Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Assessing the performance of gray and green strategies for sustainable

urban drainage system development: A multi-criteria decision-
making analysis
Wenyu Yang a, b, c, Jin Zhang a, *
a
Institute of Groundwater and Earth Sciences, Jinan University, 510632, Guangzhou, China
b
Chair of Hydrology, Brandenburgische Technische Universita€t Cottbus - Senftenberg, 03046, Cottbus, Germany
c
Chair of Environmental Economics, Brandenburgische Technische Universita €t Cottbus - Senftenberg, 03046, Cottbus, Germany

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The performance assessment of a sustainable urban drainage system (SUDS) involves multiple criteria
Received 1 May 2020 and is important for the decision-making of urban sustainable development. In this study, we intend to
Received in revised form balance the comprehensiveness and objectivity in the performance assessment of SUDS development
4 December 2020
through a combination of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) analysis and mathematical quantifi-
Accepted 28 January 2021
Available online 31 January 2021
cation. We proposed an MCDM framework with eight quantifiable indicators, including flood mitigation
capacity, pollution control capacity from technical criteria, life-cycle cost, damage cost, recreational
Handling editor: Prof. Jiri Jaromir Klemes function from socioeconomic criteria, biotope area ratio from ecological criteria, and spatial consistency
from political criteria. A city-scale model based on engineering datasets and satellite images was created
Keywords: to implement gray and green infrastructure strategies in the studied area. Results revealed that gray
Gray and green strategies strategies performed better in hydraulic improvements, mitigating approximately 17% of flood magni-
Multi-criteria decision-making tude and decreasing over 20% of flood-induced damage. Green strategies were more eco-friendly,
Sustainable urban drainage system removing approximately 60% of non-point pollution and improving at most 15% of the ecological
Urban flooding
level. Integrated assessment demonstrated that the combine-used strategy showed the overall best
Non-point pollution
performance, with a sustainability index of 0.676. Therefore, the methods and results in this study could
provide additional improvements in the decision-making process of SUDS development.
© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Climate change-induced hydrological alteration and rapid
urbanization-induced land-use conversion have caused severe
problems of flooding, water pollution, and economic loss world-
wide (Chang et al., 2020). It has reported that climate change has
tripled extreme flood events in Europe during the past 100 years,
resulting in losses of over 70 billion Euros (Paprotny et al., 2018),
and precipitation intensity in North America could increase by up
to 40% in the next 80 years due to climate change (Kirchmeier-
Young and Zhang, 2020). Additionally, urbanization-induced wa-
ter pollution has affected over 30% of territory in China during the
past decades, causing water scarcity in a population of over 0.72
billion (Ma et al., 2020). As the center of population and economic
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jzhang@jnu.edu.cn (J. Zhang).
activities, urban areas suffer flooding and water pollution problems
to a much greater extent than other places. Under these circum-
stances, therefore, urban sustainable development encounters
challenges, and research on adaptation and risk-reduction solutions
has received immense attention (Depietri and McPhearson, 2017).
As a vital functional component of urban sustainable develop-
ment, the urban drainage system is regarded as a traditional solu-
tion to the risk of urban flooding and water pollution (Zhou et al.,
2014). The traditional urban drainage system is single-objectively
designed for the rapid drainage of stormwater runoff by piping
networks (Tavakol-Davani et al., 2016; Zhou et al., 2014). However,
as sustainable environmental friendliness has received increasing
attention as a key point of urban development, the single-
objectively designed traditional urban drainage system has been
increasingly criticized due to the limited capacity for multi-
functional water management and limited flexibility for adapting
to future climatic and hydrological variations (Arisz and Burrell,
2006; Chocat et al., 2007). In this regard, scholars have gradually

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126191
0959-6526/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
W. Yang and J. Zhang
shifted their research focus from traditional drainage systems to
potential alternatives.
A sustainable urban drainage system (SUDS) d also termed
low impact development in North America and New Zealand,
water sensitive urban design in Australia, and sponge city in China
d is a promising solution to urban flooding and water pollution
and attracts increasing research interest (Fletcher et al., 2015; Hua
et al., 2020; Mouritz, 1996). In contrast to single-objectively
designed drainage systems, SUDS is designed with a range of
technologies and practices to attenuate stormwater runoff, reduce
piping network pressure, and mitigate the environmental impact
of non-point source pollution (Fletcher et al., 2015; Mitchell,
2005).
Among the technologies involved in SUDS, gray and green in-
frastructures have been commonly used and adopted in previous
studies (Dong et al., 2017a; Gu et al., 2017; Yang et al., 2020). Gray
infrastructure refers to practices installed as part of the traditional
urban drainage system, including sewers and storage tanks, which
are composed predominantly of concrete and steel structures
with collection, conveyance, and drainage functions (Tavakol-
Davani et al., 2015). Green infrastructure refers to decentralized
practices installed on catchment surfaces, including green roofs
(GR), bio-retention (BR), and permeable pavement (PP), which are
composed of vegetated and porous structures to promote infil-
tration and detention of stormwater runoff in urban watersheds
(Bartesaghi Koc et al., 2017; Eckart et al., 2017; Fletcher et al.,
2015). Numerous studies have been conducted to evaluate the
performance of gray and green infrastructures for SUDS devel-
opment. For example, Alves et al. (2019) proved that gray in-
frastructures were effective for flood mitigation. Yang et al. (2020)
demonstrated that the combined use of three green in-
frastructures (bio-retention, infiltration trenches, and rain bar-
rels) removed up to 27% of the runoff volume in a long-term
hydrological scenario; Hua et al. (2020) established an integrated
assessment framework, which involved the environmental and
operational impacts of low impact development practices and
technical-economic indicators. However, most of the previous
studies evaluated the hydraulic aspect of SUDS performance,
including flood mitigation and hydraulic damage reduction; non-
point pollution control has remained less of a priority (Yang et al.,
2020; Zhou et al., 2013).
Non-point source pollution is caused by multiple diffuse
sources in stormwater runoff from urban areas, agricultural lands,
and other surface catchments (USEPA, 2017). In recent decades,
non-point source pollution has gradually become a key concern
for SUDS development around the world. The US government
passed the Clean Water Act in 1972 for water pollution reduction,
and the US Environmental Protection Agency indicates that non-
point source pollution should be reduced for water bodies to
achieve relevant standards in the Clean Water Act (Ribaudo, 2001).
The European Union implemented the Water Framework Directive
in 2000 to address point and non-point source pollution by
requiring assessment of threats to ecology and water quality on
catchments (Gozzard et al., 2011). As the largest developing
country, China began to be concerned about non-point source
pollution in the early years of the 21st century, and the passage of
the Action Plan for Prevention and Control of Water Pollution in 2015
indicated that non-point source pollution control has become a
national policy for water environment governance (Ministry of
Ecology and Environment of the People’s Republic of China,
2015). However, due to insufficient research on performance
evaluation, non-point source pollution control technologies
encountered challenges in engineering applications, which also
limited SUDS development.
Furthermore, urban water management and SUDS development
2
Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191
require more non-technical criteria from social, economic, ecolog-
ical, and political aspects (Hammond et al., 2015; Shariat et al.,
2019; Zhou et al., 2014). For instance, Zhou et al. (2012) evaluated
the socioeconomic impact of climate change adaptation strategies
by calculating the tangible and intangible damage loss; Grunewald
et al. (2017) indicated that green space and its recreational function
should be considered as a service to the social system in the city;
Grose (2014) addressed constructed ecologies in urban infrastruc-
ture engineering; and Frantzeskaki et al. (2019) linked policy
criteria in decision-making for urban sustainable adaptation solu-
tions. However, the evaluation of these aspects in previous studies
was mostly based on stakeholder interviews and expert scoring
without mathematical quantification. The objectivity of the evalu-
ation results was unable to meet the requirements of decision
support for SUDS development (Ellis et al., 2004; Ghumman et al.,
2018; Loc et al., 2017; Shariat et al., 2019). Additionally, with the
involvement of multiple evaluation criteria in a decision-making
process, the determination of preferences for each criterion can
be challenging.
Multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) d also termed multiple
objective decision support (MODS) and multi-criteria decision
analysis (MCDA) d has been increasingly adopted to solve
decision-making problems involving multiple options and multiple
criteria (Hajkowicz et al., 2000; Marttunen et al., 2017). It is an
effective multi-variable analysis tool, which can improve the ana-
lytic rigor, transparency, and auditability of the decision-making
process by integrating the performance of options in different
criteria and balancing subjective preferences from different stake-
holders (Kremer et al., 2016). MCDM emerged in 1960s and was
originally applied in military planning, it has currently received
immense interest in water-related areas, such as watershed man-
agement, water quality management, water policy management
and urban water infrastructures (Hajkowicz and Collins, 2007).
Scholars have developed different methods for MCDM analysis,
such as analytical hierarchy process (AHP) (Mansur et al., 2016),
elimination and choice expressing reality (ELECTRE) (Martin et al.,
2007), preference ranking organization method for enrichment
evaluation (PROMETHEE) (Chou et al., 2007), technique for order
preference by similarity (TOPSIS) (Ahmadisharaf et al., 2016), and
Choquet Integral (Moghtadernejad et al., 2018). Regarding the de-
ficiencies in the above-mentioned research fields, this study pro-
vided a hypothesis: that the combination of MCDM analysis and
mathematical quantification method can balance the objectivity
and comprehensiveness of evaluation results.
Consequently, to assist the stormwater best management
practices by assessing the performance of gray and green strategies
for a sustainable urban drainage system development, in this study
(1) an integrated performance of gray and green infrastructures in
SUDS development was evaluated by hydraulic and water-quality
models; and (2) an MCDM framework was established which
contained quantified evaluations from aspects of urban flood
mitigation, non-point source pollution control, socioeconomic
impact, ecological protection, and policy acceptance. The
remainder of this study is illustrated as follows: the MCDM
Framework Setup explains the evaluation criteria and quantification
methods involved in the MCDM framework; the MCDM Framework
Application introduces the hydraulic and water-quality model based
on engineering datasets and satellite images of Chaohu City in
China as a case study for the implementation of gray and green
strategies and performance analysis; the Results and discussions
section presents the results and discussions regarding the perfor-
mance of gray and green strategies and the effectiveness of the
MCDM framework; the Conclusion summarizes the results and
implications of this study.
W. Yang and J. Zhang Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191

