Sustainability 13 02791

sustainability
Article
Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems in Spain: A Diagnosis
Ignacio Andrés-Doménech 1, * , Jose Anta 2 , Sara Perales-Momparler 3 and Jorge Rodriguez-Hernandez 4
1 Instituto Universitario de Investigación de Ingeniería del Agua y Medio Ambiente (IIAMA),

Universitat Politècnica de València, 46022 Valencia, Spain
2 Water and Environmental Engineering Group (GEAMA), Universidade da Coruña, Elviña,
15071 A Coruña, Spain; [email protected]
3 Green Blue Management, S.L. (TYPSA Group), Paterna, 46980 Valencia, Spain;
[email protected]
4 GITECO Research Group, Universidad de Cantabria, 39005 Santander, Spain; [email protected]
* Correspondence: [email protected]
Abstract: Sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) were almost unknown in Spain two decades
ago; today, urban drainage in the country is transitioning towards a more sustainable and regener-
ative management in a global context where green policies are gaining prominence. This research
establishes a diagnosis of SUDS in Spain and examines the extent to which the country is moving
towards the new paradigm in three dimensions: (a) the governance and social perception of the
community, (b) the regulative background, and (c) the implementation and the technical performance
of SUDS. The diagnosis identifies barriers that hinder the change. Then, we define the challenges that
Spain has to face to overcome obstacles that delay the transition. Barriers to the governance sphere
are related to the lack of involvement, knowledge, and organisational responsibilities. Within the
regulative framework, the absence of national standards hinders the general implementation at the
national scale, although few regional and local authorities are taking steps in the right direction with
their own regulations. From the technical perspective, SUDS performance within the Spanish context
was determined, although some shortcomings are still to be investigated. Despite the slowdown
Citation: Andrés-Doménech, I.; caused by the hard recession periods and the more recent political instability, SUDS implementation
Anta, J.; Perales-Momparler, S.; in Spain is today a fact, and the country is close to reaching the stabilisation stage.
Rodriguez-Hernandez, J. Sustainable
Urban Drainage Systems in Spain: A Keywords: SUDS; nature-based solutions; change management; technical performance; legislation;
Diagnosis. Sustainability 2021, 13, social perception; governance; regenerative policies
2791. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su13052791
Received: 4 February 2021

1. Introduction
Accepted: 1 March 2021
Published: 5 March 2021
Urban drainage management has been experiencing a complex evolution in recent
decades, from a conventional well-established framework to an emerging new paradigm.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
Conventional practice of urban drainage often considers stormwater as a waste, therefore
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
focusing on its rapid conveyance into discharging water bodies causing negative environ-
published maps and institutional affil- mental impacts. Uncontrolled urban growth and soil sealing worsen these effects [1], as
iations. they roughly alter the urban hydrological cycle. More rapid catchment kinetics and higher
runoff volumes lead to heavier hydrological urban catchment responses. Therefore, runoff
washes more contaminants downstream [2], and, consequently, polluted sewer overflows
threaten the quality of the water natural capital and its ecological status [3].
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
New technologies emerged in the last 30–40 years to cope with the new challenges
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
that urban drainage has to face. Sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) are an alterna-
This article is an open access article
tive and supplementary approach to traditional urban drainage practices. SUDS are an
distributed under the terms and innovative strategy for stormwater management and urban planning, aiming at mimicking
conditions of the Creative Commons and restoring hydrological processes existing prior to urban development (infiltration,
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// filtration, storage, evapotranspiration, etc.), by integrating runoff management devices
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ into the urban landscape. Common SUDS techniques comprise green roofs, permeable
4.0/). pavements, filter strips, vegetated swales, infiltration trenches, soakaways, rain gardens,
Sustainability 2021, 13, 2791. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052791 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2021, 13, 2791 2 of 22
detention and retention basins, and constructed wetlands, among others. The innovation
of SUDS when compared to the traditional approach is the placement of equal emphasis
on water quantity (controlling the runoff rate and volume [4]), water quality (preventing
diffuse pollution [5]), amenity (creating and sustaining better places for people [6]), and
biodiversity (creating and sustaining better places for nature [7]), the four pillars of the
SUDS philosophy [8]. This approach can help cities transitioning from the traditional
approach to a more sustainable urban environment by incorporating SUDS for drainage
management [9].
Transition frameworks applied to urban drainage management must provide coherent
methodologies to enable cities to adapt their water systems from today’s state into a better
condition in the future [10]. Nevertheless, the complexity of the urban ecosystem arises as
a major challenge to develop the paradigm switch from traditional drainage perspectives
to a SUDS-based horizon [11]. As it is strongly dependent on the climate and the local
urban environment, the connection with the place for the adoption of best practices, which
are conducted with the aim of achieving a regenerative system, is of great importance [12].
Many authors have documented this transition process [13,14], showing that a structured
pathway increases the probability of success. The governance context is also important;
different studies on transitions in urban water management demonstrate that obstacles to
the paradigm switch are largely socioinstitutional rather than technical [15,16]. Therefore,
the more the governance context aligns with regenerative policies, the more forceful the
transition steps will be.
In Europe, drainage issues in cities have been given increasing attention from policy-
makers since the Water Framework Directive [17] came into force. Two decades later, the
European Union is promoting the European Green Deal, an action plan to boost the efficient
use of resources by moving to a clean and circular economy in order to restore biodiversity
and to cut pollution. The European Green Deal is an integral part of the Commission’s
strategy to implement the United Nation’s 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development
Goals (SDG) [18]. Within this context, nature-based solutions (NbS) are gaining prominence.
NbS are defined as actions which are inspired by, supported by, or copied from nature; they
aim at enhancing sustainable urbanisation, restoring degraded ecosystems, developing
climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies, and improving risk management
and resilience [19]. SUDS are specific technologies included in the broader NbS concept.
Increasing their use is set as a European priority for a better drainage management in the
cities of the future [20].
In recent decades, the European Union has shown a transition into this new paradigm [21]
at very different speeds. The United Kingdom and, especially, Scotland, played a pioneer
role for many years, while Denmark and Sweden are today the frontrunners countries in the
transition process. Nevertheless, despite a recent take-off, the SUDS paradigm is still limited in
Europe [21] and unequally distributed among countries. In the Mediterranean area, experiences
are still scarce, with the need to create showcases to demonstrate the feasibility and suitability
of new solutions in the long term [12]. Although significant advances have been achieved
over the last decades, it is in the very recent years that southern European countries improved
their knowledge and experience. Spain and Italy stand out in terms of their recent research
efforts, showing that SUDS are drivers of innovation and transition towards a new stormwater
paradigm in the Mediterranean [22].
This paper focuses on analysing and diagnosing the stage reached by Spain after
two decades of efforts promoting the paradigm shift towards a more sustainable and
regenerative urban drainage management. We describe three main levels of the transition
process and examine to which extent Spain has transitioned within them. First, we tackle the
governance and social perception of SUDS by the community as the dimension at the higher
level that demands the change. Then, we analyse the normative and regulative background
in which we must embody SUDS. Finally, we present the level of implementation and
technical performance of SUDS reached in Spain. The correct steps and enablers, as well
as the barriers hindering the process, are documented to finally determine the challenges
that the country must face in the near future to strengthen the new approach for smarter
integrated urban drainage management.
2. Diagnosis Methodology
The diagnosis presented herein is based on identifying barriers that hinder the change
towards a more sustainable and regenerative urban drainage in Spain. Often, physical
constraints for change are identified as limits rather than barriers, whereas this last term
is usually reserved for sociological and institutional obstacles [23]. The following three
categories of barriers were addressed by Hoang and Fenner [24] to analyse systems in-
teractions of stormwater management using SUDS and green infrastructure: physical
barriers (limitations in implementation and performance), perception/information barriers
(unaccommodating social opinion and prejudices), and organisational barriers (divergent
responsibilities amongst involved actors). Brown and Farrelly [15] identified 12 different
typologies of socioinstitutional barriers impeding the transition towards sustainable urban
water management: an uncoordinated institutional framework; limited community engage-
ment, empowerment and participation; limits of the regulatory framework; insufficient
resources (capital and human); unclear, fragmented roles and responsibilities; poor organ-
isational commitment; lack of information, knowledge, and understanding in applying
integrated, adaptive forms of management; poor communication; no long-term vision,
strategy; technocratic path dependencies; little or no monitoring and evaluation; and lack
of political and public will.
The barrier typology and classification used herein to diagnose the challenges that
Spain has to face to overcome obstacles that impede SUDS advancement towards the
stabilisation stage are as follows (Table 1).
Table 1. Barriers typology and classification (adapted from [15,24]).
Barrier Dimension Barrier Classification

a.1. Low community engagement and participation.
(a) Social and governance dimension a.2. Isolated roles and responsibilities.
a.3. Lack of technical information dissemination.
b.1. Uncoordinated institutional framework.
(b) Regulatory framework dimension b.2. Limits of the regulatory framework.
b.3. Lack of political and public will.
c.1. Insufficient resources.
(c) Technical dimension c.2. Lack of monitoring and evaluation.
c.3. Reluctance regarding long-term efficiency.
The analysis of the social/governance and technical dimensions was carried out by a
systematic literature review. Keywords used were as follows: “Sustainable Urban Drainage
Systems” OR “Sustainable Drainage Systems” OR “Low Impact Development” OR “Water
Sensitive Urban Design” OR “Innovative Stormwater Management” OR “sustainable
stormwater systems” AND “Spain”. The search was performed on the Web of Science with
the following specific settings: timespan = all years; selected databases = Web of Science
Core Collection; region = Spain. The query returned 54 items. An analysis of the year of
publication of these references shows a rapid overview on how SUDS research has evolved
in the country: 1 reference in 2003, 1 in 2005, 12 between 2010 and 2015, and 40 since
2016, highlighting a strong take-off of the topic in the last 5 years. The literature review in
this research was completed with other publications, mainly from Spanish non-indexed
journals. It is worth mentioning the special issue “Consolidating sustainable drainage
in Spain” published in 2019 by the journal Revista de Obras Públicas, a reference for civil
engineering publications in Spanish. In addition, reports of R&D projects were analysed
and reported.
The analysis of the regulative background was performed by direct analysis of laws,
regulations, and guidelines of application in Spain. European directives and documents
were accessed at the EUR-Lex and EU Publications sites of the Publications Office of the
European Union. Spanish laws were accessed on the official State gazette site (Boletín
Oficial del Estado), whereas regional and local documents were accessed on the respective
public websites.
Finally, the political and economic contexts were added into the discussion, as they
have both conditioned the evolution of SUDS technologies in Spain in recent years. Given
these contexts and the identified barriers, the challenges for the near future were identified.
3. Social Perception and Governance for the Paradigm Switch

