save our cities, one waterway at a time

Our Mission: To combat climate change and to make Sydney healthier and happier, using the power of generative AI and community co-design

The world is on fire (literally)

Sea and flooding levels rising.

Our cities getting hotter, and our forests burn.

Biodiversity collapsing, breaking our connection to Country.

A radical response is needed and everywhere matters.

A 50 metre strip along our coastlines, rivers and harbours matters more.

73% of Australians live in our coastal cities

Our cities create the most impact and will be the most impacted.

But we have a proven technology which can protect our cities.

Rewilded foreshore urban parks can become our first line of defence against climate change

Mangroves, wetlands and oyster reefs instead of concrete floodwalls.

Cooling streams and urban forests instead of having to hide in air-conditioning during extreme heat.

Like power grids and sewers this should be critical infrastructure

But in Australia this implementation has been slow and generally small scale.

This is Critical Blue Green Infrastructure

Let’s stop waiting and just do it.

The Blue Green Domain seeks to create a NGO which works with the community to:

- Co-design

- Co-advocate and

- Co-deliver

Precinct scale visions of blue-green infrastructure.

These large urban foreshore parks can protect our community while enhancing the beauty, health and liveability of our city.

We have identified twenty self-funding precinct-scale rewilding projects across Sydney.

These projects would pay for themselves by stacking:

- Carbon credits

- Nature Repair Markets

- Water quality indexes

- Social impact bonds

- Economic desirability

- Insurance risk reduction

- Job creation

- Uplift value capture

Using a citizen-led approach we can create for a vision for these critical green places on Sydney harbour

Using our methodology we can co-create

1. A vision for each location

2. Evidence of community support

3. Community advocacy

4. A precinct master plan

5. A business & benefits case

6. An actionable delivery strategy

Developing this master plan would typically require $10M per precinct and be the opaque domain of state government and developers.

With our plan, this is reduced to $3M per site and emerges from the community.

Enabled by technology

These plans will need traditional city planning, economics, landscape architecture and urban design.

However, we will drastically speed up and scale up this process through use of AI tools.

App-based gamification of urbanism will allow the community to collectively create and understand the trade-offs inherent in various designs.

This tool will also allow urban planners, technical experts and architects to rapidly quantify the social, economic and environmental impacts in a live parametric model.

These project will deliver critical Blue Green Infrastructure

• Creates a barrier which rises with the sea level
• Sequesters large amounts of carbon
• Cools surrounding areas
• Cleans our water and air
• Restores critical habitat
• Heals Country, a step towards reconciliation
• Makes our cities more liveable and attractive
  
• And our lives longer
  

Singapore, New York, Copenhagen, Seoul and many other global cities have used this strategy at scale.

Why change?

At each of these sites state government, Local government, developers and the community are locked in conflict over their individual visions for the city.

We propose a citizen-led unsolicited urbanism approach to break the deadlock – starting with a proof of concept in Iron Cove.

Can we do this?

Around the world, we find examples of communities which have achieved urban transformation, first despite, then in partnership with the government due to the power of a vision.

The High Line in NYC started as an idea, grew into an NGO, and then a world-changing project.

$2 million in philanthropy catalysed well over $2 billion in value.

It is an idea whose time has come

The explosion of AI procedural and parametric design tools unlocks radical new ways to dream of a green and healthy Sydney together.

Government policy is aligning, and a vast community groundswell is growing for practical, immediate ways to address climate change.

Why us?

We are uniquely positioned to assemble an alliance of Sydney’s leading experts, activists and academics.

We have the influence and connections to advance this plan from a vision to delivery.

No one else can create a unified vision

Control over the harbour and foreshore is fragmented across twenty government entities.

No one else will

Major projects in NSW are initiated primarily by the development industry, who will follow but not lead this.

It’s up to us

Why you?

You share our vision

We need to raise $1 to $3 million in seed funding to create a master plan for a rewilded Iron Cove, Tamborine and Rushcutters Bays as a proof of concept.

We need access to your capital, connections and passion.

Contact us

Email at colin@bluegreen.au

PLACE

A VISION OF REWILDED IRON COVE

Background: Iron Cove

Iron Cove is a large bay on Sydney Harbour surrounded by some of the city’s most desirable and populated suburbs. It suffers from water pollution, lack of canopy, overtaxed social infrastructure, user conflict, major flooding and comparatively low economic value.

It was a paradise, now the ecology is in a permanent crisis

Source: Survey of Port Jackson, New South Wales by John Septimus Roe, Lieut. R.N. in 1822

Restoring it to its pre-colonial landform will provide a vast range of social, economic and environmental benefits.

Urgent intervention is required

Rising sea levels will swamp surrounding homes and roads in the next thirty years, while two hundred years of mismanagement has left a toxic legacy and environmental collapse.

Our plan

We propose the creation of a 400-hectare public park, converting one of the largest areas of connected state-owned inner urban land in Sydney to its highest and best use.

Nature-based innovation in blue green infrastructure

Using global best practice approaches, this project will create a master plan to adapt to sea level rise and restore the pre-colonial landscape by connecting and upgrading existing parks.

The marine ecology will be restored by boardwalks with oyster reefs, with mangroves and salt marshes planted behind them, safely entombing the existing contamination.

The University of Sydney

A self-funding parkland

Initial research indicates that this project could be revenue neutral to the State of NSW through innovative financial design.

This can be achieved by stacking future revenue sources, including carbon sequestration, nature repair markets and value capture mechanisms.

These future revenue streams could then be converted to project capital through the investment of impact, institutional and sovereign wealth investment.

How will we do this?

It begins with a vision and a plan.

In New South Wales, an “Unsolicited Proposal” planning instrument provides a pathway for this project as State Significant Precincts (SSP).

A robust community-embraced master plan and business case illustrating its self-funding nature could unite the lands held by ten different state entities into a single authority.

This is the pathway Barangaroo and Western Sydney Parklands both took, but such a plan has yet to emerge from the local and academic community.

We propose to change that!

Stage 1: Brand and fund raising

Create an evocative place brand that defines the precinct in the public's mind and evokes for them a vision of a greener, healthier future for Iron Cove.

Using this brand as an anchor, craft a brand for the cause of rewilding Iron Cove then use it to raise philanthropic funds from high-net-wealth individuals and corporate foundations.

Stage 2: Establish the base case

Take an unflinching look at the truth about now.

Evaluating the current social, economic, and environmental conditions, and impacts along with technical assessments, including flooding, contamination, biodiversity, and heritage, will allow us to create an estimation of the likely cost of Business As Usual (BAU).

Citizen science and community action groups will play a critical role in establishing the base case.

The Billion Oyster Project in NYC (shown to the right) has illustrated the power of citizen science in making challenging urban rewilding possible, educational and fun.

Stage 3a – A community emergent design

Listening to the community and key stakeholders with innovative methods of engagement to define the public benefit and community desires.

Beginning with Aboriginal Heritage and Connection to Country, followed by Community Narrative Inquiry – Looking two generations back and two generations forward to discover the Iron Cove which lives in the memory of the community, and understand what they want to create for their grandchildren.

Australians love our parks and our natural environments; it is critical part of our identity as a nation - and we collectively all want to play our part in shaping it.

Stage 3B – A serious game

Create a platform which enables the gamification of urbanism, allowing the community to play and design their ideal Iron Cove.

This fun multi-platform game will allow the exploration of opportunities and trade-offs of this project based on their preferences. We can use this wisdom of the crowd to develop a final master plan which emerges from their collective dreams and desires. Developed in partnership with a major game company this tool will also allow high-level costing and benefit analysis on options on demand.

Source: BLOCK, created at USC School of Architecture

Stage 4 – Public prototype

A prototype on Sydney Harbour with a floating boardwalk, wetlands, and light/sound.

This vivid story of the transitions of Sydney Harbour and its people through Aboriginal eyes acting as an impactful climate change narrative. During daylight, it will allow an explanation of the Iron Cove project through interpretive signage and make the public case for change.

LEARN ABOUT THE GREEN MILE

Source: BIOMATRIX and the Green Mile

Stage 5 - Deliverables

The end goal of this project is a unique and innovative Unsolicited Proposal for NSW Government and institutional investors to fund it in partnership with NSW State government.

• Business case for NSW Treasury.
• Unsolicited Planning Proposal for State Significant. Infrastructure (SSI)
• A community organised and ready for change.

Stage 6 – Scale up

The methodology developed for this project could have large-scale impacts and creates valuable IP.

• Applicable to sites like the Cooks River, Rushcutters Bay, and the Bays Precinct.
  
• The serious game may have long-term commercial benefits.
• Frameworks for Urban Blue Carbon and Urban Nature Repair will have a lasting impact.

The sale of the Iron Cove rewilding master plan to the State Government or an impact investment consortium will fund growth to providing climate mitigation solutions at scale.

PROCESS

JOURNEY AND RESEARCH

Research and background

Covid was a time of contrasts for me.

I spent half of it designing an Aboriginal Eco Resort in a pristine natural environment in the East Kimberly.

The other half stuck in Sydney during lockdown taking long walks around Iron Cove.

I found myself wondering why Iron Cove was so degraded and why hasn’t anything been done about it?

Water pollution, lack of canopy, overtaxed social infrastructure, user conflict, major flooding, reduced recreational value, smells terrible and is far from its highest and best use.

And about to be massively impacted by climate change.

Why can’t we?

This became a turning point in my life and career. I’ve been a serial entrepreneur who has designed and opened fifty cafes in five countries.

I came to realise that I could open another hundred café, but if we don’t address the challenge of climate change, it’s all just building sandcastles before the tide.

This question has become a central obsession of my five-year PhD at the University of Sydney.

Why haven’t we restored Sydney Harbour to protect our city?

We understand how to do it

Studying how this problem has been addressed elsewhere, revealed a wealth of global blue-green infrastructure solutions.

Interviewing 50+ marine biologists, climate scientists, economics and urban designers illustrated practical ways it can be done.

Applying this nature positive rewilding strategy at scale and restoring the mangroves and oyster reefs to Iron Cove is both economically and technically feasible.

Combining rewilding strategies with connecting the currently fragmented foreshore parkland would yield vast social, economic and environmental benefits

We understand the benefits

Adapting the foreshore areas of our urban parks is our best hope of mitigating the impacts of climate change.

Resilience

Climate/ Carbon

Ecology/ Biodiversity

Flood Mitigation

Healing Country

Liveability

Active Transport

Water quality & monitoring

Public Amenity

Density on Green Amenity

Policy Alignment

Highest value per ha

Health & Wellbeing

Swimmable Harbour

Tourism and Recreation

While providing vast social, economic and environmental benefits.

It’s not a shortage of capital

Research indicates that this project could be revenue neutral to the State of NSW through innovative financial design.

This can be achieved by layering future revenue sources, including carbon sequestration, nature repair markets and value capture mechanisms.

Financial Mechanism: Sources & citations

It’s a problem of vision

We propose to create an NGO and a series of powerful tools to allow urban design experts to co-envision our foreshores with the community.

There is a singular power to a vision.

With a vision and a plan, the impossible becomes probable

It is a vision we need urgently

Rising sea levels will swamp surrounding homes and roads in the next thirty years; heat will make the areas of our city unsafe for the aged.

Meanwhile, the social demands on our parks outstrip capacity and years of mismanagement has left a toxic legacy and environmental collapse.

But it’s a vision the current players can’t, won’t and maybe shouldn’t provide

Won’t – The interactions between the state, developers and the community are plagued by mistrust, secrecy and division and no one will take initiative.

Can’t – Control of the harbour and foreshore is fragmented across multiple agencies, LGAs and departments.

Shouldn’t - State Government’s scarce resources and focus are best spent elsewhere. The harbour areas will never be the first priority.

2nd Order Barries: Sources & citations

Creating a vision requires balance

If creating a shared vision was easy someone else would have done it already.

Doing so requires balancing three very divergent sets of needs.

We have well understood tools for understanding this balancing act.

1st Order Barries: Sources & citations

It requires planning

Creating a collective vision requires navigating three unreconciled ways of planning.

An ever-shifting puzzle of alignment, realignment, and paralysis.

We need tools to navigate and reconcile these ways of planning.

It needs to align government agendas

For our case study of Iron Cove there are three tiers of government land managers each with their own agenda, policies and resource constraints.

Even within each tier there are conflicting priorities.

2nd Order Barries: Sources & citations

It requires the art of the possible and the profitable

All large projects need to balance meet three thresholds.

To create this vision, we need to understand all twenty sides of this “cube”

A move on one side changes all of the others.

It is a wicked problem which is both complicated and complex.

How do we do that?

We change how the game is played.

Typical project flow

Typical Project Flow of NSW Urban Parkland begins with a developer seeking to undertake a major project and offers a financial contribution or works in kind to facilitate approval.

They develop an initial concept which does the minimum needed to meet the requirements of the Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA).

Urban Planners, Urban Designers, Landscape Architects and Technical Experts work up a plan to this specification.

Council and the Department of Planning interrogate the plan, ensuring it complies with planning regulations.

Then as the final step before delivery the community is consulted seeking to calm any objections. It is far too late for meaningful input.

Unsolicited urbanism

We propose to create a community emergent designs for a large urban foreshore parklands, which no one has asked for, but everyone needs.

The convergence of innovations across AI, urban design, community engagement and sustainable finance allow is to upend the traditional hierarchy of urban landscape design.

Our proposal

In our vision the community creates the initial vision, experts curate their vision and provide details. This produces a business case which documents how the project self-funds and masterplan illustrating the vision of a community centric green, healthy and resilient foreshore park.

Modification Schedule 3 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Planning Systems) 2021

State Significant Infrastructure (SSI) refers to development projects of significant economic, social, or environmental importance as designated by the NSW State Environmental Planning Policy 2021.

Schedule 3 designates SSI permitted under the Policy includes infrastructure and development that is essential for the provision of public services and facilities, such as hospitals, schools, roads, and utilities.

Projects of our type could be made simpler to implement with the modification of Schedule 3 to include critical blue-green infrastructure.

If critical Blue-Green Infrastructure is defined as combined water, natural and aboriginal heritage infrastructure the upcoming Federal Nature Positive Act may provide a constitutional law justification for this change.

