The Green Infrastructure in Cities as A Tool for Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation: Slovakian and Polish Experiences

Abstract

Climate change could be seen as a 21st century phenomenon. This topic has been taken up equally by professionals as well as the general public. Adaptation and mitigation actions are needed, especially in cities where the concentration of population and an increased demand for resources (e.g., water, food, land) are expected in the coming years. Already, 400 cities have been declared to be in a "climate emergency" state. There are no longer any doubts that current environmental state requires actions and solutions for both the alarming climate situation and urban quality life development. If such action is not going to be taken, the environmental state will deteriorate. One possible solution could be the use of green infrastructure. This research compares approaches to green areas and green infrastructure development in Bratislava (Slovakia) and Wrocław (Poland). A comparison was made for projects realized between 2013 and 2018-i.e., since the publication of the European Union (EU) Strategy on Adaptation to Climate Change in 2013. The research presents an overview of delivered projects regarding land use. The overview, which is supported by a density map of implemented green projects, verifies whether the new greenery fits and fills in the existing natural areas. Secondly, the green projects were analyzed according to years and land use types using Tableau software. Moreover, the legislation of climate adaptation mechanisms and practical aspects of green infrastructure implementation are shown. Finally, actions concerning the greening of the cities were categorized into practical, educational, and participatory ones, and the potential of green infrastructure as a positive landscape, micro-climate, health, and aesthetic influence was examined.

Towards Green Resilient Cities in Eastern European Union Countries

“…Sometimes, green infrastructures can have direct economic benefits, also sustaining the overall city system resilience, for example when used for agriculture (Panagopoulos et al 2018). There are numerous papers analysing the concept of green resilient cities and the planning issues of green areas, from the perspective of their role in improving resilience to climate change (Belčáková et al 2019, Reinwald et al 2019. The direct contribution of green infrastructure (integrated into the larger concept of nature-based solutions) to build general urban resilience by effective land-use planning is also demonstrated in the literature (Bush and Doyon 2019).…”

The Combination of Building Greenery and Photovoltaic Energy Production—A Discussion of Challenges and Opportunities in Design

“…Implementing green infrastructure (GI) in cities is an important strategy to help inhabitants stay healthy [11]. GI also offers many other benefits such as noise reduction, stormwater retention and dust-particle filtering.…”

Nature-Based Solutions for Water Management in Peri-Urban Areas: Barriers and Lessons Learned from Implementation Experiences

“…Although there is not a fixed spatial scale, it is understood that peri-urban areas could tend to municipal levels for their planning competencies or bigger scales for implementations linking rural and urban systems. The multiple benefits delivered could be regarded as interrelated services, influencing different fields as landscape management; risks and climate regulation; recreation, physical and mental health, and well-being [35]. This approach is open to contextualization as various GI and ES are mentioned when referring to implementation experiences, e.g., in the use of NBS or other green terms such as GI, ES, Eb; also, its open to adaptation, since NBS could be known under other terms such as LID, WSUD, SUDS, IUWM.…”

“…The lack of interactions among the different actors involved compromises the perception of NBS, which could be negative for aspects such as costs, benefits in the short-and long-term, and impact of the solution [52]. This could lead to difficulties due to inhabitant resistance to changes [29,35], passive involvement, and insignificant increase of social cohesion [8], fear of the unknown, and uncertainty [16,17]. Some NBS functions could lead to disservices, which are perceived negatively or affect safety perceptions, i.e., fire risks on green spaces or drowning risks in SUDS [31].…”