Over the last decades, barriers hindering SUDS implementation have been overcome
at different speeds in different countries. Major efforts have been made in regard to the
technical performance of SUDS. In parallel, the normative and regulative framework is
growing, although great efforts are still needed. Nevertheless, social perception of SUDS
and governance issues have not been paid enough attention to in recent years, at least in
Spain, with very few experiences of community participation.
Conventional urban stormwater systems are mainly centralised, both from the techni-
cal and operational perspectives. Urban drainage with SUDS comprises a multidisciplinary
group of stakeholders that aligns with the decentralised approach of the problem. Multiple
actors associated with stormwater management can be classified according to different
factors (origin, profession, interest, etc.) Specifically, the categorisation known as the
quintuple helix stands out, since it is usually used as a formula for innovation in terri-
torial management. According to this classification, four groups are distinguished into
the fifth element, the environment: government, academia, industry, and civil society.
For boosting sustainable stormwater management, the involvement of all stakeholders is
needed, especially to consider their perceptions and to achieve common and consensual
solutions [25].
Involving stakeholders in a collaborative framework to better design technical solu-
tions was the purpose of the project “Collaborative transition towards sustainable urban
drainage: making it happen at district scale” [26], the first well-known initiative of this type
in Spain. With the aim of designing the drainage strategy in a neighbourhood in the city
of Castellón (Valencian Community), collaborative sessions were conducted to establish
the subject focus; identify and facilitate stakeholders; describe problems and issues; and
finally, develop the long-term integrated vision. A collaborative, multi-actor approach
for defining the optimal strategy for sustainable and adaptive stormwater management
is needed and demanded by society to provide assistance in overcoming barriers for the
transition to better urban environments [27]. A remarkable achievement was the formation
and work undertaken by the collaborative group of actors involved in urban stormwater
management formed by key local and regional actors, from technicians and politicians to
neighbourhood citizens. The latter were key actors in the establishment of the baseline
and shared their district knowledge in the identification of the best solution. The main
goal defined during the sessions was bridging the gap between pilot to district-city im-
plementation of SUDS. To do so, during three collaborative sessions, different objectives
were progressively reached: identification of baseline conditions; listing of shortcomings;
definition of the vision for the pilot city; cataloguing of potential SUDS typologies to be
considered for the pilot district, locating SUDS implementation, discussion of results from
multicriteria analysis of solutions, and identification of actions at the mid and long term.
The group boosted dissemination of the benefits that SUDS bring, contributing to enhanced
urban environments from the environmental and social points of view.
Within the context of the above-mentioned research project, a questionnaire was
developed to better assess the needs at the local and regional levels [28]. Among the
respondents (44), 56.8% were local administration, 11.4% were water companies, 9.1%
were consultants, 2.3% were researchers, 2.3% were construction companies, 2.3% were
national administration, and 6.8% were regional administration (9.5% corresponded to
other profiles). Most of the respondents were municipal authorities and, in particular,
Sustainability 2021, 13, x 5 of 21
ents (44), 56.8% were local administration, 11.4% were water companies, 9.1% were con-
sultants, 2.3% were researchers, 2.3% were construction companies, 2.3% were national
administration, and 6.8% were regional administration (9.5% corresponded to other pro-
files). Most of the respondents were municipal authorities and, in particular, technical
profiles. For
technical context,
profiles. two questions
For context, opened opened
two questions the questionnaire: (a) Do (a)
the questionnaire: youDoknow what
you know
SUDSSUDS
what are? and
are?(b)
andDo(b)you
Dothink SUDSSUDS
you think help help
in mitigating the climate
in mitigating change
the climate effects?
change Fig-
effects?
ure 1 shows
Figure the the
1 shows results of these
results two two
of these questions. The survey
questions. also asked
The survey for the
also asked formain moti-
the main
vations for implementing
motivations for implementing SUDS.
SUDS.TheThe
main responses
main responseswere
wererunoff
runoffquality
quality improvement,
improvement,
flood
flood risk
riskreduction,
reduction,urban
urbanlandscape
landscape improvement,
improvement,infiltration andand
infiltration aquifers recharge,
aquifers and
recharge,
natural environments
and natural creation
environments and biodiversity
creation enrichment.
and biodiversity enrichment.
Figure 1. Results
Figure 1. Results of
of the
the context
context questions
questions within
within the
the survey
survey developed
developed in
in the
the project
project “Collaborative
“Collaborative transition
transition towards
towards
sustainable
sustainable urban
urban drainage:
drainage: making
making itit happen
happen at
at district
district scale”
scale” [28].
[28].
This
This questionnaire
questionnaire also
also asked
asked participants about the
participants about the main
main barriers
barriers for
for SUDS
SUDS imple-
imple-
mentations.
mentations. Respondents identified as the main problems the uncertainty about costs
Respondents identified as the main problems the uncertainty about costs and
and
the lack of information regarding lifespan and maintenance needs of
the lack of information regarding lifespan and maintenance needs of SUDS infrastruc- SUDS infrastructures.
tures.The importance that neighbours can give to SUDS when exploring new ways to
manage The urban runoffthat
importance was also highlighted
neighbours can giveby other authors
to SUDS in Spainnew
when exploring [29].waysThetosocial
man-
experience developed in Cáceres (Extremadura) revealed the importance
age urban runoff was also highlighted by other authors in Spain [29]. The social experiencegiven by citizens
to new solutions
developed to face
in Cáceres water management
(Extremadura) revealedunder uncertain climate
the importance given by change
citizensscenarios.
to new
This study also demonstrated that SUDS are perceived by citizens as “amenity providers”,
solutions to face water management under uncertain climate change scenarios. This study
which empowers the non-hydraulic pillars of SUDS, amenity, and biodiversity. The result
also demonstrated that SUDS are perceived by citizens as “amenity providers”, which
of such perceptions is that SUDS are evolving into a real alternative for urban runoff
empowers the non-hydraulic pillars of SUDS, amenity, and biodiversity. The result of
management, increasingly endorsed by all stakeholders and, no less important, understood
such perceptions is that SUDS are evolving into a real alternative for urban runoff man-
by citizens [22].
agement, increasingly endorsed by all stakeholders and, no less important, understood by
The experience at Bon Pastor district in Barcelona city also reveals a high level of
citizens [22].
involvement during the design process [30]. As a result, citizens assumed sustainability as
The experience at Bon Pastor district in Barcelona city also reveals a high level of
a major driver for future retrofitting actions. Nevertheless, this case also highlights one of
involvement during the design process [30]. As a result, citizens assumed sustainability
the most important operational barriers at local scale: the responsibility of maintenance of
as a major driver for future retrofitting actions. Nevertheless, this case also highlights one
SUDS. The usual isolation of services within local authorities (usually organised as silos,
of thewater
such most services,
importantgardening,
operational and barriers
urbanat local scale:
planning) thenot
does responsibility
help to adopt of maintenance
coordinated
of SUDS. The
strategies usual isolation
to manage and maintainof services
SUDSwithin local authorities
infrastructures (usually
during their organised
operational life.as si-
los, such water services, gardening, and urban planning) does not
The participation of all actors involved within the urban water cycle is needed help to adopt coordi-to
nated strategies to manage and maintain SUDS infrastructures during their
effectively promote the paradigm shift. It is necessary to consider their different perceptions operational
life. try to achieve integral and agreed solutions. The paradigm shift affects all levels,
and
The the
although participation
enablers ofofitsall actors involved
integration may vary within the urban
at different water
scales. Tablecycle
2 sums is needed
up factorsto
effectivelytopromote
involved enhancethetheparadigm shift. It isofnecessary
social perception to consider
SUDS at different their
scale different
levels percep-
according to
tions and try to achieve integral
experiences developed in Spain [25]. and agreed solutions. The paradigm shift affects all levels,
although the enablers of its integration may vary at different scales. Table 2 sums up fac-
tors involved to enhance the social perception of SUDS at different scale levels according
to experiences developed in Spain [25].
Table 2. Factors to improve social perception of sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) (adapted
from [25]).
Level Factor
Collaborative networks involving governance actors.
National Conferences and workshops to share knowledge.
Roadmap at the national scale.
Regional working groups to focus on the problem.
Regional Creation of supramunicipal alliances to boost replicability.
Promotion of technical training.
Integral management with effective relations between involved services.
Local Development of strategic action plans for stormwater management.
Educational activities to improve SUDS knowledge.
Involvement of the community and social actors.
Neighbourhood Sharing of SUDS pilot performance with citizens.
Promotion of SUDS as enhanced solutions for amenity and biodiversity.
Knowledge networks are powerful tools that can be used to boost a paradigm switch
and to encourage new forms of innovation. In 2004, Coventry University and the Urban
Water Technology Centre at Abertay University (United Kingdom) launched a national
network in the UK, SUDSnet, to help academia and the industry to communicate effectively
about SUDS. Following the path of the British experience, the twin Spanish network
RedSUDS was born in 2008 from a dissemination project developed by the GITECO group
at the University of Cantabria. During the years of the economic crisis, RedSUDS decreased
its activity. In 2016, in association with the Polytechnic University of Valencia and Green
Blue Management, RedSUDS was re-launched with the objective of consolidating a group
of professionals interested in SUDS to promote the change in Spain and to overcome the
existing barriers.
RedSUDS organised a national meeting in 2017, “Challenges and future of SUDS
in Spain”. The event was a huge success with participation of more than 200 attendees
from the administration, industry, university, and research centres. The Spanish Na-
tional Government highlighted during the meeting the importance of a basic regulatory
framework for the development of actions, as well as the importance of collaboration
between administrations to go further together. The role of SUDS for urban retrofitting
and regeneration processes was discussed. A high consensus was reached for its gradual
implementation since the key for urban regeneration lies in the strong commitment to
green infrastructure [25]. After the meeting, the National Government organised bilateral
technical meetings with regional and local authorities and academia to collect feedback for
SUDS implementation in Spain. These meetings put the topic on the agenda at the highest
level. Nevertheless, the political instability in Spain since 2018 has hindered the process.
After the 2017 meeting, the network committed to meet every two years in order to
maintain the focus group of SUDS in Spain. In 2019, the Universidade da Coruña joined the
organising committee of the event. The 2019 meeting highlighted the gradual consolidation
of SUDS in Spain, with the participation of representatives of the national, regional and
local governments, as well as the industry and research centres. RedSUDS highlighted
the quintuple helix model and put the environment at the top of the list of priorities,
as demanded by society. To achieve the goals regarding regenerative development, the
normative and regulative framework must ensure the right context to boost the green
paradigm in urban drainage. The British experience of SUDSnet and its Spanish twin are
excellent examples of how a network of professionals on a specific subject can effectively
contribute to the management of the transition, but unfortunately, they are not enough.
4. Normative and Regulative Background