Australian Federal Government Acts have a significant impact on State Government legislation as they provide a legal framework and guidelines that state governments must adhere to when developing and implementing their own laws and policies. This is relevant in our case as the pending Nature Positive Act at a Federal Level will require modification of NSW State Legislation.

The proposed Australian Nature Positive Act aims to protect and restore the country's natural environment by setting targets for biodiversity conservation and sustainable land use. An amendment of Schedule 3 of Planning Systems would meet this requirement.

Well, how do we do all of that?

By leveraging twenty different concepts and technologies.

Each of them are well understood and tested.

But never before combined in urban design & planning in Australia

Leveraging the power of nature to heal itself

Mangroves

These were a critical element of the pre-colonial landscape of Sydney harbour.

As the lungs of our waterways mangroves and saltmarsh cleaned and regulated the ecosystem of the harbour, their removal heralded a slide towards ecological collapse.

Their restoration would provide habitat and breeding grounds for countless birds, fish and native wildlife.

Mangroves are the most effective carbon sequestration technology we know of, locking away atmospheric carbon at many times the rate of dryland forests. Mangroves also act to lock away heavy metals, which are harmful to other parts of the ecosystem, especially oysters and ourselves.

Each hectare has the potential to produce a large number of annual carbon credits and biodiversity-based credits under the Nature Repair Act if we can develop a suitable framework.

Urban Green Infrastructure

Urban Green Infrastructure refers to the network of natural and semi-natural spaces within urban areas, including parks, gardens, street trees, and green roofs. In the Sydney-specific context, it includes concepts like rewilding concrete canals, returning buried streams to the surface and creating floodable parkland.

As temperatures rise and extreme weather events become more frequent, urban green spaces play a crucial role in our cities. They provide shade, reduce the urban heat island effect, improve air quality, and help manage stormwater runoff. Additionally, these green spaces offer opportunities for recreation, mental well-being, and social interaction, making cities more liveable and resilient in the face of climate challenges of the next century. By investing in and expanding the urban green infrastructure, Sydney can effectively adapt to and combat the impacts of climate change, ensuring a sustainable and vibrant future for its residents.

Boardwalks

It seems odd to describe something as simple as a boardwalk as a technology but when used on a large scale they provide a vast array of public benefits at a relatively low cost. They can act as active transport corridors providing places for us to walk, bike and run. The addition of public gathering spots, fishing platforms and benches can allow these to become both the anchor and connecting element of a great public park.

In cities, like Sydney, with complex issues relating to public access to harbour foreshores, they provide a critical source of civil amenity providing places for the public to gather, learn and explore nature within the city.

Finally, they can serve to protect sensitive natural environments while still permitting public access.

Managed retreat & Density on green amenity

Managed retreat is an essential, if challenging, strategy in Australia to mitigate the risks associated with flooding. It is a planned and controlled relocation of people and infrastructure away from these high-risk zones. This approach ensures the safety and well-being of residents while also protecting valuable assets.

While the need for managed retreat is well understood by government and insurance industry stakeholders, discussions within public forums are usually charged with emotions, with a perception of governmental overreach if acting proactively or blame if acting too late.

Density on Green Amenity, sometimes known as Compact Green Urban Development, presents an opportunity to meet both the challenges of managed retreat and the housing crisis. It can provide a mechanism for homeowners within the flood zone to be fairly compensated as part of larger precinct-scale development which steps residential density back from our waterways and up.

Narrative Inquiry

Narrative inquiry is a research approach that aims to understand and explore human experiences through the lens of storytelling.

It recognises that individuals construct their identities and make sense of the world around them through narratives or personal stories. In this approach, researchers collect and analyse narratives shared by participants, which can be through interviews, diaries, or other written or spoken accounts. The focus is not only on the content of the narratives but also on how they are told, including the language, metaphors, and emotions used.

This deepens and enriches our more technology-driven co-design methods, exploring what these green spaces meant for their parents and grandparents and what they dream they could be for their children and grandchildren. Urban parks meet the needs of five generations, lifting the discussion out of the realm of immediate concerns and elevating the vision to a higher level.

Daylighted stormwater and naturalised canals

Most of the rain which falls on Sydney flows to its harbour through underground stormwater pipes or concreted canals.

This has resulted in not only costly, ageing and difficult to maintain infrastructure but also periodic of sewage overflow into these channels during high rains. Also importantly this water, which once flowed along the surface, is no longer available to our urban greenery, reducing their ability to cool our city and their ability to withstand drought conditions.

There is a global movement to manage stormwater with Nature-Based Solutions bringing long underground streams to the surface and replacing aging concrete canals with rewilded banks more suitable to weather extremes of a climate change-impacted Australia.

Nature Based Solutions to stormwater management not only mitigate flood risks and reduce pollution but also enhance biodiversity, improve public health and provide aesthetic and recreational benefits.

Connection to Country

The Aboriginal Connection to Country holds immense significance when it comes to planning urban parks in Australia. Aboriginal people have a deep spiritual and cultural connection to the land, which has been nurtured over thousands of years.

Their traditional knowledge and understanding of the environment are invaluable in ensuring authenticity when rewilding urban parkland areas. This connection represents a technology, an understanding, with roots stretching back through time and forward in a possible future in harmony with the land.

By involving Aboriginal communities in the planning process, their unique perspectives can help create parks that not only reflect their rich cultural heritage but also promote biodiversity, conservation, and ecological sustainability. This collaboration strengthens the connection to the land and fostering reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. Ultimately, recognising and respecting this Connection to Country, and working with Traditional Owners to Heal Country in urban park planning is a means to create inclusive and harmonious public spaces that benefit all Australians.

Natural and Cultural Technologies magnified

by Design and Computer Science

Parametric design

Parametric design is a cutting-edge technology emerging as a powerful tool for promoting sustainability in landscape architecture and design.

By utilising algorithms and computational tools, parametric design allows for the exploration of complex and dynamic interactions and designs that are optimised for environmental performance. This approach enables designers to generate solutions that are not only aesthetically pleasing but also energy-efficient, resource-efficient, and responsive to the local context.

Parametric design allows for exploring multiple design iterations, enabling landscape designers to optimise their designs based on various sustainability parameters such as embodied carbon, social benefit maximisation, and minimisation of material usage. The power of parametric design lies in its ability to push the boundaries of sustainable design and create innovative solutions that until recently impractical due to limitations in computational power.

Generative AI urban design

The recent release of Unreal Engine 5.2 heralded an explosion in AI Generative terrain tools.

Generative AI terrain works by using advanced algorithms to create realistic and diverse landscapes. These algorithms analyse and learn from existing terrain data, such as satellite images or topographic maps, to understand the patterns and features present in real-world terrains. Based on this understanding, the AI can then generate new terrains that incorporate randomness and variation into the generation process, creating unique and believable landscapes in real time.

The implications of this paradigm-shifting technology are just beginning to be understood.

Object Orientated Design

An evolution of a core computer science concept of Object Oriented Design (OOD) applied to architecture. This is a design approach that focuses on breaking down a system into individual objects, each representing a specific entity or component of the system. These objects are designed to have their own set of properties and behaviours, which can interact with other objects in the system. This design approach allows for modular and reusable components, making it easier to maintain and modify the system as a whole.

Applied to landscape architecture and urban design it allows the creation of virtual objects which have complex interdependencies embedded into them. For example, a ‘park bench’ might know it wants to face a path, but not block it, likes having a tree behind it and be no closer than 50m near the nearest bench. Also, the object could contain the likely cost, embedded carbon and likely social benefit metrics.

Financial Innovation

Carbon credits

In Australia, carbon credits, also known as Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCUs). They represent a reduction or removal of one tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent from the atmosphere.

Urban green infrastructure, such as parks, green roofs, and street trees, could but currently do not play a significant role in this context as the current frameworks are designed to operate at large scale in primarily rural regions.

We are effectively “leaving money on the table”, funds that could be used to finance this living infrastructure.

Nature Repair Market and Nature Positive

The Australian Nature Repair Market Act is pending federal legislation aimed at conserving and restoring the country's natural environment. It recognises the importance of protecting Australia's unique biodiversity and ecosystems, which are threatened by habitat loss, climate change, and invasive species.

The act provides a framework for the government to implement measures to repair and rehabilitate damaged or degraded natural areas, including the establishment of protected areas, the restoration of habitats, and the reintroduction of native species.

Under the scheme, when a landholder conducts a project to repair or protect nature, they will be issued with a tradeable certificate.

This paradigm-shifting act is part of a broader reform of Australian environmental law to shift to a nature-positive framework.

These reforms will replace a multitude of confusing and poorly regulated bio-diversity credits with a single, powerful, and marketable Australian nature repair credit.

Blah blah blah

Value capture of zoning uplift

Value capture of zoning uplift in urban planning refers to recouping the increase in land value, typically when land is rezoned for higher density or more profitable use.

The concept is based on the principle that the community, through the local government, should benefit from the increase in land value that results from zoning changes rather than the increase being solely for the benefit of the landowner or developer.

This is especially relevant in urban parklands, as adjacency to high- quality urban green spaces increases property values by up to 15%.

This can be achieved through various mechanisms such as levies, taxes, or the provision of public amenities and infrastructure by the developer. In the NSW context, this has been successfully executed by the creation of 99-year ground leases, the rents of which provide stable long-term revenue to fund adjacent parkland and civil amenities.

Financialization of co-benefit

The co-benefits refer to the additional advantages beyond the primary purpose of the infrastructure.

Some of these benefits have established market mechanisms like carbon or bio-diversity credits, however, others like heritage do not.

On a practical level, however, projects that deliver exceptional additional co-benefits have been able to achieve well above market prices for their credits. For example, credits from Aboriginal fire farming initiatives have been able to receive two to three times the prevailing market rate.

Well-marketed, high-profile projects like the rewilding foreshore areas of Sydney Harbour are likely to achieve above-market prices for credits on the voluntary market.

Social and Green Impact

Social and Environmental Impact Bonds in Australia, also known as Social Benefit Bonds or Pay for pay-for-success bonds, are a financial instrument that allows private investment in public sector programs.

They are designed to help address complex social and environmental issues, such as public health initiatives, decontamination of industrial sites, or civil amenity and community services.

These instruments allow the government to set a specific social outcome and contract a service provider to achieve it. Private investors fund the service provider's operations, and if the agreed-upon social outcome is achieved, the government repays the investors their principal plus a return.

Although still emerging and largely untested in Australia, this method holds promise for funding urban green infrastructure due to the well-understood long-term benefits to the Commonwealth regarding wellness and public health from the creation of parkland and urban rewilding.

Authorities and SSI

A major barrier to the implementation of large scale infrastructure is the fragmentation of control of our government owned lands. Many projects have failed due to the challenges of navigating the 20+ government entities which manage Sydney Harbour.

There are two ways to navigate this web of conflicting entities successfully.

The first is the creation of precinct authorities which encompasses the responsibility of overseeing and managing a designated area or precinct, ensuring compliance with relevant regulations, coordinating development, and fostering community engagement, and promoting economic growth and sustainability within the precinct. Notable successful use of this strategy includes Barangaroo Delivery Authority, Darling Harbour Authority, Sydney Olympic Park Authority, Western Sydney Parklands Trust, and The Rocks Precinct Authority. While currently viable this approach is only suitable for large precincts and requires considerable political capital to establish.

A second, more scalable approach, would be the use of the planning pathway of State Significant Infrastructure. This planning instrument is used to identify and assess development projects that have a significant impact on the state's economy, environment, and communities. Use of this approach will require modification of an existing Act, which would require significant investment but result in unlocking many urban green infrastructure projects. The pending Nature Positive Act at a Federal Level may provide the constitutional law justification of this change.

Sovereign guarantee

A sovereign guarantee on investment is a commitment made by a government to ensure the repayment of a loan or investment within its jurisdiction.

It provides assurance to the investor that they will be protected against any potential default or loss, as the government takes responsibility for the repayment.

In other areas of the world, this is a common method of funding large-scale urban green infrastructure especially where the project creates long-term, if low levels, of cashflow through the project life.

It allows Superannuation Funds and other large institutional investors who do not require high rates of return or are willing to discount to achieve social and environmental outcomes.

This class of investor however is generally unwilling to accept risk.

A sovereign guarantee provides an opportunity for state government to source funding of large projects without government debt. It only converts to a liability if the financial modelling of future cashflows prove fundamentally incorrect.)

PPP’s to deliver UGI

In the context of precinct scale development and urban green infrastructure, a PPP can be applied to address various challenges and achieve sustainable urban development.

This collaboration allows for the integration of public and private resources, knowledge, and skills to design, develop, and maintain green infrastructure within a precinct or urban area.

A PPP can be formed to develop a green infrastructure project, such as a park or urban garden, within a precinct. The government may provide the land and regulatory support, while private sector organizations contribute funding, design expertise, construction capabilities, and ongoing maintenance services.

Moreover, a PPP can also facilitate the establishment of financing mechanisms for precinct scale development and urban green infrastructure. By combining public funding, private investments, and innovative financing models, such as green bonds or tax incentives, the financial burden can be shared, enabling the implementation of large-scale projects that might otherwise be financially unviable.

Green Third Spaces

The concept of the Third Space refers to a social and physical environment that transcends the boundaries of home and work, providing individuals with a sense of belonging, community, and connection.

Parks and green spaces can act as Third Spaces by offering a shared public realm that fosters social interactions, promotes physical and mental well-being, and facilitates a sense of place and identity among diverse individuals and communities.

Cafes, sports clubs, marinas, and other third places play a vital role in enhancing the economic sustainability of a large urban park. These establishments attract visitors and residents, increasing footfall and generating revenue through their services and products. They also create job opportunities for local communities, contributing to economic growth and development. Lastly, by offering recreational and social spaces, these third places promote tourism, leading to increased spending in the park and surrounding areas, thus bolstering its economic sustainability.

In addition to supporting the economic viability of the park itself through rents and economic activity these spaces these third places provide a vital social benefit. Australians have a singular love of cafes, sports clubs, marinas, movies under the stars, concerts, bike rentals, arts spaces and many more types of commercial in park activities.

GAME

A serious but fun game played on multiple platforms.

Focuses narrowly on the narrow edge of the harbour.

Limiting scope to foreshore parks reduces complexity.

Designed to look and play like an actual boardgame.

CARDS

Each card contains a key element of parklands.

A card can include physical items like park benches, mangroves, or dog parks.

