Development of sustainable urban drainage systems in Eastern Europe: an analytical overview of the constraints and enabling conditions

Figures & data

Table 1. Socio-cultural, institutional and economic barriers for SUDS.

Barriers and/or threats or enabling conditions	Analytical perspective	Geographical scope	References
Institutional (including regulatory)
A lack of institutional and legal frameworks supporting or recognizing SUDS, including rule books, building and environmental standards, financial guidelines, codes of practice, approved recommended blueprints etc.	Collaborative learning, Adaptive governance	UK, Germany, international	Brink et al. (2016); Droste et al. (2017); Mukhtarov et al. (2019)
Fragmentations and overlaps in local and national government structures, responsibilities, mandates, policy and management objectives, and lack of coordination between stakeholders	Transfer of innovation and actor networks; A feasibility overview; Climate change governance; Governance of ecosystem services	Tanzania, Denmark, Pacific small island states, the EU; Sub-Saharan Africa	Mguni, Herslund, and Jensen (2015); Kabisch et al. (2016); Du Toit et al. (2018); Pedersen Zari et al. (2019)
Weak systems of formal governance and planning, or weak governance arrangements for relevant sectors or practices (including lack of secure land tenure or environmental quality oversight)	Governance of ecosystem services (generic); A feasibility overview; Climate change governance	Sub-Saharan Africa, Pacific small island states, the EU	Kabisch et al. (2016); Du Toit et al. (2018); Pedersen Zari et al. (2019)
Limited or no options for connecting SUDS to municipal infrastructure or maintain it sustainably due to infrastructural or regulatory issues or financial rules	Hyper-local governance of innovation, Financial politics	Kenya, Germany	Droste et al. (2017); Mulligan et al. (2020)
A lack of baseline data or solid evidence showcasing the benefits of SUDS over traditional approaches	Governance of ecosystem services (generic); Integrated urban and regional planning	Sub-Saharan Africa, UK & USA	van Ham and Klimmek (2017); Du Toit et al. (2018)
Economic
Uncertainties and risks related to costs of maintenance (including risks of failure)	Collaborative learning; Hyper-local governance of innovation	UK, Kenya	Mukhtarov et al. (2019); Mulligan et al. (2020)
Property rights (e.g. individual ownership of the buildings)	Transfer of innovation and actor networks	Denmark	Mguni, Herslund, and Jensen (2015)
Limitations in financial, infrastructural and expert capacity for SUDS development or integration of “green” and “gray”; need for sustainable external support	Governance of ecosystem services (generic); Integrated urban and regional planning; Financial politics; A feasibility overview	Sub-Saharan Africa, UK & USA, Germany, Pacific small island states	Droste et al. (2017); van Ham and Klimmek (2017); Du Toit et al. (2018); Pedersen Zari et al. (2019)
Social inequality, including the disparity in green space availability	Governance of ecosystem services (generic)	Sub-Saharan Africa	Du Toit et al. (2018)
Trade offs between land use and ecosystem services (including due to urbanization and population growth pressure)	Governance of ecosystem services (generic); Adaptive governance	Sub-Saharan Africa; International	Brink et al. (2016); Du Toit et al. (2018)
Socio-cultural (including behavioral)
Reluctance of engineering and planning communities to embrace SUDS or integrate them to gray infrastructure designs	Collaborative learning; Hyper-local governance of innovation	UK, Kenya	Mukhtarov et al. (2019); Mulligan et al. (2020)
City’s derelict hydro-social contract	Transfer of innovation and actor networks	Tanzania	Mguni, Herslund, and Jensen (2015)
Perception of SUDS as compromising safety (e.g. flood, healthy) aspects, and overly poor understanding of the value of wetlands and surface waters in urban contexts	Governance of ecosystem services (generic)	Sub-Saharan Africa	Du Toit et al. (2018)

Figure 1. Case study areas.

Table 2. Case study areas.

	Lviv^a	Mahilioŭ	Pskov
Area, km^2	171	118.5	95.6
Population	755,822	383,313	210,116
Population density, people per km^2	4,420	3,235	2,198
Elevation (mean/max/min/range), m	315/409/232/177	171/210/138/72	47/63/29/34
Green (tree, shrub) areas	50.1 km^2/29.3%	15.9 km^2/13.5%	18.8 km^2/19.7%
Water bodies	0.7 km^2/0.4%	2.5 km^2/2.1%	4.1 km^2/4.3%
Streams (surface/underground)	77.5 km/42.1 km	70.5 km/6.2 km	84.7 km/3.3 km
City drainage length, km	793.6 km	283.9 km	100.4 km
City sewerage length, km		483.7 km	340.9 km
Area with treated drainage	61.5 km^2/36%	20.1 km^2/17%	13.4 km^2/14%
Area of residential districts without city sewerage, km^2	17.1	12.7	6.6

Data sources: Bayrak (2016), MSOL (2020), MSOM (2020), PCA (2020), DMP (2020), LVK (2020), MVK (2020), PVK (2020).

^a The area administrated by Lviv City Council.