The Spanish regulatory and institutional framework for urban drainage is a complex
issue, as in other many countries. This complexity is inherent with the distribution of
powers between the national government, the different regional governments, and local
authorities. In addition, the whole system is under the umbrella of the European legislation
that sets the general rules. Therefore, the analysis of the Spanish legal framework on urban
drainage must be fourfold: the European, national, regional, and local levels.
4.1. The European Umbrella

Two decades ago, Directive 2000/60/CE [17] represented the most important improve-
ment regarding environmental legislation related to water within the European Union. The
Water Framework Directive (WFD) offers a general background for action in the field of
water policy and, specifically, the principle that marks all further legislative development,
including that of urban drainage. The WFD established the need to identify and assess
pressures and impacts on the receiving water bodies. Stormwater; emergency overflows;
and, specifically, urban drainage (including runoff) were identified as pollution sources [31].
Consequently, urban drainage, in terms of its broader definition, must be considered to
preserve the good ecological status of receiving water bodies.
Since the WFD came into force, other European Directives related to urban drainage
systems were developed. Some examples are water Directive 2006/7/CE [32] or ground-
water pollution Directive 2006/118/CE [33]. Both directives affect to urban drainage
management, recognising the impacts caused by stormwater discharges from combined or
separate sewer systems.
In addition to the previous Directives, the earlier Urban Wastewater Treatment Di-
rective (UWTD) 91/271/EC [34] requires that all flows reaching a combined network
be treated. In addition, discharges to the receiving environment must be minimised, by
limiting overflows in extreme situations such as unusually heavy rainfall.
Beyond the directives, there are European recommendations and strategies that regard
important aspects for the implementation of the regulatory framework on urban drainage.
“Guidelines on best practice to limit, mitigate or compensate soil sealing” [1] promote the
use of permeable materials and surfaces, green infrastructure, and natural water harvesting
systems to maintain some of the soil pristine functions. The EU Green Infrastructure
strategy [35] highlights the great possibilities that green infrastructure offer for urban
regeneration. In addition, it fosters stormwater and flood risk management through green
infrastructure since it promotes the creation of multifunctional landscapes and spaces
within the city.
Increasing urban runoff overloading caused by climate change and ongoing soil
sealing in urban areas results in higher flooding risks and combined sewer overflow
(CSO) and stormwater runoff pollution, enhancing ecological impacts on the aquatic
systems [36]. Despite the improvements already made, significant investment is needed in
urban drainage systems to maintain an acceptable functioning of the systems, as stated by
the recent evaluation of the UWTD [37]. In this report, which was performed in parallel
with the fitness of check evaluation of the WFD and the flood directive [38], urban runoff
and CSO are considered as a main source of the deterioration of the ecological status of
the water bodies. About 60% of surface water bodies do not achieve the “good” ecological
status required by the WFD [39]. In addition, illicit intrusions into the sewage networks
are recognised as an increasing problem, being even illegal as in Spain or Italy [40]. The
optimal location of monitoring points within the system can help to identify pollution
sources, as well as to quantify the impact of CSOs into the environment.
In late 2019, the European Commission launched the European Green Deal [18], an
integral part of the strategy to implement the United Nation’s 2030 Agenda and the SDG of
United Nations. The Green Deal is an ambitious plan to tackling climate and environmental-
related challenges. The plan specifically mentions the need to address water pollution from
urban runoff and prevent and minimise flooding effects. This challenge related with urban
drainage is at the top priorities of the European institutions.
4.2. The National Framework: From Top to Bottom

The Spanish national legislative framework on water-related issues began to be estab-
lished in the early 19th century and was finally launched when the first Water Acts came
into force in 1866 and 1879. The current situation began to develop during the mid-1980s,
when the first Water Act of the recovered Democracy was approved. Spanish national
legislation on water is composed of a set of different laws and regulations. The reference
standard is the current Water Act [41]. This law presents the legal framework for the public
hydraulic domain in regard to water quantity, uses, protection, and planning within the
river basins that are directly managed by the central administration. However, this law
does not have any specific aspects regarding stormwater management or urban drainage.
In 2012, a law modifying the regulations for the public hydraulic domain [42] came
into force. This law supposes a strong milestone in urban drainage in Spain: the need for
management for sewer systems overflows during rainy weather. All new urban devel-
opment projects must not only consider the convenience of having combined or separate
networks but must also adopt measures to limit stormwater conveyance into the sewer
system and limit the production of first flushes to reduce the mobilisation of pollution
during rainfall episodes. Although the modification of the regulations for the public do-
main did not explicitly name SUDS, they are implicit within measures to promote urban
runoff control at the source and CSO reduction. In addition, this law calls the Ministry of
Environment to dictate the technical standards to define the environmental objectives and
technical guidelines to design specific measures and manage stormwater control systems.
As we will later discuss, this issue is still a challenge for the country.
SUDS were finally considered in the national legislation in 2016 [43]. This new Royal
Decree (638/2016) modified the regulations for the public hydraulic domain, the regulation
of hydrological planning, and other regulations regarding the management of flood risks,
ecological flows, hydrological reserves, and wastewater discharges. Specifically, the law
states that new industrial estates and urban developments must introduce sustainable
drainage systems, such as permeable surfaces, to reduce the risk of flooding. The law
introduces the principle of hydrological invariance, and it establishes the situations where
SUDS are compulsory within the country. In addition, the Instruction for Hydrological
Planning [44] emphasises the need to consider and evaluate diffuse and point pollution
sources. This text specifically considers pollution sources from stormwater overflows in
urban areas, industrial estates, or roads.
This national framework provides the general rules for regional and local governments
to develop their own regulations. The complexity of the territorial organisation of the
country leads to different views and scopes in regard to facing the problem.
4.3. The Regional Governments: An Approach to Mid-Scale Solutions

Regarding urban drainage issues, regional governments have responsibilities related
to urban planning, environment, water treatment, and water management on intra-region
river basins (inter-region basins are responsibility of the national government). Regional
governments suppose a link between the central government and the local authorities,
which, in the end, are responsible for urban drainage management.
Table 3 shows regulations and guidelines developed in some regions of Spain. At the
more ambitious level, areas such as Canarias or Región de Murcia have adopted a law
requiring the compulsory usage of SUDS in new urban developments. The motivation that
boosted Región de Murcia to adopt this obligation by law is related to the ongoing policies
to restore the degraded environmental status of the “Mar Menor”, a coastal saltwater
lagoon threatened by polluted agricultural and urban runoff overflows into the water body.
SUDS have been recognised as a potential solution for the surrounding urban areas. At
an intermediate level, regions such as Comunitat Valenciana, Comunidad de Madrid or
Galicia have developed regulations promoting (but not compelling) the use of SUDS. The
technical approach is detailed in the cases of Galicia or Madrid, whereas the documents of
Comunitat Valenciana limit their scope to a mere recommendation. Finally, other regions
have promoted the edition of guidelines (Catalunya and Euskadi) that identify SUDS as
solutions for better stormwater management.
Table 3. Main regional regulations (R) and guidelines (G) in Spain related to SUDS.
Year Region Climate 1 Type Scope and SUDS Implications Reference

Manual for urban planning with sustainability
2005 Euskadi Cf G criteria. SUDS are key elements for a better [45]
urban drainage management.
Technical guidelines for hydraulic
Cf
2009 Galicia R infrastructures. Sets criteria for integrating SUDS [46]
Cs
and technical details.
Guidelines for the sustainable development of
2010 Euskadi Cf G urbanisation projects. Promotes rainwater [47]
harvesting and the use of SUDS for infiltration.
BS
Cs
2011 Catalunya G Guidelines for rainwater harvesting. [48]
Cf
Df
Law for territorial planning, urban planning,
Comunitat BS
2014 R and landscape. Green infrastructure is promoted [49]
Valenciana Cs
in urban and developable areas.
Territorial action plan on flood risk prevention in
Comunitat BS the Valencian Region. The regulative documents
2015 R [50]
Valenciana Cs promote the use of SUDS for urban drainage
management.
Regulation of hydrological planning in “El
Cs
2015 Canarias R Hierro”. SUDS are compulsory in new urban [51]
BW
developments.
Modification of law for territorial and urban
BS planning (2015). Eco-efficiency criteria for
2015 Región de Murcia R [52]
BW climate effects mitigation and re-naturalisation:
use of SUDS.
Regulations for sewer systems. Includes
Comunidad de BS
2016 2 R technical recommendations for [53]
Madrid Cs
SUDS implementation.
Law for the adoption of urgent measures for
BS environmental sustainability of the “Mar
2019 Región de Murcia R [54]
BW Menor”. Prioritisation of SUDS for stormwater
runoff control into the sea.
1Climate types according to the second-order Köppen classification [55]; BS = arid steppe; BW = arid desert; Cs = temperate with dry
period in summer; Cf = temperate without dry period; Df = cold with temperate/fresh summer. 2 Regulations updated in 2020.
4.4. The Local Level: Regulations and Direct Legislation

The European, national, and regional regulatory framework must finally be detailed
in the local legislation on urban drainage. In Spain, municipalities have full competences in
urban sewage and stormwater management. In recent years, many local authorities have
started to incorporate SUDS into their own legislation to align with the supra-municipal
regulatory background. Table 4 compiles the main regulations and guidelines developed
in some of the main cities of Spain (>100,000 inhabitants).
Table 4. Main local regulations (R) and guidelines (G) in Spain incorporating SUDS.
Year City Type Scope and SUDS Implications Reference

Regulations for sewage and drainage systems. Requires
2004 Girona R rainwater harvesting. Promotes infiltration and retention to [56]
control hydrological impact of urbanisation.
Water management and efficient use ordinance. Sets minimum
2006 Madrid R [57]
threshold of permeable pavements in public spaces.
Guidelines for sustainable green areas. Promotes rainwater
2007 Madrid G [58]
harvesting, infiltration, and the use of permeable pavements.
Incorporation of environmental prescriptions into the general
urban development plan. New prescriptions include obligation
2012 Santander R [59]
of using SUDS like permeable pavements or
infiltration techniques.
Regulations for sewage and drainage systems. Promotes the use
2015 Valencia R [60]
of SUDS in new developments.
Technical criteria for the sewage network. Promotes the use of
2015 Barcelona R [61]
SUDS in new developments.
Technical manual for SUDS design in green and public spaces.
2018 Madrid G [62]
Establishes quantity and quality standards for SUDS design.
Technical manual for SUDS design. Promotes drainage
2019 Castellón G management through SUDS, both in public and private spaces. [63]
Establishes quantity and quality standards for SUDS design.
Technical instructions for sewage systems. Regarding drainage
management, the document fixes a maximum flowrate to be
2019 Sevilla R [64]
released downstream. Promotes the use of SUDS to achieve
this objective.
2020 Barcelona G Technical guidelines for SUDS design [65]
The main cities in Spain are adopting local rules for SUDS implementation. The degree
of obligation is still very uneven, from strong limitations for stormwater management like
in Sevilla to just recommendations as in the case of Valencia. Nevertheless, all these cities
are putting considerable effort into updating their regulative framework to include specific
regulations for SUDS implementation.
Society demands a change to a greener drainage, and the regulatory framework
must ensure the legal conditions to promote the transition. Spain has taken the experi-
ences of many other countries that began the change before, but a lot of work still has to
be conducted to overcome the institutional barriers regarding the implementation and
performance of SUDS in the country.
5. Implementation and Technical Performance of SUDS

