Cargando…
Nature-based solutions efficiency evaluation against natural hazards: Modelling methods, advantages and limitations
Nature-based solutions (NBS) for hydro-meteorological risks (HMRs) reduction and management are becoming increasingly popular, but challenges such as the lack of well-recognised standard methodologies to evaluate their performance and upscale their implementation remain. We systematically evaluate t...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8192688/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34088074 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147058 |
_version_ | 1783706086870614016 |
---|---|
author | Kumar, Prashant Debele, Sisay E. Sahani, Jeetendra Rawat, Nidhi Marti-Cardona, Belen Alfieri, Silvia Maria Basu, Bidroha Basu, Arunima Sarkar Bowyer, Paul Charizopoulos, Nikos Gallotti, Glauco Jaakko, Juvonen Leo, Laura S. Loupis, Michael Menenti, Massimo Mickovski, Slobodan B. Mun, Seung-Jae Gonzalez-Ollauri, Alejandro Pfeiffer, Jan Pilla, Francesco Pröll, Julius Rutzinger, Martin Santo, Marco Antonio Sannigrahi, Srikanta Spyrou, Christos Tuomenvirta, Heikki Zieher, Thomas |
author_facet | Kumar, Prashant Debele, Sisay E. Sahani, Jeetendra Rawat, Nidhi Marti-Cardona, Belen Alfieri, Silvia Maria Basu, Bidroha Basu, Arunima Sarkar Bowyer, Paul Charizopoulos, Nikos Gallotti, Glauco Jaakko, Juvonen Leo, Laura S. Loupis, Michael Menenti, Massimo Mickovski, Slobodan B. Mun, Seung-Jae Gonzalez-Ollauri, Alejandro Pfeiffer, Jan Pilla, Francesco Pröll, Julius Rutzinger, Martin Santo, Marco Antonio Sannigrahi, Srikanta Spyrou, Christos Tuomenvirta, Heikki Zieher, Thomas |
author_sort | Kumar, Prashant |
collection | PubMed |
description | Nature-based solutions (NBS) for hydro-meteorological risks (HMRs) reduction and management are becoming increasingly popular, but challenges such as the lack of well-recognised standard methodologies to evaluate their performance and upscale their implementation remain. We systematically evaluate the current state-of-the art on the models and tools that are utilised for the optimum allocation, design and efficiency evaluation of NBS for five HMRs (flooding, droughts, heatwaves, landslides, and storm surges and coastal erosion). We found that methods to assess the complex issue of NBS efficiency and cost-benefits analysis are still in the development stage and they have only been implemented through the methodologies developed for other purposes such as fluid dynamics models in micro and catchment scale contexts. Of the reviewed numerical models and tools MIKE-SHE, SWMM (for floods), ParFlow-TREES, ACRU, SIMGRO (for droughts), WRF, ENVI-met (for heatwaves), FUNWAVE-TVD, BROOK90 (for landslides), TELEMAC and ADCIRC (for storm surges) are more flexible to evaluate the performance and effectiveness of specific NBS such as wetlands, ponds, trees, parks, grass, green roof/walls, tree roots, vegetations, coral reefs, mangroves, sea grasses, oyster reefs, sea salt marshes, sandy beaches and dunes. We conclude that the models and tools that are capable of assessing the multiple benefits, particularly the performance and cost-effectiveness of NBS for HMR reduction and management are not readily available. Thus, our synthesis of modelling methods can facilitate their selection that can maximise opportunities and refute the current political hesitation of NBS deployment compared with grey solutions for HMR management but also for the provision of a wide range of social and economic co-benefits. However, there is still a need for bespoke modelling tools that can holistically assess the various components of NBS from an HMR reduction and management perspective. Such tools can facilitate impact assessment modelling under different NBS scenarios to build a solid evidence base for upscaling and replicating the implementation of NBS. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8192688 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81926882021-08-25 Nature-based solutions efficiency evaluation against natural hazards: Modelling methods, advantages and limitations Kumar, Prashant Debele, Sisay E. Sahani, Jeetendra Rawat, Nidhi Marti-Cardona, Belen Alfieri, Silvia Maria Basu, Bidroha Basu, Arunima Sarkar Bowyer, Paul Charizopoulos, Nikos Gallotti, Glauco Jaakko, Juvonen Leo, Laura S. Loupis, Michael Menenti, Massimo Mickovski, Slobodan B. Mun, Seung-Jae Gonzalez-Ollauri, Alejandro Pfeiffer, Jan Pilla, Francesco Pröll, Julius Rutzinger, Martin Santo, Marco Antonio Sannigrahi, Srikanta Spyrou, Christos Tuomenvirta, Heikki Zieher, Thomas Sci Total Environ Review Nature-based solutions (NBS) for hydro-meteorological risks (HMRs) reduction and management are becoming increasingly popular, but challenges such as the lack of well-recognised standard methodologies to evaluate their performance and upscale their implementation remain. We systematically evaluate the current state-of-the art on the models and tools that are utilised for the optimum allocation, design and efficiency evaluation of NBS for five HMRs (flooding, droughts, heatwaves, landslides, and storm surges and coastal erosion). We found that methods to assess the complex issue of NBS efficiency and cost-benefits analysis are still in the development stage and they have only been implemented