The potential use of nature-based solutions as natural hazard mitigation measure for linear infrastructure in the Nordic Countries

• Published in: Geoenvironmental disasters 2024-09, Vol.11 (1), p.27-33, Article 27
• Main Authors: Capobianco, Vittoria, Palau, Rosa Maria, Solheim, Anders, Gisnås, Kjersti, Gilbert, Graham, Danielsson, Per, van der Keur, Peter
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Barriers; Biodiversity; Carbon sequestration; Case studies; Climate change; Climate change adaptation; Disaster risk reduction; Documents; Earth and Environmental Science; Earth Sciences; Ecosystem services; Environment; Environmental risk; Environmental Science and Engineering; Flood frequency; Flood management; Floods; Geoecology/Natural Processes; Geography; Hazard identification; Hazard mitigation; Information management; Infrastructure; Landslides; Landslides & mudslides; Managers; Mitigation; Natural Hazards; Review; Reviews; Rockfall; Standardization; Storms
• ISSN: 2197-8670; 2197-8670
• DOI: 10.1186/s40677-024-00287-4

Background Reliable infrastructure is vital for Nordic societies, but they face escalating climate risks. Climate change is increasing magnitude and frequency of floods, storms, and landslides, making adaptive solutions crucial. Methods This review explores Nature-Based Solutions (NbS) for mitigating natural hazards along Nordic linear infrastructure. The motivation of the review comes as result of a preliminary survey conducted among to the main infrastructure managers in the Fennoscandian peninsula. The objective was to pinpoint the natural hazards that pose greatest concern under future climate scenarios, as well as to understand which specific information is needed to adopt NbS Results Floods, erosion, landslides and rockfalls emerged as primary hazards of concern for the infrastructure owners, hence the review process was focused only on NbS aimed at mitigating the effects of these specific hazards. A total of 78 documents were identified from the review process and were integrated with examples and case studies from other relevant on-going and past projects. Despite only a few of the NbS identified in these documents were directly implemented for linear infrastructure such as roads and railways, and none dealing with electric grids, several NbS were identified to have a potential for implementation for Nordic linear infrastructure. A list of NbS options, not all implemented along linear infrastructure but with potential for it, is provided. This list is meant to serve as “vade mecum” for a quick and easy access to NbS as mitigation options for linear infrastructure managers in the Nordic Countries. The NbS are classified in green, blue, green/blue and hybrid approaches, and supported by examples of case studies both in the Nordic Countries as well as countries having similar climates. Conclusions This review underlines the challenges and opportunities of adopting NbS. Challenges such as the lack of expertise, space and climate constraints, and path dependency on adoption of traditional infrastructure must be addressed to mainstream NbS. The review highlights the importance of standardization, European guidelines, and technical manuals in promoting NbS adoption among infrastructure managers, as well as the necessity of accounting for the wider co-benefits of NbS, including carbon sequestration, biodiversity and ecosystem services. This paper contributes to the understanding of NbS as potential natural hazards mitigation options for Nordic infrastructu