2. MCDM framework setup (Hoque et al., 2012). In the RRV, reliability is the probability that the
system is in a safe state, resilience describes the ability of the sys-
2.1. MCDM framework overview tem to minimize magnitude and duration of failures throughout the
lifetime of the design when subject to exceptional conditions, and
In this study, an MCDM framework was established for the in- vulnerability measures the susceptibility of the system to hazard
tegrated performance evaluation of adaptation strategies for SUDS during failure (Bush and Doyon, 2019; Chang and Huang, 2015;
development. The MCDM framework was designed with eight Rezende et al., 2020).
quantifiable indicators from technical, socioeconomic, ecological, The hydraulic and environmental RRV indexes (RRVh and RRVe)
and political aspects (Table 1). were used to evaluate performance in flood mitigation and pollu-
tion control, respectively, and calculated in Eq. (1) and Eq. (2),
2.2. MCDM method selection respectively.

Nf
1=3
X
1=3
Scholars have adopted various MCDM methods, such as AHP 1 X tf 1 Nf Hf  Hdi tf i
(Mansur et al., 2016), ELECTRE (Martin et al., 2007), PROMETHEE RRVh ¼ 1 i  1 i ,
Nf tn Nf Hdi tn
i i
(Chou et al., 2007), TOPSIS (Ahmadisharaf et al., 2016), and the

Nf
1=3
Choquet integral (Moghtadernejad et al., 2018). Each method was 1 X Hf i  Hdi

developed with an individual theoretical foundation, and no Nf Hdi
i
particular method had an obvious advantage or disadvantage over
the others. Hajkowicz and Higgins (2008) indicated that the ease of (1)
understanding can be a primary concern for MCDM method se-
lection, because decision-makers are unlikely to use a confusion-
prone approach.
X
1=3 !!1=3
In this study, the performance evaluation of strategies for UDS 1 No toj 1X No X
l LojkLajk toj
RRVe¼ 1  1 ,
sustainability development involves multiple criteria, and the No tn No Lajk tn
j j k
preference of each criterion can vary significantly among stake- !!1=3
holders. Under these circumstances, the analytic hierarchy process 1X No Lo La
j j

(AHP) method can be a simple and flexible way to deal with varied No Laj
j
stakeholder preferences through pairwise comparison (Huang
et al., 2011). Hence, AHP was used for MCDM analysis in this (2)
study, and the number of options was fixed at an early stage to
where RRVh and RRVe are the hydraulic and environmental RRV
avoid rank reversal.
indexes; Nf is the number of flooding nodes; tfi is the flooding
The detailed introduction and comparison of pros and cons of
duration of the ith flooding node, in h; tn is the total elapsed time, in
the five commonly used methods were presented in
h; Hfi is the water depth of the ith flooding node, in m; Hdi is the
Supplementary material S1 and Table S1.
designed depth of the ith flooding node, in m; No is the number of
CSO nodes; toj is the overflow duration of the jth CSO node; Lojk is
2.3. MCDM criteria quantification
the load of pollutant k (k ¼ COD, TN, TP) at the ith flooding node, in
kg; and Lajk is the maximal allowable load of pollutant k at the ith
The proposed MCDM framework consisted of eight evaluation
flooding node, in kg.
indicators from technical, socioeconomic, ecological, and political
criteria. All the evaluation indicators were quantified by mathe-
matical calculation, described as follows. 2.3.2. Socioeconomic criteria
The socioeconomic criteria consider the strategy performance in
2.3.1. Technical criteria terms of cost and benefit and social impact (Zhou et al., 2014). Cost
Technical criteria concern the performance of adaptation stra- is the expense of adaption strategies and is calculated by the life-
tegies in flood mitigation and pollution control. In this study, the cycle cost (LCC); benefit refers to the reduction of tangible and
reliability-resilience-vulnerability (RRV) index was used for tech- intangible loss and is quantified by the hydraulic and environ-
nical performance evaluation. The RRV was originally used to mental damage cost (DCh and DCe); the social impact was evaluated
evaluate the technical performance of the water resource system by quantifying the recreational function (RF).
(Hashimoto et al., 1982) and has been applied for decision-making The life-cycle cost (LCC) is an economic index that measures all

Table 1
MCDM framework.

Criteria Technical Socioeconomic Ecological Political

Hydraulic Environmental Life-cycle Hydraulic damage Environmental Recreational Biotope area ratio Spatial consistency
reliability- reliability- cost cost damage cost function
resilience- resilience-
vulnerability vulnerability

Abbreviation RRVh RRVe LCC DCh DCe RF BAR SC

Description RRV index in RRV index in Life-cycle Damage cost of Damage cost of Recreational The ecologically The spatial
hydraulic aspect environmental cost of infrastructures water due to non- function of effective surface area in consistency of
aspect strategies due to flooding point pollution green space proportion to total land strategies in whole
area planning
Quantifying RRV equation RRV equation LCC Flood depth- Pollution control GAI equation BAR equation Spatial analysis
method equation damage function cost function through ArcGIS
Weight 0.2033 0.2033 0.2033 0.1166 0.1166 0.0698 0.0436 0.0436

3
W. Yang and J. Zhang Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191

associated expenses throughout the entire lifetime, including surface area is the sum of surface types with a specific weighting
capital, annual costs, and salvage value (Spatari et al., 2011). The factors according to their influence on regulatory ecosystem ser-
present value of cost (PVC) was used to convert all incurred costs vices (Lakes and Kim, 2012). The BAR ratio was calculated using Eq.
during the entire lifespan into the present value and is calculated by (7).
Eq. (3).
BAR ¼ 0:2  a1 þ 0:3  a2 þ 0:5  a3 þ 0:7  a4 þ a5 (7)
T

