Kuitert, L; Willems, J J and Volker, L (2021) Value integration through social innovation in blue-green infrastructure projects. In: Scott, L and Neilson, C J (eds.) Proceedings of 37th Annual ARCOM Conference, 6-7 September 2021, Online Event, UK.
Abstract
Blue and green infrastructure (BGI) projects such as rain gardens, green roofs and water squares, embody a variety of values such as technical (drainage), environmental (biodiversity), economic (property development) and social (health and wellbeing). Because these values have proven to be challenging to integrate, local governments are increasingly experimenting with social innovation as a bottom-up form of value integration. Because we lack knowledge about different ways of how value integration is achieved, we compare four BGI projects in North-Western Europe, involving four cities in three countries that share the ambition to realise BGI through social innovation. The findings reveal that social innovation leads to four ways of value integration: materialistic, human, organisational and process. These value integration arrangements unfortunately seem to mainly contribute to greater alignment between values rather than true value integration. Our research helps to better detect where and when public values are dealt with in BGI projects.
| Item Type: | Conference Paper (Paper) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | climate adaptation; value integration; social innovation; case study comparison; blue-green infrastructure projects |
| Index terms: | rain, green infrastructure, climate adaptation, drainage, case study, integration, social innovation, Europe, biodiversity, health and wellbeing, local government, property development, public value, green roof |
| Subjects: | infrastructure and transport systems, sustainability and resilience, administrative law, political science, communities and social development, biodiversity, data collection methods, sustainable design, mental health and wellbeing, climate science, economic development, physical geography and landforms, organizational analysis |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Engineering Principles, Sustainability, Organizational Design, Health and Safety, Legal Issues, Governance, Geographical Context, Urban Studies |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here