Opening up the subsurface for the cities of tomorrow The subsurface in the planning process

Mielby, Susie; Eriksson, Ingelöv; Diarmad, S.; Campbell, Gary A.; Lawrence, David

doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.11.125

Cited by 22 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The idea was also to foster development of policy which reflects the importance of the urban subsurface. As an end result, the Cost Sub-Urban program could recommend the basis for improved availability, initial use and re-use of subsurface data (Campell et al 2017;Gogu et al 2017;Mielby et al 2017;NGU 2018).…”

Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geology for society in 2058: some down-to-earth perspectives

Smelror

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting and correction before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the book series pertain. Although reasonable efforts have been made to obtain all necessary permissions from third parties to include their copyrighted content within this article, their full citation and copyright line may not be present in this Accepted Manuscript version. Before using any content from this article, please refer to the Version of Record once published for full citation and copyright details, as permissions may be required.

show abstract

Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geology for society in 2058: some down-to-earth perspectives

Smelror

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities). Embedding understanding of the subsurface (e.g., geotechnical properties, shallow geohazards potential) into urban planning can increase the safety of urban development (Mielby et al, 2017).…”

Section: Improve Links Between Drr and Sustainable Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Invited Perspective: Building sustainable and resilient communities – Recommended actions for natural hazard scientists

Gill¹,

Taylor²,

Duncan³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Reducing disaster risk is critical to securing the ambitions of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and natural hazard scientists make a key contribution to achieving this aim. Understanding Earth processes and dynamics underpins hazard analysis, which (alongside analysis of other disaster risk drivers) informs the actions required to manage and reduce disaster risk. Here we suggest how natural hazard research scientists can better contribute to the planning and development of sustainable and resilient communities through improved engagement in disaster risk reduction (DRR). Building on existing good practice, this perspective piece aims to provoke discussion in the natural hazard science community about how we can strengthen our engagement in DRR. We set out seven recommendations for enhancing the integration of natural hazard science into DRR: (i) characterise multi-hazard environments, (ii) prioritise effective, positive, long-term partnerships, (iii) understand and listen to your stakeholders, (iv) embed cultural understanding into natural hazards research, (v) ensure improved and equitable access to hazards information, (vi) champion people-centred DRR (leaving no one behind), and (vii) improve links between DRR and sustainable development. We then proceed to synthesise key actions that natural hazards scientists and research funders should consider taking to improve education, training, and research design, and to strengthen institutional, financial and policy actions. We suggest that these actions should help to strengthen the effective application of natural hazards science to reduce disaster risk. By recognising and taking steps to address the issues raised in these recommendations, we propose that the natural hazard science community can more effectively contribute to the inter/transdisciplinary, integrated work required to improve DRR.

show abstract

“…Subsurface knowledge and management followed the urban development, instead of restricting it. Discussions and knowledge exchange within the framework of the COST Action TU1206 Sub-Urban have shown that this is not a unique situation for Rotterdam, but a general trend in most cities in Europe and beyond (Mielby et al 2017).…”

Section: Bridging the Gap Between Urban Planners And Subsurface Specimentioning

confidence: 99%

Planning the city of tomorrow: bridging the gap between urban planners and subsurface specialists

Dick¹,

Eriksson²,

Beer

et al. 2017

Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of the Royal Socie

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper addresses the process towards the integration of subsurface knowledge into urban planning for three cities – Rotterdam, Glasgow and Oslo – participating in the European Cooperation in Science and Technology (COST) Action TU1206 Sub-Urban. These cities each have unique challenges in managing conflicts and opportunities in the subsurface in the planning process. The COST Sub-Urban Action has enabled a unique interaction between subsurface specialists and urban planners across over 20 European cities, and has laid the foundations for a new understanding between experts who develop subsurface knowledge and those who can benefit most from it – urban planners and decision makers. Common challenges identified include: improving planning policies, enhancing the level of awareness of the subsurface in city development and the modification of legislation to include the subsurface. The paper provides a review of the current status of subsurface planning in the three cities, each of whom are aiming to adapt their urban planning practice and legislation in light of emerging subsurface knowledge, and the current major knowledge gaps. In our opinion, there are two main routes to raise awareness that lead to improved understanding and the use of subsurface information in urban planning processes: (1) the development of a subsurface policy and (2) providing subsurface information. These measures should enable subsurface knowledge to be widely disseminated in order to manage risks and opportunities, and maximise the economic, social and environmental benefits of the urban subsurface and its services on which cities depend.

show abstract

Opening up the subsurface for the cities of tomorrow The subsurface in the planning process

Cited by 22 publications

References 1 publication

Geology for society in 2058: some down-to-earth perspectives

Geology for society in 2058: some down-to-earth perspectives

Invited Perspective: Building sustainable and resilient communities – Recommended actions for natural hazard scientists

Planning the city of tomorrow: bridging the gap between urban planners and subsurface specialists

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About