Asset management for blue-green infrastructures: a scoping review

Abstract

Urban drainage systems have developed way beyond the traditional piped combined or separate sewer systems. Many ‘new’ systems are being introduced, ranging from stormwater infiltration facilities to green roofs. However, the widely advocated blue-green infrastructures are typically overlooked by asset managers, which will very likely have detrimental effects on their performance, service life, and wider adoption. In this paper, the working group on Urban Drainage Asset Management (UDAM – https://udam.home.blog/) of the IWA and IAHR Joint Committee on Urban Drainage discusses whether the state-of-the-art knowledge based on conventional sewer asset management is sufficient to develop asset management for blue-green infrastructures (BGIs). The discussion is structured around the five preconditions for effective control and asset management. Results show that asset management for BGIs is still underdeveloped due to a lack of monitoring techniques covering the broad range of BGI benefits and performance indicators, inspection techniques covering relevant failure mechanisms and models describing these mechanisms, maintenance and rehabilitation options, and sufficient support tools to aid inhabitants in the operation and maintenance of their individual BGIs such as green roofs or vegetated swales.

Water infrastructure asset management: state of the art and emerging research themes

“…Regarding this, the following themes appear pertinent although they are practically neglected in the scientific and technical literature: the study of the life and performance of green infrastructure and nature-based solutions; the implementation of their management as assets (Langeveld et al, 2022); their interface with grey infrastructure in more complex systems. As with everything mentioned previously, research in this area will require interdisciplinarity.…”

“…This paper is not a systematic review as others encountered in the current literature and used in the following (Bradley et al, 2016;L. Chen & Bai, 2019;Daulat et al, 2022;Hawari et al, 2020;Langeveld et al, 2022;Matejko, 1983;McDonald, 2019;Mohammadi et al, 2019;Mohammadi et al, 2020;Nkwunonwo et al, 2023;Sadeghikhah et al, 2022). It highlights research proposals based on the authors' experience faced with an analysis of the perspectives set out in recent articles (2018)(2019)(2020)(2021)(2022), and supported by a state of the art largely based on the literature in the field.…”

Urban nature-based solutions planning for biodiversity outcomes: human, ecological, and artificial intelligence perspectives

“…While engineers and scientists have been working hard on objectively optimising the performance of nature, application of such technologies has not been as widespread as we hoped. The economic sustainability of current NBS practices and technologies is still questionable (Langeveld et al, 2022). It heavily depends on complexity of NBS applied (e.g., whether it is a very technical solution requiring specific operation and care, or common natural feature), longevity of the solution (short-term or long-term management and care), and method used for economic evaluation (evaluation based only on direct costs and profits, or it also includes benefits of ecosystem services).…”

Stormwater Quality and Long-Term Efficiency Capturing Potential Toxic Elements in Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems—Is the Soil Quality of Bio-Swales after 10–20 Years Still Acceptable?

“…There is a need to monitor and document the function of NBSs to show the impact the NBSs have in handling stormwater, especially in a changing climate [44]. This study is a contribution to such documentation.…”