X 

1 1 1
PVC ¼ C0 þ Ca   1  Ca  (3) where BAR is the BAR ratio; a1 is the area of the rooftop without
t¼0 ð1 þ rÞt T ð1 þ rÞT
strategies, in m2; a2 is the area of the permeable surface without
the plant, for example, clinker brick, mosaic paving, or gravel sub-
where PVC is the present value of life-cycle cost, in CNY; C0 is
base, in m2; a3 is the area of the permeable surface with the plant,
capital cost, in CNY; Ca is an annual cost, in CNY; T is lifespan, in y; t
for example, gravel with grass cover or wood-block paving, in m2;
is time variation, in y; and r is the discount rate, which was set as 5%
a4 is the area of the vegetative surface without connecting to soil
according to the benchmark yield of infrastructure in China (Liao
below, in m2; and a5 is the area of the vegetative surface connected
et al., 2015).
to the soil below, in m2 (Lakes and Kim, 2012).
The hydraulic and environmental damage costs (DCh and DCe)
evaluated the damage cost due to flooding and pollution discharge
and are calculated using Eq. (4) and Eq. (5), respectively. DCh was
calculated through a flood depth-damage function, which
2.3.4. Political criteria
described an empirical relationship between the recorded flood
The political criteria determine how much the adaptation stra-
depth and the estimated infrastructure damage (Huizinga et al.,
tegies can be integrated into current planning policy from the
2017); and DCe was quantified through a pollution control-cost
aspect of magnitude and location (Martin et al., 2007). The spatial
function that documented the expense of reducing pollutants per
consistency (SC) was used to evaluate political performance, which
unit through biochemical treatment and emissions trading (Dong
calculates the areal percentage of strategies in line with the total
et al., 2017b). The flood depth-damage and pollution control cost
catchment area and is described by Eq. (8).
functions should be acquired from local authorities to ensure the
accuracy and applicability of the empirical data. X
n X
m
GYci GNcj
SC ¼ 0:5  þ 0:5  (8)
X
n X
m
i
GYpi j
GNpj
DCh ¼ Afij  Cfij (4)
i j
where GYci is the magnitude of the designed gray strategy, which is
spatially consistent with planned gray strategy at the ith point, in
X
l
m; GYpi is the magnitude of planned gray strategy at the ith point,
DCe ¼ Lpk  Cpk (5)
in m; GNcj is the magnitude of the designed green strategy (which
k
is spatially consistent with the planned green strategy at the jth
where Afij is the area of a flood with a depth of i m (i ¼ 0.1, 0.2, …, point) in m2; and GNpj is the magnitude of the planned green
n) on the land-use type j (j ¼ building, road, …, m), in m2; Cfij is strategy at the jth point, in m2;
the damage cost of the flood with the depth of class i, in CNY m2;
Lpk is the load of pollutant k (k ¼ COD, TN, TP), in kg; Cpk is the
disposal expense of pollutant k, in CNY kg1.
2.4. MCDM weight determination
The recreational function (RF) refers to the function of recrea-
tion through interactions with green-color landscapes (Haines-
Stakeholders from the government, research institutes, engi-
Young and Potschin, 2013). In this study, the green accessibility
neering companies, and citizen groups were interviewed to
index (GAI) was used to quantify the recreational function of green
investigate the preferences of the eight above-mentioned in-
space and green infrastructure and was calculated by Eq. (6) (Fan
dicators. Subsequently, the AHP method was used to calculate the
et al., 2017).
weight for each indicator, as described below.

 sffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
X
n
Disti Api Api
GAI ¼ 0:6  1  þ 0:2  þ 0:2  (6)
i¼1
300 Aci Apmax
2.4.1. Judgment matrix setup
where GAI is the green accessibility index; Disti is the shortest A judgment matrix was created to integrate stakeholder pref-
distance from the pixel to the edge of the ith small green space, in erence based on a comparative scale proposed by Saaty (1980) (Eq.
m; Api is the actual area of the ith small green space, in m2; Aci is (9)). The judgment matrix consisted of 8  8 pairwise comparisons,
the area of a circle with the same perimeter as the ith small green integer numbers of 1e4 were used to indicate the priority of the
space, in m2; and Apmax is the green space with the maximal area, former factor to the latter factor from equally important to signif-
m2 . icantly important, and the four corresponding reciprocals indicated
the converse priority of the former factor to the latter factor. As
listed in Eq. (9), two RRV indexes and LCC were the top-concerned
2.3.3. Ecological criteria indicators due to the direct reflection of effectiveness and spending,
The ecological criteria focus on analyzing how green infra- followed by two DC indexes and RF, which indicated a negative and
structure strategies can improve the urban ecosystem by increasing positive social impact. The BAR and SC were assigned to the lowest
green space (Artmann et al., 2017). The biotope area ratio (BAR) was priority because of their lower influence than former indicators.
adopted to evaluate ecological performance (Lakes and Kim, 2012). However, it should be noted that stakeholder preferences could be
The BAR describes the amount of ecologically effective surface area affected by culture, national policy, and local situation; thus,
in proportion to the total land area. The ecologically effective detailed interviews are essential for a specific project.
4
W. Yang and J. Zhang Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191

2 3
RRVh RRVe LCC DCh DCe RF BAR SC xsi  xi
6 RRVh x0si ¼  IFi (13)
6 1 1 1 2 2 3 4 4 77 si
6 RRVe 1 1 1 2 2 3 4 4 7
6 7
6 LCC 1 1 1 2 2 3 4 4 7 where x0si is the standardized result value of indicator i for strategy
  6 7
A ¼ aij 88 ¼ 6
6 DCh 1=2 1=2 1=2 1 1 2 3 3 77 s; xsi is the original result value of indicator i for strategy s; xi is the
6 DCe 1=2 1=2 1=2 1 1 2 3 3 7 mean result value of indicator i for all involved strategies; si is the
6 7
6 RF 1=3 1=3 1=3 1=2 1=2 1 2 2 7
6 7 standard deviation of the results of indicator i for all involved
4 BAR 1=4 1=4 1=4 1=3 1=3 1=2 1 1 5 strategies; IFi is the impact factor of indicator i, indicating the
SC 1=4 1=4 1=4 1=3 1=3 1=2 1 1 positive or negative impact of the indicator on the evaluation re-
(9) sults (assigned as 1 for RRVh, RRVe, RF, BAR, and SC and assigned
as 1 for LCC, DCh, and DCe).
The consistency index and consistency ratio were calculated to
Subsequently, the sustainability index (SI) was determined by
verify the rationality of the judgment matrix (Mahmoud and Gan,
the weighted summation of the standardized result values and
2018), as presented in Eq. (10) and Eq. (11).
calculated using Eq. (14).
m8
CI ¼ (10) X
8
81 SIs ¼ Wi  x0si (14)
i¼1
CI
CR ¼ (11)
RI where SI is the sustainability index of strategy s, Wi is the global
weight of indicator i, and x0si and is the standardized result value of
where CI is the consistency index, m is the average consistency indicator i for strategy s.
vector, CR is the consistency ratio, and RI is the random index
dependent on the number of indicators involved in a pairwise
comparison, assigned a value of 1.41 in an 8  8 pairwise com- 3. MCDM framework application
parison matrix (Saaty, 1980).
The judgment matrix was considered reasonable, because the 3.1. Case study
CR value was less than 0.1 (Saaty, 1980).
The MCDM framework was adopted in a case study in a 10 km2
area in the city of Chaohu, China, which primarily consists of resi-
2.4.2. wt calculation dential, commercial, and public areas. The current surface imper-
Based on the judgment matrix, the weights of the eight in- viousness exceeds 0.7, and the traffic load is increasing due to urban
dicators were calculated using Eq. (12) and are listed in the last row development, both of which has a large hydraulic and environ-
of Table 1. mental burden on local UDS (Chaohu, 2013). Thus, an effective
adaption strategy is required for sustainable UDS development in
Q 1
8 8 the area.
i¼1 aij
Wi ¼ (12)
P8 Q8 1 
8
j¼1 i¼1 aij 3.2. Modeling overview

