No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Challenges to realizing the potential of nature-based solutions
Abstract
Globally, rising seas, coastal erosion, extended dry periods, and flooding contribute to decreased water security and increased disaster incidence. Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) are increasingly advanced as innovative responses to promote adaptation and build resilience, and they are arguably more sustainable than traditional gray infrastructure. There is a growing body of information regarding the material, social, and technological advances that constitute NBS and the ways in which nature can complement traditional built infrastructure. However, critical gaps remain. Promoting a coupled systems approach, we explore fundamental challenges, including issues of participation and equity, economic valuation, scalar mismatches, the integration of natural and built infrastructure, and governance. NBS do not entail quick solutions, and to reach their full potential NBS require a fundamental rethinking of society's relationship with nature. Addresses
... Consistent with other research [72,73], stakeholders suggested there is a need for more NbS training programs adapted to water management, infrastructure, and risk Perceptions of grey infrastructure being more effective ...
... By effectively communicating the results from previous NbS projects, including evaluation and monitoring protocols, and guidelines, to a range of different stakeholders-including policy platforms and publications-awareness and interest would increase, which could lead to more funding and support for key actors [70]. Furthermore, the standardization of methods for assessing NbSs and their multifunctional performance would help build the evidence-based benefits of NbSs against grey infrastructure [73]. ...
... Governance and political considerations have been identified as some of the main factors affecting all other barriers to NbS adoption [71]. Working from sectoral silos, a lack of political will, weak and inconsistent legal frameworks and regulations, and a lack of transparency in decision-making and public engagement were the most frequently mentioned barriers during interviews; all of these are known barriers to NbS consideration and implementation [70,71,73,82,83] (Figure 4). ...
Nature-based solutions (NbSs) have long recognized the value of coastal and marine ecosystem management and associated ecosystem services as useful tools for climate change mitigation (e.g., blue carbon) and adaptation (e.g., coastal protection against flooding and storm surges). However, NbSs remain poorly acknowledged and mostly absent from coastal planning for disaster risk reduction policies in the Caribbean, as well as from ex-post disaster reconstruction funds. With the increasing frequency and intensity of hurricanes in the region, NbSs are now more needed than ever. Taking Mexico as a representative case study for the wider Caribbean, we here seek to identify and analyze the barriers and opportunities perceived by relevant stakeholders for mainstreaming coastal-marine NbSs into coastal management and disaster risk reduction policies (e.g., mangroves as green infrastructure) to protect coastal societies and national economies against hurricanes. We conduct semi-structured, in-depth interviews with twenty stakeholders covering academic, governmental, tourism, NGO, coastal planning, and financial domains. Among the twenty-three identified barriers, governance, institutional, financial, and human-capacity aspects are the most dominant perceptions behind the current lack of NbS implementation. Future action for the policy integration of NbSs requires widespread political will and better quantification of both the provision of ecosystem services and their economic benefits under conventional markets.
Citation: Moreno, C.S.; Roman-Cuesta, R.M.; Canty, S.W.J.; Herrera, J.; Teutli, C.; Muñiz-Castillo, A.I.; McField, M.; Soto, M.; Amaral, C.d.; Paton, S.; et al. Stakeholders' Perceptions of Nature-Based Solutions for
... Consistent with other research [72,73], stakeholders suggested there is a need for more NbS training programs adapted to water management, infrastructure, and risk management professionals, in order to increase technical knowledge capacity and raise awareness of solutions other than grey infrastructure. ...
... By effectively communicating the results from previous NbS projects, including evaluation and monitoring protocols, and guidelines, to a range of different stakeholders-including policy platforms and publications-awareness and interest would increase, which could lead to more funding and support for key actors [70]. Furthermore, the standardization of methods for assessing NbSs and their multi-functional performance would help build the evidence-based benefits of NbSs against grey infrastructure [73]. ...
... Governance and political considerations have been identified as some of the main factors affecting all other barriers to NbS adoption [71]. Working from sectoral silos, a lack of political will, weak and inconsistent legal frameworks and regulations, and a lack of transparency in decision-making and public engagement were the most frequently mentioned barriers during interviews; all of these are known barriers to NbS consideration and implementation [70,71,73,82,83] (Figure 4). ...
