By David Jenkins
One of the most transformative developments in asset management practice in recent times has been the momentum for integrating green assets into infrastructure planning.
Green assets tick two main boxes. Incorporating them into infrastructure services reduces the overall carbon footprint, and they can be cost-effective compared to utilising a traditional hard-engineered solution.
Why build hard assets from concrete and steel if there is already a natural asset there that can deliver a similar service?
Traditional grey infrastructure accounts for around 70% of global greenhouse gas emissions and half of all resources used and waste created globally.
Recognising natural assets and using green infrastructure options is a crucial step toward meeting carbon reduction goals and building community resilience.
Green assets can also serve several purposes. They can help with carbon sequestration, reduce urban heat islands, and deliver amenity and leisure benefits.
In Australia, IPWEA has partnered with several organisations in South Australia to launch the Asset Management for Green Infrastructure project, that will develop an industry-leading best practice guideline for integrating nature-based options into mainstream asset management processes and tools.
Practice Note 15 – Asset management for green infrastructure will include details on valuation and condition assessment methodologies, co-benefits, service provision, demand management, lifecycle analysis, risk assessments, long-term strategic and financial management planning, costs, threats, case studies, decision tools and templates.
Practice Note 15 will be shared internationally and empower asset managers to integrate green assets into their plans confidently.
The project encompasses a wide range of nature-based assets, including street trees, green roofs and walls, parks and gardens, urban forests, community gardens, water sensitive urban design assets, hybrid reefs and mangroves.
These can be configured to provide essential, cost-effective, sustainable, climate-resilient infrastructure services.
One barrier to integrated planning has been the lack of international accounting standards for green infrastructure, but organisations are successfully using operational and replacement costs.
IPWEA is also part of the National Urban Green Infrastructure Round Table, a collective group of Australia’s most influential membership bodies and organisations in Green Infrastructure. And several positive developments have been made in terms of creating frameworks for integrating green assets.
In Canada the town of Gibsons in Canada has been hailed as a pioneer in this approach, and part of its project was to integrate natural storm water ponds into stormwater management.
In the Gibsons project, the town’s managers included the town aquifer in their asset management plan to provide water storage and filtration while also delivering drinking water so pure that it met health standards without any chemical treatment.
Using a replacement cost model, the value of the ponds was assessed at between C$3.5 million and C$4 million, estimates which could be further refined by determining avoided costs related to flood damage.
The benefit from this approach was that it enabled the town to incorporate the ponds’ value into an overall asset management plan.
In another Canadian example, the not-for-profit Natural Assets Initiative (NAI) examined the City of Grand Forks’ response to extreme riverine flooding in 2017 and 2018.
It established that the nearby Kettle River floodplain reduced flood damage to urban buildings during high-flow events by between C$500 and C$3500 per hectare.
Having quantified this benefit, the City could justify spending C$51.6 million on floodplain management, including property buy-back and restoration.
Canada’s Natural Assets Initiative has created a guidebook for local governments on how to proceed and integrate natural assets confidently.
The guidebook outlines a methodology that begins with scoping the assets, categorising them into an asset hierarchy, documenting their condition and then moving to identify the levels of service they could provide.
There are recommendations on quantifying risk and linking lifecycle management costs to service levels, all of which aim to integrate natural assets into the regular planning strategy.
At the heart of the move to integrate green infrastructure into mainstream asset management is the need for all professions to speak the same language and use a shared vocabulary.
If we can achieve this, the move towards green infrastructure can develop greater momentum as it is embraced by a wider group of stakeholders, all of whom have common interests and goals.
Along with our collaborative partners, IPWEA believes that articulating the financial value of green assets is a transformative change management approach that can facilitate better decision-making.
Concrete and steel solutions will always have a place in asset management plans but integrating them alongside nature-based solutions can deliver a range of improved outcomes that are consistent with our communities’ aspirations.
The Asset Management for Green Infrastructure project has been funded by IPWEA, project partners and the Local Government Research and Development Scheme administered by the Local Government Association of South Australia.