where Wi is the global weight of the ith indicator, and aij is the
relative priority of the ith indicator in the jth column in Eq. (9).
2.5. MCDM result demonstration
To provide decision makers with a more intuitive experience of
the MCDM results, the MCDM result in this study were demon-
strated by visualization and standardization.
2.5.1. Result visualization
The multi-criteria performance of gray and green infrastructure
strategies, except for LCC, was visualized through geological spatial
analysis (Meerow and Newell, 2017). The result values were
assigned to the corresponding nodes and land patches according to
the coordinates and visualized by Kriging interpolation with a
spatial resolution of 15  15 m.
2.5.2. Result standardization
As the results of each indicator were not consistent in units and
or value ranges, a standardization process was essential (Liu et al.,
2019). Standardization rescales result values with different units
and ranges to into a range with zero mean and unit variance,
allowing the comparison of evaluation results without altering the
data distribution (Freedman et al., 2007). The standardization
process was calculated using Eq. (13).
5
Several hydraulic and water quality processes, including
rainfall-runoff, flood generation, and pollution generation, were
involved in modeling. To consider the impact of the overland
routing process on flood generation (DHI, 2014), a hydrological
software (MIKE URBAN) was adopted for model construction.
The integrated hydraulic and water quality model was con-
structed based on data for terrain conditions, land-cover distribu-
tion, and drainage networks. Terrain condition indicated the
elevation of the study area and was stored in raster format; land-
cover distribution was digitized from remote sensing images
(www.earthexplorer.usgs.gov, accessed in Jun 2019). Drainage
network data were acquired from local authorities and stored in
DWG format. Through data analysis and processing in Microsoft
Excel and ArcGIS, the model was constructed with 44 km of links,
1367 nodes, 61 outlets, 1 basin, 1 pump, and 1423 sub-catchments
(Fig. 1).
Sensitivity analysis was conducted for model parameterization.
To reduce the computation load, the Latin Hypercube One-Factor-
at-a-Time (LH-OAT) (Gu et al., 2017) method was adopted for
sensitivity analysis of seven input parameters. The initial loss and
hydrological reduction factor were key factors influencing runoff
volume, with partial correlation coefficients of 0.8762 and 0.6647,
respectively. Manning’s number and mean surface velocity heavily
influenced peak flow; the partial correlation coefficients of these
two parameters exceeded 0.60. In terms of water quality parame-
ters, the build-up rate was highly sensitive to the build-up and
W. Yang and J. Zhang
Fig. 1. Scope of the study area and the drainage model.
wash-off loads, with partial correlation coefficients of 0.9665 and
0.8095, respectively. The detachment rate and wash-off exponent
were key parameters for the wash-off load; both partial correlation
coefficients exceeded 0.90. More detailed results of sensitivity
analysis are displayed in Figure S1, and the detailed process is
introduced in Supplementary material S2.1.
Subsequently, the input parameters were calibrated and vali-
dated by comparing the historical datasets and simulated results.
The results of calibration and validation are presented in Figure S2,
and the detailed processes are introduced in Supplementary ma-
terial S2.2. The calibrated parameters are listed in Table S2.
3.3. Hydrological and non-point pollution scenario
The hydrological and non-point pollution modeling scenarios
were involved in the case study. The hydrological scenario contains
information on the rainfall pattern, which is an essential input data
for hydraulic modeling. The non-point pollution scenario contains
information on non-point source pollutants, which is the essential
input data for water-quality modeling.
By analyzing the pattern of the measured rainfall events, a
typical hydrological scenario was determined, with a rainfall
duration of 120 min, rainfall depth of 32.728 mm, and rainfall time-
to-peak rate of 0.35.
By analyzing the sampled non-point pollutants of chemical
oxygen demand (COD), total nitrogen (TN), and total phosphorous
(TP), a typical non-point pollution scenario, was determined. The
non-point pollution scenario involved non-point pollutants of COD,
TN, and TP, which had individual maximum build-up amounts of
100, 6, and 1 kg/ha, respectively. The parameters of the hydrological
and non-point pollution scenarios are listed in Table S3.
6
Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191
3.4. y and green infrastructure strategies
Gray, green, and combined infrastructure strategies were
implemented for SUDS development. Gray strategies were
designed completely in line with the drainage planning of Chaohu
City from local authorities (Chaohu, 2013). The two types of gray
infrastructures involved were separated sewer pipelines (SSP) and
combined water retention tanks (CWRT), which were installed in or
connected to the existing drainage system; the specific installation
location was determined by drainage planning (Chaohu, 2013).
Based on the different percentages of the implementation to
planning dimensions, three large-scale (GY-L, 100% of the planning
dimension), medium-scale (GY-M, 75% of the planning dimension),
and small-scale (GY-S, 50% of the planning dimension) gray stra-
tegies were designed.
Regarding the design of green strategies, the implementation
schemes were determined based on the analysis of land-use types
in the study area and the characteristics of commonly used green
infrastructures with different applicability (Table S4). Specifically,
three major land-use types in the study area were suitable for green
infrastructure implementation (building areas, paths and squares,
and green space). Three types of green infrastructures from
Table S4 were correspondingly selected and installed: green roofs
(GR) for building areas, permeable pavement (PP) for paths and
squares, and bio-retention (BR) for green spaces. Based on the
empirical installation ratio (the percentage of the installation area
to the total area of suitable land-use surface), large-scale (GN-L,
installation ratio: 45%), medium-scale (GN-M, installation ratio:
30%), and small-scale (GN-S, installation ratio: 15%) strategies were
designed.
Additionally, the combined strategies were designed with the
joint implementation of the large-scale (CO-L), medium-scale (CO-
W. Yang and J. Zhang Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191

M), and small-scale (COeS) gray and green strategies. Therefore, a
total of nine strategies were designed in this study (Table 2).
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Technical performance
more non-point source pollution to be discharged into the water
along with rainfall runoff. In comparison, as green infrastructure
emphasizes infiltration, the drainage capacity of the green strategy
is limited by the infiltration rate, but diffused pollutants are effec-
tively adsorbed with the infiltrated runoff. This result agreed with
previous studies (Alves et al., 2018; Liquete et al., 2016).

