Assessment of the Sustainability Performance of Eco-Engineering Measures in the Mediterranean Region

Abstract

Eco-engineering has a crucial role in defining and achieving the sustainability credentials of a civil engineering project. Better eco-engineering practices would help better in reducing the adverse impacts on the environment and society, but also on the financial performance of the project. However, the assessment of the sustainability effects of eco-engineering strategies can be challenging, as the treatment of this topic has been neglected in the scientific literature. The challenges lie in balancing the project delivery objectives with the sustainable design that will ensure appropriate and satisfactory environmental and financial performance and deliver social benefits such as ecosystem services. In order to achieve better practice and advance the knowledge in the field, there is a need for broader analysis of completed eco-engineering projects applied at different spatio-temporal scales. The aim of this study was to critically analyse 23 eco-engineering case studies provided by the ECOMED project partners using a life cycle analysis through a single sustainability framework based on a relatively small set of key performance indicators (KPIs), which reflect the principles of sustainability, and which are not contextual for eco-engineering projects. The objectives of this study are twofold: (i) to highlight areas of best practice and potential enhancement in the application of eco-engineering strategies, and (ii) to propose refinement and enhancement of the existing framework with KPIs contextual to eco-engineering projects. The results of the study suggest that the feasibility, mobilisation, and the long-term stages of an eco-engineering project are the most sustainable project stages, while the award, construction, and monitoring stages could generally benefit from a range of enhancements including benefits stemming from double-loop learning and a common basis for the specification and quantification of the financial resources needed to apply eco-engineering strategies. The outcomes of this study will benefit decision makers and eco-engineering practitioners alike in terms of not only raising the sustainability profile of the projects they are involved in, but also in terms of more efficient and cost-effective application of eco-engineering strategies.

A Novel Integrated Design Methodology for Nature-Based Solutions and Soil and Water Bioengineering Interventions: The Tardio&Mickovski Methodology

“…It is worth mentioning that, to the above purely mechanical objective, we must add all the ecological and ecosystem benefits obtained in parallel. Indeed, a comprehensive and fair assessment of nature-based solutions (NBS) and SWB techniques must include all benefits and effects achieved throughout the service life of the intervention [8]. Parameters such as biodiversity increase check, resilience evolution check, sustainability check, etc.…”

“…According to the strategy and philosophy of the SWB works, the materials that initially provide rigidity and stability to a slope will gradually transfer their stabilizing functions to the developing vegetation and, hence, ensure sustainability of the solution [8]. On the other hand, the use of plants as a building material transfers and transcends the plant multifunctionality to engineering structures.…”

“…There are general decision frameworks aiding the decision-making process regarding quantitative and temporal aspects of the SWB approach [8,[11][12][13], as well as protocols for sampling, testing, and monitoring of SWB interventions [14,15], although an experience-based and detailed design protocol is still lacking [16]. In this study, our objectives are to integrate the stress transfer process between the inert elements and the vegetation, as well to incorporate both the typical dynamic nature and the evolution of an SWB work into an integrated ecoengineering design methodology.…”

A nature-based solution selection framework: Criteria and processes for addressing hydro-meteorological hazards at open-air laboratories across Europe

“…Future enhancement of the proposed framework should see its application accompanied by an assessment of the sustainability performance at each stage of the NbS selection process. This assessment can be carried out using existing approaches (e.g., Mickovski and Thomson, 2017;Mickovski et al, 2022), which can, then, be used as a planning tool for the next steps in the NbS construction process. As mentioned earlier, the performance assessment will have to include the environmental, societal, financial, and engineering aspects of each NbS to have a common basis for comparison and selection.…”

“…Currently, the main challenge for implementing and upscaling NbS is the lack of long-term evidence on the feasibility and performance of NbS projects together with the lack of action-oriented frameworks contributing towards capacity building in NbS (Wickenberg et al, 2021). These frameworks should provide guidance for the design, implementation, and monitoring of NbS Mickovski et al, 2022). However, a key practical challenge for NbS planning is the selection of suitable and context-specific NbS for achieving strategic goals (Raymond et al, 2017;Cohen-Shacham et al, 2019).…”