Task B

B: Evidence base from case studies:

Coordinator: University of Thessaloniki

The Task B will develop methods for guiding case studies on assessing risk reduction performance of nature- based/green infrastructure (GI) solutions. For this, the Task will assess the ancillary benefits of GI, as well as the costs involved to develop GI. The risk assessment in Task B follows the overall risk assessment approach as used by IPCC (2013), where risk is being defined as a function of the hazard, exposure and vulnerability of those assets and people. Developing green infrastructure can influence all three factors, such that overall risk is reduced. For example, coastal mangrove forest or the instalment of artificial reefs lowers the probability of storm surges hitting the coastal urban areas that may lay behind the GI. Similarly, green roofs in urban areas may both lower the probability that extreme precipitation inundate streets and houses, and also lower the exposure from people to heat-stress through the insulating effect from GI against heatwaves. Additional, GI solutions promise a range of co-benefits, such as recreation, landscape aesthetics, biodiversity conservation, provisioning services as fish and timber, which are not provided by grey infrastructure measures.

Action B.1: REVIEW – Critical review of the evidence base for GI:
Assessing what GI measures are currently implemented or proposed in the cases, their costs, and what information is already available for identifying their effect on current- and future risk levels, and co-benefits.

Action B.2: RISK – Risk assessment/GI benefits for DRR:
Assessment of current- and future risk for 2 selected ‘Lighthouse cases’.
-> Download the Pdf

Action B.3: CO-BENEFITS – Valuing costs and co-benefits of GI:
Assessing the co-benefits of GI, i.e. benefits from ecosystem services, such as recreation, nutrient retention, reduced soil erosion, reduction of noise and PM etc., as well as biodiversity conservation.


WordPress Appliance - Powered by TurnKey Linux