The RRVh and RRVe values are listed in Tables S5 and S6 and
visualized in Figs. 2 and 3, demonstrating the technical perfor-
mance of nine strategies in flood mitigation and non-point pollu-
tion control.
Fig. 2 presents GIS maps of the study area with RRVh values
ranging from 0 to 1 for each single node, indicating flood-
mitigation performance from poor to good. The study area
showed poor flood-mitigation performance in the baseline sce-
nario, especially in the southwest and northeast areas. The imple-
mented strategies improved the flood-mitigation performance to
varying degrees depending on the implementation schemes. The
RRVh value increased with the strategy scale, and the overall flood-
mitigation performance of gray strategies was better than that of
green strategies. Additionally, the combined gray-green strategies
performed better than the single-implemented strategies. The
study area showed the highest overall RRVh value after imple-
menting the CO-L combined strategy.
Fig. 3 presents GIS maps of the study area with RRVe values
ranging from 0 to 1 for each single node, indicating pollution-
control performance from poor to good. The city currently faces
high pollution risk along two principal inner rivers due to poor
pollution-control capacity, and the implemented strategies altered
the risk level to varying degrees. Specifically, green strategies were
effective in non-point pollution control, and the RRVe value
significantly increased with the implementation of more green
infrastructures. However, the implementation of gray strategies
induced higher pollution risk, and pollution-control performance
weakened as the scale of gray infrastructures increased. Addition-
ally, the combined strategies were inferior to single green strategies
for pollution control. The highest RRVe came from the GN-L green
strategy rather than the CO-L combined strategy.
Comparing the results of RRVh and RRVe revealed that gray
strategies performed better in flood mitigation, and green strate-
gies were more suitable for pollution control. As gray in-
frastructures focus on rapid drainage, the expanded gray strategy
can significantly improve the flood-mitigation capacity but causes
4.2. Socioeconomic performance
The life-cycle cost of the nine strategies is listed in Table S7,
indicating expenses involved during the entire lifespan. The gray
and green strategies had similar LCC, both of which increased with
the enlargement of the implementation scale. The CO-L combined
strategy had the highest LCC of over 450 million CNY.
The DCh and DCe values of the nine strategies are listed in
Tables S8eS9 and visualized in Figs. 4 and 5, demonstrating the
damage cost due to flooding and non-point pollution in the study
area under the baseline scenario and nine strategies, respectively.
Fig. 4 presents DCh values from blue to red, indicating that the
flood damage cost ranged from 0 to 2000 CNY/m2. The city
currently suffers flood damage in low-altitude areas along the river
and in some discrete northeastern and southwestern sites. The
flood damage was significantly reduced after implementing gray
strategies, whereas the green strategies only showed limited flood-
damage reduction effects. The CO-L combined strategy had the best
flood-induced damage cost reduction performance, which elimi-
nated almost all discrete damage sites in the northeast and
southwest regions and greatly reduced the damage level in low-
lying areas along the river.
Fig. 5 presents the DCe values from blue to red, indicating that
the pollution damage cost ranged from 0 to 160,000 CNY for each
CSO site. Non-point pollution caused severe damage in the baseline
scenario, and the southern and eastern areas around the inner river
suffered the most serious pollution-induced damage. The damage
cost decreased with the implementation of more green in-
frastructures, and the GN-L green strategy reduced approximately
55% of pollution-induced damage costs. However, the damage cost
increased as the scale of the gray strategy increased, and DCe values
for combined strategies were even higher than those of the single-
implemented green strategies.
The GAI values are listed in Table S10 and visualized in Fig. 6,
demonstrating the recreational function of green space for the nine
strategies. Fig. 6 shows that the GAI values ranged from 0 to 1 for

Table 2
Gray and green strategies design.

Strategies Description Green infrastructures Gray infrastructures

Type Scale Site Type Scale Site

GY-S Gray strategy in small scale SSP þ CWRT 50% Separated sewer system, combined sewer
system
GY-M Gray strategy in medium scale SSP þ CWRT 75% Separated sewer system, combined sewer
system
GY-L Gray strategy in large scale SSP þ CWRT 100% Separated sewer system, combined sewer
system
GN-S Green strategy in small scale BR þ GR þ PP 15% Building rooftop, path, square, green
space
GN-M Green strategy in medium scale BR þ GR þ PP 30% Building rooftop, path, square, green
space
GN-L Green strategy in large scale BR þ GR þ PP 45% Building rooftop, path, square, green
space
COeS Combined strategy in small BR þ GR þ PP 15% Building rooftop, path, square, green SSP þ CWRT 50% Separated sewer system, combined sewer
scale space system
CO-M Combined strategy in medium BR þ GR þ PP 30% Building rooftop, path, square, green SSP þ CWRT 75% Separated sewer system, combined sewer
scale space system
CO-L Combined strategy in large scale BR þ GR þ PP 45% Building rooftop, path, square, green SSP þ CWRT 100% Separated sewer system, combined sewer
space system

7
W. Yang and J. Zhang Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191

Fig. 2. Maps of RRVh value for baseline scenario and nine strategies.

each single green patch, indicating the recreational function of
green space from low to high. Green strategies significantly
improved recreational function at the city scale. The GAI index
increased as the scale of green infrastructures increased, whereas
gray strategies did not contribute to recreational improvement. The
highest GAI value of 667.72dobserved under the GN-L green
strategydwas approximately eight times that of the baseline sce-
nario and two times that of the CO-L combined strategy.
The locations of high flood risk (red color) in Fig. 4 do not
completely coincide with the locations of low RRVh values (brown

8
W. Yang and J. Zhang Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191

Fig. 3. Maps of RRVe value for baseline scenario and nine strategies.

color) in Fig. 2, because RRVh evaluates the runoff-control ability for
each node of the drainage system, whereas DCh evaluates the de-
gree of flood-damage suffered by the catchment surface. Owing to
the influence of terrain, despite the occurrence of runoff surcharge
at the nodes with lower RRVh, the surcharged water flows and
gathers in low-lying areas according to the slope (DHI, 2011;
Rossman and Huber, 2016). Therefore, in the DCh results, most of
the high-risk areas appeared in low-altitude areas along the river.
The result of the socioeconomic evaluation showed that gray
and green strategies had similar expenses; gray strategies

9
W. Yang and J. Zhang Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191

Fig. 4. Maps of DCh value for baseline scenario and nine strategies.

performed better in flood-damage reduction, and the green stra-
tegies were more suitable for pollution-damage reduction. How-
ever, as the implementation of gray infrastructure did not increase
any green space, the gray strategies did not contribute to recrea-
tional improvement. This result agreed with the technical
performance evaluation; rapid-discharge-based gray strategies
drain runoff faster, and infiltration-based green strategies capture
more diffused pollutants. The results of the socioeconomic evalu-
ation were consistent with those of Liquete et al. (2016) and Tzoulas
et al. (2007).

10
W. Yang and J. Zhang Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191

Fig. 5. Maps of DCe value for baseline scenario and nine strategies.

4.3. Ecological performance
The BAR values in Table S11 and Fig. 7 present the percentage of
ecologically effective surface area in the total land area for the nine
strategies. Fig. 7 shows that the study area was assigned a BAR value
ranging from 0 to 1 for the land patch, indicating the ecological
performance from poor to good. BAR remained unchanged when
implementing gray strategies, indicating that the gray strategy did
not contribute to ecological improvement. In contrast, ecological
performance was significantly improved with the implementation

11
W. Yang and J. Zhang Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191

Fig. 6. Maps of GAI value for baseline scenario and nine strategies.

of green strategies.
The BAR results had similarities and differences with the GAI
results. Similarly, both results indicated that the gray strategies did
not contribute to the two fields due to lack of green space. In
contrast, locations with low BAR values in Fig. 7 do not completely
coincide with location with low GAI values in Fig. 6, because GAI
evaluates the accessibility of green space by the surrounding public,
whereas BAR evaluates the percentage of ecological effective area
for each land patch. Due to the influence of land-use distribution,
although some green spaces have higher BAR values, their location

12
W. Yang and J. Zhang Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191

Fig. 7. Maps of BAR value for baseline scenario and nine strategies.

far from public access results in poor space accessibility and makes
improving recreational function difficult (Fan et al., 2017).
Ecological performance results showed that only green strate-
gies contributed to ecological improvement; this agreed with the
results of a previous study (Tzoulas et al., 2007).
4.4. Political performance
The spatial consistency ratios are listed in Table S12 and visu-
alized in Fig. 8, illustrating how much the strategies were imple-
mented in line with the planning policy. The three sub-maps in the

13
W. Yang and J. Zhang
Fig. 8. Maps of spatial consistency for nine strategies.
first row of Fig. 8 demonstrate the locations of planned gray stra-
tegies (in brown), implemented gray strategies (in green), and
overlapped gray strategies (in blue). The three sub-maps in the
second row present the locations of planned green strategies (in
gray), implemented green strategies (in green), and overlapped
green strategies (in red). Almost all the implemented gray in-
frastructures were spatially consistent with planned gray in-
frastructures (SC ratio 89e98%). In comparison, a lower proportion
of the implemented green infrastructure was in line with planning
policy (SC ratio 63e76%).
As the gray strategies were designed completely in line with the
drainage planning of Chaohu City from the local authority (Chaohu,
2013), spatial consistency was only affected by the installation scale
of the gray infrastructure rather than installation location.
14
Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191
However, green infrastructures were deployed based on land-use
type distribution, and the location and magnitude of green strate-
gies differed significantly from the urban land-use planning policy
(www.mohurd.gov.cn, accessed in August 2019).
4.5. Integrated evaluation
The above-mentioned evaluation results were standardized and
listed in Table 3; the best values in each criterion are presented in
bold. The performance of the nine strategies varied among the four
criteria, and the optimal strategy for each indicator was different.
Specifically, the CO-L combined strategy was the best option in
RRVh and DCh; the GN-L green strategy performed best in RRVe,
DCe, RF, and BAR; and the GY-L gray strategy was optimal for SC.
W. Yang and J. Zhang Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191

Table 3
Standardized performance value of strategies in MCDM framework.