5.1. Implementation of SUDS in Spain
In 2002, the University of Exeter led the Daywater EU funded project (adaptive
decision support system for the integration of stormwater source control into sustainable
urban water management strategies) [66,67], which presented a review of the use of best
management practices (BMPs) in Europe. The report concluded that “the use of BMPs
in Southern European countries, such as Greece, Italy, Spain and Portugal, is limited.
However, interest in their use appears to be growing”. Focusing on Spain, the report
highlighted that rainfall patterns of Mediterranean areas, more irregular and torrential
than those in Northern Europe, were a concern for SUDS development in southern Europe.
Nevertheless, interest in SUDS in Spain was taking off at that time, and experience after
almost two decades proves that even under Mediterranean rainfall conditions, SUDS are
an efficient solution to improve urban drainage management.
One of the first experiences in Spain documented in the literature was developed
22 years ago. It consisted of a system of vegetated swales and detention basins for the
drainage management of a 300,000 m2 industrial area [68]. At that time, SUDS were almost
unknown in Spain; nevertheless, the developer of the industrial estate was a French com-
pany, and because of their influence, SUDS were demanded for implementing stormwater
management in the area. Since then, SUDS have been progressively introduced in Spain.
Table 5 sums up some of the most relevant implementations in the country. Figure 2 shows
some of the most recent examples of SUDS implemented in Madrid, Ribarroja, Sevilla,
and Benicàssim.
Table 5. SUDS in Spain. SUDS techniques: permeable pavement (PP), green roof (GR), filter drain (FD), infiltration tank
(IT), vegetated swale (VS), bioretention systems (BS), infiltration basin (IB), detention basin (DB), and sand filter (SF).
Year Location SUDS Types Description Reference

1998 Sant Boi (Barcelona) VS, DB Industrial area (30 ha) [68]
Pedestrian impervious
2003 Parque Gomeznarro (Madrid) PP [69]
pavement replacement
22,000 m2 parking area
2005 Sports Centre (Gijón) PP [70]
(new development)
First implementation of
2005 Torre Baró (Barcelona) PP, FD, DB SUDS in Barcelona at [71]
district scale
Parque Cristina Enea (San
2007 FD, IT Urban park (9.50 ha) [62]
Sebastián)
1100 m2 experimental
2008 Las Llamas Park (Santander) PP [70]
parking area
2009 Parc Joan Reventós (Barcelona) FD, DB, IT, IB Urban park (2.80 ha) [70]
Pilot showcases
Benaguasil and Xàtiva developed to gather
2011 GR, PP, IB, DB, VS [12,70,72]
(Valencia) data under
Mediterranean climate
Highway runoff
2012 Fene (A Coruña) SF [73]
(0.94 ha)
2014 Avenida Gasteiz (Vitoria) PP, FD Urban retrofitting [74]
Green area of the
2015 BBVA headquarters (Madrid) GR, PP, FD, IT [62]
building complex.
Flooding prevention in
2015 Parque La Marjal (Alicante) DB [75]
an urban park
2016 Alfonso XIII street (Madrid) BS, IB, DB, FD Urban park (0.20 ha) [62]
New residential
2016 Valdebebas (Madrid) PP, IT development including [76]
green areas (1065 ha)
108,000 m2 parking
Wanda Metropolitano Stadium
2017 PP area (new [77]
(Madrid)
development)
Parque Logístico
2017 BS, VS, IB Private industrial area [78]
Valencia (Ribarroja del Turia)
Table 5. Cont.
Nevertheless, interest in SUDS in Spain was taking off at that time, and experience after
Year Location
almost two decades proves SUDS Types
that Description rainfall conditions,
even under Mediterranean Reference
SUDS are
2018 Avenida ElanGreco
efficient solution to improve
(Sevilla) PP, FD, urban
BS drainage management.
Urban retrofitting [79]
2018 Parque CentralOne of the first experiences
(Valencia) FD, IT in Spain documented
Urban park in theha)
(8.60 literature was [80]
developed 22
years ago. It consisted of a system of vegetated swales and detention basins for the drain-
Torre en Conill and Mas Flooding prevention in
2018 age management FD, IT2 [81]
Camarena residentials (Bétera) of a 300,000 m industrial area [68]. At that
a residential areatime, SUDS were almost un-
known in Spain; nevertheless, the developer of the industrial estate was a French com-
Urban retrofitting with
Torre de pany,
S. Vicent
andstreet
because of their influence, SUDS were demanded for implementing stormwater
2018 PP reuse of [82]
(Benicàssim)
management in the area. Since then, SUDS have been progressively introduced in Spain.
ceramic material
Table 5 sums up some of the most relevant implementations in the country. Figure 2
2018 La Atalayuela (Madrid) PP, FD, BS Urban park (9.40 ha) [83]
shows some of the most recent examples of SUDS implemented in Madrid, Ribarroja, Se-
villa, and Benicàssim.
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
Figure 2. (a)
(a) Infiltration–detention
Infiltration–detention basin
basin in
in Alfonso
Alfonso XIII
XIII park
park (Madrid);
(Madrid); (b)
(b) infiltration
infiltration trench
trench in Ribarroja;
Ribarroja; (c) bioretention
systems and permeable pavement in Sevilla; (d) ceramic permeable pavement in
systems and permeable pavement in Sevilla; (d) ceramic permeable pavement in Benicàssim.Benicàssim.
After
After two
two decades
decades of
of SUDS
SUDS implementation
implementation in Spain, sustainable drainage solutions
are
are becoming
becoming more familiar to municipal practitioners and politicians. To To achieve this
take-off,
take-off, research
research on
on SUDS
SUDS is is of paramount
paramount importance;
importance; demonstrations
demonstrations ofof good
good perfor-
perfor-
mances from
mances from the
the quantity
quantity and
and quality
quality perspectives
perspectives are crucial to promote
promote this change with
solid steps.
solid steps.
5.2. Research on SUDS Technical Performance

After some experiences in the 1990s with alternative stormwater drainage techniques
in Santander and Barcelona, SUDS research in Spain focused on permeable pavements.
Initial research projects on SUDS and, specifically, on permeable pavements, have been
developed since 2003 in the University of Cantabria. GITECO Research Group, with
the collaboration of Coventry University (UK), designed different test equipment and
methodologies that have become a reference over the years [69].
The research developed in the experimental car park at Las Llamas Park (Santander)
was an important milestone [84]. A total of 45 parking lots were built with different
permeable materials and configurations to analyse their performance regarding water
quantity and quality. The results show the ability of permeable pavements to enhance
urban drainage management; these results were, at that time, of great importance to
overcome barriers questioning SUDS performance. Quantitative analysis showed that
surface materials are influential on the overall response of permeable pavement.
Clogging is always an issue for research on permeable pavements. This phenomenon
directly affects the loss of infiltration capacity of this type of SUDS. Many studies have
been conducted in recent years regarding this topic. Sañudo-Fontaneda et al. characterised
clogging on interlocking concrete block pavements, proving that the surface slope of the
pavement influences the clogging process: the flatter the surface, the less influence of
clogging [85]. Further research on clogging considered porous concrete and porous asphalt
surfaces [86]. The results show less reduction in infiltration capacities for porous concrete
surfaces rather than for porous asphalt under the clogging scenarios analysed.
After 10 years of operation of the car park lots at Las Llamas Park, an end-of-life
analysis of the infrastructure was conducted [87]. The research concluded that parking
spaces constructed with porous concrete or porous asphalt were fully blocked after nine
years of operation without any maintenance, in part due to mistakes during construction
and ageing of the construction materials used. Nevertheless, those constructed with
interlocking concrete blocks showed high infiltration rates after the same period and
under the same (non)maintenance conditions. These results highlighted the paramount
importance of construction materials selection, quality control during execution, and
maintenance activities to preserve permeable pavements hydraulic properties.
The influence of initial moisture conditions of the permeable pavements can also
be determinant for the hydraulic response. With porous concrete surfaces, the initial
infiltration rates tested in unsaturated conditions were near to ten time higher than those
corresponding to saturated moisture conditions [88]. These results show that the long-term
hydraulic efficiency of permeable pavements might be different depending on the rainfall
conditions and on the consequent dry–wet periods. When a permeable pavement response
under two different climatic conditions is analysed, only varying the frequency of rainfall
events, the same conclusions arise [89]. A long dry period before a rainfall episode increases
the hydraulic infiltration and retention capacity of the permeable pavement.
Regarding the use of innovative construction materials, recent studies for replacing
cement with other alternative materials in continuous cement-based porous surfaces have
shown that replacing up to 5% of cement with metakaolin increases permeability [90].
Nevertheless, an increase in this proportion seems to be counterproductive; hence, much
research is needed to accurately characterise these possibilities of cement replacement.
A great challenge for SUDS research in Spain was to demonstrate that, even under
Mediterranean rainfall conditions, SUDS can improve urban drainage management. Over-
coming this technical barrier was the main objective of the AQUAVAL project, developed
between 2010 and 2013. Seven SUDS pilots (permeable pavement, green roof, infiltration
basin, detention basin, vegetated swale, rainwater harvesting tank, and bioretention area)
were constructed in Xàtiva and Benaguasil (Valencia region) and monitored for more than
a year [12,22,72]. The results show great performances from the quantity and quality
perspectives. For instance, permeable pavements reduced runoff production over 90%.
Some necessary design adjustments generated valuable lessons learned for the future to
improve construction and maintenance of SUDS in the Mediterranean region.
Innovative solutions for permeable pavements made of reused low commercial ce-
ramic material demonstrate that SUDS are technologies well aligned with the circular
economy principles [82], again showing excellent performance: 86% average reduction of
runoff production, 70%–100% peak flow reduction, and up to 90% retention of the chemical
oxygen demand (COD). The Life-CERSUDS project has been recognised by the European
Union as an example of an innovative strategy that improves urban resilience to climate
change by promoting water infiltration and reuse.
Southern Spain also needs overcome the climate barrier for SUDS implementation.
Research developed at the University of Granada compared the response of different
types of permeable pavements under real rainfall conditions [91]. Hydrological efficiencies
over 80% were reported for volume management, whereas the highest performance was
achieved for peak flow reduction (over 95%). Moreover, significant increases in water
residence times were proven (70%).
Beyond permeable pavements, green roofs have shown good performance in Spain.
After one year of monitoring, Andrés-Doménech et al. reported hydrological efficiencies
between 53% and 100% in Xàtiva and Benaguasil (Valencia) [22,92]. Such values indicate
that green roofs are effective at source, even under Mediterranean conditions. Indeed,
retrofitting half of the conventional roofs of a densely urbanised area into green roofs
would lead to a reduction of 75% of the runoff production at the city scale for the more
frequent rainfall episodes [92]. Additionally, green walls have recently been studied and
monitored [93], with researchers showing how alternative substrates like coconut fibre
mixed with rice husk can reduce common impacts caused by usual growing media based
on moss.
Other types of SUDS have also been the subject of attention, but to a lower extent.
The performances of a concrete conventional ditch, a vegetated swale, and a filter drain
in linear drainage in a car park in Oviedo were compared [94]. Total suspended solids
(TSS) were reduced by 76% in the filter drain and by 56% in the vegetated swale. Turbidity
was reduced by 59% and 54%, respectively. Detailed analysis of polluted runoff suggests
that SUDS mainly based on retention (rain gardens, bioretention areas, detention basins,
or wetlands) are appropriate to manage first-flush events [2] and remove about 90% of
sediment loads [95].
Although good performance indicators have been shown within many monitored
SUDS infrastructures, monitoring programs are still scarce as they usually depend on
funding related to research projects that do not last more than 2–3 years. More ambitious
monitoring plans are required to assess the long-term performance of SUDS and to quantify
their end of life in order to better define the proper maintenance and conservation strategies.
6. Challenges for the Near Future