Or construction methodologies like biochar mix in the deep soil.

MOVES

Embedded in each card are multiple parameters.

These include typical costs and embodied carbon.

Along with social, economic, and environmental benefits.

Building a live business case.

SCORE

As you play cards meters displaying total cost, total carbon and a range of other indicators shift and change.

The game board also shifts and changes to ensure the total project stays financially and carbon neutral.

BALANCE

Cards have inter-dependencies and trade-offs.

For example ‘keystone species habitat’ requires foreshore planting to be played first.

Playing expensive cards will increase things like adjacent density and carbon credit generating wetlands.

FUN

To make sure the game has virality and replayability it needs to be fun.

Scenario’s, big ideas and playful reskinning can add joy and exploration.

It has to be a good game, not just a serious one.

WINNING

The game can be played solitaire style on your mobile device, cooperatively online or in person with real cards in a community workshop.

Winning is balance and an outcome for your park that you love.

CURATION

If successful, each park will get thousands of ‘my ideal park’ submissions.

Our team of landscape architects, urban designers and technical experts can use these responses to curate a collective master plan design.

BALANCE

The social, economic, and environmental data encoded into each card is where the real magic happens.

These parametric models will allow for the masterplan to rapidly inform the business and benefits cases.

BEHIND THE SCENES

Recent advancements in generative AI and parametric modelling make this game possible

As cards are played, the AI assigns objects on a skeleton and then graphically displays them on the board.

MASTER PLAN

A stretch goal would be allowing the game board output to a high-level concept masterplan for the park itself.

This would be computationally intensive and may not be technically feasible yet.

But this is a fast moving space.

MODEL

The model and modelling required to create this game has utility well beyond it.

It could empower designers to rapidly iterate concepts.

Along with educational and informational future uses.

OUTPUTS

The game will create a vision in the public imagination of what can be.

The data gathered will allow the creation at scale of foreshore park concept master plans and their business cases.

Global examples

Around the world, large-scale Urban Green Infrastructure projects are being used to both mitigate the local impacts of climate change and to make global cities more liveable.

These projects present both inspiration and a rallying point for Sydney. If citizens and governments in our peer cities have succeed at ambitious rewilding projects - why cant we?

They show us that cities and nature can thrive together.

The Highline NY

The New York Highline is an elevated linear park located in Manhattan, New York City. It was originally built as a freight rail line in the 1930s, but fell into disuse and was abandoned in the 1980s. However, in 2009, the Highline was transformed into a public park, showcasing innovative urban design and landscape architecture. The park spans approximately 1.45 miles and runs from Gansevoort Street in the Meatpacking District to West 34th Street, offering visitors a unique experience of nature, art, and urban exploration.

The New York Highline was established due to a unique collaboration between the public and private sectors. The project was conceived in the early 2000s as a way to repurpose the abandoned elevated railway track into a vibrant public space, spearheaded by a group of local residents, community activists, and urban planners who recognised the potential of this neglected infrastructure. Their vision was to create a green oasis amidst the concrete jungle of New York City, providing residents and visitors with a unique recreational and cultural experience. To realise this ambitious project, the Friends of the Highline, a non-profit organisation, was formed to re-imagine the rusting icon railway into a wildflower meadow and public park. Through persistent lobbying and fundraising efforts, the organisation garnered the support of the city government and secured significant funding from private donors. In 2009, the first section of the Highline opened to the public, marking the beginning of a transformative journey for this once-forgotten railway. Since its inception, the New York Highline has become an iconic symbol of urban revitalisation, attracting millions of visitors annually and serving as a model for similar projects around the world.

More information can be found at www.thehighline.org

Zealandia NZ

The Zealandia project in New Zealand is an ambitious conservation initiative aimed at restoring and preserving the natural habitat and biodiversity of the Wellington region. Spanning over 225 hectares, Zealandia is a sanctuary for native flora and fauna, including endangered species such as the tuatara and the kākā. The project focuses on predator control and habitat restoration, creating a safe haven for indigenous species to thrive. Zealandia also serves as an educational and research centre, providing opportunities for visitors and scientists to learn about New Zealand's unique ecosystem and contribute to its conservation efforts. With its stunning landscapes and successful conservation efforts, Zealandia has become a popular destination for nature enthusiasts and a symbol of New Zealand's commitment to environmental sustainability.

Ten minutes from the heart of Wellington Zealandia feels a world a way. More details at www.visitzealandia.com

Cloudburst Masterplan Copenhagen

The Cloudburst Masterplan in Copenhagen is an innovative urban development strategy aimed at managing and mitigating the effects of heavy rainfall and flooding in the city. The plan focuses on creating sustainable and resilient solutions to combat the increasing challenges posed by climate change. It involves the implementation of a range of measures, including the construction of green infrastructure such as parks, wetlands, and retention ponds, as well as the integration of water-sensitive design principles into urban planning. By incorporating nature-based solutions, the Cloudburst Masterplan not only helps to prevent flooding but also enhances the overall liveability and attractiveness of the city. It serves as a model for other cities around the world facing similar climate-related challenges.

Read the Cloudburst Masterplan

The Billion Oyster Project

The Billion Oyster Project is an innovative initiative to restore the oyster population in the New York Harbor and surrounding waters. By working with local schools, community organisations, and volunteers, the project seeks to restore one billion oysters by 2035.

This project's core is its environmental benefits, as oysters are natural filter feeders that can help improve water quality by removing pollutants and excess nutrients from the water. Oyster reefs act as natural breakwaters, reducing the impact of storm surges and wave energy and protecting NYC from flooding.

The Billion Oyster Projects foundation is citizen science resulting in well-established social benefits as it engages local communities, particularly students, in hands-on restoration work and educational activities, fostering a sense of stewardship and connection to the marine environment.

Learn about the Billion Oyster Project

Tillemakade 99 farm Rotterdam

Tillemakade 99 Farm is a partially floating sustainable urban farm located in Rotterdam, Netherlands built in a formerly heavily contaminated area of the harbour. It is known for its innovative approach to agriculture, using vertical farming techniques and hydroponics to grow various crops in a limited space. The farm aims to promote local food production and reduce the environmental impact of traditional farming methods. It also serves as a community space, hosting workshops and events to educate and engage the public in sustainable farming practices.

Part of a broader floating park and civil amenity hub this community garden is made entirely out of recycled materials incorporates large marine waste traps and other innovative ways to clean the harbour.

Learn more about Rotterdam’s floating park

West Kowloon Cultural District, Hong Kong

The West Kowloon Cultural District in Hong Kong is a dynamic hub for arts, culture, and entertainment. This vibrant waterfront precinct features a range of world-class cultural venues, including the Xiqu Centre for Chinese opera, M+ Museum for contemporary visual culture, and the Lyric Theatre Complex.

The district fosters social benefits by promoting cultural exchange, community engagement, and lifelong learning through its diverse programming. While not as ecologically ambitious as some of our other inspirations, it is a vast improvement over a typical highway embankment and tunnel entrance. The district incorporates sustainable design principles and green spaces, enhancing urban biodiversity and providing a public realm that enhances the quality of life for residents and visitors alike.

It illustrates how an Public Authority is carefully structured can balance the social, environmental and economic needs of the city.

Learn more about the West Kowloon Cultural District

The Wild Mile Chicago

Rehabilitating one of the most toxic waterways in the world, The Wild Mile Chicago is a floating eco-park situated on the North Branch Canal of the Chicago River. This project, the first of its kind in the world, aims to create an urban, floating ecosystem that provides a habitat for wildlife while also serving as a space for human recreation and education.

Once complete the mile-long park will feature a variety of plant species, walking paths, learning stations, and places for people to relax and enjoy nature. As community driven project, its vision, planning and delivery has been led by and for the people of Chicago.

It is a powerful example of a community’s ability to co-create urban wilderness in the most hostile of environmental conditions.

The story of the Wild Mile

Jinhua Yanweizhou

A rewilded serene park located in Jinhua, Zhejiang province, China. Due to its monsoon climate, Jinhua suffers from annual flooding. The former flooding strategy was to build stronger and taller concrete floodwalls which severed the intimate relationship between the city, the vegetation, and the water, while actually amplifying the destructive force of the annual floods.

Housing the city's opera house the park needed to balance both social and environmental demands. The resulting solution is an example of floodable parklands maintaining urban connection and civil amenities in even the worst monsoon conditions. Its innovative design has resulted in it becoming a major tourist attraction in its own right.

Learn how Jinhau Yanweizhou Park manages flooding in harmony with nature

Heron’s Head Park San Francisco

Heron's Head Park in San Francisco has converted a post-industrial wasteland into a showcase of the city's commitment to sustainability. This park, located on a former landfill, has been transformed into a thriving ecosystem, attracting a diverse range of bird species and marine life. The restoration efforts have been so successful that the park has become a vital stopover for migratory birds, making it an important site for conservation and research.

The EcoCenter in the park serves as a classroom for many local schools, community-based organizations, and government agencies. Children and families can play in the Create with Nature Zones, challenge their balance on the suspended rope bridge, hide in the tree cave or take in the views and reflecting on the juxtaposition of the park and its industrial surroundings.

The park's emphasis on environmental sustainability sets a precedent for future urban development, demonstrating that economic growth and ecological preservation are not mutually exclusive.

Learn more about the EcoCentre at Heron’s Head Park

Singapore Gardens by the Bay

Singapore Gardens by the Bay is a 101-hectare nature park situated in the Central Region of Singapore. It's a marvel of horticultural artistry that features a blend of plant life from around the world, displayed in its spectacular Cooled Conservatories.

One of the key features of the park is the interaction with water. The gardens are designed with water-saving technologies, including a rainwater collection system that captures run-off from the greenhouse roofs. This water is used to irrigate the plants and for the garden's spectacular water features including the Kingfisher Wetlands and the souring Cloud Forest.

The project has significantly impacted tourism and the economy of Singapore. Since its opening in 2012, it has become an internationally recognised icon of Singapore and become one of the top tourist destinations in the Asia Pacific region.

Discover the Gardens by the Bay

Cheonggyecheon River Seoul

The Cheonggyecheon River Seoul project, is a major urban renewal initiative that transformed the South Korean capital, Seoul. The project's origin story dates back to the 15th century when the Cheonggyecheon stream was the centre of daily life in Seoul. However, in the mid-20th century, it was covered with concrete for roads and an elevated highway to accommodate the city's rapid industrialization.

In 2003, then-Mayor Lee Myung-bak initiated the $900 million project to restore the stream, aiming to promote environmental sustainability and improve the quality of life in Seoul. The highway was dismantled, the stream was uncovered, and the banks were landscaped with paths and vegetation, creating a vibrant public space.

The project, completed in 2005, has since become a symbol of urban regeneration and ecological restoration. Critically it has also reduced urban temperatures 3 to 6 degrees on average along its length, resulted in significant air pollution reduction and mitigated flooding impacts.

Learn about the social, environmental and economic benefits of the Cheonggyecheon River Project

Toronto Waterfront Revitalization

The Toronto Waterfront Revitalization is a comprehensive initiative to transform the city's waterfront into a vibrant, sustainable, and accessible community. The origin of this project can be traced back to the late 1990s when a group of visionary leaders recognised the untapped potential of Toronto's waterfront. They believed that by revitalising the area, the city could not only enhance its economic potential by creating a world-class community focused waterfront.

In 2000, the governments of Canada, Ontario, and the City of Toronto came together to form Waterfront Toronto, a public organization tasked with leading the revitalization efforts. Since then, Waterfront Toronto has been working collaboratively with stakeholders, including developers, community organizations, and the public, to transform the waterfront into a vibrant and sustainable mixed-use community that encompasses residential, commercial, cultural, and recreational spaces.

The ambitious plan aims to create a "blue edge" along the city's waterfront, featuring parks, public spaces, cultural institutions, and diverse neighbourhoods, while also addressing critical issues such as climate change resilience and affordable housing.

Learn how PPP Governance can transform a city's interaction with the harbour in a balanced and transparent way

Discussion

We are inspired by how projects initiated by the community have grown into city-shaping initiatives as shown by the Highline and Wild Mile. This is especially impactful when the projects act as urban oases protecting threatened biodiversity like in the case of Zealandia, Heron’s Head Park and the Billion Oyster Project, with these projects also acting to drive influential citizen science-based outcomes.

We have also been inspired by projects which achieve social and ecological paradigm shifts while at the same time mitigating the catastrophic losses from flooding, as is in the case of the Copenhagen Cloudburst Masterplan and Jinhua Yanweizhou parklands. This is especially impressive in projects which transform our understanding on nature in the city, transforming the worst polluted areas of global cities into their most green like was achieved in the Cheonggyecheon River Seoul and Tillemakade 99 farm in Rotterdam.

Projects which have transformed not just the nature of their city, but the culture of their region we find especially important like the West Kowloon Cultural District, Hong Kong, and Singapore Gardens by the Bay both of which have become world-leading tourism precincts. Finally examples of good governance and transparency are inspiring such as found in Toronto Waterfront Revitalization.

These are just a handful of hundreds of inspiring projects changing global cities around the world. They provide a bright counterpoint to the gloomy daily news of climate change, and a ray of hope.

BENEFITS

URBAN BLUE GREEN INFRASTRUTURE

WATER

Slowing stormwater in urban environments through the use of parks offers a sustainable solution that mitigates flooding, improves water quality, and enhances biodiversity.

Rewilded urban waterways mitigate excessive nutrients enter the harbor improving water quality and promotes a healthier ecosystem by preventing harmful algal blooms while supporting diverse marine life.

If purposefully designed urban parks can serve as vital green flood mitigation infrastructure, providing natural barriers against storm surge and sea level rise, thus reducing flood risks, mitigating property loss and disruption during extreme weather events.

Deployed at scale, urban rewilding provides a cost-effective, sustainable solution for achieving a clean swimmable harbour by intercepting and sequestering most sources of marine pollution. It alone cannot ensure water quality, but as part of a multi-tier strategy for the management of stormwater and sewage, it provides our best path to a safe, clean, swimmable Sydney Harbour.

ENVIRONMENTAL

AIR

Urban parks help mitigate air pollution by acting as green lungs in cities, filtering harmful pollutants and improving air quality for both humans and wildlife.

