Blue-green infrastructure (BGI) is becoming a more popular means of dealing with climate change and climate change-related events. However, as the concept of BGI is relatively new, many urban and rural planners are unfamiliar with the barriers they may face during the lifecycle of a BGI project. As a result, some have been hesitant to adopt BGI solutions. The literature has unveiled many of the barriers that inhibit the successful development of BGI, however, this information has yet to be presented in a manner that allows for easy identification. In this paper, a systematic literature review is undertaken to develop a framework which will enable BGI planners to assess the potential threats of a BGI project throughout the project’s lifecycle.

Blue and green infrastructure (BGI) has been defined as “an interconnected network of waterways, wetlands, wildlife habitats, and other natural areas; greenways, parks, and other conservation lands; working farms, ranches, and forests; and wilderness and other open spaces that support species, maintain natural ecological processes, sustain air and water resources, and contribute to the health and quality of life” (Mell, 2008).

The concept of a BGI is to use natural or semi-natural infrastructure to reduce the risk of harmful natural events in a manner that delivers multiple additional ecosystem services to a wide range of individuals. For example, a BGI may be used to reduce the impact of flooding events. Floodplains or wetlands can be restored at strategic sites that will store excess water preventing surges in residential or urban areas 1 . Similarly, traditional grey infrastructure such as removable flood-barriers or waterproof walls could be also constructed to ease flooding. However, restored floodplains, the BGI solution, delivers multiple additional ecosystem services that traditional grey infrastructure does not, such as water purification, increased biodiversity and increased scenic value.