Besides social, governance, regulatory, and technical barriers, the paradigm switch
towards a sustainable and regenerative urban drainage is also conditioned by the political
and economic contexts. Figure 3 shows the general situation from these two perspectives
and how SUDS deployment in the country has been unfolding. The figure also shows
SUDS achievements in Spain over the last three decades. This analysis shows how the
general context of the country has directly affected SUDS evolution in Spain.
Sustainability 2021, 13, 2791 challenges at the national scale. Fortunately, within the same context, some local 15guide-
of 22
lines and regulations have been developed; indeed, the local level is, at present, the most
pro-active towards SUDS implementation in Spain.
Figure3.3. The
Figure The evolution
evolution of
of SUDS
SUDSin
inSpain
Spainin
inthe
theframework
frameworkof
ofthe
thepolitical
politicaland
andsocioeconomic
socioeconomiccontexts
contexts(1990–2020).
(1990–2020).
Almost until the

Considering thatlate
in 1990s,
2008, SUDS were notcrash
the economic known andin Spain. Some isolated
the following experiences
recession were re-
(Barcelona and Santander) were developed during this period, and research
sponsible for the first slowdown period, and ten years later, since 2018, the high politicalon SUDS began,
especially
instability caused the second slowdown period. The main required conditions to UK.
in relation to permeable pavements, with knowledge imported from the face
During the following
these challenges in thedecade, SUDS
near future areexperienced their firstand
economic prosperity take-off in Spain.
political Large
stability. Bothand
are
ambitious R&D projects, with national and European funds, were developed during these
difficult to ensure nowadays considering the pandemic situation.
years, overcoming mainly technical barriers. During this decade, SUDS techniques were
The evolution of SUDS in Spain is taking advantage of many lessons learned from
also recognised as key elements needed for integrated stormwater management in separate
other, more SUDS-advanced countries, especially on the technical level. Nevertheless,
and combined sewerage systems at the national level [96]. In 2008, the economic crash
some governance best practices showing good results abroad are still reluctant to be
strongly hit Spain, and the consequences on investments were dramatic. Public resources
adopted here. A paradigmatic example is the imperviousness fee in Germany, as part of
in R&D decreased for the first time in 15 years and did not reach the same level until
an integral strategy to advance urban green infrastructure [98]. As a common practice, the
2020. In addition, investments on public works also suffered strong cuts at the national,
wastewater fee is estimated based on the drinking water demand, which has been largely
regional, and local levels. Consequently, SUDS implementation slowed down during the
recognised as unfair. The change has been taking place decisively since the 2000s to effec-
2008–2014 recession.
tively consider the runoff amount released per property [99]. Furthermore, in this sense,
After 2015, an apparent economic positive context has coexisted with an instable
in the UK, the development of a large regulatory framework and the publication of tech-
political period, with four general elections in the national government in a five-year
nical guidance
period. arisethe
As a result, as strategical
2015–2018 drivers for change [100].
period represented a secondAs mentioned
take-off forabove,
SUDS,today,
with
oneconsolidation
the of the main barriers impeding
of research, the transition atofthe
the implementation thenational
RedSUDS level is the lack
network ofnational
at the national
standards
level, developing
and the the generalimplication
most determined technical criteria
of thefor design.authorities
national From the technical perspec-
in SUDS-related
tive, SUDS performance within the Spanish context has been proven,
issues. In fact, one of the few technical guides promoted at the national level regarding although some
shortcomings are still to be investigated (i.e., end of life and long-term
sustainable water management in built environments was published in 2015 [97], although performance).
Thus,
its scopesome
andtechnical
impact have challenges must be The
been limited. also political
tackled before
changes achieving
since 2018thestopped
stabilisation
any
stage. Nevertheless,
further initiative at theSUDS in Spain,
national level.after two decades
Although since the
RD1290/2012 first on
called take-off, are a fact.
the Ministry of
Environment to dictate the technical standards to define the environmental objectives
and technical guidelines to design and manage stormwater control systems measures, the
country is still developing these standards to provide a uniform roadmap to tackle urban
drainage challenges at the national scale. Fortunately, within the same context, some local
guidelines and regulations have been developed; indeed, the local level is, at present, the
most pro-active towards SUDS implementation in Spain.
Considering that in 2008, the economic crash and the following recession were re-
sponsible for the first slowdown period, and ten years later, since 2018, the high political
instability caused the second slowdown period. The main required conditions to face
these challenges in the near future are economic prosperity and political stability. Both are
difficult to ensure nowadays considering the pandemic situation.
The evolution of SUDS in Spain is taking advantage of many lessons learned from
other, more SUDS-advanced countries, especially on the technical level. Nevertheless, some
governance best practices showing good results abroad are still reluctant to be adopted
here. A paradigmatic example is the imperviousness fee in Germany, as part of an integral
strategy to advance urban green infrastructure [98]. As a common practice, the wastewater
fee is estimated based on the drinking water demand, which has been largely recognised as
unfair. The change has been taking place decisively since the 2000s to effectively consider
the runoff amount released per property [99]. Furthermore, in this sense, in the UK, the
development of a large regulatory framework and the publication of technical guidance
arise as strategical drivers for change [100]. As mentioned above, today, one of the main
barriers impeding the transition at the national level is the lack of national standards
developing the general technical criteria for design. From the technical perspective, SUDS
performance within the Spanish context has been proven, although some shortcomings are
still to be investigated (i.e., end of life and long-term performance). Thus, some technical
challenges must be also tackled before achieving the stabilisation stage. Nevertheless,
SUDS in Spain, after two decades since the first take-off, are a fact. The national regulative
framework faces difficulties, but regional and local governments are taking steps in the
right direction.
Table 6 presents the main challenges and their drivers for SUDS implementation in
Spain, according to the barriers categorised within the three analysed dimensions herein:
social/governance, regulative, and technical barriers. As other authors [15,16] have already
recognised, the most challenging barriers to overcome are within the governance and
regulative spheres rather than within the technical field. Indeed, the latter are mainly
impeded by the lack of economic resources. Nevertheless, social and regulative barriers
are related to human behaviours and attitudes and are more difficult to change, especially
in a well-established discipline such as urban drainage management.
Table 6. Challenges and enablers of SUDS implementation in Spain, according to barriers presented in Table 1.
Dimension Barriers Challenges Enablers

Social/Governance a.1. Low community Increasing citizenship Community involvement;
engagement and participation. public participation. proactive authorities.
a.2. Isolated roles Need for protocols and Maintenance of SUDS as an
and responsibilities. coordination between opportunity for municipal
municipal services. services coordination.
a.3. Lack of technical Increasing awareness about Green sensitivity and
information dissemination. multiple benefits of SUDS; SUDS training;
promotion of a citizen RedSUDS network;
science approach. educational activities.
Table 6. Cont.
Dimension Barriers Challenges Enablers