Strategies R-R-Vh R-R-Ve LCC DCh DCe RF BAR SC Sustainability index

Weight

0.2033 0.2033 0.2033 0.1166 0.1166 0.0698 0.0436 0.0436

GY-S 0.445 1.097 1.009 0.483 1.138 1.333 1.089 0.621 0.411
GY-M 0.309 1.116 0.266 0.478 1.160 1.333 1.089 1.091 0.519
GY-L 0.035 1.227 0.179 0.004 1.425 1.333 1.089 1.432 0.538
GN-S 1.448 0.060 1.139 1.230 0.097 0.629 0.272 1.604 0.245
GN-M 0.673 0.551 0.516 0.873 0.737 0.661 0.544 1.047 0.088
GN-L 0.445 1.421 0.107 0.487 1.180 0.709 1.361 0.493 0.345
COeS 0.375 0.116 0.386 0.462 0.194 0.629 0.272 0.491 0.218
CO-M 1.058 0.403 0.980 1.425 0.443 0.661 0.544 0.022 0.386
CO-L 1.923 1.242 2.048 1.668 1.072 0.709 1.361 0.469 0.676

The sustainability indexes (SI) of the nine strategies were
calculated based on standardized result values and indicator
weights (Table 3). CO-L was the optimal strategy for sustainable
UDS development and had the highest SI value of 0.574, followed by
GN-L and CO-M (with SI values of 0.290 and 0.271, respectively) and
GY-S, with the lowest SI value of 0.421. Table 3 illustrates the
different contributions of the eight evaluation indicators to the SI
values for the adaptation strategies. The large contribution from the
two RRV indexes and DCh led COL to be the optimal solution despite
the effect of LCC. In contrast, although LCC and SC contributed to
the SI value of GY-S, this strategy still showed the poorest perfor-
mance because of significant negative contributions from RRVe and
DCe.
The results of the integrated evaluation demonstrated that gray
strategies more effectively reduced the damage caused by flooding
and were more consistent with urban planning. Hence, the
implementation of gray strategies could be preferred by stake-
holders from government and engineering companies. In contrast,
green strategies performed better in terms of pollution control and
ecological improvement, and enhance the recreational function at a
city scale by improving the water and land environment; thus, they
are more likely to be favored by stakeholders from research in-
stitutes and citizen groups. This result is in line with previous
studies (Ellis et al., 2004; Loc et al., 2017; Martin et al., 2007).
4.6. Research implications
This study intends to provide a systematically performance
assessment of gray-green infrastructures for SUDS development. A
quantifiable MCDM method was proposed accordingly, and it was
subsequently applied in a case study to objectively assess the per-
formance of gray and green infrastructures from multiple criteria.
Results proved that the MCDM evaluation results are clear and
rigorous despite the involvement of multiple options for the SUDS
development. All the single-criteria result values of the involved
options are mathematically determined and straightforwardly
visualized, the stakeholder preferences in different criteria are
objectively integrated through operations research calculations,
thereby ensuring a rigorous evaluation on the involved options.
Additionally, the hybrid implementation of gray-green in-
frastructures is the optimal strategy with best overall performance,
whereas the optimal strategy in each single-criteria is very
different. Gray infrastructures performed better in hydraulic as-
pects, such as mitigating urban flooding and flood damage; while
green infrastructures were more suitable for scenarios dealing with
eco-environmental problems, such as non-point pollution control
and ecological recreation function improvement. However, due to
the limitation of data and computational load, the model will
inevitably be simplified to some extents compared with the actual
15
situation, the complexity of the hydraulic and water quality process
can cause the simulation results vary from the actual results. In
addition, natural and social differences in different regions may also
lead to the fluctuations in the simulation results. Therefore, the
optimal plan for the development of SUDS in specific region re-
quires further analysis based on the actual situation.
As a debate concern in urban water management and sponge
city development, the respective performance of gray and green
infrastructures is notable. Although green infrastructure has
received immense attention in SUDS development, gray infra-
structure still plays a vital role in stormwater management as it
provides different benefits to different aspects compared to green
infrastructure (Nguyen et al., 2019). However, the exact benefits of
gray and green infrastructures to different aspects are difficult to be
determined without a detail quantitative analysis. Although there
are several studies evaluated the green infrastructure in water
quantity management and economic performance, the other per-
formance in water quality management and social-as well as
ecological criteria was not evaluated or not integrated evaluated in
this same study, especially with the consideration of gray infra-
structure together. Therefore, an integrated evaluation of gray and
green infrastructures is essential. Through this study, the respective
performance of gray and green infrastructures and the benefits to
urban water management were further clarified, thus being able to
provide more objective references and avoid the subjective pref-
erences in the decision-making process of SUDS development.
In conclusion, the hypothesis of this study was proven correct;
namely, the combination of MCDM analysis and mathematical
quantification methods can effectively balance comprehensiveness
and objectivity in the decision-making process. Furthermore, this
study demonstrated the performance of gray and green in-
frastructures in water quantity and quality management as well as
socioeconomic, ecological, and policy perspectives through
detailed data and visualized results, which had not been adequately
studied before. These results provide an objective decision support
for SUDS development in the studied area and also for the other
similar regions worldwide.
5. Conclusions
An MCDM framework with eight quantifiable indicators was
proposed in this study to analyze the performance of gray and
green strategies in SUDS development based on technical, eco-
nomic, social, and political criteria. The results showed that the
proposed MCDM method effectively balanced comprehensiveness
and objectivity in the decision-making process, despite the
involvement of multiple options. The gray strategies performed
better in hydraulic and political aspects and that the green strate-
gies were more suitable for environmental and ecological
W. Yang and J. Zhang
improvement; only the hybrid system of both strategies compre-
hensively contributes to SUDS development.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Wenyu Yang: Writing - original draft, Methodology, Software.
Jin Zhang: Conceptualization, Writing - review & editing,
Resources.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to gratefully thank Prof. Dr. Frank Mol-
kenthin and Prof. Dr. Frank Wa €tzold for their assistance with hy-
draulic modeling and multi-criteria analysis. This work was jointly
supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China
(Grant No.: 42077156), the Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic
Research Foundation (Grant No.: 2020A1515011130), the Water
Resource Science and Technology Innovation Program of Guang-
