{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017781541066892465, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.715909090909091, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Siting green stormwater infrastructure in a neighbourhood to maximise secondary benefits: lessons learned from a pilot project

Abstract When siting green stormwater infrastructure (GSI), cities do not respond only to technical and regulatory requirements; they also strive to maximise environmental, aesthetic and social benefits. To help cities optimise the siting of GSI in the context of climate change, we developed a participatory decision support tool. Applied to a neighbourhood, this tool identified only a few sites where GSI would yield all secondary benefits and reduce climate change vulnerability. In the light of the need for large-scale implementation of GSI in cities, this finding raises the following questions: How can the potential benefits provided by a site be best identified? Are there potential synergies or antagonisms between benefits? How do they relate to vulnerability? Can a participatory decision-making process involving local stakeholders improve this process? Informed by the existing literature on balancing ecosystem services and vulnerability, these questions are addressed within a broader perspective of landscape design and urban planning.