IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i5p2093-d1602162.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Practitioner Perceptions of Mainstreaming Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS): A Mixed Methods Study Exploring Direct Versus Indirect Barriers

Author

Listed:
  • Hebba Haddad

    (School of Psychology, University of East London, Stratford Campus, Water Lane, London E15 4LZ, UK
    Sustainability Research Institute, University of East London, 4-6 University Way, Docklands, London E16 2RD, UK)

  • John Bryden

    (Thames 21, 78-83 Upper Thames Street, London EC4R 3TD, UK)

  • Stuart Connop

    (Sustainability Research Institute, University of East London, 4-6 University Way, Docklands, London E16 2RD, UK)

Abstract

Sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) represent an opportunity to use stormwater management as a mechanism to deliver multiple co-benefits. They can play a key role in urban climate change adaptation, restoring nature, and increasing health and social wellbeing. Despite these benefits, their uptake is limited with many practitioners reporting barriers to implementation. To explore these barriers, and to define actions to unlock scaling, our mixed-methods study explored comparative perceptions of SuDS practitioners within the UK. Survey research ( n = 48) provided an overview of broad experiences across a range of SuDS practitioners. Main barriers described were access to funds, difficulty retrofitting, cost to maintain, and the ownership of SuDS. Main issues having the least available information to support SuDS scaling were conflicts with corporate identity, cost to maintain, and collaboration between various stakeholders. Follow-up interviews ( n = 6) explored experiences among a contrasting subset of survey respondents: those who experienced the highest number of perceived barriers and those who experienced the fewest barriers to SuDS implementation. From these interviews, key themes were identified that categorized the barriers for SuDS implementations: people-related elements; limiting practicalities; and informational factors. The findings were differentiated between indirect barriers (i.e., soft barriers, such as individual practitioner knowledge and capacity gaps linked to poor knowledge exchange) and direct barriers (i.e., hard barriers including specific gaps in SuDS data and knowledge experienced more universally). The importance of differentiating between knowledge-based (indirect) barriers that can be unlocked by improved information-transfer solutions and actual (direct) barriers that need further considered approaches and the generation of new knowledge to overcome is highlighted. Evidence-based policy recommendations for governmental and SuDS-based organisations are presented.

Suggested Citation

  • Hebba Haddad & John Bryden & Stuart Connop, 2025. "Practitioner Perceptions of Mainstreaming Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS): A Mixed Methods Study Exploring Direct Versus Indirect Barriers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-22, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:5:p:2093-:d:1602162
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/5/2093/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/5/2093/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:5:p:2093-:d:1602162. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.