Negotiating the green obstacle course: Ranking priorities and problems for municipal green infrastructure implementation
Negotiating the green obstacle course: Ranking priorities and problems for municipal green infrastructure implementation
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127436
复制
发表时间：
2022-01-01
影响因子：
6.4
通讯作者：
Collins, Alexandra M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Back, Phil;Collins, Alexandra M.
本文阐述了一项研究的结果，该研究探讨了小城市在实施绿色基础设施(GI)项目时面临的优先事项和障碍，并按感知重要性排序。这项研究收集了欧洲西北部四个国家人口少于50万的城市的49名市政官员和民选代表的意见，采用封闭式卡片分类方法作为半结构化访谈形式的一部分。结果表明，优先事项有明确的等级，特别关注居民以人为本的利益，特别是美观和宜居性作为地理标志交付的关键目标的重要性，以及在选举周期内确保居民获得明显好处的可取性；与环境和经济挑战有关的长期目标，尽管在公司政策中得到承认，但在交付时会吸引较低的优先事项，可能会遇到与其他预期利益的权衡。正如其他研究发现的那样，GI交付的最大障碍不是资金，尽管这仍然很重要；相反，参与者将其归因于缺乏领导力和对绿色倡议的优先顺序，城市组织内部的合作困难和分散。能力也是一个明显的问题，调查结果突显出缺乏资源(包括资金)，但也缺乏收集证据支持项目的技能，以及工作人员竞标和交付新的全球倡议提案的时间。当将这些调查结果与大城市的其他调查结果进行比较时，特别是那些人口超过100万的城市，结果表明影响地理标志实施的优先顺序、临界质量、资源和能力以及能力方面的差异，这些是重要的，因为它们可能阻止大城市的地理标志最佳做法可移植到规模较小的城市，而大城市往往更活跃和更具创新性。知识的联合生产可为改善地理信息系统的实施提供相当大的潜力，但任何此类计划的设计都应认识到能力问题，为此应提供资源，允许较小城市的从业者参与。最后，答复者强调了当地社区日益提高的环境意识，虽然这方面的效果还有待观察，但人们认为这在改善小城市实施地理信息系统方面有相当大的潜力。
This paper sets out the results of a study exploring, and ranking in order of perceived significance, the priorities and obstacles faced by smaller cities when implementing green infrastructure (GI) projects. The study captured the views of 49 municipal officers and elected representatives in cities of less than 500,000 population across four countries in northwest Europe, using a closed card sorting methodology as part of a semi-structured interview format. The results show a clear hierarchy in priorities, with particular attention paid to anthropocentric benefits to residents, especially the importance of aesthetics and liveability as a key objective in GI delivery, and the desirability of securing visible benefit to residents within the electoral cycle; longer-term objectives linked to environmental and economic challenges, although acknowledged in corporate policies, attract a lower priority when it comes to delivery, and may encounter trade-offs against other desired benefits. The greatest obstacle to GI delivery is not funding, as found in other studies, although this remains significant; rather, it is difficulty of collaborations and fragmentation within the city organisation which participants attributed to a lack of leadership and prioritisation of green initiatives. Capacity is also a clear issue, and the results highlight a lack of resources (including funding) but also skills in assembling evidence in support of projects, and staff time to bid for and deliver new GI proposals. When comparing these findings to others from larger cities, particularly those with a population over 1 million, the results suggest differences in prioritisation, critical mass, resources and capabilities and capacities influencing GI implementation, these are important to consider as they may prevent transferability of GI best practices from larger cities, who tend to be more active and innovative, to smaller scale cities. Co-production of knowledge, could offer considerable potential to improve GI implementation, but the design of any such schemes should recognise the issue of capacity by providing resources to allow participation of practitioners in smaller municipalities. Finally, respondents highlighted increasing environmental awareness of local communities and whilst the effect of this is yet to be seen, this was considered as having considerable potential in improving GI implementation in smaller municipalities.