1. General information
Location and description of the intervention
City or FUA
Chiang Rai
Region
Asia
Short description of the intervention
The Kok River which runs through Chiang Rai City is in the process of being ecologically restored (Ref. 1). Having previously been a "lifeline for the city and various communities along its banks", sections of the river ran dry 20 years ago due to the construction of a large scale diversion channel and dredging by a major hotel (Ref. 2). In addition to reestablishing the river flow, restoration efforts are focusing on the opportunity to provide additional water storage, flood reduction and urban greening (Refs. 1 & 4). These improvements are considered particularly important given that the city of Chiang Rai is "expected to be affected by climate-induced drought as a result of changing rainfall patterns; rain which may also be heavy at times leading to excessive runoff into such channels; and flooding" (Ref. 4). To date, wetlands have been restored, and community benefits, such as a walking path, created (Ref. 3).

Improved water circulation and quality are further going to minimise the occurrence of breeding grounds for disease vectors (Ref. 4). Whilst already recognised as a problem, vector-borne and waterborne diseases are anticipated to become more prevalent due to increased temperatures associated with climate change (Ref. 4).
Address

Chiang Rai
Thailand

Location
The NBS is a city-wide initiative, the GIS point marks the centre of the city
Type of area before implementation of the NBS
Other
Please specify “other type of area” before implementation of the NBS
The intervention focuses on the restoration of the River Kok in its original location.
Website of the intervention
https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/8ff925b8-2254-4b71-a7f…
Timeline of intervention
Start date of the intervention (planning process)
2012
Start date of intervention (implementation process)
2012
End date of the intervention
ongoing
Present stage of the intervention
Ongoing
Goals of the intervention
At the start of the project, a feasibility study was undertaken which included a site survey, a community needs assessment and recommendations for reviving the river as an alternate to cementing over the river (Ref. 9).

Specific goals of the project include:
- Restore the river, improve water quality and reestablish the river flow (Refs. 1 & 9);
- Minimise the occurrence of breeding grounds for disease vectors, anticipated to become more prevalent due to increased temperatures associated with climate change (Ref. 4).
- Provide areas for recreation, including installation of water parks and gardens (Refs. 1 & 9);
- Provide opportunities for household-level agricultural purposes (Refs. 1 & 9);
- Possibly create constructed wetlands that could serve wastewater treatment purposes (Refs. 1 & 9).
- Restoration efforts aim to create opportunities for the river to provide additional water storage, flood reduction and urban vegetation (Refs. 1 & 4).
Quantitative targets
It is unclear whether quantitative targets were devised for this intervention. However, public forums and hearings enabled the project to take into account how degradation of the river had affected local communities, and what the communities' needs and opinions on the restoration project were (Ref. 1). The community needs assessment undertaken within the feasibility study further considered communities' perceptions, views and cultural connections to the river (Ref. 1).
Monitoring indicators defined
Unknown.
Sustainability challenge(s) addressed
Climate action for adaptation, resilience and mitigation (SDG 13)
Climate change adaptation
Green space, habitats and biodiversity (SDG 15)
Habitat and biodiversity restoration
Water management (SDG 6)
Flood protection
Stormwater and rainfall management and storage
Improvements to water quality
Health and well-being (SDG 3)
Creation of opportunities for recreation
Economic development and employment (SDG 8)
Economic development: agriculture
Climate change adaptation: What were the goals of the NBS?
Reduce exposure to climate risks directly
Reduce the impacts of climate risks events on urban places and communities
Climate change adaptation: What activities are implemented to realize the conservation goals and targets?
Implement solutions to capture/store water to increase its availability and prevent shortages from droughts
Restore wetlands and/or coastal ecosystems to dissipate the effects of flooding and/or storms
Renaturalization of rivers and other water bodies
Other
What types of restoration goals are / were defined for the NBS intervention?
Ecosystem-focused
What activities are implemented to realize the restoration goals and targets?