through the methodologies developed for other purposes such as fluid dynamics models in micro and catchment scale contexts. Of the reviewed numerical models and tools MIKE-SHE, SWMM (for floods), ParFlow-TREES, ACRU, SIMGRO (for droughts), WRF, ENVI-met (for heatwaves), FUNWAVE-TVD, BROOK90 (for landslides), TELEMAC and ADCIRC (for storm surges) are more flexible to evaluate the performance and effectiveness of specific NBS such as wetlands, ponds, trees, parks, grass, green roof/walls, tree roots, vegetations, coral reefs, mangroves, sea grasses, oyster reefs, sea salt marshes, sandy beaches and dunes. We conclude that the models and tools that are capable of assessing the multiple benefits, particularly the performance and cost-effectiveness of NBS for HMR reduction and management are not readily available. Thus, our synthesis of modelling methods can facilitate their selection that can maximise opportunities and refute the current political hesitation of NBS deployment compared with grey solutions for HMR management but also for the provision of a wide range of social and economic co-benefits. However, there is still a need for bespoke modelling tools that can holistically assess the various components of NBS from an HMR reduction and management perspective. Such tools can facilitate impact assessment modelling under different NBS scenarios to build a solid evidence base for upscaling and replicating the implementation of NBS. Elsevier 2021-08-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8192688/ /pubmed/34088074 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147058 Text en © 2021 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Review Kumar, Prashant Debele, Sisay E. Sahani, Jeetendra Rawat, Nidhi Marti-Cardona, Belen Alfieri, Silvia Maria Basu, Bidroha Basu, Arunima Sarkar Bowyer, Paul Charizopoulos, Nikos Gallotti, Glauco Jaakko, Juvonen Leo, Laura S. Loupis, Michael Menenti, Massimo Mickovski, Slobodan B. Mun, Seung-Jae Gonzalez-Ollauri, Alejandro Pfeiffer, Jan Pilla, Francesco Pröll, Julius Rutzinger, Martin Santo, Marco Antonio Sannigrahi, Srikanta Spyrou, Christos Tuomenvirta, Heikki Zieher, Thomas Nature-based solutions efficiency evaluation against natural hazards: Modelling methods, advantages and limitations |
title | Nature-based solutions efficiency evaluation against natural hazards: Modelling methods, advantages and limitations |
title_full | Nature-based solutions efficiency evaluation against natural hazards: Modelling methods, advantages and limitations |
title_fullStr | Nature-based solutions efficiency evaluation against natural hazards: Modelling methods, advantages and limitations |
title_full_unstemmed | Nature-based solutions efficiency evaluation against natural hazards: Modelling methods, advantages and limitations |
title_short | Nature-based solutions efficiency evaluation against natural hazards: Modelling methods, advantages and limitations |
title_sort | nature-based solutions efficiency evaluation against natural hazards: modelling methods, advantages and limitations |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8192688/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34088074 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147058 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kumarprashant naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT debelesisaye naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT sahanijeetendra naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT rawatnidhi naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT marticardonabelen naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT alfierisilviamaria naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT basubidroha naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT basuarunimasarkar naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT bowyerpaul naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT charizopoulosnikos naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT gallottiglauco naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT jaakkojuvonen naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT leolauras naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT loupismichael naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT menentimassimo naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT mickovskislobodanb naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT munseungjae naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT gonzalezollaurialejandro naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT pfeifferjan naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT pillafrancesco naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT prolljulius naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT rutzingermartin naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT santomarcoantonio naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT sannigrahisrikanta naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT spyrouchristos naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT tuomenvirtaheikki naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations AT zieherthomas naturebasedsolutionsefficiencyevaluationagainstnaturalhazardsmodellingmethodsadvantagesandlimitations |