Our urban green spaces act as natural filters, purifying the air by absorbing and neutralising harmful pollutants like nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide, and particulate matter, enhancing air quality and mitigating the adverse effects of air pollution on human well-being. This is an area where scale is critical.

Urban green infrastructure can act as a natural shield and buffer zone, mitigating the harsh impacts of heatwaves, strong winds, and severe storms by regulating microclimates and reducing urban heat island effects.

The benefits of foreshore parks extend well beyond the parklands themselves, cooling surrounding residential areas as far as 500m away, an impact which is amplified by park scale and connectedness.

These benefits extend globally with foreshore landscape, wetlands and mangroves being highly effective carbon sinks.

ENVIRONMENTAL

SOIL

Mangroves and waterwise foreshore landscaping can play a crucial role in mitigating soil and coastal erosion by acting as natural buffers, stabilising shorelines, and reducing the impact of storm surges, thus providing significant long-term benefits.

With proper species selection, urban landscaping can remove dioxins and heavy metals from the soil through a process called phytoremediation, where they absorb and accumulate these contaminants in their tissues, effectively detoxifying the soil. This is especially critical in former industrial harbour areas of Sydney which still have extremely high levels of dioxins, lead, copper, zinc, cadmium and organochlorine pesticides (e.g. DDT).

Urban parks play a secondary but critical role in combating the urban heat island effect. They increase the landscape's permeability, allowing rains to soak into the subsoil rather than running off as stormwater. This results in higher levels of subsoil hydration, which ensures the urban trees can continue to provide their cooling impacts even in extreme heat and drought conditions. This also critical preserves tree health through drought years.

ENVIRONMENTAL

BIODIVERSITY

Urban wetlands and forests provide crucial habitats for a diverse range of plant and animal species, promoting biodiversity and contributing to the overall health and resilience of ecosystems in urban areas. Urban mangroves and wetlands on Sydney Harbour provide vital habitat for wildlife, offering shelter, feeding grounds, and breeding sites in otherwise urbanised environments.

This habitat is especially critical for threatened keystone species like the powerful owl, southern myotis, eastern long-necked turtle, stripped marsh frog, green and golden bell frogs, long-nosed bandicoot and bar-tailed godwit.

Beyond our most threatened species, many of our favourite backyard residents depend on urban foreshore forests and wetlands like the blue wren, kookaburra, rainbow lorikeets, tawny frogmouths, brushtail possums, flying foxes, rakali, blue tongue skinks and eastern water dragons.

ENVIRONMENTAL

WASTE

Urban green infrastructure effectively mitigates pollution, run-off, and waste in urban areas through its natural filtration and absorption processes, enhancing urban environments' overall sustainability and resilience.

Biochar and upcycling of recyclables can be utilized in the development of public green spaces, fostering sustainable practices while reducing waste. Biochar, made from residential garden waste and paper recycling is especially valuable as improves soil fertility, enhances nutrient retention, and promotes plant growth by increasing water-holding capacity and providing a habitat for beneficial microorganisms. It also acts as a long-term carbon sink to allow the creation of parkland which is carbon net zero or even net negative.

Municipal scale black fly larvae food composting can become a key element of a circular economy which supports urban parklands it both reduces waste volumes and methane emissions from landfills while enabling healthy thriving parklands. With clever design, these composting systems can be built within urban parklands to further tighten the circular economy flows.

ENVIRONMENTAL

RESILENCY

Our urban green spaces increase our city’s capacity to endure exceptional events like droughts, economic disruption, floods and, as we have recently learned, pandemics.

Urban foreshore parks play a crucial role in enhancing a city's resiliency by providing natural spaces that mitigate the impacts of climate change. Parks also serve as essential green infrastructure that not only promotes physical and mental well-being but also offers opportunities for social distancing and outdoor recreation during public health emergencies like COVID-19.

Increased urban resiliency multiplies other economic, social and environmental benefits by enhancing the city's ability to withstand and recover from shocks, while also fostering social cohesion and equity and ensuring the long-term sustainability of the urban environment.

ENVIRONMENTAL

NETWORK

The network effects of urban parklands are critical but complex, multifaceted and often subtle in their manifestation.

As a society we are beginning to understand that our urban park spaces do not exist as isolated patches of green but rather as part of a complex network within the city.

The network effects between urban parks, private green spaces, and the harbour create a harmonious ecosystem that nurtures both the environment and the community. These interconnected spaces amplify the benefits of each other, enhancing the overall well-being of the city and its inhabitants. The result is a vibrant tapestry of greenery, fostering a sense of belonging and harmony.

Connected parkland, especially along our harbour, create a vital blue-green web weaving the natural spaces of our city together. Due to the network effects large scale and green grid connected parks are not the the simple sum of benefits, but a compounding multiplier on the impact of all of a foreshore parks many social, economic and environmental benefits.

ENVIRONMENTAL

RECREATION

Australians have an unwavering love affair with their foreshore urban parks. These picturesque spaces, nestled along the stunning coastlines, serve as a sanctuary for both locals and tourists alike. Whether it's a morning jog, a family picnic, or a leisurely stroll with friends, these parks are the heart and soul of our communities. They provide a much-needed escape from the hustle and bustle of city life, allowing us to reconnect with nature and rejuvenate our spirits.

As people engage in recreational activities such as jogging, playing sports, or simply strolling through the park, they have the opportunity to connect with others, forming new friendships and strengthening existing relationships. The shared experience of enjoying the park's amenities creates a sense of unity and promotes social integration, breaking down barriers and bringing people from diverse backgrounds together.

SOCIAL/CULTURE

WELLNESS

Urban parks have been widely recognised for their positive impact on individual and community wellness. Studies have consistently shown that access to green spaces within urban environments has a multitude of benefits for physical, mental, and social well-being.

Physically, urban parks provide opportunities for exercise, promoting physical fitness and reducing the risk of chronic diseases such as obesity and cardiovascular disorders. Furthermore, these green spaces offer a sanctuary for mental well-being, allowing individuals to escape the stress and noise of the city and find solace in nature.

Spending time in urban parks can alleviate symptoms of anxiety, depression, and attention deficit disorders while also enhancing cognitive function and creativity. In addition, these spaces foster social interactions and community engagement, promoting social well-being and a sense of belonging.

SOCIAL/CULTURE

EQUALITY

Urban parks contribute significantly to social equity by offering accessible green spaces that promote physical and mental well-being, foster community connections, and enhance the overall quality of life for individuals, particularly those residing in underserved communities.

These green spaces provide accessible and inclusive recreational opportunities for all members of society, regardless of their socioeconomic status or background. By offering free amenities such as playgrounds, sports fields, walking paths, and picnic areas, urban parks create a level playing field where people from different social strata can come together and engage in healthy and enjoyable activities.

SOCIAL/CULTURE

CONNECTION

The impact of foreshore parkland on social cohesion and connection is significant. Foreshore parks provide a neutral third space for individuals from diverse backgrounds, fostering a sense of community and belonging.

The shared experience of the park promotes social interactions, encourages dialogue, and enhances the overall sense of connection. Additionally, foreshore parkland often hosts community events, festivals, and gatherings, which further contribute to social cohesion and the formation of civil society.

Less formally, a large park creates opportunities for people to interact, engage in shared activities, and build relationships. Whether it's families enjoying a picnic, friends playing sports, or strangers striking up conversations on a bench, these spaces encourage social interaction and create a sense of unity. The parkland becomes a melting pot where individuals from all walks of life can come together, breaking down barriers and bridging gaps between different social groups.

SOCIAL/CULTURE

EDUCATION

A park on the shores of Sydney Harbour is not just a beautiful addition to our city's landscape; it is an opportunity for education that cannot be overlooked. A place where children can immerse themselves in the wonders of nature, where they can witness the delicate balance of ecosystems firsthand.

The park could serve as a living laboratory for high school and university students to study the effects of urban rewilding on biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human well-being. Students could also be involved in the planning and managing of the park, gaining valuable experience in conservation and community engagement.

This rewilded parks will be a place of discovery, where curiosity is nurtured, and the love for nature is instilled in the hearts of the future generation. It will be a place where children can learn not only from textbooks but from the very land beneath their feet, fostering a deep connection to the natural world and a sense of responsibility to care for it.

SOCIAL/CULTURE

BEAUTY

"Nature is not a place to visit. It is home." - Gary Snyder

Snyder’s quote reminds us of the profound importance of the beauty of nature to city residents. It reminds us that nature is not just a destination or a recreational spot; it is an essential part of our lives. The beauty of nature provides solace, inspiration, and a sense of belonging to those living in bustling cities. It offers a refuge from the concrete jungle and a reminder of the intrinsic connection between humans and the natural world. Nature is not merely a place we go to escape; it is where we truly belong, and its beauty is essential for our physical, mental, and emotional well-being.

SOCIAL/CULTURE

CREDITS

The generation of carbon credits and biodiversity credits through urban parks has economic benefits beyond the project itself. The first way this manifests is in the increasing the total amount of investment in nature within the city, as projects which self-fund free up funding for critical projects with less clear financing avenues.

In Sydney, this manifests in a key issue of justice in the city, with areas of western Sydney facing critical green infrastructure shortfalls, resulting in urban heat island effects, long distances to parkland for residents and fragmentation of nature. If parks in the relatively affluent eastern city can self-fund, this frees up state funds for investment. It changes the discussion from “this park or that park” to “this park and that park, then that park as well”.

Additionally, by investing in the creation of these frameworks in a global city close to major universities these high-profile projects will attract disproportionate attention. Urban carbon and Biodiversity Frameworks developed here will have utility to projects in remote/regional Australia and in developing countries in the Asia Pacific region – projects which would typically struggle to attract academic interest and funding.

ECONOMIC

SAVINGS

Urban green infrastructure is not just an attractive addition to our cities; it is a powerful tool that saves money, improves water quality, and boosts the economy. By integrating large green areas into our cities, we can significantly reduce our energy consumption. The shade provided by these green spaces reduces the need for air conditioning, resulting in lower electricity bills and corresponding carbon reduction.

Moreover, urban greenery acts as natural filters to help reduce pollution and nutrient load of water, reducing the need for expensive water treatment facilities both reducing negative public health outcomes and stormwater discharge fees to water utilities.

The active transport benefits enabled by large urban parks, such as walking and cycling, can lead to significant economic savings.

ECONOMIC

INSURANCE

Urban Green Infrastructure, through its implementation of green roofs, permeable pavements, and urban forests, can effectively reduce insurance costs by mitigating the risks associated with extreme weather events, such as flooding and heat waves.

Nature-based solutions to flooding, like the restoration of mangroves and oyster reefs, can be designed to act more efficiently to mitigate storm surges and the longer-term effects of sea level rise.

These green spaces act as a shield and a sponge, absorbing excess rainwater and preventing flooding, thus reducing the risk of water damage claims. Additionally, green infrastructure helps regulate temperature, mitigating the impact of extreme heatwaves or cold snaps and decreasing the frequency of claims related to property damage caused by extreme weather conditions.

Finally, the presence of green infrastructure promotes a healthier lifestyle, leading to a decrease in insurance claims related to sedentary lifestyles and associated health conditions.

ECONOMIC

VALUE CAPTURE

The creation of a new urban park can have a significant positive impact on the surrounding area, leading to increased property values and economic activity. This is because parks provide several benefits to the community and increase the neighbourhood's attractiveness. Businesses and residents are willing to pay more for property located near a park, leading to an increase in the overall value of the area. This increase in property values can then generate additional tax revenue for the city, which can be used to fund other public amenities and services.

Value capture is a mechanism governments employ to capture a portion of the increase in property value resulting from public investments and infrastructure improvements in urban areas. This approach aims to ensure that the public benefits from the increased value generated by public investments while also financing future urban development projects. If ‘captured’ this can both be used to fund the project and provide long-term revenue to state government to fund other critical priorities.

ECONOMIC

TRANSPORT

Large urban parks along Sydney's foreshore offer significant benefits to active transport, fostering a healthier and more sustainable mode of commuting. These parks provide ample space for walking, cycling, and jogging, promoting physical activity and reducing reliance on motorized transportation, thereby improving air quality and reducing traffic congestion.

Foreshore parks have a unique benefit for active transport, firstly by connecting the dense residential areas of Sydney to the CBD. Boardwalks, being intrinsically at sea-level avoid the steep sloped hills which discourage casual riders from commuting by bike.

If combined with a Density on Green Amenity and Transport Orientated Development urban redevelopment this impact can be compounded by using the parks, and the active transport paths within them to encourage car to walk/bike mode shift. This can be achieved by park adjacent ‘park and ride’ locations and good access to the parks by public transport.

ECONOMIC

JOBS

New green urban spaces not only provide direct employment through park maintenance and management but also indirectly contribute to job creation in various sectors. The construction and development of urban parks generate employment opportunities for architects, engineers, and construction workers. Once established, these parks require ongoing maintenance, which leads to the employment of park rangers, gardeners, and maintenance staff.

Additionally, these urban parks attract visitors and tourists, boosting the local economy and creating jobs in the hospitality, tourism, and retail sectors. Furthermore, urban parks often serve as venues for events and recreational activities, which require event planners, vendors, and security personnel. These activities then have secondary onflow employment benefits in their suppliers. New parks serve as catalysts for job creation, fostering economic growth and enhancing the quality of life in urban communities.

ECONOMIC

ATTRACTION

Creating a large new park in Sydney will enhance its appeal to global workers by providing a green and recreational space for them to enjoy. The park will also contribute to the city's overall liveability, making it a more attractive destination for talented individuals worldwide.

Sydney is already known for its iconic landmarks, such as the Sydney Opera House and the Sydney Harbour Bridge, and its beautiful beaches and parks. New parks and the cultural institutions within them will amplify this existing advantage.

Attracting highly skilled global workers to Sydney benefits the city's economy, culture and diversity. It brings new ideas, skills and perspectives that can help drive innovation and economic growth. This virtuous cycle creates a more vibrant and cosmopolitan city that is attractive to both locals and visitors.

ECONOMIC

Together we can turn Sydney Harbours foreshore blue-green again.

Contact me at

Email colin@bluegreen.au

Or in person at

INCUBATE Demo Day

November 9th 2023

Sources and Citations

This section is included to provide context and additional depth for readers. Much of the following sections are drawn from the literature review of my ongoing PhD at the University of Sydney in Urbanism. Due to this, it should not be considered as a final and authoritative source of information on the many topics included in this proposal.