Rehabilitate and restore damaged or destroyed ecosystems
Implementation activities
To date, restoration of the river has focused on restoring wetlands and creating community benefits, such as a walking path (Ref. 3). It appears that only certain sections of the river have been restored as yet, with a monitoring and evaluation stage having been entered following the realisation of a 'pilot project' section of the river (Ref. 1).
Type of NBS project
Management and improved protection of rivers and other blue areas
Ecological restoration of ecosystems
Monitoring and maintenance of habitats and/or biodiversity
NBS domain and interventions
Ecological domain(s) where the NBS intervention(s) is/are implemented
Blue infrastructure
Rivers/streams/canals/estuaries
In-land wetlands, peatlands, swamps, and moors
Grey infrastructure featuring greens
Riverbank/Lakeside greens
Please specify "other Climate change adaptation activity"
Adapt to the expected increase in vector-borne and waterborne diseases, anticipated to become more prevalent due to increased temperatures associated with climate change (Ref. 4).
Vegetation Type
Other
Amenities offered by the NBS
Unknown
Services
Expected ecosystem services delivered
Provisioning services
Food for human consumption (crops, vegetables)
Water (surface and ground water for drinking and non-drinking purposes)
Regulating services
Flood regulation
Water purification / filtration
Cultural services
Tourism
Recreation
Scale
Spatial scale
Meso-scale: Regional, metropolitan and urban level
Beneficiaries
Primary Beneficiaries
Citizens or community groups
Food producers and cultivators (i.e. farmers, gardeners)
Governance
Governance arrangements
Co-governance with government and non-government actors
Non-government actors
Non-governmental organisation (NGO) / Civil society / Churches
Researchers, university
Please specify the roles of the specific government and non-government actor groups involved in the initiative
The Thailand Environment Institute is a non-governmental, non-profit entity, and is the project holder for the intervention (Ref. 4). The project implementer is Chiang Rai Municipality, and other partners include the Royal Irrigation Department, Department of Public Works, Town & Country Planning; Chulalongkorn University; Rajabhat University Chiang Rai; and Khon Kaen University (Ref. 4). The project is further featured as one of the Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network's City Projects (see Ref. 4 for further information).
Key actors - initiating organization
Non-government organisation/civil society
Land owners
Public space owned by the city
Key actors - Other stakeholders involved (besides initiating actors)
Local government/municipality
Non-government organisation/civil society
Citizens or community group
Researchers/university
Land owners
Public space owned by the city
Participatory methods/forms of community involvement used
Consultation (e.g. workshop, surveys, community meetings, town halls)
Policy drivers
NBS intervention implemented in response to an Regional Directive/Strategy
No
NBS intervention implemented in response to a national regulations/strategy/plan
Unknown
NBS intervention implemented in response to a local regulation/strategy/plan
Yes
Please specify the "local regulation/strategy/plan"
Recognising that increased future climate vulnerability is anticipated to affect the urban poor the hardest, with environmental damage being understood as reducing the potential for realisation of ecosystem services (Ref. 4), institutional change has been observed within Chiang Rai through policy change which favours natural and ecological methods to preserve riverine systems in place of hard infrastructure (Ref. 6). This shift can be evidenced through the 2008 initiation of the ongoing “Enhancing Urban Ecosystem and Biodiversity in Chiang Rai City” project, which aims "at restoring and conserving the diverse ecosystems that co-exist in the city area in order to maintain a natural balance of urban and economic development, society and the environment" (Ref. 8). The municipality of Chiang Rai therefore began to develop climate-resilient urban and economic plans which focused on Kok River restoration, due to the recognition that "demand for water resources within the Kok River Basin is already a critical issue for the city and projected climate change risks such as rainfall variability and temperature increase are likely to exacerbate this" (Ref. 4). Whilst information is somewhat lacking, it appears that the methods pursued are therefore well aligned with the "Enhancing Urban Ecosystem and Biodiversity in Chiang Rai City" initiative.
