Top 32%
neste catálogo (660 práticas pontuadas)
As pontuações concentram-se em valores altos, pelo que a posição dentro do catálogo é muitas vezes mais reveladora do que o número isolado.
Carbon — sequestration / storage, evidenced1/3
The BGF is linked to Oslo's 100,000-tree planting goal, but the cost-benefit study evaluated stormwater economics, not carbon sequestration, so the carbon evidence is indirect and unquantified.
Biodiversity — conservation / improvement, evidenced1/3
Biodiversity is one of four weighted BGF scoring categories, but no independent study measuring actual biodiversity change on BGF-scored sites was found.
Water & soil — retention, infiltration, erosion control3/3
A peer-reviewed cost-benefit study of six blue-green infrastructure options in Oslo's Grefsen catchment found benefit-cost ratios up to 17.3 for wadi-based stormwater retention, directly evidencing the water dimension.
Fire resilience — risk reduction, evidenced0/3
No source addresses fire risk; the BGF targets stormwater and vegetation, not fire resilience.
Governance, certification & transferability3/3
Introduced as a binding city norm in 2019 and since adapted into a Norwegian national standard with documented 2023 revisions, showing real regulatory uptake and cross-jurisdiction transferability.
Evidoria. Fator Azul-Verde de Oslo — Uma Pontuação Obrigatória de Águas Pluviais e Vegetação para Novos Empreendimentos. ID persistente: 661f4624-d274-4fa4-a4df-d580b1527089.