TY - JOUR
T1 - Knowledge, attitudes, intentions, and behavior related to green infrastructure for flood management
T2 - A systematic literature review
AU - Venkataramanan, Vidya
AU - Lopez, Denise
AU - McCuskey, David J.
AU - Kiefus, Daniel
AU - McDonald, Robert I.
AU - Miller, William M.
AU - Packman, Aaron I.
AU - Young, Sera L.
N1 - Funding Information:
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1848683 . Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. This work was also supported by The Nature Conservancy NatureNet Postdoctoral Fellows Grant, by Leslie and Mac McQuown through the McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Science , Northwestern University, and by the Resnick Family Social Impact Fund, Institute for Sustainability and Energy, Northwestern University . Sera Young was supported by an Andrew Carnegie Foundation Fellowship.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2020/6/10
Y1 - 2020/6/10
N2 - Green infrastructure (GI), which mimics natural hydrological systems, is a promising solution for flood management at the intersection of urban built infrastructure and natural systems. However, it has not yet achieved widespread uptake, due in part to insufficient understanding of human dimensions of the broader socio-ecological-technical system. We therefore conducted a multidisciplinary systematic literature review to synthesize research on people's existing knowledge about flood risk and GI, and how that shapes their attitudes and motivation to adopt new solutions. We systematically screened 21,207 studies on GI for flood management; 85 met our inclusion criteria. We qualitatively analyzed these studies to extract results on knowledge, attitudes, intentions, and behavior relating to GI for flood management. Overall, knowledge of GI was low across the 44 studies in which it was evaluated. Seventy studies assessed attitudes about GI, including the functional, aesthetic, health and safety, recreational, conservation, financial, and cultural value of GI, albeit their measurement was inconsistent. Willingness to implement or pay for GI varied considerably across 55 studies in which it was measured. Twenty studies measured and documented behavior relating to GI use, and these found low rates of adoption. Few studies systematically assessed the role of demographic, socio-economic, or geographic characteristics that could influence individuals' knowledge, attitudes, intentions or behavior, and thereby the success of GI programs. We recommend that researchers should more systematically capture data on human dimensions of GI (i.e. knowledge, attitudes, intentions, and behavior) across diverse settings to improve program design and uptake, especially among vulnerable populations. Greater attention to the social component of the socio-ecological-technical system will help ensure that GI programs are equitable, inclusive, and sustainable.
AB - Green infrastructure (GI), which mimics natural hydrological systems, is a promising solution for flood management at the intersection of urban built infrastructure and natural systems. However, it has not yet achieved widespread uptake, due in part to insufficient understanding of human dimensions of the broader socio-ecological-technical system. We therefore conducted a multidisciplinary systematic literature review to synthesize research on people's existing knowledge about flood risk and GI, and how that shapes their attitudes and motivation to adopt new solutions. We systematically screened 21,207 studies on GI for flood management; 85 met our inclusion criteria. We qualitatively analyzed these studies to extract results on knowledge, attitudes, intentions, and behavior relating to GI for flood management. Overall, knowledge of GI was low across the 44 studies in which it was evaluated. Seventy studies assessed attitudes about GI, including the functional, aesthetic, health and safety, recreational, conservation, financial, and cultural value of GI, albeit their measurement was inconsistent. Willingness to implement or pay for GI varied considerably across 55 studies in which it was measured. Twenty studies measured and documented behavior relating to GI use, and these found low rates of adoption. Few studies systematically assessed the role of demographic, socio-economic, or geographic characteristics that could influence individuals' knowledge, attitudes, intentions or behavior, and thereby the success of GI programs. We recommend that researchers should more systematically capture data on human dimensions of GI (i.e. knowledge, attitudes, intentions, and behavior) across diverse settings to improve program design and uptake, especially among vulnerable populations. Greater attention to the social component of the socio-ecological-technical system will help ensure that GI programs are equitable, inclusive, and sustainable.
KW - Knowledge
KW - Nature-based solutions
KW - Perceptions
KW - Social science
KW - Stormwater management
KW - Urban flooding
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85081064771&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85081064771&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137606
DO - 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137606
M3 - Review article
C2 - 32325585
AN - SCOPUS:85081064771
SN - 0048-9697
VL - 720
JO - Science of the Total Environment
JF - Science of the Total Environment
M1 - 137606
ER -
