party are grouped according to transition management cluster activities:* Transition Arena: Strengthen links with internal members and external stakeholders who have a stake in source control SUDS and develop an integrated long-term vision.* Transition Agenda: Develop a shared strategic plan which considers aligning agendas with other infrastructure initiatives and enforcement / inspection policies to ensure cost effective, fit for purpose measures particularly in the areas of unit plot, local streets and regeneration areas.* Transition Experiments / case studies: Encourage research partnerships to validate techniques in the source control toolkit not yet applied in Scotland and showcase case studies.* Transition Monitoring / evaluation: undertake a baseline assessment to gauge source control uptake and performance, revise existing guidance and encourage capacity building programmes.<br/

Source control SUDS delivery on a global scale and in Scotland including approach by responsible organisations and professional groups

Background to researchThe Sustainable Urban Drainage Scottish Working Party via CREW commissioned this work on the implementation of source control for SUDS in Scotland. The project is being carried out by researchers based at Abertay University Dundee involves three phases. These are presented in separate reports; this report covers phase 2 of that work. Source control sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) are an established technique in many parts of the world. Source control SUDS are a key component of what is termed the stormwater treatment train. Source controls manage the more frequent but smaller polluting rainfall events as close to the source as possible (where the rain falls). Site and regional control SUDS are larger downstream structures which manage the longer term rainfall events and provide additional treatment when required. One of the key advantages of managing the more frequent rainfall events at source is that downstream site and regional SUDS will have longer life spans resulting in overall cost efficiencies. Scotland is regarded as a frontrunner in the UK regarding implementation of SUDS with site and regional drainage structures now considered ‘business as usual’. However the uptake of source control is less routine than would be expected.Objectives of researchPhase one of this research looked at the background to the evolution of source control in Scotland to provide an insight into the enabling factors and obstacles for uptake of the systems since. Phase two(this report) appraises delivery of the systems in seven countries and case studies are developed to understand why source control was implemented and how it was achieved. The current delivery by responsible organisations and professional groups which encourage and influence the source control agenda in Scotland is also appraised. Using these findings, the transition pathway from traditional drainage to source control SUDS are reconstructed and mapped out to highlight the historical and current enabling (and disabling) factors to realise the transition to date. A transition framework is used to highlight the transition strengths developed by responsible organisations over the last two decades which had assisted in accelerating the transition.Key findings and recommendationsKey outcomes of this research include:* In Scotland the source control vision and agenda is fragmented due to different stakeholder drivers and funding mechanisms.* There are examples of the use of incentives in Scotland (i.e. legislative, regulatory, financial,social and environmental) to drive integrated agendas. However these have not been successfully showcased to provide the evidence base for encouraging replication and up-scaling of the methodologies and techniques.* There are limited frontier source control SUDS ‘niches’ to nurture innovative techniques such as raingardens – a learning by doing concept. A more focused research agenda to validate these systems as viable sustainable solutions for Scotland would assist in accelerating uptake.* Lack of sector engagement, particularly with the public is a disabling factor for uptake.A final observation from this phase of the study is that requests from various interested parties for CREW / SUDS Working Party to share outputs indicates the need for this research

Rural sustainable drainage systems:a practical design and build guide for Scotland's farmers and landowners

Soil cultivation, manure / fertiliser applications and chemical spraying can all contribute to diffuse pollution from agricultural land. Rainfall runoff from farm roads, tracks, yards and dusty roofs are also potential sources of diffuse pollution. Whilst many changes in farming practice have dealt with these sources of pollution there still remains instances where small amounts escape from a farmyard into a nearby ditch or where sediment laden overland field flows make their way into a ditch or burn, river or natural wetland and finally the sea. This not only has cost implications for a farmer but these incidents across a catchment have a huge impact on our water environment. Rural Sustainable Drainage Systems (Rural SuDS) will reduce agricultural diffuse pollution impacts as they are physical barriers that treat rainfall runoff. They are low cost, above ground drainage structures that capture soil particles, organic matter, nutrients and pesticides before they enter our water environment. Rural SuDS for steadings prevent blockages in drains and ditches. They contribute to good environmental practice and farm assurance schemes. In fields they can be used for returning fertile soil back to farmland and will help your business become more resilient to the impacts of climate change. Trapping soils, organic matter and nutrients means that valuable assets can be reclaimed – recent studies indicate savings of £88 per hectare per year! This Design and Build guide can be used by farmers and land managers to reduce diffuse pollution