It will be by its nature a live document, changing and evolving as the project does and as the fast moving areas of innovation The Blue Green Domain includes evolve.

If you believe a key source is missing, or interpreted incorrectly please do not hesitate to reach out.

About Mangroves

Mangroves were a major keystone species in pre-colonial Sydney Harbour, providing a critical cultural and physical part of life for the Aboriginal inhabitants and the ecosystems of which they shared Country (Irish, 2017). Over the period of colonisation and industrialisation, they were removed from many areas, first slowly to allow shore access and provide firewood then rapidly as dredging and land reclamation were extensively employed to shape the foreshores. (Hoskins, I., 2009). Mangroves and saltmarshes have historically been undervalued and were seen by the legal and planning systems of Australia as wastelands until the 1970s when the signing of the RAMSAR treaty began to change the national understanding of their ecological importance. however, legal protection did not come into effect until the mid-1990s. As a result, many areas of urban mangroves and salt marshes have become degraded by human activities, especially draining, dredging and land reclamation (DCCEEW, 2016). Both mangroves and salt marsh are considered threatened ecosystems which serve a number of purposes, including providing feeding and breeding habitat for fish, birds and crustaceans, and filters for nutrients and sediments. They also act to reduce erosion and maintain water quality, providing protection from storms and cyclones and act as a carbon sink. (NSW Marine, 2023) (DCCEEW, 2016). Mangroves are well-explored in ecosystem service-based research with demonstrated benefits in shoreline protection, nurseries and critical habitat for coastal fisheries and their land-building capacity. Mangroves provide a range of ecosystem services, including carbon sequestration, water purification, and providing habitat for a variety of species. Additional ecosystem services include carbon sequestration, water purification, and habitat for a variety of species (Menéndez, at al. 2020) (Lovelock, et al 2022).

Mangroves play a crucial role in averting flooding from both storm surge and overland flooding and damages to people and property. They provide critical flood protection benefits, especially in areas where exposure is concentrated along vulnerable coastlines. The flood reduction benefits result from positive compounding effects of the reduction of wave action, wave strength and shore stabilisation, forming an effective barrier defence to coastal regions vs flooding and erosion. Mangroves can reduce up to 66% of the wave energy within the first 100m of forest width. (McIvor, Spencer, Möller, and Spaldinga, 2016)

While coastal mangroves have been considerably reduced in scale, they have been shown to mitigate more than $65 billion dollars annually in property losses, primarily from tropical cyclones and other storm events. These benefits become more significant during high-intensity events, pointing to a greater benefit as the impacts of climate change manifest more strongly (Menéndez, et al. 2020).

Under protected conditions, mangrove ecosystems can adjust to rising sea levels by building vertically through soil accretion. This is achieved both through the production of organic matter by the plant itself and by trapping and retention of mineral sediments (Krauss et al.). This provides a unique point of difference to grey infrastructure, which cannot by its nature respond to changes in sea level rise other than through costly rebuilding. The maximum extent of tolerable sea level rise appears to be 6.1mm per year, providing a nature-based coastal protection system in the low and medium global warming scenarios. Under the high scenarios, seas may rise over 7mm per year, implying that mangroves alone may not suffice and additional management may be required (Sadat-Noori. 2021). The presence of a mangrove barrier will, even in this high scenario, be vastly less costly to manage to achieve mitigation outcomes for foreshores prone to flooding and erosion.

Coastal wetlands lock considerable amounts of carbon due to their unique attributes. Large areas of wetland were removed across Australia, which, if restored, can sequester immense amounts of carbon. This carbon capture, if financialised, results in a positive NPV in most rural coastal wetlands in Australia, especially if co-benefits are considered or the carbon credit price rises. (Hagger, Waltham and Lovelock, 2022). With its higher land and material costs, urban wetlands may result in a lower NPV, but little research has been undertaken in this area. Mangrove restoration has been found to be the most cost-effective per ha of a broad range of marine restoration carbon sequestration projects. However, it is important to note that project failure was found to be a significant risk, and impacted on the average net present value of such projects. Community involvement increases the likelihood of success, and smaller-scale projects seem more likely to succeed but have limited impact, with large projects found to be most likely to succeed in areas where mangroves previously existed (Bayraktarov, et al. 2016). Compared to other carbon sequestration projects, mangrove restoration was found to be the most cost-effective but high-risk, noting, however, that risks decrease with scale, along with community and policy alignment (Taillardat, Thompson, Garneau, Trottier, and Friess, 2020) (Jakovac, et al 2020).

Nature-based systems of carbon capture have the potential to be more scalable, cost-effective and co-benefit-creating compared to technological solutions such as direct air capture, geological sequestration and biochar production, all of which have yet to be deployed at scale and face economic, social and environmental barriers. Mangrove forests, tidal marsh and seagrass beds produce three economically valuable co-benefits (among many) bird life with associated tourism, coastal protection due to reduced wave action and fisheries enhancement. (Macreadie, et al 2021). To enable the creation of a successful carbon credit framework, the following must be established: an applicable use of technology which effectively means an established calculation method - which Mangroves and Salt Marsh both have (via the Blue Carbon Framework), an identified site, the proponent has a legal right to carry out the project on the site, along with the clear demonstration of additionality and permanence (Bell-James and Lovelock, 2019)

The carbon sequestration rate in mangroves can vary significantly depending on the specific conditions of the mangrove ecosystem. The Blue Carbon Initiative estimates an annual carbon sequestration rate for mangroves averages between 6 to 8 Mg CO₂e/ha (tons of CO₂ equivalent per hectare). These rates are about two to four times greater than global rates observed in mature tropical forests (Blue Carbon Initiative 2023) which is in turn more than twice the carbon stocks held in sub-tropical dryland forests. However, unlike dryland forests, urban mangroves are unlikely to release stored carbon in bushfires making their effective rate of sequestration considerably higher. Still, ongoing research is required to provide robust data for the emerging carbon frameworks (Donato, et al 2011). The successful implementation of these frameworks in the Australian context has required the development of a blue carbon accounting model (BlueCAM) used within the Tidal Restoration of Blue Carbon Ecosystems Methodology Determination 2022 of the Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF), which is Australia’s voluntary carbon market scheme (Lovelock, et al 2022). With this framework in place for regional Australian coastal wetlands, extrapolation to an urban coastal wetland context appears possible but not without challenges. While research is ongoing, subtropical mangroves appear to result in carbon sequestration of 13.33 CH4 (kg ha yr) across a range from 5.01 to 15.51 CH4 (kg ha yr), suggesting sustainable cashflows can be generated by urban wetland mangroves with value likely to trend up as more data becomes available and the carbon price rises.

Relevant to the case study location of Iron Cove Mangroves are known to play a significant role in the ecosystem, including acting as a natural filter for heavy metals. They can absorb and accumulate heavy metals in their woody tissues and leaf matter, thus reducing the concentration of these pollutants in the environment through a process of bioaccumulation. The heavy metals commonly found in mangroves include lead, copper, zinc, cadmium, and mercury from the water, sediment, and air. (Annamalai, 2023)

An immense body of literature related to this topic can be found in the library section of the Blue Carbon Initiative https://www.thebluecarboninitiative.org/library

Annamalai, A, 2022. Bioaccumulation of Heavy Metals Pollutants in Pichavaram Mangrove Ecosystem, Southeast Coast of India. Journal of Environment and Ecology

Atchison, J., 2019. Green and blue infrastructure in Darwin; carbon economies and the social and cultural dimensions of valuing urban mangroves in Australia. Urban Science, 3(3), p.86.

Bayraktarov, E., Saunders, M.I., Abdullah, S., Mills, M., Beher, J., Possingham, H.P., Mumby, P.J. and Lovelock, C.E., 2016. The cost and feasibility of marine coastal restoration. Ecological Applications, 26(4), pp.1055-1074.

Bell-James, J. and Lovelock, C.E., 2019. Legal barriers and enablers for reintroducing tides: An Australian case study in reconverting ponded pasture for climate change mitigation. Land use policy, 88, p.104192.

DCCEEW, 2016 Coastal Wetlands - Mangroves and saltmarshes. Australian Government, Department of the Environment and Energy, https://www.dcceew.gov.au/water/wetlands/publications/factsheet-wetlands-mangroves-saltmarsh , Accessed 17/09/23

Donato, D.C., Kauffman, J.B., Murdiyarso, D., Kurnianto, S., Stidham, M. and Kanninen, M., 2011. Mangroves among the most carbon-rich forests in the tropics. Nature geoscience, 4(5), pp.293-297.

Hagger, V., Waltham, N.J. and Lovelock, C.E., 2022. Opportunities for coastal wetland restoration for blue carbon with co-benefits for biodiversity, coastal fisheries, and water quality. Ecosystem Services, 55, p.101423.

Hoskins, I., 2009. Sydney Harbour: a history. UNSW Press.

Irish, P., 2017. Hidden in plain view: the Aboriginal people of coastal Sydney. Sydney: NewSouth Publishing.

Jakovac, C.C., Latawiec, A.E., Lacerda, E., Lucas, I.L., Korys, K.A., Iribarrem, A., Malaguti, G.A., Turner, R.K., Luisetti, T. and Strassburg, B.B.N., 2020. Costs and carbon benefits of mangrove conservation and restoration: a global analysis. Ecological Economics, 176, p.106758.

Krauss, K.W., McKee, K.L., Lovelock, C.E., Cahoon, D.R., Saintilan, N., Reef, R. and Chen, L., 2014. How mangrove forests adjust to rising sea level. New Phytologist, 202(1), pp.19-34.

Lovelock, C.E., Adame, M.F., Bradley, J., Dittmann, S., Hagger, V., Hickey, S.M., Hutley, L.B., Jones, A., Kelleway, J.J., Lavery, P.S. and Macreadie, P.I., 2022. An Australian blue carbon method to estimate climate change mitigation benefits of coastal wetland restoration. Restoration Ecology, p.e13739.

Macreadie, P.I., Costa, M.D., Atwood, T.B., Friess, D.A., Kelleway, J.J., Kennedy, H., Lovelock, C.E., Serrano, O. and Duarte, C.M., 2021. Blue carbon as a natural climate solution. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, 2(12), pp.826-839.

McIvor, A., Spencer, T., Möller, I. and Spaldinga, M., 2016. 2| Coastal defense services provided by mangroves. Managing Coasts with Natural Solutions, 24, pp.24-47.

Menéndez, P., Losada, I.J., Torres-Ortega, S., Narayan, S. and Beck, M.W., 2020. The global flood protection benefits of mangroves. Scientific reports, 10(1), pp.1-11.

NSW Marine, 2023, NSW Marine Estate Management Strategy, https://www.marine.nsw.gov.au/marine-estate-programs/marine-estate-management-strategy Accessed 13/09/2023

Sadat-Noori, M., Rankin, C., Rayner, D., Heimhuber, V., Gaston, T., Drummond, C., Chalmers, A., Khojasteh, D. and Glamore, W., 2021. Coastal wetlands can be saved from sea level rise by recreating past tidal regimes. Scientific reports, 11(1), pp.1-10.

Taillardat, P., Thompson, B.S., Garneau, M., Trottier, K. and Friess, D.A., 2020. Climate change mitigation potential of wetlands and the cost-effectiveness of their restoration. Interface Focus, 10(5), p.20190129.

The Blue Carbon Initiative, https://www.thebluecarboninitiative.org/about-blue-carbon Accessed 13/09/2023

About Oyster Reef

Oyster reefs are complex, dynamic, and biologically diverse ecosystems formed primarily by the aggregation of oyster shells and the presence of live oyster populations. These unique marine habitats have garnered significant scientific and ecological interest due to their numerous environmental benefits and potential to protect urban areas from coastal hazards. Oyster reefs are characterised by their ability to provide essential ecosystem services such as water filtration, shoreline stabilisation, and habitat creation.

Oysters were a keystone species of Sydney Harbour and a major source of nutrition for the Aboriginal people of the Sydney area (Irish, 2017). The local names of The local names of shellfish used as food by the recorded as Dal-gal mussel, Dotang-by a rock oyster, Dainia oyster, and Kah-dien 'the shell on the wo-mar-ra or spearthrower'. Shell middens include Rock Oysters Saccostrea glomerata, Hairy Mussels Trichomya hirsute, Sydney Cockles Anadara trapezia and Mud Oysters Ostrea angasi (Attenbrow, 2022).

One of the pivotal functions of oyster reefs is their capacity to improve water quality in coastal areas. Oysters are filter-feeders capable of removing suspended particles, excess nutrients, and pollutants from the water column (Yeh, Bouchard, Grubb, and Lanovoi, 2021). This natural filtration process can enhance water clarity and reduce the prevalence of harmful algal blooms, contributing to a healthier aquatic environment. In urban settings, where polluted runoff and nutrient loading are common issues, oyster reefs serve as a crucial line of defence by mitigating the detrimental effects of poor water quality on both marine ecosystems and human populations (Wakefield, 2020). Oysters also sequester heavy metals, including copper, lead and zinc however, they become unsafe to eat (Lee and Birch, 2016). This occurs at even relatively low levels due to their ability to filter extremely large amounts of particulate matter. In environments of exceedingly high levels of lead and copper, however, the growth of the oysters are stunted so to be used to reduce these kinds of pollution effectively, secondary heavy metal sequestration methods are required (Lee and Birch, 2016).

Oyster reefs also play a pivotal role in protecting urban areas from coastal erosion. Their physical structure helps dissipate wave energy and stabilise shorelines (Wakefield, 2020). By acting as natural breakwaters, oyster reefs reduce the erosive impact of storm surges, acting as safeguarding valuable coastal infrastructure, including homes, businesses, and critical infrastructure (Hynes, 2022).In regions vulnerable to sea-level rise and increased storm activity, oyster reefs can significantly reduce the risks associated with coastal hazards. Reef design was found to impact how effectively these functions were achieved. High-elevation reefs were found to be denser and more effective at disrupting wave action (Hogan and Reidenbach, 2022)

The ecological significance of oyster reefs extends to their role as biodiversity hotspots. These reefs offer a unique habitat for a myriad of marine species, from small invertebrates to fish and crustaceans (Giby, 2018). As urban development often leads to habitat loss and fragmentation, oyster reefs provide a refuge for numerous species, contributing to the overall resilience and diversity of coastal ecosystems. This biodiversity, in turn, can benefit local fisheries and enhance the recreational value of urban waterfront areas (Smith, 2022).

