Balancing between the poles
The Sustainability triangle of Scott Campbell simplistically shows the dynamic balance between three critical dimensions of sustainable development - environmental protection, social equity, and economic development. The potential conflicts between them form the axes of the triangle - resource conflict, development, and property conflicts. As we know from history, the cities located next to the big water benefitted from the available water resources, materials, and energy. They reduced transportation costs essential for the market economy development. These places became the centers of trade and industrial production, resulting in thriving economies. Today, as the global communities join the strive for sustainability, our economic activity next to the water alternates towards less impactful and more knowledge-based industries.
Source - Scott Campbell, The Planner's Triangle Revisited
Nevertheless, as much as they can be beneficial, they might harm both natural and human communities, potentially inflicting the imbalances mentioned above. Industrial and transportation use of waterways and the shores involve private property rights - thus limiting the availability of these areas to the broader public and often resulting in ecosystem degradation. As we won`t compromise the environment for monetary benefits, there must be ways to balance our miles and energy consumption with long-term resilience.
Rivers and waters as a source of power and means of transportation dictate the allocation of industrial enterprises, utility services, navigation infrastructure, and trade and mobility hubs such as ports or bridges. Along with technological development, these uses require less space and can be compacted to spare the areas for post-industrial community impactful uses. Thus, the remnants of industrialization gradually pave the road to adaptive reuse, time and space-specific transformability, and as a result - resilience. On the other hand, the utilities still functioning require strategic adaptation against the changing climate conditions, especially considering coastal storms and riverine floods. Both waterborne and ground transportation infrastructure can be disrupted by the increased water levels causing the ripple effect of business operation disruption and power shortages. The critical community assets such as the power stations, evacuation routes, resiliency hubs, and other facilities should be prepared to withstand the extreme external shocks.
All these adjustments are resource-demanding, and most importantly, they need a solid scientific base to identify where adaptation is feasible, or relocation is inevitable. Moreover, broader education and knowledge on hazard preparation facilitates successful resiliency integration on a community scale. Transparency of the new standards` and technologies` implementation is essential for the broader range of stakeholders to participate in decision-making. Community engagement is a broadly viable approach, even in port management, as it emphasizes the importance of involving local stakeholders in decision-making and planning. By building solid relationships with local communities, ports can ensure their operations are socially responsible and sustainable. This idea is aligned with the collaborative approach to shaping the future of a community.
Another approach to reducing the vulnerability of industrial and transportation assets and supporting the environment includes the technology-based reduction of carbon footprint, preventing water and air pollution. It involves smart adaptation and low-impact transport, supporting ecosystem health and further technological progress. A further move in hi-tec resilience implies the switch to Circular Economy - reducing waste and maximizing the value of resources. Ports and large-scale industrial facilities may adopt this approach by reusing and repurposing materials, reducing emissions and waste, and implementing sustainable practices throughout the optimized supply chain.
The risks associated with key asset maladaptation affect coastal communities in many ways. The toxic discharges and nonpoint source pollution affect social well-being, environmental health and, as a result - further sustainable economic development. Market-based and educational barriers against smart and green infrastructure can be resolved using the balancing idea of the Sustainability triangle and innovative, collaborative tools. The desired prosperity with the low-carbon industry and infrastructure can be integrated with the comprehensive support of the nested governance structure. From the level of local city managers to the global Sustainable Development Goals - the development of sustainable transportation systems can live harmlessly with water when sustainability is located in the center.