Regulative b.1. Uncoordinated Development of the national Municipalities boosting
institutional framework. reference standards. the change.
b.2. Limits of the Development of the national The international context: Agenda
regulatory framework. legislative framework. 2030 of UN and EU fitness
evaluation of the Urban
Wastewater Treatment Directive,
Water Framework Directive, and
EU Green Deal.
b.3. Lack of political and Imperviousness fees. Incentives for private owners.
public will.
Technical c.1. Insufficient resources. Strategic R&D focused on Innovation boosts by facilitating
innovation and development of partnerships among the water
technological services for utilities, policymakers, and
industry and society. researchers from public and
private institutions.
Increasing public and private
resources for R&D.
c.2. Lack of monitoring SUDS long-term Funding and definition of a
and evaluation. monitoring plans. national strategy for combined
sewer overflows (CSO) and
SUDS monitoring.
c.3. Reluctance regarding Characterisation of the Research on SUDS long-term
long-term efficiency and long-term performance of SUDS; performance and end of life.
implementation. urban water system hybrid Research on potential
approach combining grey and cost-effectiveness of SUDS in
green infrastructure. reducing CSOs.
7. Conclusions
In the early 1990s, sustainable urban drainage systems were technologies almost
unknown in Spain. Today, SUDS have found their way in urban drainage strategies in the
country due to the fact that many barriers have been overcome, especially on the technical
level. Considerably strong efforts were made initially in research focusing on permeable
pavements. Further work on other SUDS techniques has been conducted, meaning that
performances from the quantity and quality perspectives are well documented at the
national scale. Nevertheless, further efforts are needed, especially to establish long-term
monitoring plans to analyse the end-of-life conditions of SUDS and the actions to define
and establish best practices regarding maintenance, their implementation in existing dense
urbanised urban areas, and the assessment of cost benefits in reducing CSO. The regula-
tory framework has shown considerable developments at the local level, driven by the
promising results achieved at the technical level. Many cities are developing their own
guidance and regulations on SUDS, but the lack of a national framework and, especially,
the still unpublished national standards, impede the development of a coordinated strategy
at the national scale. The challenge to overcome this situation must be driven from the
highest level of governance by increasing awareness, community engagement, and coordi-
nation of the different actors involved within the transition process. Although political and
economic contexts often play against change, the pillars of the transition are established
and are strong. The opportunities that arise after any crisis must be seized. Over the next
decade, SUDS in Spain must reach the stabilisation stage—we have the knowledge; we
must maintain the will.
Author Contributions: I.A.-D. conceptualised the paper; the four authors gathered and analysed
resources and data; I.A.-D. and S.P.-M. wrote the original draft of the governance section; I.A.-D. and
J.A. wrote the original draft of the legislation section; I.A.-D. and J.R.-H. wrote the original draft of
the technical section; the four authors discussed and wrote the challenges section; the four authors
reviewed the complete paper. I.A.-D. edited the final version of the manuscript. All authors have
read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research is developed within the framework of the Spanish Plan Estatal de Investi-
gación Científica y Técnica y de Innovación 2017–2020, project HOFIDRAIN (Holistic characterization
of filtering sections for smart and sustainable management of urban drainage systems at city scale)
through the sub-projects ENGODRAIN (grant number RTI2018-094217-B-C31), MELODRAIN (grant
number RTI2018-094217-B-C32) and POREDRAIN (grant number RTI2018-094217-B-C33) funded
by Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, Agencia Estatal de Investigación (AEI) and the European
Regional Development Fund (ERDF). The APC was funded by the ENGODRAIN (RTI2018-094217-B-
C31) project.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. European Commission. Guidelines on Best Practice to Limit, Mitigate or Compensate Soil Sealing. Available online: https:
//ec.europa.eu/environment/soil/pdf/guidelines/pub/soil_en.pdf (accessed on 18 November 2020).
2. Andrés-Doménech, I.; Hernández-Crespo, C.; Martín, M.; Andrés-Valeri, V.C. Characterization of wash-off from urban impervious
surfaces and SuDS design criteria for source control under semi-arid conditions. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 612, 1320–1328. [CrossRef]
3. Suárez, J.; Puertas, J. Determination of COD, BOD, and suspended solids loads during combined sewer overflow (CSO) events in
some combined catchments in Spain. Ecol. Eng. 2005, 24, 199–217. [CrossRef]
4. Sun, C.; Romero, L.; Joseph-Duran, B.; Meseguer, J.; Muñoz, E.; Guasch, R.; Martinez, M.; Puig, V.; Cembrano, G. Integrated
pollution-based real-time control of sanitation systems. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 269, 110798. [CrossRef]
5. Lundy, L.; Wade, R.; A Critical Review of Methodologies to Identify the Sources and Pathways of Urban Diffuse Pollutants. Stage
1 Contribution to: Wade, R. et al. A Critical Review of Urban Diffuse Pollution Control: Methodologies to Identify Sources,
Pathways and Mitigation Measures With Multiple Benefits. Available online: https://crew.ac.uk/publications (accessed on
20 February 2021).
6. Dias, N.; Curwell, S.; Bichard, E. The Current Approach of Urban Design, its Implications for Sustainable Urban Development.
Procedia Econ. Financ. 2014, 18, 497–504. [CrossRef]
7. Sandifer, P.A.; Sutton-Grier, A.E.; Ward, B.P. Exploring connections among nature, biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human
health and well-being: Opportunities to enhance health and biodiversity conservation. Ecosyst. Serv. 2015, 12, 1–15. [CrossRef]
8. Woods Ballard, B.; Wilson, S.; Udale-Clarke, H.; Illman, S.; Scott, T.; Ashley, R.; Kellagher, R. The SUDS manual; CIRIA C753:
London, UK, 2015; Available online: http://www.scotsnet.org.uk/documents/NRDG/CIRIA-report-C753-the-SuDS-manual-v6
.pdf (accessed on 4 March 2021).
9. Lundy, L.; Wade, R. Integrating sciences to sustain urban ecosystem services. Prog. Phys. Geogr. Earth Environ. 2011, 35, 653–669.
[CrossRef]
10. Jefferies, C.; Duffy, A. The SWITCH Transition Manual: Managing Water for the City of the Future; University of Abertay Dundee:
Dundee, UK, 2011; ISBN 978-1-899796-23-6.
11. Ferguson, B.C.; Brown, R.R.; Deletic, A. Diagnosing transformative change in urban water systems: Theories and frameworks.
Glob. Environ. Chang. 2013, 23, 264–280. [CrossRef]
12. Perales-Momparler, S.; Andrés-Doménech, I.; Andreu, J.; Escuder-Bueno, I. A regenerative urban stormwater management
methodology: The journey of a Mediterranean city. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 109, 174–189. [CrossRef]
13. Frantzeskaki, N.; Loorbach, D.; Meadowcroft, J. Governing societal transitions to sustainability. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. 2012, 15, 19.
[CrossRef]
14. Nevens, F.; Frantzeskaki, N.; Gorissen, L.; Loorbach, D. Urban Transition Labs: Co-creating transformative action for sustainable
cities. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 50, 111–122. [CrossRef]
15. Brown, R.R.; Farrelly, M.A. Delivering sustainable urban water management: A review of the hurdles we face. Water Sci. Technol.
2009, 59, 839–846. [CrossRef]
16. Rauch, W.; Seggelke, K.; Brown, R.; Krebs, P. Integrated Approaches in Urban Storm Drainage: Where Do We Stand? Envi-
ron. Manag. 2005, 35, 396–409. [CrossRef]
17. European Parliament; Council of the European Union. Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
of 23 October 2000 Establishing a Framework for Community Action In the Field of Water Policy. Available online: https:
//eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2000/60/oj (accessed on 18 November 2020).
18. European Commission. Secretariat-General. COM/2019/640 Final—Communication from the Commission to the European
Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions:
The European Green Deal. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=COM:2019:640:FIN

