Assessing the IUCN global standard for nature-based solutions in riverine flood risk mitigation

被引:4
作者
Berg, Maikel [1 ]
Spray, Chris J. [3 ]
Blom, Astrid [1 ]
Slinger, Jill H. [1 ]
Stancanelli, Laura M. [1 ]
Snoek, Yvo [2 ]
Schielen, Ralph M. J. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Delft Univ Technol, Delft, Netherlands
[2] Netherlands Minist Infrastruct & Water Management, Utrecht, Netherlands
[3] Dundee Univ, Dundee, Scotland
关键词
NbS-Framework; Societal challenges; Sustainability and mainstreaming; Biodiversity; Economic;
D O I
10.1016/j.envdev.2024.101025
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) published their Global Standard for Nature-based Solutions (NbS) in an effort to further a common understanding and successful application of NbS. Our objective is to analyse the applicability of and considerations and advancements in using the IUCN Standard, as very few studies have examined and reflected on its actual application. As method, we applied the IUCN Standard to three case studies of river restoration projects with a focus on flood risk mitigation: (1) Eddleston Water Project, (2) "Room for the River" Deventer Project, and (3) Missouri River Levee Setback Project. Rather than evaluating the case studies itself, we evaluated the outcome to find the strong and weak points of the IUCN Standard. The gathered data (publicly accessible documents, conducted interviews with experts and stakeholders) was analysed and showed the role of the number of documents and interviews available. This determined the outcome of the IUCN assessment. The consultation of project experts has appeared to be an essential step in the data collection, while stakeholder interviews and field visits were less important, but did increase the degree of substantiation and the ease of data collection, respectively. Although restricted by a limited evaluation of flood risk mitigation studies, using the IUCN Standard for an ex -post assessment can provide credibility to project processes (e.g. stakeholder engagement and adaptive management), reveal project strengths and weaknesses, and provide opportunities for the comparison of projects. Hence, the IUCN Standard aptly evaluates process-based aspects of Nature-based Solutions for riverine flood risk mitigation.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 73 条
[61]   How does a nature-based solution for flood control compare to a technical solution? Case study evidence from Belgium [J].
Turkelboom, Francis ;
Demeyer, Rolinde ;
Vranken, Liesbet ;
De Becker, Piet ;
Raymaekers, Filip ;
De Smet, Lieven .
AMBIO, 2021, 50 (08) :1431-1445
[62]  
Tweed Forum, 2020, Eddleston Water Project - Review of Stakeholder Engagement Webinar
[63]  
Urbland DN, 2007, Ruimtelijk Kwaliteitskader - Ruimte voor de Riverprojecten - Deventer
[64]  
USACE, 2013, Finding of No Significant Impact & Revision to: December, 2011 Tiered Environmental Assessment: Public Law 84-99 Emergency Levee Rehabilitation Program
[65]  
USACE, 2013, Public notice - project No: NWO-PM-A-13-003
[66]  
USACE, 2018, The Sponsor's Guide - to the USACE Levee Safety Program
[67]  
Van de Laar R., 2010, Planstudie Ruimte voor de Rivier Deventer: Milieueffectrapport
[68]  
van Gerner H., 2015, 20150909Ruimte voor de RivierJachthaven-Zandweerplas-13 Photograph
[69]  
Verdonschot P., 2015, Fact Sheets for Restoration Projects - REFORM (D4.5)
[70]  
Werritty A., 2010, Restoration strategy: eddleston water scoping study