Mandatory or voluntary intervention
Unknown
Enablers
Presence of specific city-level GI/NBS vision/strategy/plan - mentioned in connection to the project
Unknown
Presence of specific city-level GI/NBS section/part in a more general plan - mentioned in connection to the project
Yes
Please specify the general plan with GI/NBS section
The municipality of Chiang Rai began to develop climate-resilient urban and economic plans which focused on Kok River restoration, due to the recognition that "demand for water resources within the Kok River Basin is already a critical issue for the city and projected climate change risks such as rainfall variability and temperature increase are likely to exacerbate this" (Ref. 4). Whilst information is somewhat lacking, it appears that the methods pursued are therefore well aligned with the "Enhancing Urban Ecosystem and Biodiversity in Chiang Rai City" initiative.
If there is a relevant strategy or plan, please specify the theme / type of the plan.
City specific climate change policy or plan
Biodiversity strategy or plan
Please specify other vegetation type
Unknown
Presence of city network or regional partnerships focused on NBS - mentioned in connection to the project
Yes
Please specify
Chiang Rai is part of the Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (ACCCRN), and this project is featured as one of ACCCRN's City Projects (see Ref. 4 for further information).
Presence of GI / NBS research project - mentioned in connection to the project
Unknown
Subsidies/investment for GI / NBS in the city - mentioned in connection to the project
No
Co-finance for NBS
Unknown
Co-financing governance arrangements
Unknown
Was this co-governance arrangement already in place, or was it set up specifically for this NBS?
Unknown
Financing
Total cost
Unknown
What is/was the Cost/Budget (EUR) of the NBS or green infrastructure elements?
Unknown
What are the total amount of expected annual maintenance costs?
Unknown
What is the expected annual maintenance costs of the NBS or GI elements?
Unknown
Please specify cost savings
Unknown
Please specify total cost (EUR)
As yet, the only cost information available is that pertaining to the period January - September 2012 in which the feasibility study was undertaken (Ref. 9). The budget for this period has been recorded as $250,000 = €215,473.75 (1 USD = 0.86 EUR) (Ref. 4).
Source(s) of funding
Unknown
Type of fund(s) used
Unknown
Non-financial contribution
Unknown
Business models
Risk reduction model
Which of the involved actors was motivated by this model?
Public actor (e.g. municipality)
Private non-for-profit actor (e.g. NGO, foundation)
Type of innovation
Social
Policy innovation
Please specify social innovation
The River Kok restoration and the general move towards "restoring and conserving the diverse ecosystems that co-exist in the city area in order to maintain a natural balance of urban and economic development, society and the environment" (Ref. 8) evidences the notion that institutional and policy change has been undergone within Chiang Rai (Ref. 6). Having recognised that environmental damage reduces the potential for realisation of ecosystem services (Ref. 4), evidence exists of local policies favouring natural and ecological methods to preserve riverine systems in place of hard infrastructure (Ref. 6), as evidenced by the ongoing “Enhancing Urban Ecosystem and Biodiversity in Chiang Rai City” project.
Novelty level of the innovation
Unknown
Please specify novelty level of the innovation
There is no information available to suggest that the project was influenced by, and implemented as a result of, another similar project.
Replicability/Transferability
Unknown
Please specify Replicability/Transferability
It appears that the project is still ongoing. As such, the restoration of the river section which comprised the 'pilot project' section will likely be expanded along the stretch of the Kok River which runs throughout Chiang Rai (Ref. 1), however, it is unknown whether this initiative would then be expanded beyond the city confines.
Impacts, benefits
Environmental impacts
Climate change
Strengthened capacity to address climate hazards/natural disasters
Water management and blue areas
Improved water quality
Enhanced protection and restoration of freshwater ecosystems
Green space and habitat
Increased green space area
Description of environmental benefits
Whilst expected that a number of environmental benefits will be had by the restoration of the River Kok once the project has been completed, at present, evidence has only been provided on certain sections of the river having had its "hydrological and ecological characteristics restored" (Ref. 1). Ref. 1 also highlights how the landscape surrounding the pilot project section of the river restoration has also "undergone significant changes", having now "been transformed into a public space that can be accessed by both tourists and locals", with Ref. 2 explaining that the land adjacent to the restored section of the river "is now a safe and green space".