Nature-based solutions (NbSs) have long recognized the value of coastal and marine ecosystem management and associated ecosystem services as useful tools for climate change mitigation (e.g., blue carbon) and adaptation (e.g., coastal protection against flooding and storm surges). However, NbSs remain poorly acknowledged and mostly absent from coastal planning for disaster risk reduction policies in the Caribbean, as well as from ex-post disaster reconstruction funds. With the increasing frequency and intensity of hurricanes in the region, NbSs are now more needed than ever. Taking Mexico as a representative case study for the wider Caribbean, we here seek to identify and analyze the barriers and opportunities perceived by relevant stakeholders for mainstreaming coastal-marine NbSs into coastal management and disaster risk reduction policies (e.g., mangroves as green infrastructure) to protect coastal societies and national economies against hurricanes. We conduct semi-structured, in-depth interviews with twenty stakeholders covering academic, governmental, tourism, NGO, coastal planning, and financial domains. Among the twenty-three identified barriers, governance, institutional, financial, and human-capacity aspects are the most dominant perceptions behind the current lack of NbS implementation. Future action for the policy integration of NbSs requires widespread political will and better quantification of both the provision of ecosystem services and their economic benefits under conventional markets. Citation: Moreno, C.S.; Roman-Cuesta, R.M.; Canty, S.W.J.; Herrera, J.; Teutli, C.; Muñiz-Castillo, A.I.; McField, M.; Soto, M.; Amaral, C.d.; Paton, S.; et al. Stakeholders' Perceptions of Nature-Based Solutions for
... Nature-based solutions (NBS, such as natural or hybrid infrastructure) offer an opportunity to deliver multiple benefits when considered as interconnected systems. A successful systems approach to NbS considers relevant physical, biological, and social processes and their interactions to include the immediate project footprint and the surrounding watershed or coastal zone (Nelson et al., 2020). Such approaches enable evaluating and identifying ways to reduce conflict and maximize synergies to produce sustainable solutions. ...
... For example, by strengthening sand dunes, building up salt marshes and barriers islands, constructing new offshore reefs, among various techniques, planners and engineers can protect coastal communities. The protection also enhances amenities for people and provides habitat for fish and wildlife, thus supporting local economies and minimizing the negative impacts of hard infrastructure (Nelson et al., 2020;Bridges et al., 2018Bridges et al., , 2021a. To bring forth this pressing need into action, the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) 2011 Civil Works Strategic Plan (USACE, 2011) sought to balance economic, environmental, and social objectives while increasing stakeholder engagement and active partnering through innovative and environmentally sustainable solutions to the Nation's water resources challenges. ...
... Considerations during planning include the objectives of the structure to be enhanced (i.e., stop or slow the water; high energy vs. low energy environment), what native species reside in the system, and what types of features are viable to encourage a diverse assemblage of organisms while achieving the engineering objectives. Any challenges associated with including NBS for biodiversity into the design should be considered, including the ability to enhance biodiversity beyond conventional approaches (Nelson et al., 2020;Chapman and Underwood, 2011). These factors need to be considered during the initial problem definition phase to understand better the site-specific hydrodynamic conditions and the habitat features that can be included in the design (Strain et al., 2018). ...
Global environmental factors (e.g., extreme weather, climate action failure, natural disasters, human environmental damage) increasingly threaten coastal communities. Shorelines are often hardened (seawalls, bulkheads) to prevent flooding and erosion and protect coastal communities. However, hardened shorelines lead to environmental degradation and biodiversity loss. Developmental pressures that are growing in scale, scope, and complexity necessitate the development of sustainable solutions to work with, rather than against, nature. Such nature-based solutions (NBS) provide protection and improve environmental quality and enhance biodiversity. To further this pressing need into action, the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) began the Engineering With Nature (EWN) initiative to balance economic, environmental, and social benefits through collaboration with partners and stakeholders. This work shows how engineering practice can be advanced through structured decision-making and landscape architecture renderings that include ecological sciences and NBS into an integrated approach for enhancing biodiversity in coastal marine environments. This integrated approach can be applied when designing new infrastructure projects or modifying or repairing existing infrastructure. To help communicate designs incorporating NBS, drawings, and renderings showcasing EWN concepts can aid decision-making. Our experiences with implementing EWN in practice have revealed that involving landscape architects can play a crucial role in successful collaboration and lead to solutions that protect coastal communities while preserving or enhancing biodiversity.
