4.6 Article

Re-Thinking Soil Bioengineering to Address Climate Change Challenges

期刊

SUSTAINABILITY
卷 13, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su13063338

关键词

soil bioengineering; nature-based solutions; climate change adaptation; landslides; erosion

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Soil bioengineering involves the sustainable use of vegetation in civil engineering to combat climate change challenges and achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals. By analyzing over 20 case studies, this research aims to bridge the gap between scientific and technical aspects, providing recommendations for future multidisciplinary approaches in addressing climate change through soil bioengineering.
Soil bioengineering includes the sustainable use of vegetation for civil engineering purposes, including addressing climate change challenges. Previous research in this area has been focused on determination of the strength and stability that vegetation provides for the soil it grows in. The industry, on the other hand, has concentrated on mainly empirical approaches in the design and construction of nature-based solutions. The aim of this paper is to attempt a reconciliation of the scientific and technical aspects of soil bioengineering with a view of proposing broad guidelines for management of soil bioengineering projects aimed at combatting climate change and achievement of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs). More than 20 case studies of civil engineering projects addressing climate change challenges, such as erosion, shallow landslides, and flooding, were critically reviewed against the different project stages and the UN SDGs. The gaps identified in the review are addressed from civil engineering and asset management perspectives, with a view of implementing the scientific and technical nexus in the future. Recommendations are formulated to help civil engineers embrace the multidisciplinary nature of soil bioengineering and effectively address climate change challenges in the future.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据