dong Province (Grant No.: 2017e26), the Chinese Scholarship
Council (Grant No.: 202008080005), and Managing Water Re-
sources for Urban Catchments project in the framework of the Sino-
German “Innovation Cluster Major Water” (Grant No.:
02WCL1337A-K) funded by the German Federal Ministry of Edu-
cation and Research (BMBF). The software was supported by DHI
WASY GmbH (Berlin) with MIKE URBAN software license number
72514. The mention of trade names or commercial products does
not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. This
manuscript has not been subjected to the required peer and policy
review of the above-mentioned agencies and, therefore, does not
reflect their views; no official endorsement should be inferred.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126191.
References
Ahmadisharaf, E., Tajrishy, M., Alamdari, N., 2016. Integrating flood hazard into site
selection of detention basins using spatial multi-criteria decision-making.
J. Environ. Plann. Manag. 59, 1397e1417.
Alves, A., Gersonius, B., Kapelan, Z., Vojinovic, Z., Sanchez, A., 2019. Assessing the
Co-Benefits of green-blue-grey infrastructure for sustainable urban flood risk
management. J. Environ. Manag. 239, 244e254.
Alves, A., Gersonius, B., Sanchez, A., Vojinovic, Z., Kapelan, Z., 2018. Multi-criteria
approach for selection of green and grey infrastructure to reduce flood risk and
increase CO-benefits. Water Resour. Manag. 32, 2505e2522.
Arisz, H., Burrell, B.C., 2006. Urban drainage infrastructure planning and design
considering climate change. In: 2006 IEEE EIC Climate Change Conference. IEEE,
pp. 1e9.
Artmann, M., Bastian, O., Grunewald, K., Artmann, M., Bastian, O., Grunewald, K.,
2017. Using the concepts of green infrastructure and ecosystem services to
specify leitbilder for compact and green citiesdthe example of the landscape
plan of dresden (Germany). Sustainability 9, 198-198.
Bartesaghi Koc, C., Osmond, P., Peters, A., 2017. Towards a comprehensive green
infrastructure typology: a systematic review of approaches, methods and ty-
pologies. Urban Ecosyst. 20, 15e35.
Bush, J., Doyon, A., 2019. Building urban resilience with nature-based solutions:
how can urban planning contribute? Cities 95, 102483.
Chang, I.S., Zhao, M., Chen, Y., Guo, X., Zhu, Y., Wu, J., Yuan, T., 2020. Evaluation on
the integrated water resources management in China’s major cities – Based on
City Blueprint® Approach. J. Clean. Prod. 262, 121410.
Chang, L.-F., Huang, S.-L., 2015. Assessing urban flooding vulnerability with an
emergy approach. Landsc. Urban Plann. 143, 11e24.
Chaohu, U.P.I., 2013. Engineering Plan of Storm Water and Anti-flood in Chaohu.
16
Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191
Chaohu, China (in Chinese) [S].
Chocat, B., Ashley, R., Marsalek, J., Matos, M., Rauch, W., Schilling, W., Urbonas, B.,
2007. Toward the sustainable management of urban storm-water. Indoor Built
Environ. 16, 273e285.
Chou, W.-C., Lin, W.-T., Lin, C.-Y., 2007. Application of fuzzy theory and PROMETHEE
technique to evaluate suitable ecotechnology method: a case study in Shihmen
Reservoir Watershed, Taiwan. Ecol. Eng. 31, 269e280.
Depietri, Y., McPhearson, T., 2017. Integrating the Grey, Green, and Blue in Cities:
Nature-Based Solutions for Climate Change Adaptation and Risk Reduction,
Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas. Springer,
Cham, pp. 91e109.
DHI, 2011. Mike Flood 1D-2D ModellingdUser Manual. DHI Water & Environment.
DHI, 2014. MIKE URBAN: Collection System.
Dong, X., Guo, H., Zeng, S., 2017a. Enhancing future resilience in urban drainage
system: green versus grey infrastructure. Water Res. 124, 280e289.
Dong, Z., Zhao, W., Zhou, X., Zhao, P., 2017b. Cost analysis of COD and NH3-N
treatment in urban sewage treatment plants. Liaoning Urban Rural Environ.
Sci. Technol. 37, 67e69.
Eckart, K., McPhee, Z., Bolisetti, T., 2017. Performance and implementation of low
impact development e a review. Sci. Total Environ. 607e608, 413e432.
Ellis, J.B., Deutsch, J.C., Mouchel, J.M., Scholes, L., Revitt, M.D., 2004. Multicriteria
decision approaches to support sustainable drainage options for the treatment
of highway and urban runoff. Sci. Total Environ. 334e335, 251e260.
Fan, P., Xu, L., Yue, W., Chen, J., 2017. Accessibility of public urban green space in an
urban periphery: the case of Shanghai. Landsc. Urban Plann. 165, 177e192.
Fletcher, T.D., Shuster, W., Hunt, W.F., Ashley, R., Butler, D., Arthur, S., Trowsdale, S.,
Barraud, S., Semadeni-Davies, A., Bertrand-Krajewski, J.-L., Mikkelsen, P.S.,
Rivard, G., Uhl, M., Dagenais, D., Viklander, M., 2015. SUDS, LID, BMPs, WSUD
and more e the evolution and application of terminology surrounding urban
drainage. Urban Water J. 12, 525e542.
Frantzeskaki, N., McPhearson, T., Collier, M.J., Kendal, D., Bulkeley, H., Dumitru, A.,
Walsh, C., Noble, K., Van Wyk, E., Ordo n~ ez, C., 2019. Nature-based solutions for
urban climate change adaptation: linking science, policy, and practice com-
munities for evidence-based decision-making. Bioscience 69, 455e466.
Freedman, D., Pisani, R., Purves, R., 2007. Statistics: Fourth International Student
Edition. W.W. Norton & Company.
Ghumman, A., Haider, H., Al-Salamah, I., Ghazaw, Y., Ghazaw, Y.M., Alhumaid, M.,
Ghumman, A.R., Haider, H., Al-Salamah, I.S., Ghazaw, Y.M., 2018. Sustainability
evaluation framework of urban stormwater drainage options for arid environ-
ments using hydraulic modeling and multicriteria decision-making. Water 10,
581-581.
Gozzard, E., Mayes, W.M., Potter, H.A.B., Jarvis, A.P., 2011. Seasonal and spatial
variation of diffuse (non-point) source zinc pollution in a historically metal
mined river catchment, UK. Environ. Pollut. 159, 3113e3122.
Grose, M.J., 2014. Gaps and futures in working between ecology and design for
constructed ecologies. Landsc. Urban Plann. 132, 69e78.
Grunewald, K., Richter, B., Meinel, G., Herold, H., Syrbe, R.-U., 2017. Proposal of in-
dicators regarding the provision and accessibility of green spaces for assessing
the ecosystem service “recreation in the city” in Germany. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci.
Ecosyst. Serv. Manag. 13, 26e39.
Gu, X., Liao, Z., Zhang, G., Xie, J., Zhang, J., 2017. Modelling the effects of water
diversion and combined sewer overflow on urban inland river quality. Environ.
Sci. Pollut. Control Ser. 24, 21038e21049.
Haines-Young, R., Potschin, M., 2013. Common International Classification of
Ecosystem Services (CICES): Consultation on Version 4, August-December 2012.
EEA Framework Contract No EEA. Contract No EEA/IEA/09/003.
Hajkowicz, S., Collins, K., 2007. A review of multiple criteria analysis for water
resource planning and management. Water Resour. Manag. 21, 1553e1566.
Hajkowicz, S., Higgins, A., 2008. A comparison of multiple criteria analysis tech-
niques for water resource management. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 184, 255e265.
Hajkowicz, S.A., McDonald, G.T., Smith, P.N., 2000. An evaluation of multiple
objective decision support weighting techniques in natural resource manage-
ment. J. Environ. Plann. Manag. 43, 505e518.
Hammond, M.J., Chen, A.S., Djordjevi c, S., Butler, D., Mark, O., 2015. Urban flood
impact assessment: a state-of-the-art review. Urban Water J. 12, 14e29.
Hashimoto, T., Stedinger, J.R., Loucks, D.P., 1982. Reliability, resiliency, and vulner-
