Blue–green infrastructure (BGI) has become a practical approach with emerging attention to addressing flood mitigation in many countries worldwide. The environmentally sound, sustainable approach of BGI has led it to gain scientific interest above other available mitigation techniques, such as grey infrastructure, soakaways, etc. This study was intended to conduct a thorough scoping review, followed by a bibliometric analysis, using the VOSViewer version 1.6.19, of the available flood mitigation techniques and the emergence and effectiveness of BGI as a strategy. The scoping review was based on 50+ recent (between 2013 and 2022) journal research papers. The study enabled the development of an elaborative idea about BGI and its applications in Australia, and it describes the trend of research to use BGI for flood mitigation. Following a comprehensive survey, it was established that BGI had been recognized as an effective measure in addressing unexpected floods, and it is indeed a beneficial project in the long term. It mitigates urban flooding, improves the environmental quality by purifying the urban atmosphere, and, further, includes the health and well-being of the community as co-benefits. However, although BGI has many environmental and other connected benefits, there are some restrictions that are decelerating the initiation of BGI as a project. Therefore, this application takes time and effort even before implementation. The bibliometric analysis of this study revealed that robust connectivity is seen in the global perspective between BGI, green infrastructure, and flood risk management, depicting a strong bond. In contrast, in the Australian context, an explicitly networked BGI specifically had yet to be seen, and only “green infrastructure” was used instead. However, the emergence of BGI for flood mitigation was recognized in 2015, while Australian research was likely initiated in 2016. There is less acceleration in Australian studies compared to the global scenario. BGI is a trending topic in scientific research, offering a vast variety of benefits to the country. Concluding, this study strongly suggests an immediate initiation of proper awareness and the development of relatable policies as two primary considerations to encourage the implementation of BGI, which is an effective strategy to address floods in Australia and create livable and healthy cities.

The COVID-19 pandemic has adversely affected human lifestyle in numerous ways and one such key affected social element is the management of household plastic waste. Due to its effective barrier properties against the COVID-19 virus, usage and consumption of personal protective equipment (PPE) and other single-use plastic (SUP) products have increased exponentially to meet the accelerated demand. Therefore, this paper analyses the changes in community behavioural patterns of household plastic waste management with the prevailing COVID-19 pandemic situation in Sri Lanka. The comparative analysis of majorly consumed plastic waste types, plastic disposal methods, and perceptions of existing policies before and after the pandemic are broadly discussed. A comprehensive questionnaire was conducted in a stratified randomly sampled community and analysed using SPSS. Disposable face masks (39.9%) and hand sanitiser products (33.0%) were popular plastic products during the pandemic. The frequency of handing over the waste to collectors and recycling centres decreased slightly, from 32.1% to 31.4% and 24.2%–19.8%, respectively. Conversely, respondents’ preference for burning plastic waste increased from 23.4% to 27.0% after the pandemic. The plastic disposal methods from before and after the pandemic are significantly associated with income level (p = 0.00) and employment status (p = 0.00). No significant association was observed between the disposal method before the pandemic and the education level of respondents (p = 0.185). However, a significant association was evident between the disposal method after the pandemic and the education level of respondents (p = 0.025).

This study examined plastic waste management in Sri Lanka, concentrating on the contributing factors to plastic waste generation and collection. Data were gathered through a questionnaire survey from registered plastic recycling and management centres. The analysis revealed a positive correlation between tourist arrivals and plastic waste generation, indicating increased plastic waste production due to tourism spanning from 2014 to 2022. However, plastic waste collection negatively correlated with precipitation levels, suggesting heavy rainfall hampers collection efforts. This study found HDPE, PVC, LDPE, and PP to be the most collected and recycled plastic types, whereas PS and PET recycling were less prevalent. The results demonstrate the need for enhanced recycling infrastructure and highlight the necessity for government participation in plastic waste management initiatives. This study recommends increasing waste collection and recycling during the tourist season. In addition to enhancing public and private awareness, there should be additional investment in recycling facilities. The findings offer crucial insights into plastic waste management in Sri Lanka, emphasizing the importance of collaborative efforts and comprehensive strategies to tackle plastic pollution.

Adaptive Reuse of Historic Buildings (ARHB) is a new concept in developing countries like Sri Lanka. One of the main concerns for the intendancy of decision makers to ARHB is the operational energy. This paper analyzes the research gap of reusing historical buildings as office spaces by utilizing their structural and architectural designs and preserving the buildings’ authenticity for the future. It further aims to protect energy-efficient historical buildings from getting demolished and replaced with new modern buildings. A set of operational energy variables of modern office buildings and the potential historic buildings that can be reused as office spaces was established. During the early 1990s, old Dutch-era buildings in the country were mainly used as government office buildings. Three Dutch-era buildings in Galle Fort and three modern buildings in Colombo City have been selected as the case studies. Design-Builder (DB) software was used to comprehensively analyze sets of operational energy consumption variables. Selected historic buildings in Galle consumed 143.74 kWh/m², 156.34 kWh/m², and 209.39 kWh/m² while modern buildings consumed 337.29 kWh/m², 210.99 kWh/m², and 382.57 kWh/m² as operational energy, respectively. According to the analysis, the operational energy requirement of ARHB is comparatively lesser than that of modern buildings. This study, therefore, mainly concludes that the historical buildings saved more operational energy than the modern building envelopes while considerably reducing environmental impacts and saving the building energy cost.