On the road to a new stormwater planning approach:from Model A to Model B

Abstract

Traditional models for planning urban water systems are to great extent based on technical and economic considerations (Model A). This approach is adequate for planning isolated and well-defined water systems. With the introduction of the concept of sustainability, the water systems interact with societal processes in the urban environment. We are not any more dealing with an isolated water system but with a complex adaptive system. For such systems the traditional planning models are not good enough. A more integrated planning approach is needed (Model B). An important characteristic of this new approach is that the complexity of the planning process is not combated but made manageable. As a result, during the process different space scales are handled parallel, time plays a more important role and more actors are involved. It is an open process. Also more values of water are taken into account. Different techniques for sustainable stormwater drainage are described. Based on experiences in the city of Malmö in Sweden a practical approach for integrated planning of these types of drainage systems has evolved (Model B). As a result multiple use of stormwater facilities has today been general practice in Malmö. The outcome of some sustainable stormwater projects is presented.

Reliable, resilient and sustainable water management: the Safe & SuRe approach

“…The interventions framework presented facilitates analysis from different “directions”: top‐down, middle based, bottom‐up, and circular. These directions build upon the model A and model B planning approaches proposed by Geldof and Stahre (), where model A represents traditional planning approaches and model B represents a mode of thinking whereby the “water system” is considered as being inclusive of society. The four directions are presented visually in Figure and explored in the following sections.…”

“…This approach to water management represents the conventional planning process, where decisions are made centrally and system design decisions are assumed to deliver the required level of service under prevailing conditions. While it is recognized that this approach does not reflect the multiple feedbacks present in a social–ecological–technical system and may be inadequate for complex, adaptive systems (Geldof and Stahre ), it is still widely used and therefore worthy of discussion. A top‐down approach has been used in hydrological studies, catchment management, and integrated urban water management (Bai et al ; Casal‐Campos et al ; Hickel and Zhang ), for example, and also for risk management studies and emergency planning (Jansen et al ; Cabinet Office ; Public Safety Canada ).…”

MSMA Implementation Factors in Integrated Stormwater Management

“…The use of catchment ponds can be used as a recreational area that prioritizes the natural environment without affecting the ecosystem of an area. However, recreational access and public facilities present challenges in sustainable stormwater management [17]. It involves urban design criteria in an area.…”