Lessons from adapting resilience indicators to flooding and storm- water management.

This deliverable reports on the activities conducted as part of Task 5.2.The objective is to a) contributeto improving resilience to releases of contaminated water in the Göteborg case study and b) to identifysocial and organizational enablers for the development and effective use of technologies fordigitalization of water management. For this purpose, we used tools developed for identifying, visualizingand evaluating/acting upon data addressing resilience in critical infrastructures, defined and quantifiedthrough indicators.The framework for the deliverable is based upon a) a previous H2020 project regarding the design,implementation and added value from using the tools as well as b) findings from the SCOREwaterdeliverable D5.1 regarding issues of stakeholder engagement, user involvement and implementation/evaluation (focusing on the two former).

Through an iterative design process, we created a baseline witha scenario with regard to resilience against the release of insufficiently purified water from a worksitein the West link construction project in Göteborg. Based upon the baseline we created a business casefor what we wanted to measure and improve through the tools. We created two checklists for measuringand acting upon data on resilience addressing the business case. Finally, we identified a few bestpractices for stakeholder engagement as well as examples of how to make best use of the technologiesand services to be developed and deployed in the SCOREwater project.The deliverable provides a process description of the successive iteration we carried out. We show halffinishedchecklists for resilience measurement, describe stakeholder feedback from these and asuccessive development of the business case and the checklists.

The process illustrates that the tool isuseful for this context and provide a beneficial illustration for how to create useful checklists thatstakeholders benefit from to increase knowledge about resilience and how to improve resilience. Thebest practices for introducing and adapting the resilience tools were to do “homework” properly (that isto identify the relevant baseline) and to interact intensively to identify and define stakeholder issuessuch as:1. What is the regulatory context setting the rules of the game?2. Who are the relevant actors, their responsibilities and their possible contributions?3. What are their problems and motivations (pains and gains)?4. What added value can the tools provide?5. How can the purpose of using the tools best be aligned with and add to the overall project/casestudy objectives?Similarly, the replication of the tools in Amersfoort and possibly Barcelona require doing the “homework”and engaging in identifying baselines and business cases as well as how to implement them into existingpractices.Contribution to the case study: The Göteborg municipal environmental board saw the tools as anopportunity to develop methods for early warning, such as enabling mitigation of negative environmentalimpacts on recipients from the release of stormwater and process water from construction sites.Construction companies saw that the tools provided potentials for improving knowledge of resilience oftheir water management as well as potentials to improve their resilience. Stakeholders stressed that ifthe organizational capacities to make use of the data and services provided by improvements in sensorcapability and AI solutions are not improved, overall resilience would not be improved. The baseline is also useful to measure the impacts in a later stage of the project.

Contribution to the project: The social and organizational enablers identified to make best use of thetechnologies and services to be developed and deployed in the SCOREwater project were related to thecommunicative and organizational abilities to react to and how to use the improvements in sensortechnology and AI solutions. The business case provides an example of how added value could help toimprove current practices at construction sites and provide arguments for the possibility for morestringent regulation and oversight due to improved technology. This includes e.g. workplace routines foracting upon alarms, as well as more frequent reporting to authorities, based upon real-time monitoringand using AI technology for proxy indicators.

Subscribe to our newsletter