Figure 2. Recently renovated public spaces in case study areas. Mahilioŭ: “Kamsamolski park” (A. 1940, B. 2018); Square of Honor (C. 1980, D. 2019) Lviv: “Gubernatorskie valy” (E. 1894, F. 2016); “Stryiskiy park” (G. 1903–1914, F. 2016) Pskov: “Detsky park” (I. 1990s, J. 2013); Embankment of the Velikaya river (K. 1973, L. 2018)

Table 3. Summary of enabling factors for SUDS implementation in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine.

Driver	Belarus	Russia	Ukraine
The overall robustness of national governance frameworks	→	↘	↘
Available human and social capital	↘	↘	↘
Openness to external environmental aid and the availability of institutional infrastructure for fundraising and project implementation	↘	→	↗
Openness of policymaking communities and societies at large to SUDS development	→	→	↘
Business climate in countries and particular locations	↘	→	→

Brink, Ebba, Theodor Aalders, Dóra Ádám, Robert Feller, Yuki Henselek, Alexander Hoffmann, Karin Ibe, et al. 2016. “Cascades of Green: A Review of Ecosystem-Based Adaptation in Urban Areas.” Global Environmental Change 36: 111–123. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.11.003.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Droste, Nils, Christoph Schröter-Schlaack, Bernd Hansjürgens, and Horst Zimmermann. 2017. “Implementing Nature-Based Solutions in Urban Areas: Financing and Governance Aspects.” In Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas. Linkages between Science, Policy and Practice, edited by Nadja Kabisch, Horst Korn, Jutta Stadler, Aletta Bonn, 307–321. Cham: Springer.

 Google Scholar

Mukhtarov, Farhad, Carel Dieperink, Peter Driessen, and Janet Riley. 2019. “Collaborative Learning for Policy Innovations: Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems in Leicester.” Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning 21 (3): 288–301. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2019.1627864.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mguni, Patience, Lise Herslund, and Marina Bergen Jensen. 2015. “Green Infrastructure for Flood-Risk Management in Dar Es Salaam and Copenhagen: Exploring the Potential for Transition towards Sustainable Urban Water Management.” Water Policy 17 (1): 126–142. doi:https://doi.org/10.2166/wp.2014.047.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Kabisch, Nadja, Niki Frantzeskaki, Stephan Pauleit, Sandra Naumann, McKenna Davis, Martina Artmann, Dagmar Haase, et al. 2016. “Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation in Urban Areas: Perspectives on Indicators, Knowledge Gaps, Barriers, and Opportunities for Action.” Ecology and Society 21 (2): 39. doi:https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08373-210239.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Du Toit, Marié J., Sarel S. Cilliers, Martin Dallimer, Mark Goddard, Solène Guenat, and Susanna F. Cornelius. 2018. “Urban Green Infrastructure and Ecosystem Services in Sub-Saharan Africa.” Landscape and Urban Planning 180: 249–261. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.06.001.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Pedersen Zari, Maibritt, Gabriel Luke Kiddle, Paul Blaschke, Steve Gawler, and David Loubser. 2019. “Utilising Nature-Based Solutions to Increase Resilience in Pacific Ocean Cities.” Ecosystem Services 38: 100968. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100968.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mulligan, Joe, Vera Bukachi, Jack Campbell Clause, Rosie Jewell, Franklin Kirimi, and Chelina Odbert. 2020. “Hybrid Infrastructures, Hybrid Governance: New Evidence from Nairobi (Kenya) on Green-Blue-Grey Infrastructure in Informal Settlements. Urban Hydroclimatic Risks in the 21st Century: Integrating Engineering, Natural, Physical and Social Sciences to Build Resilience.” Anthropocene 29: 100227.

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

van Ham, Chantal, and Helen Klimmek. 2017. “Partnerships for Nature-Based Solutions in Urban Areas: Showcasing Successful Examples.” In Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas: Linkages between Science, Policy and Practice, edited by Nadja Kabisch, Horst Korn, Jutta Stadler, and Aletta Bonn, 275–289. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

 Google Scholar

Bayrak, Galyna. 2016. “The Channels of River of Lviv: Transformation during the Historical Epoch and Modern Stage.” Visnyk of the Lviv University. Series Geography 50 (50): 3–21. doi:https://doi.org/10.30970/vgg.2016.50.8671.

 Google Scholar

MSOL (Main Statistical Office in Lviv Region). 2020. “Region Passport.” Accessed August 1, 2020. http://database.ukrcensus.gov.ua/regionalstatistics/pasport.asp

 Google Scholar

MSOM (Main Statistical Office of Mahilioŭ Region). 2020. “Official Statistics.” Accessed August 1, 2020. http://mogilev.belstat.gov.by/ofitsialnaya-statistika/

 Google Scholar

PCA (Pskov City Administration). 2020. “Territory.” Accessed August 4, 2020. http://pskovadmin.ru/about_pskov/territory

 Google Scholar

DMP (Road and Bridge Enterprise). 2020. “About Road and Bridge Enterprise”. Accessed August 1, 2020. http://mgkudmp.mogilev.by/o-nas

 Google Scholar

MVK (Mahilioŭ VodoKanal). 2020. “About Mahilioŭ VodoKanal”. Accessed August 1, 2020. http://vodokanal.mogilev.by/history

 Google Scholar

PVK (Pskov VodoKanal). 2020. “Pskov Vodokanal Today.” Accessed August 1, 2020. http://www.vdkpskov.ru/about_the_company/water_canal_today/

 Google Scholar