The preservation and restoration of oyster reefs in urban areas have the potential to yield substantial socioeconomic benefits. Beyond their ecological advantages, oyster reefs can enhance the aesthetic appeal of urban waterfronts, boost tourism, and support local fisheries, thus bolstering the economic vitality of urban communities. Moreover, by providing a natural buffer against coastal hazards and improving water quality, oyster reefs enhance the overall resilience of urban areas in the face of climate change and environmental challenges (Wakefield, 2020).

Finding methods to financialise the multiple benefits of oyster reefs has, however, been challenging as while the benefits are well understood hard to prove with current frameworks. The end users are unaware of the benefits, and increased engagement through seals or certifications may be valuable. The use of a seal or certifications with trustworthy monitoring and accounting may be a good interim method while tradable credit frameworks are developed (van den Burg, 2022). Additionally, oysters have a complex interaction with the carbon cycle, acting as a net source of carbon at some parts of their life cycle and a net sink at others (Fodrie et al 2017). However more recent research indicates within the broader immediate ecosystem oysters reef structures result in significant carbon sequestration both by accumulating and entrapping carbon bearing sediment and projecting adjacent seagrass, saltmarsh and wetlands (Veenstra, 2021). There is potential for future inclusion in the Blue Carbon Frameworks if ongoing research validates these findings.

Attenbrow, V 2022, Food from the sea: shellfish and crustaceans, Australian Museum, A Add a little bit of body text Accessed 24/09/2023

Fodrie, F.J., Rodriguez, A.B., Gittman, R.K., Grabowski, J.H., Lindquist, N.L., Peterson, C.H., Piehler, M.F. and Ridge, J.T., 2017. Oyster reefs as carbon sources and sinks. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 284(1859), p.20170891.

Gilby, B.L., Olds, A.D., Peterson, C.H., Connolly, R.M., Voss, C.M., Bishop, M.J., Elliott, M., Grabowski, J.H., Ortodossi, N.L. and Schlacher, T.A., 2018. Maximizing the benefits of oyster reef restoration for finfish and their fisheries. Fish and Fisheries, 19(5), pp.931-947.

Hogan, S. and Reidenbach, M.A., 2022. Quantifying tradeoffs in ecosystem services under various oyster reef restoration designs. Estuaries and Coasts, 45(3), pp.677-690.

Hynes, S., Burger, R., Tudella, J., Norton, D. and Chen, W., 2022. Estimating the costs and benefits of protecting a coastal amenity from climate change-related hazards: Nature based solutions via oyster reef restoration versus grey infrastructure. Ecological Economics, 194, p.107349.

Lee, J.H. and Birch, G.F., 2016. The mismatch of bioaccumulated trace metals (Cu, Pb and Zn) in field and transplanted oysters (Saccostrea glomerata) to ambient surficial sediments and suspended particulate matter in a highly urbanised estuary (Sydney estuary, Australia). Environmental monitoring and assessment, 188(4), pp.1-17.

Perheentupa, J., 2021. What the Colonists Never Knew: A History of Aboriginal Sydney: By Dennis Foley and Peter Read. Canberra: National Museum of Australia Press, 2020. Pp. 240. A $35 paper.

Smith, R.S., Lusk, B. and Castorani, M.C.N., 2022. Restored oyster reefs match multiple functions of natural reefs within a decade. Conserv Lett.

van den Burg, S.W.K., Termeer, E.E.W., Skirtun, M., Poelman, M., Veraart, J.A. and Selnes, T., 2022. Exploring mechanisms to pay for ecosystem services provided by mussels, oysters and seaweeds. Ecosystem Services, 54, p.101407.

Veenstra, J., Southwell, M., Dix, N., Marcum, P., Jackson, J., Burns, C., Herbert, C. and Kemper, A., 2021. High carbon accumulation rates in sediment adjacent to constructed oyster reefs, Northeast Florida, USA. Journal of Coastal Conservation, 25(4), p.40.

Wakefield, S., 2020. Making nature into infrastructure: The construction of oysters as a risk management solution in New York City. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 3(3), pp.761-785.

Yeh, H., Bouchard, E., Grubb, A. and Lanovoi, H., 2021 Farming and Restoring Oysters to Combat Climate Change.

About Foreshore Urban Green Infrastructure (UGI)

Urban green infrastructure (UGI) has come to refer to the strategically planned and managed network of green spaces, such as parks, gardens, and urban forests, integrated within urban areas to enhance environmental sustainability, promote biodiversity, mitigate climate change, and improve the overall quality of life for urban residents (Grabowski, et al., 2022). The concept emerged from the intersection of civil engineering and ecological science, focusing primarily on using natural or semi-natural systems as an alternative to traditional grey infrastructure, providing both ecological services and civil engineering outcomes.Its legacy from these disciplines is still strongly present in the literature, but it is increasingly being understood under a broader multi-disciplinary framework (Filazzola, Shrestha, and MacIvor, 2019).

By extension, Foreshore Urban Green Infrastructure (UGI) is essentially the confluence of terrestrial and aquatic spaces within urban contexts, forming verdant expanses. The urban fabric of Australia, particularly Sydney, adheres closely to the coastal contours, with the city's identity deeply intertwined with its harbour and the rivers that flow to it. A contiguous strip, approximately fifty meters in width, along these waters offers substantial social, ecological, and economic dividends to urban inhabitants, especially when these natural habitats are preserved and facilitated with paths, parkways, playgrounds, sports fields and open green spaces. (Maes et al., 2020). Healthy marine environments result in not only better ecosystem health but also improved social and economic outcomes along with a broad range of critical but often intangible benefits for both people and nature in urban environments (Beatley, T., 2014).

Climate change, as the single largest challenge for this generation's urban planners, demands innovative, sustainable solutions to mitigate its impacts, such as extreme weather events, rising sea levels, heatwaves, and increased pollution, all of which threaten urban infrastructure, public health, and socioeconomic stability (Perry, 2015). Implementing large-scale Urban Green Infrastructure (UGI) projects in Australia is crucial for addressing environmental challenges, mitigating the urban impacts of climate change and promoting sustainable urban development. However, several barriers hinder the effective delivery of such initiatives.

Beatley, T., 2014. Blue urbanism: exploring connections between cities and oceans (p. 216). Washington, DC: Island Press.

Filazzola, A., Shrestha, N. and MacIvor, J.S., 2019. The contribution of constructed green infrastructure to urban biodiversity: A synthesis and meta‐analysis. Journal of Applied Ecology, 56(9), pp.2131-2143.

Grabowski, Z.J., McPhearson, T., Matsler, A.M., Groffman, P. and Pickett, S.T., 2022. What is green infrastructure? A study of definitions in US city planning. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 20(3), pp.152-160.

Perry, J. (2015). Climate change adaptation in the world's best places: A wicked problem in need of immediate attention. Landscape and Urban Planning, 133, 1-11.

Maes, J., Liquete, C., Teller, A., Erhard, M., Paracchini, M.L., Barredo, J.I., Grizzetti, B., Cardoso, A., Somma, F., Petersen, J.E. and Meiner, A., 2016. An indicator framework for assessing ecosystem services in support of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020. Ecosystem services, 17, pp.14-23.

First-order barriers to UGI – Institutional

The institutional framework in Australia presents a clear set of first-order barriers, answering in part the question, “Why can’t the existing actors successfully deliver projects of this type and scale?”. These institutional barriers are characterised by multi-layered governance with responsibilities distributed across federal, state, and local levels.

The institutional barriers to implementing large-scale UGI within the Australian Context have been extensively discussed in popular and grey literature but not directly addressed by a significant body of academic research (GANSW, 2020) (Standards Australia, 2021). Meta-analysis of the international literature on the concepts of Urban Green Infrastructure has found clusters of barriers in policy and regulatory risks, including misaligned policy objectives, lack of policy integration and land use controls along with institutional barriers of cross-scale coordination (Pauleit, 2019) (Freney, et al, 2017) (Matthews and Byrne, 2015).

Other sources in the literature do not specifically address the governance challenges with implementing large-scale urban green infrastructure projects but provide some insights into the general delivery challenges associated with urban greening. A large body of work focuses on overcoming institutional barriers to greening cities in mainland China; however, the difference in regulatory frameworks and cultural norms reduces its relevance (Wang and Baanzhaf, 2018). A second cluster of work has focused on the European Union countries, such as the research undertaken by Matthews and Byrne (2015), which found that path dependency was a fundamental obstacle to implementing UGI, with planning systems preferring to travel over well-worn paths rather than cut new ones. Methods to overcome these path dependency barriers within the EU context were a central focus of the GREEN SURGE project, which created an implementation framework built around a layered model of integration, connectivity, multifunctionality, and social inclusion over a bedrock of assessment, development planning and dedicated actors (Pauleit, et al. 2019).

Research exploring the problem of UGI implementation more broadly from a governance perspective found that the challenge of balancing future ambitions with the realisable potential of a location is at the heart of urban public open space governance. Large-scale urban development projects need a resilient management framework that adapts to changing circumstances (Bostos, 2023). Governance challenges for UGI were found to include navigating often widely divergent policy frameworks and policies related to water scarcity, biodiversity loss and citizen participation while taking into account political influences like fiscal austerity, shortcomings of top-down management, lack of environmental knowledge, lack of political stability, and mismatch between boundaries and the scale of ecosystem services (Razzaghi and Pearsall, 2022). This governance aspect of UGI delivery has been well explored from the Eco-Systems Services perspective, as seen in research on barriers to planting urban trees (Kronenberg, 2015).

From a broader urban planning perspective, resistance to change within the urban planning establishment is seen as a key barrier to implementing UGI (Matthews and Byrne, 2015). Path dependency represents the role of historical decisions and events in shaping the trajectory of urban development, having a profound and enduring impact on cities' spatial and social structure, often leading to persistent patterns that are difficult to change (Bunker, 2012).Members of the planning profession are prone to defaulting to well-worn paths and existing mental models, which are ill-suited for the complex and often uncertain pathways required for UGI (Matthews, 2015), (Pauleit, et al., 2019). This is especially true regarding UGI, where there appears to be not just a gap in the knowledge but a gap in the understanding of the core concepts of nature-based solutions and sustainability, with the profession more likely to focus on statutory rule enforcement rather than outcome-based targets (Byrne and Jinjun, 2009).

A more fundamental structural barrier is found in exploring inherent conflicts between technocratic, participatory, and neo-liberal urban planning (Schatz and Rogers, 2016). This exploration of the irreconcilable differences in approach argues that they cannot fit together or even comfortably co-exist, and each has a complex enabling and undermining impact on the other governance processes. Neoliberal urban planning prioritises the market's needs above all other concerns, and the market prioritises the needs of powerful actors more than others (Campbell, Tait, and Watkins, 2014 ) (Mc Guirk, 2005). Participatory urban planning represents the immediately adjacent local stakeholders well but not the broader citywide community (Åström, 2020) (Seydel, and Huning, 2022). Technocratic urban planning stresses the bureaucracy and experts over the directly impacted, with the roots of its power drawn from the systems of representational democracy rather than direct democracy (Gleeson, 2006). In NSW Australia, community participation is often a token gesture as the power is wrestled between neoliberal and technocratic centres of power (Schatz and Rogers, 2016). The conflict is structurally inefficient and unsuited for meeting existential crises like climate change or affordable housing. Additionally, it exposes the planning system to the risk of powerful market actors leveraging monopoly power and avoiding competition. This has been seen to manifest in NSW in Unsolicited Proposals such as Barangaroo, providing an example of how this approach normalises the consolidation of elite power and amplifies vulnerability to corruption of decision-making (Gibson, Legacy and Rogers, 2023).

These institutional barriers are, however, not insurmountable if the concerns highlighted by Gibson, Legacy and Rogers can be mitigated. On a case-by-case basis, new large urban foreshore parks could be managed through the creation of precinct-scale development with the land consolidated under a single state-controlled authority, typically through an Act in the NSW Parliament with the resulting authority subject to the direction of the NSW Minister of Planning or Premier (Infrastructure NSW, 2010). This method of consolidation and transformation was used for Sydney Olympic Park, Barangaroo and Parramatta North using the State-Significant-Precincts instrument (DPE, 2016). However, the deal-making required to form these precincts has been widely criticised as opaque and undemocratic (Farid Uddin and Piracha, 2023). The state-significant precincts in NSW, have been at the centre of controversy in recent years. This controversy stems from a range of issues related to the planning, development, and management of these precincts (Harris, 2019).

A more promising and scalable method to implement large-scale foreshore UGI projects may be enabled by the forthcoming Australian Government Nature Positive Act (DCCEEW, 2023), which in its current drafted form will require significant revisions to NSW state-level regulations. This has arisen due to a gap between theory and practice, with legislation lagging behind best practices in urban design and sustainability (Pissourios, 2013) (Saiu, 2017). In the popular press, academic theory and the grey literature, green infrastructure, and more specifically UGI is commonly understood as infrastructure (Grabowski, 2022). This shared understanding has emerged since the 1990’s when Mark Benedict and Edward McMahon first defined the concept in their book "Green Infrastructure: Linking Landscapes and Communities." (Mell, I.C., 2017). However, in its statutory definition of State Significant Infrastructure (SSI) in the NSW Planning System, green infrastructure, Urban Green Infrastructure or blue-green infrastructure are not included (NSW Government, 2021). If this theory-practice gap could be closed, a key first-order barrier would be removed. It would allow the state of NSW's considerable powers included in the SSI legislation to overcome the barriers of fragmentation, conflict of vision and other constraints discussed elsewhere in this literature review. The Environmental Defenders Office argues that NSW’s planning and environmental laws are critically out of date and require urgent updating. It is their view that with the passage of the Federal Nature Positive Act this will be constitutionally required along with a raft of additional changes within NSW regulation (Environmental Defenders Office, 2023).

First-order barriers to UGI – Financial

Another notable barrier frequently referenced in the grey and academic literature is the limited availability of financial resources for large-scale UGI projects (Mell, 2021). Funding challenges arise due to the high upfront costs associated with UGI infrastructure, uncertainty regarding long-term returns on investment, and a lack of dedicated funding mechanisms (Toxopeus and Polzin, 2021). Insufficient financial support is often seen to hamper the planning, construction, and maintenance of UGI projects, impeding their implementation on a large scale (ABC, 2022) (Dorst et, al., 2022).