Economic impacts
Unknown
Please specify other socio-cultural impact
Safety has been increased for those residents located adjacent to the restored section of the River Kok, as has the opportunity to grow food and/or generate an income through small-scale agriculture also been provided, "This portion of the river is no longer a danger for households along the riverbank, and is now a safe and green space used for small-scale agriculture" (Ref. 2).
Description of economic benefits
As above, whilst economic benefits are anticipated to be had, particularly those related to the promotion of eco-agriculture via increased water provision occurring as a result of increasing the fluvial flow of the river, these are as yet unknown and/or unreported.
Social and cultural impacts
Social justice and cohesion
Improved liveability
Improved access to urban green space
Increased involvement of locals in the management of green spaces
Increased access to healthy/affordable food
Health and wellbeing
Improved physical health
Gain in activities for recreation and exercise
Cultural heritage and sense of place
Improvement in people’s connection to nature
Protection of natural heritage
Safety
Improved community safety to climate-related hazards
Other
Unknown
Description of social and cultural benefits
Benefits have been recorded in relation to improved access to urban greenspace; increased access to healthy/affordable food; and reduced occurrence of households being flooded (Ref. 2).

As above, however, whilst further social and cultural benefits are anticipated to be had, particularly in relation to: increased involvement of locals in the management of green spaces; improvement of sustainable agriculture practices; improved physical health (due to reduced disease vectors); gain in activities for recreation and exercise, and increased cultural heritage and sense of space as sought through the community needs assessment conducted during the feasibility study, these benefits are as yet unknown and are only considered as expected impacts.
Type of reported impacts
Expected impacts
Achieved impacts
Indicators
Unknown
Analysis of specific impact categories
Environmental justice: The implementation of the NBS project resulted in ...
Improved access to green and/or blue spaces
Increased access to healthy food for humans and/or animals
Please specify other method used to evaluate the impacts of NBS
The pilot project section of the river restoration underwent monitoring and evaluation (Ref. 1), although the details on this are scarce. Additionally, "public hearings are being organized to interview 5 communities on their perceptions, recommendations and comments on the viability and effectiveness of the pilot project (Ref. 1).
Negative impacts: Did the project cause any problems or concerns?
No information was found regarding negative impacts of the project
COVID-19 pandemic
Unknown as of October of 2021.
Methods of impact monitoring
Process of recording NBS impacts
Collection of monitoring data at specific time intervals during the project to aid evaluation
Methods used to evaluate the impacts of NBS
Interviews
Measurements of biophysical aspects of the NBS (e.g. temperature, water flow)
Other
Evidence for use of assessment
Presence of an assessment, evaluation and/or monitoring process
Unknown
Presence of indicators used in reporting
No evidence in public records
Presence of monitoring/evaluation reports
No evidence in public records
Availability of a web-based monitoring tool
No
Impact assessment mechanism
Name of any specific impact assessment tools
Unknown.
Use of GIS in mapping impacts
No
Citizen involvement
Citizens involvement in assessment/evaluation
Yes
Mode(s) of citizen involvement in evaluation/assessment
Interview
Other
Please specify other modes of citizen involvement in evaluation/assessment
Interview and public hearings (Ref. 1).
