Risk management

We’re still building this page brick by brick. Stay tuned for the grand reveal!

NBS related risks are twofold: risks that are treated with NBS, including risks to climate resilience, biodiversity, and human health that can be managed through Nature-Based Solutions and Governance & operational risks that are managed in NBS project lifecycle. City Blues project uses the international risk management standard (ISO 31000:2018 - Risk management — Guidelines), which covers i.e. risk assessment, management, communication and reporting.

Pluvial and fluvial flood risks

Governance and political support risks

Risk management has to be integrated in relevant plans and strategic documents to guide how the city should work with climate risks. For example in Sweden it is stated by law that climate risks such as flooding, erosion and landslides have to be considered in new development areas so it is an integrated part of Malmö’s land use planning. Cities still experience a loss of green space, so preserving existing green areas is the most cost-effective risk management and should be an integral part of any plans.

Other risks are working in siloes and lack of coordination with other governance areas, conflict between NBS solutions and other objectives that a city has, insufficient commitment to objectives and the cyclical nature of political decision-making, lack of knowledge on NBS and governance capacity in advocating NBS to explain their purpose and functions to politicians and wider public., and not following general plans or EU regulations.

Financing risks

One big risk related to financing NBS is the unforeseen costs throughtout the lifespan of the solution. There can also be a lack of information and experience about the potential costs, and a challenge with getting private sector on board​. Funding must be secured for the entire NBS life cycle, but the right amount can be impossible to allocate. Therefore continuous funding through wastewater taxes or stormwater fee helps minimize risks the best.

​​Another risk is the uncertainty related to i.e. ownership of the solution, regulation and responsibilities. This means that new models for funding and clearer rules are needed.

Planning and integration risks

It can be difficult to find space for new NBS sites, especially in old areas.​ Several factors can complicate the situation and increase costs. For example, other built infrastructure, natural values, and invasive species also affect costs. ​Reconciliation is always a compromise, and not all objectives can necessarily be achieved. ​

​A lot of expertise is required from the planning team and also from the external consultants (eg flood risk mitigation). A lot of people are required around the table for planning a good NBS.​

Designing risks

Designing risks relate to not knowing how to design NBS properly to work in different conditions and have them provide multiple benefits as they should. Designing the NBS performance for variable flood settings is already a state of the art, however less knowledge is available. Guidelines exist for different NBS (e.g. volume of detention ponds due to experience of previous failures of smaller systems) and city specific design manuals and techinal handbooks with previous experiences help lower design risks.

Design process needs to have feedback loops from monitoring and maintenance experiences – continuous learning is required. We need to take monitoring seriously.​

Constructing risks

Construction phase of NBS includes many risks like unknowingly working in contaminated or unstable soil or the construction work itself being the cause of polluted soil/water. There are also procurement risks like a wrong choice of constructor. Not all construction companies are specialized in NBS construction. Companies need to raise capacity in creating ecosystems in addition to building structures. To mitigate this risk quality based criteria should be used instead of price.​

Construction can cause community conflicts (noise from machines, traffic stops etc)​ coordination risks (health and safety risks), harm for underground infrastructure and river bank erosion.

Operating and maintaining risks

Efficient monitoring needs good baseline data. Risk is a lack of knowledge on how to monitor and follow the solution against the baseline.​ Another risk is seasonal variability (how many times the maintenance need to take place). Maintenance plans ​need to have different up to date scenarios for different seasons. Invasive species management plan needs to be integrated to the maintenance plans​.

Monitoring risks

Use monitoring for actually learnings, and not doing it for the project or for the regulation​. Risks exists for example in the trustworthiness of the devices. For example, inexpensive sensors may not necessarily work. You need to test in real urban environment.​ Also not all monitoring devices withstand the Nordic climate. Maintaining measuring devices also takes time and money.​

Monitoring can also be difficult in private plots due to limited accessing. Monitoring should be designed to last as long as the NBS, but securing funding or other resources can prevent this.