Greenways and Ecological Networks: Concepts, Differences, Similarities

In recent decades green infrastructure (GI) frameworks have been widely used for developing theoretical and practical models of sustainable land reorganization. Although there is still much confusion regarding various aspects of green infrastructure, since many differing perspectives have generated different definitions that emphasise the complexity of the green infrastructure concept, it is possible to find important differences and common points

Water Funds: Conserving Green Infrastructure

This manual is an effort by TNC to compile, analyze and synthesize its own experience, together with that of the water funds already in existence and under creation, in order to provide operational guidelines to people and organizations interested in establishing a water fund or similar mechanism. Each location has different ecological, social, economic, legal and institutional features and, therefore, each water fund will have its own characteristics, phases and projections. This manual presents general guidelines and logical steps that must be followed to boost the opportunities and benefits of a water fund and to minimize possible obstacles for its creation. It is not intended to be an in-depth look at every aspect of water funds. Although TNC participates in several other initiatives and similar approaches to watershed management, such as the water producers program in Brazil, this document will not address those initiatives and will only focus on the water funds scheme, placing greater emphasis on experiences in the Andean region

Green infrastructure: Research into practice

The Centre for Sustainable Planning and Environments at the University of the West of England, Bristol have been commissioned by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) to conduct a review of how the evidence base for Green Infrastructure (GI) is being translated into practice. This review will inform the future investment in GI from Innovation Programme and Partnerships within NERC.First, a review of grey literature identified the evidence related to the benefits of GI to biodiversity, ecosystem services and where these have been monetised.Second, in order to gain further insight into GI practices and their relationship with academic research there were two events bringing together the GI community of research, policy and practice

A guide and toolkit: green infrastructure

Toolkit to support the development and implementation of projects aimed at enhancing or protecting green infrastructure. Provides a rationale for investment in green infrastructure and an evaluation framework for assisting learning and decision making

Integrating Green Infrastructure Into Stormwater Policy: Reliability, Watershed Management, and Environmental Psychology as Holistic Tools for Success

As cities continue to expand, the issues of flood control and urban water quality have become major modern sustainability challenges. Green infrastructure—the use of nature-based solutions to target, treat, and store stormwater at its source—has emerged as a possible solution. While green infrastructure does offer multiple benefits for urban users, its performance is also highly variable. This Article addresses a key gap in existing literature by explicitly addressing how uncertainty in environmental and anthropogenic factors affects green infrastructure performance and integration within the Clean Water Act’s municipal separate storm sewer (MS4) regulatory program

National benchmark for green infrastructure: A feasibility study

This research examines whether a market exists for a national benchmark for green infrastructure (GI) in England. It is funded through a Natural Environment Research Council Innovation Fund (Grant Reference: NE/N016971/1). This builds on a Knowledge Transfer Partnership between the University of the West of England (UWE) and Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust, a project which includes the development of a local benchmark for Gloucestershire and the West of England and which focusses, naturally, on local priorities.This project sought to answer three main questions:•What is the demand for a GI benchmark in the built environment sector?•What types of GI and corresponding ecosystem services should the benchmark include?•What is the most appropriate model to ensure the long-term success of the benchmark?First, a desktop review of relevant assessment systems was conducted to examine a) if, and how, GI is incorporated into such systems and b) their overall operation to understand current practice within the built environment sector. The desktop review included 22 assessment systems, including benchmarks for green developments (building and community-scale) and other infrastructure, and audits, awards, guidance and tool kits that related more specifically to GI, green space or biodiversity.Second, five Expert Symposia were held to test the findings of the review as well as the initial work completed in the KTP on experts from the built environment and GI professions. Thus, the five symposia were co-hosted by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS), Landscape Institute, Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI), The Royal Society of Wildlife Trusts (RSWT), and Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA). Whilst the first three of these were quite profession specific, the latter two included participants from a broader range of backgrounds. A total of 55 experts participated in the symposia

Can urban metabolism models advance green infrastructure planning? Insights from ecosystem services research