Citizens involvement in the analysis of the assessment/evaluation
Unknown
Follow-up to the evaluation / assessment
Unknown
References
List of references
1. Thailand Environment Institute Foundation (n.d.). ACCCRN Thailand moves forward with Chiang Rai City’s Intervention Project. Nonthaburi: Thailand Environment Institute Foundation. http://www.tei.or.th/thaicityclimate/public/document-21.pdf [accessed 4/10/21];
2. Rumbaitis Del Rio, C (2015). Ecosystems and the Resilience Dividend. Bangkok: Rockefeller Foundation. https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/blog/ecosystems-and-the-resilience-dividend/ [accessed 4/10/21];
3. ICMA (2013). Learning from Malaysia, Thailand, Lao PDR and Indonesia at the Climate Leadership Academy. Washington, DC: International City/County Management Association. https://icma.org/blog-posts/learning-malaysia-thailand-lao-pdr-and-indonesia-climate-leadership-academy [accessed 4/10/21];
4. Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (2013). ACCCRN City Projects. Bangkok: Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (ACCCRN) & The Rockefeller Foundation, Asia Office. https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/8ff925b8-2254-4b71-a7fb-6082464b844e-acccrn-cities.pdf [accessed 4/10/21];
5. Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (2014). ACCCRN City Projects. Bangkok: Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (ACCCRN) & The Rockefeller Foundation, Asia Office. https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/ACCCRN-Cities-Project_June-2014.pdf [accessed 4/10/21];
6. The Rockefeller Foundation Monitoring and Evaluation Office, Verulam Associates Ltd. and Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (2014). Summative Evaluation:
The Rockefeller Foundation Asian Cities
Climate Change Resilience Network
Initiative. Bangkok: The Rockefeller Foundation, Asia Office. https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/ACCCRN-Final-Evaluation-Reissued-Dec-2016.pdf [accessed 4/10/21];
7. Asian Development Bank (2016). Nature-Based Solutions for Building Resilience in Towns and Cities: Case Studies from the Greater Mekong Subregion. Mandaluyong City, Philippines: Asian Development Bank. https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/215721/nature-based-solutions.pdf [accessed 4/10/21];
8. United Nations Human Settlements Programme (n.d.). Urban Ecosystem and Biodiversity Conservation towards Sustainable City and Climate Change Resilience. Nairobi: United Nations Human Settlements Programme: Urban Agenda Platform. https://www.urbanagendaplatform.org/best-practice/urban-ecosystem-and-biodiversity-conservation-towards-sustainable-city-and-climate [accessed 4/10/21]; and
9. Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (n.d.). ACCCRN - Thailand: Chiang Rai City. Nonthaburi: Thailand Environmental Institute. http://www.tei.or.th/thaicityclimate/public/document-44.pdf [accessed 5/10/21].
Comments and notes
Additional insights
From short description: Improved water circulation and quality are further going to minimise the occurrence of breeding grounds for disease vectors (Ref. 4). Whilst already recognised as a problem, particularly within an inner portion of the Kok River, the Mae Kok Noi, vector-borne and waterborne diseases are anticipated to become more prevalent due to increased temperatures associated with climate change (Ref. 4). Hence restoration of the Kok River and associated improved water quality is expected to improve disease and pest control in addition to increasing the effectiveness of flood reduction measures and providing a local water source for eco-agriculture and recreational purposes (Ref. 4).

From goals:
At the start of the project, a feasibility study was undertaken which included a site survey, a community needs assessment and recommendations for reviving the river as an alternate to cementing over the river (Ref. 9). Hydrological and ecological analyses were also undertaken to understand how, combined with community needs, the river restoration might be able to provide areas for recreation - including installation of water parks and gardens - and how some sections might provide opportunities for household-level agricultural purposes or lend themselves for conversion into constructed wetlands which in turn could serve wastewater treatment purposes (Refs. 1 & 9).
It was concluded that in addition to reestablishing the river flow, restoration efforts ought to focus on the opportunity for the river to provide additional water storage, flood reduction and urban greening (Refs. 1 & 4).
Public Images
River Kok prior to restoration efforts
River Kok prior to restoration efforts
http://www.tei.or.th/thaicityclimate/public/document-21.pdf
Restoration efforts of River Kok
Restoration efforts of River Kok
http://www.tei.or.th/thaicityclimate/public/document-21.pdf
River Kok Restoration
River Kok Restoration
http://www.tei.or.th/thaicityclimate/public/document-21.pdf
River Kok prior to restoration efforts
River Kok prior to restoration efforts
http://www.tei.or.th/thaicityclimate/public/document-44.pdf