(accessed on 18 November 2020).
19. Directorate-General for Research and Innovation (European Commission). Towards an EU Research and Innovation Policy
Agenda for Nature-Based Solutions & Re-Naturing Cities. Available online: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/
publication/fb117980-d5aa-46df-8edc-af367cddc202 (accessed on 18 November 2020).
20. Hattum, T.; Blauw, M.; Bergen Jensen, M.; de Bruin, K. Towards Water Smart Cities: Climate adaptation is a huge opportunity to
improve the quality of life in cities. Wagening. Environ. Res. Rep. 2016, 2787, 1–60.
21. Gimenez-Maranges, M.; Breuste, J.; Hof, A. Sustainable Drainage Systems for transitioning to sustainable urban flood management
in the European Union: A review. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 255, 120191. [CrossRef]
22. Perales-Momparler, S.; Andrés-Doménech, I.; Hernández-Crespo, C.; Vallés-Morán, F.; Martín, M.; Escuder-Bueno, I.; Andreu, J.
The role of monitoring sustainable drainage systems for promoting transition towards regenerative urban built environments: A
case study in the Valencian region, Spain. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 163, S113–S124. [CrossRef]
23. Azhoni, A.; Jude, S.; Holman, I. Adapting to climate change by water management organisations: Enablers and barriers. J. Hydrol.
2018, 559, 736–748. [CrossRef]
24. Hoang, L.; Fenner, R.A. System interactions of stormwater management using sustainable urban drainage systems and green
infrastructure. Urban Water J. 2015, 13, 739–758. [CrossRef]
25. Calcerrada, E.; Valls, P.; Castillo, R.J.; Andrés, D.I. Percepción social de los SUDS. Lecciones aprendidas y recomendaciones para
involucrar a todos los actores implicados. Rev. Obras Públicas 2019, 3607, 74–81.
26. Andrés, D.I.; Castillo, R.J.; Escuder, B.I.; Perales, M.S.; Soto, F.L.; Navarro, E.M.; Gargori, R.L.; Beltrán, P.I.; Roig, P.G.; Girard, C.
Boosting Sustainable Stormwater Management. White Paper for a Collaborative Transition Towards Sustainable Urban Drainage.
Lessons Learned from an Analysis at District Scale in Castellón (Spain) (Report). 2016. Available online: https://www.iiama.upv.
es/iiama/src/elementos/Proyectos/CKIC_COSUDS/A06_CoSuDS_Whitepaper.pdf (accessed on 24 October 2020).
27. Andrés, D.I.; Castillo, R.J.; Escuder, B.I.; Perales, M.S.; Soto, F.L.; Navarro, E.M.; Gargori, R.L.; Beltrán, P.I.; Roig, P.G.; Girard,
C. Boosting Sustainable Stormwater Management. Guide for Conducting Collaborative Sessions for Boosting the Transition
toward Sustainable Stormwater Management (Report). 2016. Available online: https://www.iiama.upv.es/iiama/src/elementos/
Proyectos/CKIC_COSUDS/A07_CoSuDS_Guide%20Collaborative%20Sessions.pdf (accessed on 24 October 2020).
28. Soto, F.L.; Navarro, E.M.; Ramírez, P.L. Collaborative Transition Towards Sustainable Urban Drainage: Making It Happen
at District Scale. Exploring Market Opportunities (Report). 2016. Available online: https://www.iiama.upv.es/iiama/src/
elementos/Proyectos/CKIC_COSUDS/A03_CoSuDS_ReportP3.pdf (accessed on 24 October 2020).
29. Sañudo-Fontaneda, L.; Robina-Ramírez, R. Bringing community perceptions into sustainable urban drainage systems: The
experience of Extremadura, Spain. Land Use Policy 2019, 89, 104251. [CrossRef]
30. Carriquiry, A.N.; Sauri, D.; March, H. Community Involvement in the Implementation of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems
(SUDSs): The Case of Bon Pastor, Barcelona. Sustainability 2020, 12, 510. [CrossRef]
31. European Commission. Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) Guidance Document
No 3. Analysis of Pressures and Impacts. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-framework/facts_
figures/guidance_docs_en.htm (accessed on 14 October 2020).
32. European Parliament; Council of the European Union. Directive 2006/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of
15 February 2006 Concerning the Management of Bathing Water Quality and Repealing Directive 76/160/Eec. Available online:
http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2006/7/oj (accessed on 15 October 2020).
33. European Parliament; Council of the European Union. Directive 2006/118/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of
12 December 2006 on the Protection of Groundwater against Pollution and Deterioration. Available online: http://data.europa.
eu/eli/dir/2006/118/oj (accessed on 15 October 2020).
34. Council of the European Union. Council Directive 91/271/Eec of 21 May 1991 Concerning Urban Waste-Water Treatment.
Available online: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/1991/271/oj (accessed on 14 October 2020).
35. Directorate-General for Environment (European Commission). Building a Green Infrastructure for Europe; European Commission:
Brussels, Belgium, 2014. [CrossRef]
36. Pistocchi, A.; Dorati, C.; Grizzetti, B.; Udias, M.A.; Vigiak, O.; Zanni, M. Water Quality in Europe: Effects of the Urban Wastewater
Treatment Directive, EUR 30003 EN; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2019; ISBN 978-92-76-11263-1.
37. European Commission. Evaluation of the Council Directive 91/271/Eec of 21 May 1991, Concerning Urban Waste-Water
Treatment. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water-urbanwaste/pdf/UWWTDEvaluationSWD448
-701web.pdf (accessed on 6 December 2020).
38. European Commission. Fitness Check of the Water Framework Directive and the Floods Directive. Available online:
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/fitness_check_of_the_eu_water_legislation/documents/WaterFitnessCheck-
SWD(2019)439-web.pdf (accessed on 6 December 2020).
39. European Environment Agency. European Waters—Assesment of Status and Pressures. EEA Report No 8/2012; Office for Official
Publications of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2012; ISBN 9789292133399.
40. Sambito, M.; di Cristo, C.; Freni, G.; Leopardi, A. Optimal water quality sensor positioning in urban drainage systems for illicit
intrusion identification. J. Hydroinform. 2020, 22, 46–60. [CrossRef]
41. Boletín Oficial del Estado. Real Decreto Legislativo 1/2001, de 20 de Julio, Por El Que SE Aprueba El Texto Refundido de la Ley
de Aguas. Available online: https://www.boe.es/eli/es/rdlg/2001/07/20/1/con (accessed on 14 October 2020).
42. Boletín Oficial del Estado. Real Decreto 1290/2012, de 7 de Septiembre, Por El Que SE Modifica El Reglamento Del Dominio
Público Hidráulico, Aprobado Por El Real Decreto 849/1986, de 11 de Abril, Y El Real Decreto 509/1996, de 15 de Marzo, de
Desarrollo Del Real Decreto-Ley 11/1995. Available online: https://www.boe.es/eli/es/rd/2012/09/07/1290 (accessed on
14 October 2020).
43. Boletín Oficial del Estado. Real Decreto 638/2016, de 9 de Diciembre, por el Que SE Modifica El Reglamento del Dominio Público
Hidráulico Aprobado por el Real Decreto 849/1986, de 11 de Abril, el Reglamento de Planificación Hidrológica, Aprobado por el
Real Decreto 907/2007. Available online: https://www.boe.es/eli/es/rd/2016/12/09/638 (accessed on 14 October 2020).
44. Boletín Oficial del Estado. Orden ARM/2656/2008, de 10 de Septiembre, por la Que SE Aprueba la Instrucción de Planificación
Hidrológica. Available online: https://www.boe.es/eli/es/o/2008/09/10/arm2656 (accessed on 14 October 2020).
45. Sociedad Pública de Gestión Ambiental Gobierno Vasco. Manual Para la Redacción de Planeamiento Urbanístico Con Criterios
de Sostenibilidad. Available online: https://www.euskadi.eus/contenidos/documentacion/guia_planeamiento_2/es_doc/
adjuntos/guia_2.pdf (accessed on 14 October 2020).
46. Xunta de Galicia. Intrución Técnicas para Obras Hidráulicas em Galicia (vol. 2). Available online: https://augasdegalicia.xunta.
gal/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=216484&name=DLFE-17836.pdf (accessed on 14 October 2020).
47. Grupo Sprilur. Guía para el Desarrollo Sostenible de los Proyectos de Urbanización. Available online: http://www.
guiaurbanizacionsprilur.com/pdf/Guia_completa_v2.pdf (accessed on 14 October 2020).
48. Molist, J.; Núñez, L.; Lacoma, C. Aprofitament d’Aigua de Pluja a Catalunya. Dimensionament de Dipòsits d’Emmagatzematge.; Agència
Catalana de l’Aigua: Barcelona, Spain, 2011.
49. Diari Oficial de la Comunitat Valenciana. Ley 5/2014, de 25 de Julio, de la Generalitat, de Ordenación del Territorio, Urbanismo y
Paisaje, de la Comunitat Valenciana. Available online: https://www.dogv.gva.es/es/eli/es-vc/l/2014/07/25/5/ (accessed on
14 October 2020).
50. Diari Oficial de la Comunitat Valenciana. Decreto 201/2015, de 29 de Octubre, del Consell, por el que SE Aprueba el Plan de
Acción Territorial Sobre Prevención del Riesgo de Inundación en la Comunitat Valenciana. Available online: https://www.dogv.
gva.es/es/eli/es-vc/d/2015/10/29/201/ (accessed on 15 October 2020).
51. Boletín Oficial de Canarias. Decreto 52/2015, de 16 de Abril, por el que SE dispone la Suspensión de la Vigencia del Plan
Hi-drológico Insular de El Hierro, Aprobado por el Decreto 102/2002, de 26 de Julio, y se Aprueban las Normas Sustantivas
Tran-sitorias de Planificación Hidrológica. Available online: http://www.gobiernodecanarias.org/boc/2015/086/002.html
(accessed on 14 October 2020).
52. Boletín Oficial de la Región de Murcia. Ley 13/2015, de 30 de Marzo, de Ordenación Territorial y Urbanística de la Región de
Murcia. Available online: https://www.boe.es/eli/es-mc/l/2015/03/30/13/con (accessed on 14 October 2020).
53. Canal de Isabel II. Normas para Redes de Saneamiento. Versión 3. 2020. Available online: https://www.canaldeisabelsegunda.
es/documents/20143/79037/2016_Normas_Redes_Saneamiento.pdf/e1461e6b-3e64-8356-2b8f-05ee9845c4d8 (accessed on
14 October 2020).
54. Boletín Oficial de la Región de Murcia. Decreto-Ley n.o 2/2019, de 26 de Diciembre, de Protección Integral del Mar Menor.
Available online: https://www.boe.es/ccaa/borm/2019/298/s36008-36089.pdf (accessed on 14 October 2020).
55. Barceló, A.M.; Nunes, L.F. Iberian Climate Atlas 1971–2000; Agencia Estatal de Meteorología, Ministerio de Medio Ambiente:
Madrid, Spain, 2009; ISBN 9788478370795.
56. Ajuntament de Girona. Ordenança Municipal Reguladora de Les AigüES Residuals I Pluvials Del Sistema Públic de Sanejament
de Girona. Available online: https://seu.girona.cat/export/sites/default/dades/ordenances/_descarrega/ord_sanejament.pdf
(accessed on 14 October 2020).
57. Ayuntamiento de Madrid. Ordenanza de Gestión Y Uso Eficiente Del Agua en la Ciudad de Madrid. 2006. Available on-
line: https://sede.madrid.es/FrameWork/generacionPDF/ANM2006_50.pdf?idNormativa=33d146ec02e4f010VgnVCM10000
09b25680aRCRD&nombreFichero=ANM2006_50&cacheKey=8 (accessed on 15 October 2020).
58. Ayuntamiento de Madrid. Criterios Para Una Jardinería Sostenible en la Ciudad de Madrid. Available online: https:
//www.madrid.es/UnidadesDescentralizadas/Educacion_Ambiental/ContenidosBasicos/Publicaciones/HuertoJardineria/
CriteriosJardineriaSostenibleMadrid.pdf (accessed on 15 October 2020).
59. Ayuntamiento de Santander. Plan General de Ordenación Urbana. Anexo XIX. Colaboración Interadministrativa. In-
forme de Sostenibilidad Ambiental. Available online: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&
cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjVrKOpwLTsAhVnxYUKHZWjBY8QFjAAegQIAxAC&url=https%3A%2F%2F1.800.gay%3A443%2Fhttp%2Fsantander.es%2Fsites%
2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Ft20_a19_colaboracion_interadministrativa.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0JWAlXKZN4d0UiUQLmpHYv (accessed