However, this barrier does not hold up under closer examination within the literature. A broad range of valuation systems have been developed to quantify the benefits of large-scale urban parks with these systems seen to be well research validated and fit for purpose (Van Oijstaeijen, Van Passel and Cools, 2020). These tools allow the blending of social benefit models with environmental and economic cost-benefit analysis toolkits to create holistic valuation frameworks (Pauleit, 2019) (Mell, 2021).

The financial benefits of UGI over traditional grey infrastructure on a purely financial basis have also been well documented in the civil engineering academic literature (Xu, et al. 2021) (Dorst et, al., 2022). This is supported by well-established Green Bond market mechanisms to replace ageing grey infrastructure with green infrastructure (Hsu and Chao, 2020). UGI is seen as often less expensive, more resilient to shocks and more attractive to the investment market (Zerbib, 2019). From a purely economically rational perspective, UGI is seen as a more optimal choice of investment funds even outside its numerous co-benefits.

These co-benefits can add considerable economic value to the project, especially if they can be quantified and encapsulated within the resulting asset value (Jones, Symons, and Young, 2015). When these benefits are compounded with the benefits to resiliency and the well-documented risk-based costs to global cities from climate change, the cost-benefit ratio analysis shifts strongly in favour of UGI projects over traditional grey infrastructure responses to climate change (Hobbie and Grimm, 2020).

Active transport economic benefits from large-scale urban parks both amplify these health benefits while providing economic value in of their own right. Walkable and bikeable cities, especially those with large green park areas enjoy stronger economic growth, desirability and health outcomes. The inverse also being true with areas of the city deprived of these benefits falling behind on social and economic inequality indicators. (Althoff et al, 2017).

Voluntary carbon credit frameworks are proliferating in terms of demand, veracity, and market sophistication as the impacts of climate change manifest and the planet rapidly warms, abet after a period of considerable uncertainty due to the uneven implementation of these carbon credit frameworks, which resulted in lack of accountability, and occasionally outright fraud (Chen, Marbouh, Moore and Stern, 2021) (Byrne and Jinjun, 2009). Restoration of coastal wetlands has a large range of benefits, not the least of which is carbon sequestration (Macreadie et al, 2021). In Australia, a comprehensive multi-year multi-institution research project has developed a robust process and framework which allows using a model, the BlueCAM, to assess these carbon flows (Lovelock, et al, 2022). While this framework does not yet apply to urban wetlands, this tool kit could be reasonably expanded to transform coastal urban parklands to revenue-generating assets (Jakovac, et al., 2020) (Needelman, et al. 2018). Carbon projects which have been demonstrated to generate significant co-benefits trade with an above-market premium, with economic studies documenting the willingness of the market to pay more for high-quality credits, and those which enhance social, and environmental conditions within the project site (Kragt, 2016) (Hagger, 2022)

Large urban parks serve as crucial habitats for various species, preserving biodiversity by providing space for flora and fauna to thrive amidst urban development. They also play a key role in restoring biodiversity by acting as 'green corridors', enabling the movement and genetic exchange of wildlife populations, which can enhance species survival and adaptation in urban environments. (Maes et al., 2020). Preserving and restoring biodiversity itself is seen as highly value-creating with weak current bio-diversity programs such as the Australian Government EPBC Act slated for replacement by the Nature Positive Act (DCCEEW, 2023) (Environmental Defenders Office, 2023). This act should bring Australia into compliance with international conventions surrounding biodiversity preservation and enhance the ability of foreshore projects to create long-term cashflows from the habitat restoration they facilitate (Pascal, Brathwaite, Philip, and Walsh, 2017).

Building on top of these existing benefits UGI and Urban Parks significantly enhance property values in adjacent urban areas (Siriwardena, 2016). This is primarily attributable to the aesthetic appeal, recreational opportunities, and environmental benefits they offer, thereby increasing the desirability of neighbouring properties (Dell’Anna, 2022). Studies consistently indicate a positive correlation between proximity to such green spaces and property value (Nagypál, 2022). The property value of nearby residential and commercial properties increases up to as much as 19% immediately adjacent to large urban parks, with park size directly correlated to the effective radius of this effect (Brears, 2021). This effect is compounded by the urban cooling provided by large-scale urban parks, resulting in a neighbourhood-wide temperature reduction, with benefits to both the comfort and costs of residents (Zhu et al., 2022). While likely that major de-aggregated benefit systems and frameworks do not yet exist to capture this value, it may be priced into the value rise of adjacent property and be effectively captured as a payment for the co-benefit.

This economic uplift effect also works on a city-wide level with Several global cities, most notably Singapore and Copenhagen, have used extensive UGI development to rise to the top of global liveability indexes, mitigating in the process significant climate risks (Mell, 2021) (Dell’Anna, 2022). The indirect benefits to the economy through increasing economic uplift from jobs, tourism, and recreation are difficult to quantity but likely considerable, as is the benefit of the levelling impact of parks which have been shown to reduce city wide inequity (Moglia, et al. 2021). The financial impact of increased wellness due to urban greenery is also substantial, if difficult to quantify, but has been documented to lower levels of depression, stress and anxiety while producing higher levels of happiness and life satisfaction with resulting job performance benefits (Navarrete-Hernandez and Laffan, 2019).

Mechanisms exist to capture this value and any zoning uplift inherent in these projects. However, considerable challenges exist with their implementation within Australia. Existing infrastructure contribution levies can fail to establish a link between benefits and contributions and are typically rate capped at the local level. Voluntary Planning Agreements are commonly used as a value capture method but are often inappropriate instruments (Stein 2019). Long-term ground leases and Tax Increment Financing (TIF) mechanisms may be more suitable for large foreshore urban parks, considering the high adjacent property values and distributed nature of the value created (Huston, and Lahbash, 2018).

Lastly, social impact bonds provide a potential mechanism to allow private investors to provide upfront capital for public projects to improve social outcomes, such as public health and wellness, and receive a return on investment if the project successfully achieves its goals. This innovative funding model can finance various urban foreshore parks with their well-documented enhancements of public health infrastructure, promoting healthy lifestyles and reducing health disparities, thus creating a healthier and more equitable community (Olson et al., 2022). It is, however, important that social impact bonds are carefully designed to avoid perverse incentives and monetisation for its own sake. Best practice restricts these bonds to financing elements of the project with a clear line of sight between improvement and social benefit (Carter, E., 2021). Key among these social benefits are a vast array of health and wellness benefits (Castillo, et al. 2021). These benefits include a reduction in all cause mortality, heart disease, mental health, respiratory health and reproductive health. In terms of mental health UGI is positively correlated with lower levels of depression, stress and anxiety and higher levels of happiness and life satisfaction (Navarrete-Hernandez, and Laffan, 2019). These benefits have a clear financial return on investment for the Australian government and are therefore well suited for use in social impact bonds.

Of course, these potential funding sources need not be considered in isolation. Multiple models are in development within the Australian context for stacking these benefits, focusing on restoring coastal mangroves and salt marshes, along with reef restoration and aboriginal fire farming (Hagger, Waltham, and Lovelock, 2022) (Ansell and Evans, 2019) (Boon and Prahalad, 2017). While these methods focus on regional and remote areas, they could be adapted to an urban context. In an international context frameworks which allow for the blending of diverse capital flows across tax, risk, credits and direct benefits are rapidly emerging (Mell, 2023). Through this compounding and stacking of capital sources and cash flows, the argument that the barrier is fundamentally financial appears to lack support, even though it is commonly seen as the primary obstacle in popular literature (ABC, 2022).

Second-order barriers to UGI – Mandate

Second-order barriers to Urban Green Infrastructure encompass a range of socio-political challenges, such as lack of political will and mandate, inadequate community engagement, and regulatory stakeholders' perceptions of risk that impede the effective implementation of green infrastructure in urban areas.

A lack of a dedicated entity with a clear mandate, which includes the delivery of UGI within the NSW Government structure, appears to be a likely obstacle to delivery. The lack of a clear mandate for any dedicated federal, state or local government actor speaks to the second-order question of “Why won’t the existing actors successfully deliver projects of this type and scale?”.

Agencies such as the newly announced Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water hold the promise of “laser focus” on these issues (NSW Government, 2023). However, this agency is charged simply with the regulation of UGI, not its delivery.Over the last twenty years, many umbrella agencies have been announced, underfunded, and then faded from prominence in regulating Sydney Harbour (Committee for Sydney, 2019). None of these agencies, however, were charged with its delivery, rather they focused on coordination and collaboration.

NSW State Government has a long history of creating Special Purpose Delivery Entities (SPDEs) to deliver large-scale infrastructure projects (Infrastructure NSW, 2022).These are typically government-owned corporations or agencies established to deliver major infrastructure projects or services. These entities are designed to operate independently from the traditional public service structures, often with their own governance and reporting arrangements (Sainati, Brookes, and Locatelli, 2017). One example of an SPDE in NSW is the Hunter Development Corporation, responsible for delivering infrastructure projects in the Hunter region of NSW. Another example is the Sydney Metro Authority, an SPDE responsible for delivering Australia’s largest public transport project, the Sydney Metro system (Sydney Metro, 2023). A focus on delivery, a commercial orientation, and a degree of independence from government typically characterise these entities. They are designed to be agile and responsive, able to attract and retain high-quality staff with specialist skills (Chadam, 2022). However, as Urban Green Infrastructure is not defined as infrastructure in the NSW Planning System, this is not a viable approach unless changed in the SEPP as discussed in section 1.1 (NSW Government, 2021). Additionally, secrecy, budget overruns, and failure to successfully manage key stakeholders of these SPDE’s have attracted significant negative public sentiment and increased government oversight in recent years (Wang, et al., 2023).

While most of the foreshore lands and waters of Sydney Harbour fall under the broad umbrella of government land, its management has devolved into the fragmented control of a multiple, layered mosaic of federal, state, and local land managers. These include Federal Government Agencies such as the Australian Defence Force, Sydney Harbour Trust and DCCEEW, along with NSW State Agencies such as TfNSW, NSW National Parks, Greater Sydney Parklands, NSW Marine, RMS, and Sydney Water. Adding to this web of governance are local government entities controlled by multiple local councils, such as the Sydney Coastal Councils Group and the nine Local Councils that comprise this group.

This impact of the erosion of decision-making power through the application of devolved decision-making is explored in the UK by Morphet, 2022. He argues that the pushing down of decision-making power to a local level, which was not matched with corresponding funding, has resulted in a need for UK local governments to utilise public/private deal-making models to achieve their policy outcomes. This was made acutely worse during the period of austerity, resulting in a neoliberal undermining of governance, compounded by national government-level deal-making coming in at a level above reducing local government power and autonomy (Morphet, 2022). There is a parallel to be made with Australian local governments, which struggle between high levels of accountability to their residents and a minimal range of funding options. This has resulted in a need to outsource key elements of governance (Christensen and Grant, 2020).

Additionally, within urban planning and urban political economy, a large body of literature focuses on the waning power of the state since the rise of neo-liberal planning in the 1980’s (Jessop, 2002), (Loftus, 2012). It is seen to have significantly influenced the implementation of all proactive urban planning and by extension, Urban Green Infrastructure through a weakening of comprehensive policies and regulations for promoting and integrating green infrastructure into urban areas (Morphet, 2022). This reduced state power has led to fragmented decision-making processes, creating challenges in coordinating and implementing green infrastructure initiatives across different sectors and jurisdictions (London and Cadman, 2009) (Mell, 2014). The declining state influence has also limited the availability of funding and resources for urban green infrastructure projects, further hindering their successful implementation.

The trend towards fragmentation within the practice and literature of urban planning is in direct contrast to the scientific literature relating to UGI, Nature Based Solutions and Urban Greening. Intervention at a large scale is pivotal in implementing climate change mitigation strategies (Landauer, Juhola, and Klein, 2019). This is especially true for nature-based carbon sequestration projects, which are most productive and cost-efficient at large scales (Schoenmaker and Schramade, 2018). Additionally, strategies implemented at larger scales can address the transboundary nature of climate change and lead to substantial mitigation outcomes (Gill, et al., 2007). Similarly, implementing UGI at scale offers the potential for broader ecological connectivity, promoting species movement and ecosystem resilience, which is especially relevant for marine and intertidal areas (Beatley 2014). Moreover, large-scale programs can better address the underlying drivers of biodiversity loss, such as habitat fragmentation, by integrating diverse stakeholders, coordinating conservation efforts, and implementing adaptive management strategies (Filazzola, Shrestha and MacIvor, 2019), (Heller and Zavaleta, 2009). Thus, understanding and considering the appropriate scale for biodiversity and climate change mitigation programs is crucial for achieving meaningful and sustainable ecological, environmental, social, and economic outcomes.

In conclusion, the delivery of Urban Green Infrastructure (UGI) in Sydney faces obstacles due to a lack of a clear mandate or dedicated entity within the NSW Government agency framework. However, the history of creating Special Purpose Delivery Entities (SPDEs) in NSW offers a potential solution to the challenges of fragmentation of control.

ABC, 2022, “Major barriers' to restoring Australia's degraded coastal ecosystems as scientists push for national plan”, Available at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-12/scientists-say-barriers-australia-coastal-ecosystem-restoration/101324380 , Accessed 27/9/23

Althoff, T., Sosič, R., Hicks, J.L., King, A.C., Delp, S.L. and Leskovec, J., 2017. Large-scale physical activity data reveal worldwide activity inequality. Nature, 547(7663), pp.336-339.

Ansell, J. and Evans, J., 2019. Contemporary Aboriginal savanna burning projects in Arnhem Land: a regional description and analysis of the fire management aspirations of Traditional Owners. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 29(5), pp.371-385.

Åström, J., 2020. Participatory urban planning: what would make planners trust the citizens?. Urban Planning, 5(2), pp.84-93.

Boon, P.I. and Prahalad, V., 2017. Ecologists, economics and politics: problems and contradictions in applying neoliberal ideology to nature conservation in Australia. Pacific Conservation Biology, 23(2), pp.115-132.