ability criteria for water resource system performance evaluation. Water
Resour. Res. 18, 14e20.
Hoque, Y.M., Tripathi, S., Hantush, M.M., Govindaraju, R.S., 2012. Watershed reli-
ability, resilience and vulnerability analysis under uncertainty using water
quality data. J. Environ. Manag. 109, 101e112.
Hua, P., Yang, W., Qi, X., Jiang, S., Xie, J., Gu, X., Li, H., Zhang, J., Krebs, P., 2020.
Evaluating the effect of urban flooding reduction strategies in response to
design rainfall and low impact development. J. Clean. Prod. 242, 118515.
Huang, I.B., Keisler, J., Linkov, I., 2011. Multi-criteria decision analysis in environ-
mental sciences: ten years of applications and trends. Sci. Total Environ. 409,
3578e3594.
Huizinga, J., De Moel, H., Szewczyk, W., 2017. Global Flood Depth-Damage Func-
tions: Methodology and the Database with Guidelines. Joint Research Centre
(Seville site).
Kirchmeier-Young, M.C., Zhang, X., 2020. Human influence has intensified extreme
precipitation in North America. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. Unit. States Am. 117, 13308.
Kremer, P., Hamstead, Z.A., McPhearson, T., 2016. The value of urban ecosystem
services in New York City: a spatially explicit multicriteria analysis of landscape
scale valuation scenarios. Environ. Sci. Pol. 62, 57e68.
W. Yang and J. Zhang
Lakes, T., Kim, H.-O., 2012. The urban environmental indicator “Biotope Area
Ratio”dan enhanced approach to assess and manage the urban ecosystem
services using high resolution remote-sensing. Ecol. Indicat. 13, 93e103.
Liao, Z., Chen, H., Huang, F., Li, H., 2015. Costeeffectiveness analysis on LID measures
of a highly urbanized area. Desalination Water Treat. 56, 2817e2823.
Liquete, C., Udias, A., Conte, G., Grizzetti, B., Masi, F., 2016. Integrated valuation of a
nature-based solution for water pollution control. Highlighting hidden benefits.
Ecosyst. Serv. 22, 392e401.
Liu, D., Qi, X., Qiang, Fu, Li, M., Zhu, W., Zhang, L., Abrar Faiz, M., Khan, M.I., Li, T.,
Cui, S., 2019. A resilience evaluation method for a combined regional agricul-
tural water and soil resource system based on Weighted Mahalanobis distance
and a Gray-TOPSIS model. J. Clean. Prod. 229, 667e679.
Loc, H.H., Duyen, P.M., Ballatore, T.J., Lan, N.H.M., Das Gupta, A., 2017. Applicability of
sustainable urban drainage systems: an evaluation by multi-criteria analysis.
Environ. Syst. Decis. 37, 332e343.
Ma, T., Sun, S., Fu, G., Hall, J.W., Ni, Y., He, L., Yi, J., Zhao, N., Du, Y., Pei, T., Cheng, W.,
Song, C., Fang, C., Zhou, C., 2020. Pollution exacerbates China’s water scarcity
and its regional inequality. Nat. Commun. 11, 650.
Mahmoud, S.H., Gan, T.Y., 2018. Multi-criteria approach to develop flood suscepti-
bility maps in arid regions of Middle East. J. Clean. Prod. 196, 216e229.
Mansur, A.V., Brondízio, E.S., Roy, S., Hetrick, S., Vogt, N.D., Newton, A., 2016. An
assessment of urban vulnerability in the Amazon Delta and Estuary: a multi-
criterion index of flood exposure, socio-economic conditions and infrastruc-
ture. Sustain. Sci. 11, 625e643.
Martin, C., Ruperd, Y., Legret, M., 2007. Urban stormwater drainage management:
the development of a multicriteria decision aid approach for best management
practices. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 181, 338e349.
Marttunen, M., Lienert, J., Belton, V., 2017. Structuring problems for Multi-Criteria
Decision Analysis in practice: a literature review of method combinations.
Eur. J. Oper. Res. 263, 1e17.
Meerow, S., Newell, J.P., 2017. Spatial planning for multifunctional green infra-
structure: growing resilience in Detroit. Landsc. Urban Plann. 159, 62e75.
Ministry of Ecology and Environment of the People’s Republic of China, M.C., 2015.
Action Plan for Prevention and Control of Water Pollution. People’s Publishing
House Beijing, China.
Mitchell, G., 2005. Mapping hazard from urban non-point pollution: a screening
model to support sustainable urban drainage planning. J. Environ. Manag. 74,
1e9.
Moghtadernejad, S., Chouinard, L.E., Mirza, M.S., 2018. Multi-criteria decision-
making methods for preliminary design of sustainable facades. J. Build. Eng.
19, 181e190.
Mouritz, M.J., 1996. Sustainable Urban Water Systems: Policy and Professional
Praxis. Murdoch University.
17
Journal of Cleaner Production 293 (2021) 126191
Nguyen, T.T., Ngo, H.H., Guo, W., Wang, X.C., Ren, N., Li, G., Ding, J., Liang, H., 2019.
Implementation of a specific urban water management-Sponge City. Sci. Total
Environ. 652, 147e162.
Paprotny, D., Sebastian, A., Morales-Napoles, O., Jonkman, S.N., 2018. Trends in flood
losses in Europe over the past 150 years. Nat. Commun. 9, 1985.
Rezende, O.M., Ribeiro da Cruz de Franco, A.B., Belen ~ o de Oliveira, A.K.,
Miranda, F.M., Pitzer Jacob, A.C., Martins de Sousa, M., Miguez, M.G., 2020.
Mapping the flood risk to Socioeconomic Recovery Capacity through a multi-
criteria index. J. Clean. Prod. 255, 120251.
Ribaudo, M., 2001. Non-point source pollution control policy in the USA. In: Envi-
ronmental policies for agricultural pollution control, vol. 123, p. 123.
Rossman, L., Huber, W., 2016. Storm Water Management Model Reference Manual
Volume II - Hydraulics. US EPA Office of Research and Development, Wash-
ington, DC. EPA/600/R-17/111.
Saaty, T., 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGrawHill, New York.
Shariat, R., Roozbahani, A., Ebrahimian, A., 2019. Risk analysis of urban stormwater
infrastructure systems using fuzzy spatial multi-criteria decision making. Sci.
Total Environ. 647, 1468e1477.
Spatari, S., Yu, Z., Montalto, F.A., 2011. Life cycle implications of urban green
infrastructure. Environ. Pollut. 159, 2174e2179.
Tavakol-Davani, H., Burian, S.J., Devkota, J., Apul, D., 2015. Performance and cost-
based comparison of green and gray infrastructure to control combined
sewer overflows. J. Sustain. Water Built Environ. 2, 4015009-4015009.
Tavakol-Davani, H., Burian, S.J., Devkota, J., Apul, D., 2016. Performance and cost-
based comparison of green and gray infrastructure to control combined
sewer overflows. J. Sustain. Water Built Environ. 2, 04015009.
Tzoulas, K., Korpela, K., Venn, S., Yli-Pelkonen, V., Ka zmierczak, A., Niemela, J.,
James, P., 2007. Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using
Green Infrastructure: a literature review. Landsc. Urban Plann. 81, 167e178.
USEPA, 2017. What is nonpoint source? Polluted Runoff. www.epa.gov/nps/basic-
information-about-nonpoint-source-nps-pollution.2017-05-02.
Yang, W., Brüggemann, K., Seguya, K.D., Ahmed, E., Kaeseberg, T., Dai, H., Hua, P.,
Zhang, J., Krebs, P., 2020. Measuring performance of low impact development
practices for the surface runoff management. Environ. Sci. Ecotechnol. 100010.
Zhou, Q., Mikkelsen, P.S., Halsnæs, K., Arnbjerg-Nielsen, K., 2012. Framework for
economic pluvial flood risk assessment considering climate change effects and
adaptation benefits. J. Hydrol. 414, 539e549.
Zhou, Q., Panduro, T.E., Thorsen, B.J., Arnbjerg-Nielsen, K., 2013. Adaption to
extreme rainfall with open urban drainage system: an integrated hydrological
cost-benefit analysis. Environ. Manag. 51, 586e601.
Zhou, Q., Zhou, Qianqian, 2014. A review of sustainable urban drainage systems
considering the climate change and urbanization impacts. Water 6, 976e992.