Cited by 255Urban Stormwater Management SolutionsUrban Planning and Landscape DesignUrban Heat Island Mitigation

Challenges of mainstreaming green infrastructure in built environment professions

Open access
Zuniga-Teran, Adriana A., Staddon, Chad, de Vito, Laura, Gerlak, Andrea K., Ward, Sarah, Schoeman, Yolandi, Hart, Aimee, Booth, Giles·2020·Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

Abstract

Green infrastructure (GI) has been identified as a promising approach to help cities adapt to climate change through the provision of multiple ecosystem services. However, GI contributions to urban resilience will not be realized until it is more fully mainstreamed in the built environment and design professions. Here, we interrogate five key challenges for the effective implementation of GI: (1) design standards; (2) regulatory pathways; (3) socio-economic considerations; (4) financeability; and (5) innovation. Methods include a literature review, case studies, and interviews with resilience managers. We propose a people-centred and context-dependent approach to advance effective implementation of GI in urban planning. We highlight two underlying currents that run across all of the challenges – (1) the role of political will as a pre-condition for tackling all challenges holistically; and (2) the role of stakeholder engagement in achieving public support, harnessing funding, and maintaining and monitoring GI in the long term.Highlights:• The effective implementation of GI is context-specific and should adhere to the basic principles of appropriate technology.• Continuous community engagement is needed to ensure the inclusivity and multi-functionality of GI.• Challenges to successful GI are intersectional and therefore cannot be addressed singly in isolation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09640568.2019.1605890

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Governance challenges include limited uptake of NbS in urban planning, limited project-based planning, and siloed approaches in planning practices.

    “Governance challenges include the limited uptake of NbS in urban planning, limited project-based planning, and siloed approaches in planning practices (23, 31, 53, 65, 66).”
  • Ecological research on NbS often pays limited attention to social dynamics and issues of equity, justice, global power imbalances, and distribution of benefits across communities.

    “Similarly, ecological research on NbS often pays limited attention to social dynamics and issues of equity, justice, global power imbalances, and distribution of benefits across communities (5, 49, 53).”
  • Socioeconomic dimensions and context are underexamined in NbS research to date, and unappreciated in the role they play in the effective implementation of NbS.

    “Socioeconomic dimensions and context are underexamined in NbS research to date, and unappreciated in the role they play in the effective implementation of NbS (53, 111).”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 81 · Cited by 255

Authors
Zuniga-Teran, A. A., Staddon, C., de Vito, L., Gerlak, A. K., Ward, S., Schoeman, Y., Hart, A., & Booth, G.
Affiliations
  • Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA;
  • University of the West of England (GB)
  • Department of Geography and Environmental Management, University of the West of England, Bristol, UK;
  • University of Arizona (US)
  • IIE MSA (ZA)
  • Arcadis (United Kingdom) (GB)
Venue
Journal of Environmental Planning and Management
Published
2019-06-12
Volume
63
Issue
4
Pages
710-732
ISSN
  • 0964-0568 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0559
OpenAlex
W2949227897
Cited by
255
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 3
FWCI
9.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Environmental Planning and Management (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • UA Campus Repository (The University of Arizona) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • UWE Research Repository (UWE Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Urban Stormwater Management Solutions
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Urban Planning and Landscape Design
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Urban Heat Island Mitigation
Keywords
green infrastructure, mainstreaming, urban resilience, climate change adaptation, ecosystem services, design standards, regulatory pathways, socio-economic considerations, innovation, political will, stakeholder engagement, community participation, appropriate technology, urban planning, built environment professions

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review