on 14 October 2020).
60. Ajuntament de València. Normativa Para Obras de Saneamiento Y Drenaje Urbano de la Ciudad de Valencia. 2015. Avail-
able online: https://www.ciclointegraldelagua.com/files/normativa/Ordenanza-Municipal-Saneamiento.pdf (accessed on
4 March 2021).
61. Ajuntament de Barcelona. Guia de Criteris Tècnics Generals de la Xarxa de Clavegueram de la Ciutat de Barcelona. 2015. Available
online: http://www.clabsa.es/PDF/BCASA-Guiatecnicaclavegueramsetembre2015v01.pdf (accessed on 14 October 2020).
62. Ayuntamiento de Madrid. Guía Básica de Diseño de Sistemas de Gestión de Pluviales en Zonas Verdes Y Otros Espacios Libres.
2018. Available online: https://www.madrid.es/UnidadesDescentralizadas/Agua/TODOSOBREAGUA(InformaciónSobreAgua)
/SistemaUrbanosDrenajeSostenible/Guíabásicadedise~nosistemasdegestiónsostenibledeaguaspluviales.pdf (accessed on
15 October 2020).
63. Ayuntamiento de Castelló de la Plana. Guía Básica de Diseño de Sistemas Urbanos de Drenaje Sostenible Para El Término
Municipal de Castelló de la Plana. 2019. Available online: http://www.castello.es/archivos/1466/Guia_Sistemas_Drenaje_
Sostenible.pdf (accessed on 14 October 2020).
64. Empresa Metropolitana de Abastecimiento y Saneamiento de Aguas de Sevilla. Instrucciones Técnicas Para Redes de
Saneamiento (PD 005.12) Rev. 6. 2019. Available online: https://www.emasesa.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/
InstruccionesTécnicasRedesSaneamientoPD005.12_V06_cc.pdf (accessed on 14 October 2020).
65. Ajuntament de Barcelona. Guia Tècnica per Al Disseny de Sistemes Urbans de Drenatge Sostenible (SUDS). Available online:
https://ajuntament.barcelona.cat/ecologiaurbana/sites/default/files/PlecPrescripcionsTecniquesDrenatge_Guia.pdf (accessed
on 4 March 2021).
66. Deutsch, J.-C.; Revitt, M.; Ellis, B.; Scholes, L. Report 5.1. Review of the use of stormwater BMPs in Europe. In Project under EU
RTD 5th Framework Programme, ADSS for the Integration of Stormwater Source Control into Sustainable Urban Management Strategies;
Laboratoire Eau Environnement et Systèmes Urbains: Créteil, France, 2003; Available online: https://www.leesu.fr/daywater/
REPORT/D5-1.pdf (accessed on 4 March 2021).
67. Scholes, L.N.L.; Revitt, D.M.; Ellis, J.B. A European project (DayWater) investigating the integration of stormwater source control
into sustainable urban water management strategies. J. Health Soc. Environ. Issues 2002, 4, 37–40.
68. Gago, L.M.A.; Gómez, V.M. Prologis Park Sant Boi Una de las primeras grandes actuaciones de drenaje urbano sostenible en
España. Rev. Obras Públicas 2019, 3607, 42–45.
69. Castro-Fresno, D.; Andrés-Valeri, V.C.; Sañudo-Fontaneda, L.A.; Rodriguez-Hernandez, J. Sustainable Drainage Practices in
Spain, Specially Focused on Pervious Pavements. Water 2013, 5, 67–93. [CrossRef]
70. Andrés-Valeri, V.C.; Perales-Momparler, S.; Fontaneda, L.A.S.; Andrés-Doménech, I.; Castro-Fresno, D.; Escuder-Bueno, I.
Sustainable Drainage Systems in Spain. In Sustainable Surface Water Management; Charlesworth, S.M., Booth, C.A., Eds.; Wiley:
Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2016; pp. 355–369.
71. Soto, R. Evolución de los Sistemas Urbanos de Drenaje Sostenible en Barcelona. Rev. Obras Públicas 2019, 3607, 46–52.
72. Perales-Momparler, S.; Hernández-Crespo, C.; Vallés-Morán, F.; Martín, M.; Andrés-Doménech, I.; Álvarez, J.A.; Jefferies, C. Su
DS Efficiency during the Start-Up Period under Mediterranean Climatic Conditions. CLEAN Soil Air Water 2013, 42, 178–186.
[CrossRef]
73. Suárez, J.; Jimenez, V.; del Río, H.; Anta, J.; Jácome, A.; Torres, D.; Ures, P.; Vieito, S. Design of a sand filter for highway runoff in
the north of Spain. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Munic. Eng. 2013, 166, 121–129. [CrossRef]
74. Marañón, B. Planificación y gestión del sistema hidrológico de Vitoria-Gasteiz en clave de infraestructura Verde (“infraestructura
azul”). Rev. Obras Públicas 2019, 3607, 21–27.
75. Arahuetes, A.; Cantos, J.O. The potential of sustainable urban drainage systems (SuDS) as an adaptive strategy to climate change
in the Spanish Mediterranean. Int. J. Environ. Stud. 2019, 76, 764–779. [CrossRef]
76. Rodríguez-Sinobas, L.; Zubelzu, S.; Perales-Momparler, S.; Canogar, S. Techniques and criteria for sustainable urban stormwater
management. The case study of Valdebebas (Madrid, Spain). J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 402–416. [CrossRef]
77. Fisac, J.; Perales-Momparler, S. Sistemas Urbanos de Drenaje Sostenible y sus usos complementarios como garantes de la
accesibilidad universal en la urbanización del Estadio Wanda Metropolitano. Rev. Obras Públicas 2019, 3607, 38–41.
78. Ibáñez, R.; Millán, P.; Valls, G.; Urios, G. Gestión de las aguas pluviales con SUDS en plataformas logísticas: Caso de la plataforma
logística en parcela M-1 del Parque Logístico Valencia, Ribarroja del Turia (Valencia). Rev. Obras Públicas 2019, 3607, 68–73.
79. Mena, A. Mejora de la gestión de las aguas pluviales urbanas en la Empresa Metropolitana de Abastecimiento y Saneamiento de
Aguas de Sevilla (Emasesa). Rev. Obras Públicas 2019, 3607, 113–119.
80. De la Fuente, L. Por una Valencia más azul, más verde. Rev. Obras Públicas 2019, 3607, 107–112.
81. Belenguer, L. Actuaciones de mejora frente a la inundabilidad en dos zonas urbanas mediante sistemas de drenaje sostenible.
Rev. Obras Públicas 2019, 3607, 53–57.
82. Castillo-Rodríguez, J.T.; Andrés-Doménech, I.; Martín, M.; Escuder-Bueno, I.; Perales-Momparle, S.; Mira-Peidro, J. Quantifying
the Impact on Stormwater Management of an Innovative Ceramic Permeable Pavement Solution. Water Resour Manag. 2021.
[CrossRef]
83. Fisac, J.; de Pazos, M.; Rodríguez, S.; Montilla, E. Reducción de descargas de sistemas de alcantarillado unitario adoptando
técnicas de drenaje urbano sostenible: El caso práctico del A.P.E. 18.06 La Atalayuela (Madrid). Rev. Obras Públicas 2019,
3607, 87–92.
84. Gomez-Ullate, E.; Castillo-Lopez, E.; Castro-Fresno, D.; Bayon, J.R. Analysis and Contrast of Different Pervious Pavements for
Management of Storm-Water in a Parking Area in Northern Spain. Water Resour. Manag. 2010, 25, 1525–1535. [CrossRef]
85. Sañudo-Fontaneda, L.A.; Rodriguez-Hernandez, J.; Vega-Zamanillo, A.; Castro-Fresno, D. Laboratory analysis of the infiltration
capacity of interlocking concrete block pavements in car parks. Water Sci. Technol. 2013, 67, 675–681. [CrossRef]
86. Fontaneda, L.A.S.; Rodriguez-Hernandez, J.; Perez, M.A.C.; Castro-Fresno, D. Infiltration Behaviour of Polymer-Modified Porous
Concrete and Porous Asphalt Surfaces used in SuDS Techniques. CLEAN Soil Air Water 2013, 42, 139–145. [CrossRef]
87. Sañudo-Fontaneda, L.A.; Andres-Valeri, V.C.; Costales-Campa, C.; Cabezon-Jimenez, I.; Cadenas-Fernandez, F. The Long-Term
Hydrological Performance of Permeable Pavement Systems in Northern Spain: An Approach to the “End-of-Life” Concept. Water
2018, 10, 497. [CrossRef]
88. Andres-Valeri, V.C.; Juli-Gandara, L.; Jato-Espino, D.; Rodriguez-Hernandez, J. Characterization of the Infiltration Capacity of
Porous Concrete Pavements with Low Constant Head Permeability Tests. Water 2018, 10, 480. [CrossRef]
89. Hernández-Crespo, C.; Fernández-Gonzalvo, M.; Martín, M.; Andrés-Doménech, I. Influence of rainfall intensity and pollution
build-up levels on water quality and quantity response of permeable pavements. Sci. Total. Environ. 2019, 684, 303–313. [CrossRef]
90. Elizondo-Martinez, E.-J.; Tataranni, P.; Rodriguez-Hernandez, J.; Castro-Fresno, D. Physical and Mechanical Characterization of
Sustainable and Innovative Porous Concrete for Urban Pavements Containing Metakaolin. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4243. [CrossRef]
91. Rodríguez-Rojas, M.; Huertas-Fernández, F.; Moreno, B.; Martínez, G.; Grindlay, A. A study of the application of permeable
pavements as a sustainable technique for the mitigation of soil sealing in cities: A case study in the south of Spain. J. Environ.
Manag. 2018, 205, 151–162. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
92. Andrés-Doménech, I.; Perales-Momparler, S.; Morales-Torres, A.; Escuder-Bueno, I. Hydrological Performance of Green Roofs at
Building and City Scales under Mediterranean Conditions. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3105. [CrossRef]
93. Rivas-Sanchez, Y.; Moreno-Pérez, M.; Roldán-Cañas, J. Mejora en la retención y distribución de agua en muros verdes usando
materiales alternativos como medio de crecimiento. Ing. Agua 2019, 23, 19–31. [CrossRef]
94. Andrés-Valeri, V.C.; Castro-Fresno, D.; Sañudo-Fontaneda, L.A.; Rodriguez-Hernandez, J. Comparative analysis of the outflow
water quality of two sustainable linear drainage systems. Water Sci. Technol. 2014, 70, 1341–1347. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
95. Anta, J.; Pena, E.; Suarez, J.; Cagiao, J. A BMP selection process based on the granulometry of runoff solids in a separate urban
catchment. Water SA 2007, 32, 419–428. [CrossRef]
96. Puertas, J.; Suárez, J.; Anta, J. Gestión de Las Aguas Pluviales. Implicaciones en El Diseño de Los Sistemas de Saneamiento Y Drenaje
Urbano; Monografía; CEDEX: Madrid, Spain, 2008; ISBN 978-84-7790-475-5.
97. Prieto, L.I.; Galán, B.L.A. La Gestión Integral Del Agua de Lluvia en Entornos Edificados; TRAGSA: Madrid, Spain, 2015.
98. Cook, S.; van Roon, M.; Ehrenfried, L.; la Gro, J.; Yu, Q. Chapter 27—WSUD “Best in Class”—Case Studies From Australia,
New Zealand, United States, Europe, and Asia. In Approaches to Water Sensitive Urban Design; Sharma, A.K., Gardner, T.,
Begbie, D.B.T., Eds.; Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2019; pp. 561–585. ISBN 978-0-12-812843-5.
99. Zhang, D.; Gersberg, R.M.; Ng, W.J.; Tan, S.K. Conventional and decentralized urban stormwater management: A comparison
through case studies of Singapore and Berlin, Germany. Urban Water J. 2015, 14, 113–124. [CrossRef]
100. Andoh, R.Y.G.; Iwugo, K.O. Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems: A UK Perspective. Glob. Solut. Urban Drain. 2002, 1–16.
[CrossRef]

Sustainability 13 02791

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sustainability 13 02791

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sustainability 13 02791

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

sustainability

1 Instituto Universitario de Investigación de Ingeniería del Agua y Medio Ambiente (IIAMA),

Received: 4 February 2021

Sustainability 2021, 13, 2791. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052791 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Table 1. Barriers typology and classification (adapted from [15,24]).

Barrier Dimension Barrier Classification

3. Social Perception and Governance for the Paradigm Switch

4. Normative and Regulative Background

4.1. The European Umbrella

4.2. The National Framework: From Top to Bottom

4.3. The Regional Governments: An Approach to Mid-Scale Solutions

Year Region Climate 1 Type Scope and SUDS Implications Reference

4.4. The Local Level: Regulations and Direct Legislation

Year City Type Scope and SUDS Implications Reference

5. Implementation and Technical Performance of SUDS

Year Location SUDS Types Description Reference

5.2. Research on SUDS Technical Performance

6. Challenges for the Near Future

Almost until the

Dimension Barriers Challenges Enablers

Dimension Barriers Challenges Enablers

The European Green Deal. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=COM:2019:640:FIN

You might also like