Cities are the drivers of socioeconomic innovation and are also forced to address the accelerating risk of failure in providing essential services such as water supply today and in the future. Here, we investigate the resilience of urban water supply security, which is defined in terms of the services that citizens receive. The resilience of services is determined by the availability and robustness of critical system elements or “capitals” (water resources, infrastructure, finances, management efficacy, and community adaptation). We translate quantitative information about this portfolio of capitals from seven contrasting cities on four continents into parameters of a coupled system dynamics model. Water services are disrupted by recurring stochastic shocks, and we simulate the dynamics of impact and recovery cycles. Resilience emerges under various constraints, expressed in terms of each city's capital portfolio. Systematic assessment of the parameter space produces the urban water resilience landscape, and we determine the position of each city along a continuous gradient from water insecure and nonresilient to secure and resilient systems. In several cities stochastic disturbance regimes challenge steady‐state conditions and drive system collapse. While water insecure and nonresilient cities risk being pushed into a poverty trap, cities which have developed excess capitals risk being trapped in rigidity and crossing a tipping point from high to low services and collapse. Where public services are insufficient, community adaptation improves water security and resilience to varying degrees. Our results highlight the need for resilience thinking in the governance of urban water systems under global change pressures.
Integrated assessment of urban water supply security and resilience: towards a streamlined approach
Abstract Urbanization and competing water demand, as well as rising temperatures and changing weather patterns, are manifesting as gradual processes that increasingly challenge urban water supply security. Cities are also threatened by acute risks arising at the intersection of aging infrastructure, entrenched institutions, and the increasing occurrence of extreme weather events. To better understand these multi-layered, interacting challenges of providing urban water supply for all, while being prepared to deal with recurring shocks, we present an integrated analysis of water supply security in New York City and its resilience to acute shocks and chronic disturbances. We apply a revised version of a recently developed, quantitative framework (‘Capital Portfolio Approach’, CPA) that takes a social-ecological-technological systems perspective to assess urban water supply security as the performance of water services at the household scale. Using the parameters of the CPA as input, we use a coupled systems dynamics model to investigate the dynamics of services in response to shocks—under current conditions and in a scenario of increasing shock occurrence and a loss of system robustness. We find water supply security to be high and current response to shocks to be resilient thanks to past shock experiences. However, we identify a number of risks and vulnerability issues that, if unaddressed, might significantly impact the city’s water services in the mid-term future. Our findings have relevance to cities around the world, and raise questions for research about how security and resilience can and should be maintained in the future.
more »
« less
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10465494
- Publisher / Repository:
- Environmental Research Letters
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Environmental Research Letters
- Volume:
- 17
- Issue:
- 7
- ISSN:
- 1748-9326
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 075006
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract -
more » « less
Abstract The security, resilience, and sustainability of urban water supply systems (UWSS) are challenged by global change pressures, including climate and land use changes, rapid urbanization, and population growth. Building on prior work on UWSS security and resilience, we quantify the sustainability of UWSS based on the performance of local sustainable governance and the size of global water and ecological footprints. We develop a new framework that integrates security, resilience, and sustainability to investigate trade-offs between these three distinct and inter-related dimensions. Security refers to the level of services, resilience is the system’s ability to respond to and recover from shocks, and sustainability refers to local and global impacts, and to the long-term viability of system services. Security and resilience are both relevant at local scale (city and surroundings), while for sustainability cross-scale and -sectoral feedbacks are important. We apply the new framework to seven cities selected from diverse hydro-climatic and socio-economic settings on four continents. We find that UWSS security, resilience, and local sustainability coevolve, while global sustainability correlates negatively with security. Approaching these interdependent goals requires governance strategies that balance the three dimensions within desirable and viable operating spaces. Cities outside these boundaries risk system failure in the short-term, due to lack of security and resilience, or face long-term consequences of unsustainable governance strategies. We discuss these risks in the context of poverty and rigidity traps. Our findings have strong implications for policy-making, strategic management, and for designing systems to operate sustainably at local and global scales.