... 1.1. The need for monitoring and learning for advancing natural infrastructure Natural Infrastructure (NI) systems are increasingly recognized as essential complements to conventional gray infrastructure that provide resilience under a changing climate in addition to other societal benefits, and are part of an integrated approach to achieving biodiversity conservation and sustainable development goals (Nesshöver et al., 2017;Nelson et al., 2020aNelson et al., , 2020b. NI (also known as nature-based solutions, nature-based features, Engineering with Nature®, or Working with Nature) are engineered or restored natural or semi-natural landscape features that provide key services (e.g., flood risk reduction, water purification, erosion protection) while providing ancillary benefits to biodiversity and society including habitat and recreational value (Bridges et al., 2015;Nelson et al., 2020aNelson et al., , 2020b. ...
... The need for monitoring and learning for advancing natural infrastructure Natural Infrastructure (NI) systems are increasingly recognized as essential complements to conventional gray infrastructure that provide resilience under a changing climate in addition to other societal benefits, and are part of an integrated approach to achieving biodiversity conservation and sustainable development goals (Nesshöver et al., 2017;Nelson et al., 2020aNelson et al., , 2020b. NI (also known as nature-based solutions, nature-based features, Engineering with Nature®, or Working with Nature) are engineered or restored natural or semi-natural landscape features that provide key services (e.g., flood risk reduction, water purification, erosion protection) while providing ancillary benefits to biodiversity and society including habitat and recreational value (Bridges et al., 2015;Nelson et al., 2020aNelson et al., , 2020b. For the purposes of this paper, we include ecological restoration under this definition, because it similarly involves a deliberate manipulation or enhancement of ecosystem services or processes and operates on similar levels of ecological complexity and time scale. ...
... Despite the expanding application of NI, the research and evidence around NI performance and service delivery required to improve implementation in practice remain limited (Nesshöver et al., 2017;Nelson et al., 2020a;Albert et al., 2021;Bridges et al., 2021). There is a need to better understand NI methods themselves as well as their interactions with conventional infrastructure, and their role in enhancing the longevity and resilience of conventional infrastructure remains insufficiently explored. ...
Natural infrastructure (NI) development, including ecosystem restoration, is an increasingly popular approach to leverage ecosystem services for sustainable development, climate resilience, and biodiversity conservation goals. Although implementation and planning for these tools is accelerating, there is a critical need for effective post-implementation monitoring to accumulate performance data and evidence for best practices. The complexity and longer time scales associated with NI, compounded by differing disciplinary definitions and concepts of monitoring necessitate a deliberate and strategic approach to monitoring that encompasses different timeframes and objectives. This paper outlines a typology of monitoring classes differentiated by temporal scale, purpose of data collection, the information benefits of monitoring, and the responsible party. Next, we provide a framework and practical guidelines for designing monitoring plans for NI around learning objectives. In particular, we emphasize conducting research and development monitoring, which provides scientifically rigorous evidence for methodological improvement beyond the project scale. Wherever feasible, and where NI tools are relatively new and untested, such monitoring should avoid wasted effort and ensure progress and refinement of methodology and practice over time. Finally, we propose institutional changes that would promote greater adoption of research and development monitoring to increase the evidence base for NI implementation at larger scales.
... The uptake of NBS is rapidly increasing, in part because the idea of nature providing solutions is simple to understand by the layperson (Cohen-Sacham et al., 2019). However, there still are several challenges to overcome prior to realising the full potential of NBS (Nelson et al., 2020). These challenges stem from the lack of operational rigour in NBS practice and science (i.e., weak knowledge of NBS design, implementation, and evaluation), and from the lack of homogeneity between NBS concepts and frameworks, which have been generally established around eclectic disciplines such as urban sustainability, ecosystem-based and climate adaptation approaches, or conservation ecology (e.g., Raymond et al., 2017;Ruangpan et al., 2020). ...