Urban metabolism studies have gained momentum in recent years as a means to assess the environmental performance of cities and to point to more resource-efficient strategies for urban development. Recent literature reviews report a growing number of applications of the industrial ecology model for Material Flow Analysis (MFA) in the design of the built environment. However, MFA applications in green infrastructure development are scarce. In this article, we argue that: i) the use of MFA in green infrastructure practice can inform decision-making towards more resource-efficient urban planning; ii) the ecosystem service concept is critical to operationalize MFA for green infrastructure planning and design, and, through this, can enhance the impact of urban metabolism research on policy making and planning practice. The article draws from a systematic review of literature on urban ecosystem services and benefits provided by green infrastructure in urban regions. The review focuses on ecosystem services that can contribute to a more energy-efficient and less carbon-intensive urban metabolism. Using the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services as a baseline, we then discuss opportunities for integrating energy provision and climate regulation ecosystem services in MFA. Our discussion demonstrates that the accounting of ecosystem services in MFA enables expressing impacts of green infrastructure on the urban energy mix (renewable energy provision), the magnitude of energy use (mitigation of building energy demand), and the dynamics of biogeochemical processes in cities (carbon sequestration). We finally propose an expanded model for MFA that illustrates a way forward to integrate the ecosystem service concept in urban metabolism models and to enable their application in green infrastructure planning and design

Green Infrastructure

The passage of the 1972 Clean Water Act transformed American rivers and streams from industrial dumping grounds into waterways suitable for drinking, navigation, and recreation. Despite years of progress, however, the work of protecting and maintaining Southwestern Pennsylvania’s most vulnerable waterways is far from complete. Frequent rainfall and outdated sewer infrastructure produce a set of hazardous conditions that degrade waterways and threaten human health. As a result, many communities throughout the region fall short of environmental compliance. As regulators converge on Southwestern Pennsylvania, residents and regional leaders are seeking a sustainable, cost-effective solution to their wet weather crisis. Traditionally, gray infrastructure—the system of underground pipes and tanks that conveys wastewater to sewage treatment facilities—was considered the only reliable means of preventing polluted stormwater from entering rivers and streams. Recently, however, a reliable and natural alternative has emerged. Green infrastructure, an approach that aims to replicate natural hydrologic processes by managing stormwater where it falls, could offer an alternative to the reliance upon costly, large-scale gray infrastructure expansion. Beyond its water management function, green infrastructure offers a number of community benefits, including its ability to improve neighborhood aesthetics, increase property values, provide cleaner air, moderate temperatures, reduce crime, and generate community engagement. Local champions of green infrastructure hail from academia, philanthropy, government, and the community—and their numbers are growing. These regional leaders and their vision for Southwestern Pennsylvania have hastened the development of green infrastructure throughout the region, producing a number of innovative projects strategically located in areas of high need. Despite their efforts, however, green infrastructure remains concentrated in small pockets of the region. Realizing the full benefits of green infrastructure requires community buy-in and a strategic watershed-based approach to planning and installation. Before green infrastructure can be considered a feasible and reliable alternative to gray infrastructure, green experts must precisely quantify its costs and benefits and formalize approaches to design and installation that are region specific. When these benefits and technologies are better understood, regional leaders can begin the work of bringing green technologies to every community in the region. Developing a green infrastructure industry in Southwestern Pennsylvania will take time. Successful implementation requires up-front investments in research, planning, and community engagement. Green technology must be proven and trusted before it can be widely applied. This report recommends that Southwestern Pennsylvania pursue green infrastructure in two distinct phases: first, research and planning, and second, engagement and expansion

Green Infrastructure

The transportation industry has increasingly recognized the vital role sustainability serves in promoting and protecting the transportation infrastructure of the nation. Many state Departments of Transportation have correspondingly increased efforts to incorporate concepts of sustainability into the planning, design, and construction phases of projects and congruently adopted sustainability measures into their internal standard policies and procedures. Sustainably constructed highways foster economic development, promote stewardship of the environment, and solicit citizen involvement for an integrated, comprehensive approach to project planning. As part of an effort to understand the extent to which sustainable design and construction principles are being used, this report selects and analyzes three case studies involving previously completed KYTC projects and assesses their commitment to sustainable concepts. Specifically, this report examines the extent to which KYTC utilized sustainable concepts for each case study as described in FHWA’s INVEST rating system. This research effort comprised three components. First, KTC researchers analyzed KYTC’s policies and manuals for project planning, design, and construction and determined the extent to which INVEST criteria and related principles were incorporated into their standard processes. Second, KTC analyzed the individual case studies themselves, to include project plans and other relevant documentation. Finally, KTC conducted interviews with each of the KYTC district offices responsible for managing those previously completed projects and obtained feedback on the INVEST criteria used for each particular project. Following this approach, KTC validated and finalized the assigned scoring ratings for each case study in accordance with the INVEST scoring guidance. In summary, this report describes the sustainable concepts and corresponding INVEST scores for each project, presents a summary of the main findings, and provides recommendations for the way ahead