Subsurface planning

Towards a common understanding of the subsurface as a multifunctional resource

Document identifier: oai:DiVA.org:ltu-76970
Access full text here:10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104316
Keyword: Engineering and Technology, Underground resources, Arkitektur, Ownership, Subsurface management, Subsurface planning, Planning, Geosystem services, Urban underground space, Civil Engineering, Underground space, Subsurface, Arkitekturteknik, Samhällsbyggnadsteknik, Teknik och teknologier, Architectural Engineering, Architecture
Publication year: 2020
Relevant Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs):
SDG 11 Sustainable cities and communitiesSDG 12 Responsible consumption and productionSDG 9 Industry, innovation and infrastructure
The SDG label(s) above have been assigned by OSDG.ai

Abstract:

In response to powerful trends in technology, resource and land supply and demand, socioeconomics and geopolitics, cities are likely to increase use of the subsurface in the near future. Indeed, the subsurface and its appropriate use have been put forward as being of crucial importance if we are to achieve resilient and sustainable cities. In recent years, quite apart from being seen primarily as a construction basis to provide physical space for infrastructure and to create a better surface living environment, the subsurface has been recognised as a multifunctional natural resource, one which provides physical space, water, energy, materials, habitats for ecosystems, support for surface life, and a repository for cultural heritage and geological archives. Currently, the subsurface is often utilised according to the “first-come-first-served” principle, which hinders possibilities to take strategic decisions on prioritisation and optimisation of competing subsurface uses, as well as fair inter- and intragenerational distribution of limited natural resources. Taking a broad international perspective, this paper investigates the subsurface as a multifunctional resource from five focal points: (1) what professionals with different backgrounds mean when using different terms related to the subsurface; (2) how professionals describe the subsurface and its multiple resources, functions and services; (3) how planning of subsurface use is supported in policy and regulations; (4) how the subsurface is included in the planning process; and (5) frameworks that can support decision-making on responsible use of the subsurface. The study reveals that the subsurface must be recognised (not only by scientists but also by decision- and policy-makers and other stakeholders) as a precious and multifunctional resource requiring careful planning and sensitive management in accordance with its potential and its value to society. Utilisation of the different subsurface functions to yield services requires careful planning and a framework to support decision-makers in achieving a balance between utilisation and preservation, and between the subsurface functions themselves in the case of outright utilisation. Further, to facilitate the necessary change towards transdisciplinary work settings in the planning process and form a platform for knowledge exchange and capacity building, there is an urgent need for a common language, i.e. mutually understandable terminology, and a common understanding, i.e. an all-inclusive view on the subsurface as a complex multifunctional resource.

Authors

Yevheniya Volchko

Chalmers University of Technology, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Göteborg, Sweden
Other publications >>

Jenny Norrman

Chalmers University of Technology, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Göteborg, Sweden
Other publications >>

Lars O. Ericsson

Chalmers University of Technology, Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Göteborg, Sweden
Other publications >>

Kristina L. Nilsson

Luleå tekniska universitet; Arkitektur och vatten
Other publications >>

Anders Markstedt

WSP, Stockholm, Sweden
Other publications >>

Maria Öberg

Luleå tekniska universitet; Arkitektur och vatten
Other publications >>

Fredrik Mossmark

Geological Survey of Sweden (SGU), Göteborg, Sweden
Other publications >>

Nikolai Bobylev

Saint Petersburg State University, Institute of Earth Sciences, Saint Petersburg, Russia
Other publications >>

Per Tengborg

Rock Engineering Research Foundation (BeFo), Stockholm, Sweden
Other publications >>

Record metadata

Click to view metadata