Our Reports

CLEARING HOUSE is structured along seven organised sections and three major perspectives. The first and second perspectives are operationalising and implementing an inter- and trans-disciplinary research approach. The third perspective focuses on knowledge exchange and dissemination.


Reviewing knowledge & developing the analytical concept:

  • D1.1 Report on a novel standardised Sino-European UFBS typology
  • D1.2 Review report on UFBS for European and Chinese resilient cities
  • D1.3 Report on societal perceptions and demands towards UFBS in China and Europe
  • D1.4 Report on governance, institutional and economic frameworks of UFBS in China and Europe
  • D1.5 Screening tool for the exploratory case study analysis
  • D1.6 Interdisciplinary analytical framework

Conducting the comparative case study analysis:

  • D2.1 Report on the exploratory analysis of all the case studies
  • D2.2 Synthesis report summarising the comparative analysis of UFBS implementation

Establishing the collaborative learning process:

  • D3.1 Guidance document for the local co-design and co-learning workshops (including local stakeholder analysis)
  • D3.2 Local co-design workshops synthesis report
  • D3.3 Sino-European co-design report
  • D3.4 Mid-term report on learning mechanisms under the 1st call
  • D3.5 Final report on learning mechanism activities
  • D3.6 Report on the citizen science approach in the case studies
  • D3.7 Learning process evaluation report, including options for durable institutionalisation

Synthesising knowledge, developing tools and piloting solutions:

  • D4.1 Report on business models and investment cases for UFBS
  • D4.2 Online application for developing, modelling and assessing UF-NBS scenarios
  • D4.3 Online benchmarking tool
  • D4.4 Four thematic guidelines
  • D4.5 Report from testing and piloting the tools in field laboratories

Communicating and disseminating:

  • D5.3 Educational package on UFBS

Project management:

  • D6.5 Final report to the EC