... Monitoring should be a transversal process across the NBS project stages, but it should also be strategically devised as a platform to gather evidence on NBS performance once specific actions have been deployed. This evidence base should convey information and confidence across the public and private sectors upon NBS performance in complex, dynamic systems, and it should consolidate the standardisation and upscaling of NBS practice, including specifications and benchmarks (e.g., Kabisch et al., 2016;Angelakoglou et al., 2019;Nelson et al., 2020). ...
... Nature-based solutions against landslides and erosion open-up an exciting opportunity to do so, but they need upscaling, so their effect can be noticeable (Cohen-Sacham et al., 2019). There is, however, a severe lack of evidence on NBS performance (e.g., Nelson et al., 2020;Ruangpan et al., 2020) which hinders the operational rigour of NBS, it undermines the trust society has in them, and it slows down the upscaling and overall uptake of NBS. Filling the knowledge gap on NBS performance against landslides and erosion is an ambitious challenge that will require the close cooperation between scientists, practitioners, end-users, human communities, and decision and policy makers. ...
The idea of nature providing solutions to societal challenges is relatively easy to understand by the layperson. Nature-based solutions (NBS) against landslides and erosion mostly comprise plant-based interventions in which the reinforcement of slopes provided by vegetation plays a crucial role in natural hazard prevention and mitigation, and in the provision of multiple socio-ecological benefits. However, the full potential of NBS against landslides and erosion is not realised yet because a strong evidence base on their multi-functional performance is lacking, hindering the operational rigour of NBS practice and science. This knowledge gap can be addressed through the definition of repositories of key performance indicators (KPIs) and metrics, which should stem from holistic frameworks facilitating the multi-functional assessment of NBS. Herein, we propose the 'rocket framework' to promote the uptake of NBS against landslides and erosion through the provision of a comprehensive set of indicators which, through their appropriate selection and measurement, can contribute to build a robust evidence base on NBS performance. The 'rocket framework' is holistic, reproducible, dynamic, versatile, and flexible in helping define metrics for NBS actions against landslides and erosion along the NBS project timeline. The framework, resultant from an iterative research approach applied in a real-world environment, follows a hierarchical approach to deal with multiple scales and environmental contexts, and to integrate environmental, eco-engineering, and socio-ecological domains, thus establishing a balance between monitoring the engineering performance of NBS actions against landslides and erosion, and the wider provision of ecosystem functions and services. Using a case study, and following the principles of credibility, salience, legitimacy, and feasibility, we illustrate herein how the 'rocket framework' can be effectively employed to define a repository with over 40 performance indicators for monitoring NBS against landslides and erosion, and with over 60 metrics for establishing the context and baseline upon which the NBS are built and encourage their reproduction and upscaling.
... Albert et al. (2019) defined NBS as actions that (i) alleviate a well-defined social challenge, (ii) utilise ecosystem processes, and (iii) are embedded within viable governance or business models. Arguably, they are more sustainable than traditional grey infrastructure (Nelson et al. 2020). Dorst et al. (2019) found several similarities between NBS, Ecosystem-based Adaption (EbA), and Green Infrastructure; however, the three varied on what qualified as 'nature'. ...
... Dorst et al. (2019) found several similarities between NBS, Ecosystem-based Adaption (EbA), and Green Infrastructure; however, the three varied on what qualified as 'nature'. Nevertheless, as Nelson et al. (2020) stated the term 'solutions' should not be oversold, and that in fact though NBS provides a solution, this 'solution' is ultimately a long-term process that requires dedicated efforts from all those involved. ...
Despite the growth in research and applications of nature-based solutions (NBS) within the literature, there are limited applications in South East Asia, moreover studies which quantitatively assess the impacts of NBS could have on hazard reduction are scarce. This paper addresses this gap by developing and validating MCDA-GIS analysis to map how potential nature strategies could mitigate flood hazard if applied within the Mun River Basin, Thailand. Through a literature review, the top three solutions for flood and drought hazards were found: wetlands, re/afforestation, and changing crop types. These strategies were reviewed and validated with a MCDA-GIS methodology, through land use change (LUC) maps to depict different future scenarios. The results found that flood hazard did decrease when NBS were implemented in the catchment, especially for A/Reforestation, and to a greater extent when a combination of NBS were applied. This article provides specific insights into the current gaps of NBS publications, specifically considering the case of the Mun River Basin, Thailand.