Bunker, R., 2012. Reviewing the path dependency in Australian metropolitan planning. Urban Policy and Research, 30(4), pp.443-452.

Byrne, J. and Jinjun, Y., 2009. Can urban greenspace combat climate change? Towards a subtropical cities research agenda. Australian Planner, 46(4), pp.36-43.

Campbell, H., Tait, M. and Watkins, C., 2014. Is there space for better planning in a neoliberal world? Implications for planning practice and theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 34(1), pp.45-59.

Castillo, M.D., Anenberg, S.C., Chafe, Z.A., Huxley, R., Johnson, L.S., Kheirbek, I., Malik, M., Marshall, J.D., Naidoo, S., Nelson, M.L. and Pendleton, N.V., 2021. Quantifying the health benefits of urban climate mitigation actions: current state of the epidemiological evidence and application in health impact assessments. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities, 3.

Carter, E., 2021. More than marketised? Exploring the governance and accountability mechanisms at play in Social Impact Bonds. Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 24(1), pp.78-94.

Chadam, J., 2022. Mega-projects in Practice-Success Factors, Organization, Financing. Management, 19, p.21.

Chen, S., Marbouh, D., Moore, S. and Stern, K., 2021. Voluntary carbon offsets: an empirical market study. Available at SSRN 3981914.

Christensen, H.E. and Grant, B., 2020. Outsourcing local democracy? Evidence for and implications of the commercialisation of community engagement in Australian local government. Australian Journal of Political Science, 55(1), pp.20-37.

Connop, S., Vandergert, P., Eisenberg, B., Collier, M.J., Nash, C., Clough, J. and Newport, D., 2016. Renaturing cities using a regionally-focused biodiversity-led multifunctional benefits approach to urban green infrastructure. Environmental Science & Policy, 62, pp.99-111.

Committee for Sydney, 2019, “Sydney Harbour, our greatest asset”, Available at https://sydney.org.au/policy-library/sydney-harbour-our-greatest-asset/ , Accessed 27/9/23

Gleeson, B., 2006. Rescuing urban regions: the federal agenda. Federalism and Regionalism in Australia new approaches, new institutions, pp.71-82.

Environmental Defenders Office, 2023, “NSW Biodiversity Conservation Act is failing and requires urgent reform” available at https://www.edo.org.au/2023/08/24/report-finds-nsw-biodiversity-conservation-act-is-failing-and-requires-urgent-reform/ , Accessed 27/9/23

Dell’Anna, F., Bravi, M. and Bottero, M., 2022. Urban Green infrastructures: How much did they affect property prices in Singapore?. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 68, p.127475.

DCCEEW, 2023, Nature Positive Plan, Available at: https://www.dcceew.gov.au/environment/epbc/publications/nature-positive-plan, Accessed 27/9/23

Dorst, H., van der Jagt, A., Toxopeus, H., Tozer, L., Raven, R. and Runhaar, H., 2022. What’s behind the barriers? Uncovering structural conditions working against urban nature-based solutions. Landscape and Urban Planning, 220, p.104335.

DPE, 2016, NSW State Significant Precincts Guideline 2016, Available at https://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/plans-for-your-area/state-significant-precincts , Accessed 27/9/23

Farid Uddin, K. and Piracha, A., 2023. Neoliberalism, power, and right to the city and the urban divide in Sydney, Australia. Social Sciences, 12(2), p.83.

GANSW, 2020, Greener Places, Available at: https://www.governmentarchitect.nsw.gov.au/policies/greener-places , Accessed 27/9/23

Gibson, C., Legacy, C. and Rogers, D., 2023. Deal-making, elite networks and public–private hybridisation: More-than-neoliberal urban governance. Urban Studies, 60(1), pp.183-199.

Gill, S.E., Handley, J.F., Ennos, A.R. and Pauleit, S., 2007. Adapting cities for climate change: the role of the green infrastructure. Built environment, 33(1), pp.115-133.

Hagger, V., Waltham, N.J. and Lovelock, C.E., 2022. Opportunities for coastal wetland restoration for blue carbon with co-benefits for biodiversity, coastal fisheries, and water quality. Ecosystem Services, 55, p.101423.

Harris, M., 2018. Machiavellian megaproject or erosion of intent?. Urban Regeneration in Australia: Policies, Processes and Projects of Contemporary Urban Change.

Heller, N.E. and Zavaleta, E.S., 2009. Biodiversity management in the face of climate change: a review of 22 years of recommendations. Biological conservation, 142(1), pp.14-32.

Hobbie, S.E. and Grimm, N.B., 2020. Nature-based approaches to managing climate change impacts in cities. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 375(1794), p.20190124.

Huston, S. and Lahbash, E., 2018. Land value capture and tax increment financing: overview and considerations for sustainable urban investment. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 2(3).

Hsu, K.W. and Chao, J.C., 2020. Economic valuation of green infrastructure investments in urban renewal: the case of the station district in Taichung, Taiwan. Environments, 7(8), p.56.

Infrastructure NSW, 2010, Barangaroo Delivery Authority Annual Report, Available at: https://www.infrastructure.nsw.gov.au/media/0o0plopo/barangaroo-delivery-authority-annual-report-2010.pdf , Accessed 27/9/23

Infrastructure NSW, 2022, State Infrastructure Strategy, Available at: https://www.infrastructure.nsw.gov.au/expert-advice/state-infrastructure-strategy/ , Accessed 4/10/23

Kragt, M.E., Gibson, F.L., Maseyk, F. and Wilson, K.A., 2016. Public willingness to pay for carbon farming and its co-benefits. Ecological Economics, 126, pp.125-131.

Lovelock, C.E., Adame, M.F., Bradley, J., Dittmann, S., Hagger, V., Hickey, S.M., Hutley, L.B., Jones, A., Kelleway, J.J., Lavery, P.S. and Macreadie, P.I., 2022. An Australian blue carbon method to estimate climate change mitigation benefits of coastal wetland restoration. Restoration Ecology, p.e13739.

Jakovac, C.C., Latawiec, A.E., Lacerda, E., Lucas, I.L., Korys, K.A., Iribarrem, A., Malaguti, G.A., Turner, R.K., Luisetti, T. and Strassburg, B.B.N., 2020. Costs and carbon benefits of mangrove conservation and restoration: a global analysis. Ecological Economics, 176, p.106758.

Jessop, B., 2002. Liberalism, neoliberalism, and urban governance: A state–theoretical perspective. Antipode, 34(3), pp.452-472.

Jones, R., Symons, J. and Young, C., 2015. Assessing the Economic Value of Green Infrastructure: Green Paper, Victoria Institute of Strategic Economic Studies

Kate Freney, Alex Lawrie, Vivienne Skinner, Chris Twitchen, 2017, TIME’S UP making green infrastructure count, UNSW Research for Evidence Based Policy

Kronenberg, J., 2015. Why not to green a city? Institutional barriers to preserving urban ecosystem services. Ecosystem services, 12, pp.218-227.

Landauer, M., Juhola, S. and Klein, J., 2019. The role of scale in integrating climate change adaptation and mitigation in cities. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 62(5), pp.741-765.

Loftus, A., 2012. Everyday environmentalism: creating an urban political ecology. U of Minnesota Press.

London, K.A. and Cadman, K., 2009. Impact of a fragmented regulatory environment on sustainable urban development design management. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 5(1-2), pp.5-23.

Macreadie, P.I., Costa, M.D., Atwood, T.B., Friess, D.A., Kelleway, J.J., Kennedy, H., Lovelock, C.E., Serrano, O. and Duarte, C.M., 2021. Blue carbon as a natural climate solution. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, 2(12), pp.826-839.

Matthews, T., Lo, A.Y. and Byrne, J.A., 2015. Reconceptualizing green infrastructure for climate change adaptation: Barriers to adoption and drivers for uptake by spatial planners. Landscape and urban planning, 138, pp.155-163.

Mc Guirk, P.M., 2005. Neoliberalist planning? Re‐thinking and re‐casting Sydney's metropolitan planning. Geographical Research, 43(1), pp.59-70.

Mell, I.C. , 2021. ‘But who’s going to pay for it? Contemporary approaches to green infrastructure financing, development and governance in London, UK. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 23(5), pp.628-645.

Mell, I.C., 2014. Aligning fragmented planning structures through a green infrastructure approach to urban development in the UK and USA. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 13(4), pp.612-620.

Mell, I.C., 2017. Green infrastructure: reflections on past, present and future praxis. Landscape research, 42(2), pp.135-145.

Morphet, J., 2022. Deals and devolution: The role of local authority deals in undermining devolved decision making. Local Economy, 37(7), pp.622-638.

Nagypál, N., 2022. Valuation challenges of urban green infrastructure. Ecocycles, 8(1), pp.1-7.

Needelman, B.A., Emmer, I.M., Emmett-Mattox, S., Crooks, S., Megonigal, J.P., Myers, D., Oreska, M.P. and McGlathery, K., 2018. The science and policy of the verified carbon standard methodology for tidal wetland and seagrass restoration. Estuaries and Coasts, 41(8), pp.2159-2171.

Olson, H., Painter, G., Albertson, K., Fox, C. and O’LEARY, C.H.R.I.S.T.O.P.H.E.R., 2022. Are Social Impact Bonds an innovation in finance or do they help finance social innovation?. Journal of Social Policy, pp.1-25.

Navarrete-Hernandez, P. and Laffan, K., 2019. A greener urban environment: Designing green infrastructure interventions to promote citizens’ subjective wellbeing. Landscape and urban planning, 191, p.103618.

NSW Government 2023, Changes to the public sector to provide laser focus on housing and energy challenges Available at https://www.nsw.gov.au/media-releases/changes-to-public-sector-to-provide-laser-focus-on-housing-and-energy-challenges Accessed 2/10/23

NSW Government, 2021, State Environmental Planning Policy (Planning Systems) 2021, Schedule 3, Available at https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/epi-2021-0724 , Accessed 27/9/23

Pascal, N., Brathwaite, A., Philip, M. and Walsh, M., 2017. Impact investment in marine conservation. Duke Envtl. L. & Pol'y F., 28, p.199.

Pauleit, S., Ambrose-Oji, B., Andersson, E., Anton, B., Buijs, A., Haase, D., Elands, B., Hansen, R., Kowarik, I., Kronenberg, J. and Mattijssen, T., 2019. Advancing urban green infrastructure in Europe: Outcomes and reflections from the GREEN SURGE project. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 40, pp.4-16.

Pissourios, I.A., 2013. Whither the planning theory–practice gap? A case study on the relationship between urban indicators and planning theories. Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, 8(2), pp.80-92.

Ramalho Kresse Bastos, M., 2023. Governance Discourses and Image Management Strategies in Large-Scale Urban Development Projects—How a Shifting Context and Actor Relations Influence Planning. Buildings, 13(6), p.1529.

Razzaghi Asl, S. and Pearsall, H., 2022. How do different modes of governance support ecosystem services/disservices in small-scale urban green infrastructure? A systematic review. Land, 11(8), p.1247.

Sainati, T, Brookes, NJ and Locatelli, G., 2017. Special Purpose Entities in Megaprojects: empty boxes or real companies? Project Management Journal, 48 (2). pp. 55-73. ISSN 8756-9728

Saiu, V., 2017. The three pitfalls of sustainable city: A conceptual framework for evaluating the theory-practice gap. Sustainability, 9(12), p.2311.

Schatz, L. and Rogers, D., 2016. Participatory, technocratic and neoliberal planning: an untenable planning governance ménage à trois. Australian Planner, 53(1), pp.37-45.

Schoenmaker, D. and Schramade, W., 2018. Principles of sustainable finance. Oxford University Press.

Seydel, H. and Huning, S., 2022. Mobilising situated local knowledge for participatory urban planning through storytelling.

Siriwardena, S.D., Boyle, K.J., Holmes, T.P. and Wiseman, P.E., 2016. The implicit value of tree cover in the US: A meta-analysis of hedonic property value studies. Ecological Economics, 128, pp.68-76.

Standards Australia, 2021, Green spaces: a cool future, Available at: https://www.standards.org.au/news/green-spaces-a-cool-future , Accessed 27/9/23

Swyngedouw, E., 2010. Impossible sustainability and the post-political condition. Making strategies in spatial planning: Knowledge and values, pp.185-205.

Sydney Metro, 2023. Sydney Metro Corporate Plan 2019 – 2021, Available at: https://www.sydneymetro.info/sites/default/files/2021-09/Sydney%2520Metro%2520Corporate%2520Plan%25202019-2021_0.pdf , Accessed 29/9/23

Toxopeus, H. and Polzin, F., 2021. Reviewing financing barriers and strategies for urban nature-based solutions. Journal of Environmental Management, 289, p.112371.

Wang, J. and Banzhaf, E., 2018. Towards a better understanding of Green Infrastructure: A critical review. Ecological Indicators, 85, pp.758-772.

Wang, T., Xu, J., He, Q., Chan, A.P. and Owusu, E.K., 2023. Studies on the success criteria and critical success factors for mega infrastructure construction projects: A literature review. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 30(5), pp.1809-1834.

Wang, J. and Banzhaf, E., 2018. Towards a better understanding of Green Infrastructure: A critical review. Ecological Indicators, 85, pp.758-772.

Wang, T., Xu, J., He, Q., Chan, A.P. and Owusu, E.K., 2023. Studies on the success criteria and critical success factors for mega infrastructure construction projects: A literature review. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 30(5), pp.1809-1834.

Van Oijstaeijen, W., Van Passel, S. and Cools, J., 2020. Urban green infrastructure: A review on valuation toolkits from an urban planning perspective. Journal of environmental management, 267, p.110603.

Xu, C., Liu, Z., Chen, Z., Zhu, Y., Yin, D., Leng, L., Jia, H., Zhang, X., Xia, J. and Fu, G., 2021. Environmental and economic benefit comparison between coupled grey-green infrastructure system and traditional grey one through a life cycle perspective. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 174, p.105804.

Zerbib, O.D., 2019. The effect of pro-environmental preferences on bond prices: Evidence from green bonds. Journal of Banking & Finance, 98, pp.39-60.

Zhu, S., Yang, Y., Yan, Y., Causone, F., Jin, X., Zhou, X. and Shi, X., 2022. An evidence-based framework for designing urban green infrastructure morphology to reduce urban building energy in a hot-humid climate. Building and Environment, p.109181.