helping to provide an overview of green infrastructure action (as was done with the Natura 2000 network)
EU: Support the development of appropriate indicators for GI valuation and monitoring
EU: Create a platform for exchanging best practices and sharing expertise
NG: Set targets and establish standards (for monitoring, measuring GI, etc)
Contextual barriers
Historical factor
Limited windows of opportunity
Low levels of existing drinking water infrastructure
Lack of synergies and integration between different sectors relevant for GI
Disconnect between policy and practice
Maintain a high awareness of relevant political considerations outside project scope, e.g. spatial plans, EU policies, regional/national elections
Consideration of local vision in project design/timing
EU: Increase coherency between EU policies across relevant sectors
EU/NG: Ensure that spending and programming is compatible with green infrastructure objectives and principles
Structural barriers Changing of management mid- project
Cross-border considerations (e.g. languages, different legal systems)
Mixed landownership titles being dealt with (private/public)
Overly detailed and rigid planning of GI projects
Hire a translator from the project’s start
Have a consistent national contact person
Increase knowledge/awareness of landowners and focus on benefits
Design projects to allow for flexibility during implementation
Regulatory barriers
Funding application and subsequent required paperwork
Conflicts between funders and requirements (e.g. different ERDF eligibility regions within a single project)
Differing definitions of GI on local/regional, national and EU levels
More funding should be made available for addressing administrative requirements or the amount of requirements should be reduced Need for harmonization of definitions, or the flexibility to adjust EU definitions/requirements to local considerations
EU: provide ‘big picture’, clarifying the concept of green infrastructure and the vision for long-term oriented future goals/action
Technical barriers Harmonizing activities while still allowing for public use of the area
Delays due to weather , breeding habits of birds, other environmental considerations
Include public awareness campaigns in the planning phase of the project, especially targeting local communities potentially affected by project activities
Allow flexibility in the timeline of projects to ensure adaptability concerning external factors
*Note: Solutions directly intended for the European Union, national governments and/or local/regional governments are labelled accordingly (EU, NG and LRG, respectively). Where no level was indicated, the solutions are left unlabelled.
legislation are considered the most powerful instruments for the development of green infrastructure and thus call for action at national and local/regional levels to better integrate green infrastructure into existing policies and legislation.
The large majority of projects being implemented at the local/regional level indicate the potential importance of the role of regional political and community support and, subsequently, the value of involving local stakeholders and integrating capacity building and awareness raising activities into project design. Raising awareness among the public and establishing stakeholder consultation processes are required where different attitudes and interests come together and “trust building” activities are needed to ensure engagement of relevant stakeholders and successful implementation of the project. Moreover, such approaches can help to change behaviours and attract public and/or private financial support.
The results also highlight the need for coordination at a national and ideally EU level for the exchange of information, experiences and best practices to optimize local/regional implementation and planning processes and spread know-how.
The cross-sectoral nature of green infrastructure projects and the subsequent diversity of objectives addressed indicate the high potential of such initiatives to contribute to and support a range of EU policies and strategies. As the majority of explored projects have several objectives, single projects can simultaneously attend to multiple local/regional needs and thereby assist broader EU goals. Recognizing this potential, increased effort is necessary to improve the coherency of EU policies and ensure that complementary activities are supported (see 6.1). Such an integrated approach calls for a broad understanding and acceptance of conservation issues and the green infrastructure approach. An extensive awareness-raising campaign would thus attempt to involve all sectors and relevant/interested stakeholders.
The high diversity of aims, focus and actors involved is also linked to a wide range of possible financing sources at different levels, which may be used alone or in combination with one another for supporting green infrastructure projects. As there is currently no dedicated funding instrument for green infrastructure at the EU level and few such instruments and dedicated resources exist at the national level, potential financing sources and their respective instruments (from all relevant sectors and policies) must be better explored and utilised. In addition, the untapped role of private actors in financing green infrastructure must be clearly outlined and their involvement and engagement into green infrastructure investments should be motivated, encouraged and maybe even incentivised.
The analysis revealed four tools which can be utilized to enable increased private sector involvement, including: the creation of a market (such as the carbon market/carbon financing); introduction of regulative instruments (e.g. a tax or fee or off-setting requirements); tax deductions; and voluntary approaches such as corporate social responsibility. In particular, helping to establish and promote public-private partnerships by the EU as well as national and regional policy makers was highlighted as one important action.
However, not only availability of financing was considered as an important success factor.
The results also showed that integrating evaluation and monitoring activities in the early stages of a project are very useful to report on a project’s progress and success, to bring up the benefits delivered, to make adjustments in the project set-up and to gain positive acknowledgement on behalf of a wider range of stakeholders as well as their support.
The systematic review of barriers faced in the in-depth case studies, which was complemented by expert knowledge, enabled the compilation of a comprehensive overview on structural, regulatory, cultural/behavioural, contextual, capacity and technical barriers and possible solution to these. In addition, numerous factors which serve as enabling factors for the successful implementation of green infrastructure projects in the different project phases (planning, setting, implementation and maintenance) have been identified. Even if both overviews are not exhaustive, they can provide very useful insights and recommendations for practitioners responsible for the development of green infrastructure projects as well as for policy makers and respective authorities to set priorities and determine corresponding activities for creating a green infrastructure supporting policy framework. The development of a spatial green infrastructure plan (at the desired level) can help to connect the variety of projects and existing green infrastructure elements as well as channel financing from the different sectors and actors.
5 Cost and benefits of green infrastructure projects
This section provides an analysis of the costs and benefits of green infrastructure projects. It defines a typology of costs and benefits, and then reviews quantitative and qualitative evidence of these benefits from the project database, six in depth case studies, and wider literature. The value of costs and benefits of individual projects is compared as far as evidence permits, and conclusions are drawn about how this evidence may be improved in future.