A green infrastructure spatial planning model for evaluating ecosystem service tradeoffs and synergies across three coastal megacities

Abstract

A growing number of cities are investing in green infrastructure to foster urban resilience and sustainability. While these nature-based solutions are often promoted on the basis of their multifunctionality, in practice, most studies and plans focus on a single benefit, such as stormwater management. This represents a missed opportunity to strategically site green infrastructure to leverage social and ecological co-benefits. To address this gap, this paper builds on existing modeling approaches for green infrastructure planning to create a more generalizable tool for comparing spatial tradeoffs and synergistic 'hotspots' for multiple desired benefits. I apply the model to three diverse coastal megacities: New York City, Los Angeles (United States), and Manila (Philippines), enabling cross-city comparisons for the first time. Spatial multi-criteria evaluation is used to examine how strategic areas for green infrastructure development across the cities change depending on which benefit is prioritized. GIS layers corresponding to six planning priorities (managing stormwater, reducing social vulnerability, increasing access to green space, improving air quality, reducing the urban heat island effect, and increasing landscape connectivity) are mapped and spatial tradeoffs assessed. Criteria are also weighted to reflect local stakeholders' desired outcomes as determined through surveys and stakeholder meetings and combined to identify high priority areas for green infrastructure development. To extend the model's utility as a decision-support tool, an interactive web-based application is developed that allows any user to change the criteria weights and visualize the resulting hotspots in real time. The model empirically illustrates the complexities of planning green infrastructure in different urban contexts, while also demonstrating a flexible approach for more participatory, strategic, and multifunctional planning of green infrastructure in cities around the world.

Blue–Green Infrastructure for Flood and Water Quality Management in Southeast Asia: Evidence and Knowledge Gaps

“…Majidi et al (2019) assessed the effectiveness of various nature-based solutions based on a range of criteria covering both hydrologic and urban cooling services. Meerow (2019) examined synergistic 'hotspots' that maximise co-benefits in Manila and found that the stormwater management service correlated positively with three other services: reducing social vulnerability, reducing the urban heat island effect and improving air quality. Other authors have examined which co-benefits should be prioritised.…”

Unequal Protection Revisited: Planning for Environmental Justice, Hazard Vulnerability, and Critical Infrastructure in Communities of Color

“…75 There is an opportunity for green infrastructure to support stormwater management, flood mitigation, and other ecosystem services and social benefits including reducing social vulnerability, access to green space, and improved mental health. 76 Nevertheless, how power, privilege, planning policies, and development patterns affect infrastructure management have to be examined. 77 Infrastructures are the fundamental building blocks of neighborhoods.…”

Green infrastructure: The future of urban flood risk management?

“…Despite this, clearer understanding of best management practices within GI scheme design is needed to ensure long term functioning and to mitigate against failure. Tools for evaluating GI success and providing an evidence base for GI implementation are beginning to be complied for GI schemes (e.g., Kapetas & Fenner, 2020; Meerow, 2019), but GI should be designed to be resilient to future changes, implying that GI should possess adaptive capacity and, ideally, the ability to naturally respond to changes in the surrounding areas (Johnson et al, 2019), much like a natural system.…”

“…The European Commission highlighted the potential multiple benefits of GI, defined as “ a strategically planned network of high quality natural and semi‐natural areas with other environmental features, which are designed and managed to deliver a wide range of ecosystem services and protect biodiversity in both rural and urban settings ” (European Commission, 2013). While urban GI are often presented as multifunctional assets, in practice, most schemes focus on a single benefit, such as stormwater management (Kabisch et al, 2016; Meerow, 2019). As such, GI is a key component of the surface water management strategies of many progressive global cities at risk of urban flooding (see Figure 1).…”