Maximising multiple benefits from sustainable drainage systems: identification and decision support

This paper describes efforts in Scotland UK to assess urban diffuse pollution sources, pathways and sinks; to establish mitigation measures, which can address waterborne urban pollution and also provide multiple benefits. The paper will describe the results from an extensive review exercise, which culminated in the development of a new decision support tool. The tool is intended to help urban planners and water managers tackle urban diffuse pollution with mitigation measures, which could provide multiple environmental and societal benefits, in addition to delivering pollution mitigation

The use of EORTC measures in daily clinical practice-A synopsis of a newly developed manual.

Cancer has increasingly become a chronic condition and the routine collection of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) like quality of life is widely recommended for clinical practice. Nonetheless, the successful implementation of PROs is still a major challenge, although common barriers to and facilitators of their beneficial use are well known. To support health care professionals and other stakeholders in the implementation of the EORTC PRO measures, the EORTC Quality of Life Group provides guidance on issues considered important for their use in daily clinical practice. Herein, we present an outline of the newly developed "'Manual for the use of EORTC measures in daily clinical practice", covering the following issues: * a rationale for using EORTC measures in routine care *selection of EORTC measures, timing of assessments, scoring and presentation of results * aspects of a strategic implementation * electronic data assessment and telemonitoring, and * further use of EORTC measures and ethical considerations. Next to an extensive overview of currently available literature, the manual specifically focuses on knowledge about EORTC measures to give evidence-based recommendations whenever possible and to encourage readers and end-users of EORTC measures to contribute to further needed high-quality research. The manual will be accessible on the EORTC Quality of Life Group website's homepage and will be periodically updated to take into account any new knowledge due to medical, technical, regulatory and scientific advances

General anaesthetic and airway management practice for obstetric surgery in England: a prospective, multi-centre observational study

There are no current descriptions of general anaesthesia characteristics for obstetric surgery, despite recent changes to patient baseline characteristics and airway management guidelines. This analysis of data from the direct reporting of awareness in maternity patients' (DREAMY) study of accidental awareness during obstetric anaesthesia aimed to describe practice for obstetric general anaesthesia in England and compare with earlier surveys and best-practice recommendations. Consenting patients who received general anaesthesia for obstetric surgery in 72 hospitals from May 2017 to August 2018 were included. Baseline characteristics, airway management, anaesthetic techniques and major complications were collected. Descriptive analysis, binary logistic regression modelling and comparisons with earlier data were conducted. Data were collected from 3117 procedures, including 2554 (81.9%) caesarean deliveries. Thiopental was the induction drug in 1649 (52.9%) patients, compared with propofol in 1419 (45.5%). Suxamethonium was the neuromuscular blocking drug for tracheal intubation in 2631 (86.1%), compared with rocuronium in 367 (11.8%). Difficult tracheal intubation was reported in 1 in 19 (95%CI 1 in 16-22) and failed intubation in 1 in 312 (95%CI 1 in 169-667). Obese patients were over-represented compared with national baselines and associated with difficult, but not failed intubation. There was more evidence of change in practice for induction drugs (increased use of propofol) than neuromuscular blocking drugs (suxamethonium remains the most popular). There was evidence of improvement in practice, with increased monitoring and reversal of neuromuscular blockade (although this remains suboptimal). Despite a high risk of difficult intubation in this population, videolaryngoscopy was rarely used (1.9%)