-
Abstract Research purpose. Smart City technologies offer great promise for a higher quality of life, including improved public services, in an era of rapid and intense global urbanization. The use of intelligent or smart information and communication technologies to produce more efficient systems of services in those urban areas, captured under the broad rubric of “smart cities,” also create new vectors of risk and vulnerability. The aim of this article is to raise consideration of an integrated cross-domain approach for risk reduction based on the risks smart cities are exposed to, on the one hand, from natural disasters and, on the other, from cyber-attacks. Design / Methodology / Approach. This contribution describes and explains the risk profile for which smart cities are exposed to both natural disasters and cyber-attacks. The vulnerability of smart city technologies to natural hazards and cyber-attacks will first be summarized briefly from each domain, outlining those respective domain characteristics. Subsequently, methods and approaches for risk reduction in the areas of natural hazards and ICT security will be examined in order to create the basis for an integrated cross-domain approach to risk reduction. Differences are also clearly identified if an adaptation of a risk reduction pattern appears unsuitable. Finally, the results are summarized into an initial, preliminary integrated cross-domain approach to risk reduction. Findings. Risk management in the two domains of ICT security and natural hazards is basically similar. Both domains use a multilayer approach in risk reduction, both have reasonably well-defined regimes and established risk management protocols. At the same time, both domains share a policymaking and policy implementation challenge of the difficulty of appropriately forecasting future risk and making corresponding resource commitments to address future risk. Despite similarities, different concepts like the CIA Triad, community resilience, absorption capacity and so on exist too. Future research of these concepts could lead to improve risk management. Originality / Value / Practical implications. Cyber-attacks on the ICT infrastructure of smart cities are a major vulnerability – but relatively little systematic evaluation exists on the topic. Likewise, ICT infrastructure is vulnerable to natural disasters too – and the risk of more severe natural disasters in the context of a global trend toward massive cities is increasing dramatically. Explicit consideration of the issues associated with cross-domain integration of reduction of interdependent risk is a necessary step in ensuring smart city technologies also serve to promote longer-term community sustainability and resilience.more » « less
-
This article offers a conceptual understanding and easily applicable guidelines for sustainable urban infrastructure design by focusing on the demand for and supply of the services provided by seven urban infrastructure systems. For more than 10,000 years, cities have evolved continuously, often shaped by the challenges they had to face. Similarly, we can imagine that cities will have to evolve again in the future to address their current challenges. Specifically, urban infrastructure will need to adapt and use less energy and fewer resources while becoming more resilient. In this article, starting with a definition of sustainability, two urban infrastructure sustainability principles (SP) are introduced: (i) controlling the demand and (ii) increasing the supply within reason, which are then applied to seven urban infrastructure systems: water, electricity, district heating and cooling and natural gas, telecommunications, transport, solid waste, and buildings. From these principles, a four-step urban infrastructure design (UID) process is compiled that can be applied to any infrastructure project: (i) controlling the demand to reduce the need for new infrastructure, (ii) integrating a needed service within the current infrastructure, (iii) making new infrastructure multifunctional to provide for other infrastructure systems, and (iv) designing for specific interdependencies and decentralizing infrastructure if possible. Overall, by first recognizing that urban infrastructure systems are inherently integrated and interdependent, this article offers several strategies and guidelines to help design sustainable urban infrastructure systems.more » « less
-
Throughout history, urban agriculture practitioners have adapted to various challenges by continuing to provide food and social benefits. Urban gardens and farms have also responded to sudden political, economic, ecological, and social crises: wartime food shortages; urban disinvestment and property abandonment; earthquakes and floods; climate-change induced weather events; and global economic disruptions. This paper examines the effects on, and responses by, urban farms and gardens to the COVID-19 pandemic. The paper is based on data collected in the summer of 2020 at the onset of the pandemic when cities were struggling with appropriate responses to curb its spread. It builds on an international research project (FEW-meter) that developed a methodology to measure material and social benefits of urban agriculture (UA) in five countries (France, Germany, Poland, UK and USA) over two growing seasons, from a Food-Energy-Water nexus perspective. We surveyed project partners to ascertain the effects of COVID-19 on those gardens and farms and we interviewed policy stakeholders in each country to investigate the wider impacts of the pandemic on UA. We report the results with respect to five key areas: (1) garden accessibility and service provision during the pandemic; (2) adjustments to operational arrangements; (3) effects on production; (4) support for urban farms and gardens through the pandemic; and (5) thoughts about the future of urban agriculture in the recovery period and beyond. The paper shows that the pandemic resulted in multiple challenges to gardens and farms including the loss of ability to provide support services, lost income, and reductions in output because of reduced labor supply. But COVID-19 also created several opportunities: new markets to sell food locally; more time available to gardeners to work in their allotments; and increased community cohesion as neighboring gardeners looked out for one another. By illustrating the range of challenges faced by the pandemic, and strategies to address challenges used by different farms and gardens, the paper illustrates how gardens in this pandemic have adapted to become more resilient and suggests lessons for pandemic recovery and longer-term planning to enable UA to respond to future public health and other crises.more » « less