HIGHLIGHTS
Applying nature-based solutions (NBS) to South East Asia Thailand.;
Using a MCDA-GIS and land use change modelling to assess the impact of NBS.;
Wetlands, re/afforestation, and changing crop types provide optimum solutions in mitigating flood hazard.;
... One is that neither the Corps nor the consulting agencies (FWS/NMFS) have budgeting processes in place to promote 7(a)(1) conservation planning. FWS and NMFS determine funding levels and personnel arrangements based on what they expect they will need for project-based 7(a) (2) consultations that are predictable from the action agencies' workplans. Section 7(a)(1) consultations are so rare that the consulting agencies do not budget for working on them. ...
... More practically, it requires agency staff to engage in a process that is not governed by existing guidelines or workflows, and for which funding may not be available. For instance, FWS and NMFS field office staff have substantial workloads already, trying to fulfill the requests for consultation under Section 7(a) (2). And Corps staff at the district level have insights about the threatened and endangered species that drive ESA compliance costs and might benefit from the broader focus of a conservation plan, but they have no formal guidelines or regulations for developing a plan that they can be confident will pass muster with all reviewers. ...
When policymakers choose to address flood risks with nature-based solutions, they secure a variety of co-benefits for the surrounding community, from improved aesthetics to enhanced climate resilience. And in some cases, co-benefits can include enhanced biodiversity and habitat improvements for threatened or endangered species. The US Army Corps of Engineers’ management plans for the Lower Mississippi River provide a valuable case study in this link between NBS and species protection. In fact, the use of NBS in the Lower Mississippi was a major factor in the recent decision to remove the Interior Least Tern from the federal endangered species list. Drawing from extensive legal research and interviews with experts from the US Army Corps of Engineers and US Fish and Wildlife Service, we explored how species conservation planning under Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(1) aligns with the planning processes for USACE Civil Works programs and might encourage greater implementation of natural and nature-based features in flood risk management. Our final report includes legal and policy recommendations.
... Global warming and the ensuing intensification of the water cycle have been associated with the increase in frequency and magnitude of extreme hydro-meteorological events (IPCC, 2014;Forzieri et al., 2016). There is evidence suggesting that NBS can effectively contribute to regulate the bio-geophysical processes driving HMHs (Nelson et al., 2020), while delivering co-benefits which artificially constructed concrete or grey infrastructure cannot provide (Anderson and Renaud, 2021). Examples of these co-benefits are the provision of natural capital, green jobs, clean air, water regulation, access to green spaces, recreational opportunities, or urban regeneration (e.g., Raymond et al., 2017a). ...
... Examples of these co-benefits are the provision of natural capital, green jobs, clean air, water regulation, access to green spaces, recreational opportunities, or urban regeneration (e.g., Raymond et al., 2017a). However, the general uptake of NBS is still slow due to the lack of internationally recognised and comparable standard methods for assessing their multi-functional performance, hindering the establishment of a solid evidence base showcasing the benefits of NBS over conventional grey approaches for hydro-meteorological risks (HMRs) management (e.g., Nelson et al., 2020). ...
Nature-based solutions (NBS) for hydro-meteorological risks (HMRs) reduction and management are becoming increasingly popular, but challenges such as the lack of well-recognised standard methodologies to evaluate their performance and upscale their implementation remain. We systematically evaluate the current state-of-the-art on the models and tools that are utilised for the optimum allocation, design and efficiency evaluation of NBS for five HMRs (flooding, droughts, heatwaves, landslides, and storm surges and coastal erosion). We found that methods to assess the complex issue of NBS efficiency and cost-benefits analysis are still in the development stage and they have only been implemented through the methodologies developed for other purposes such as fluid dynamics models in micro and catchment scale contexts. Of the reviewed numerical models and tools MIKE-SHE, SWMM (for floods), ParFlow-TREES, ACRU, SIMGRO (for droughts), WRF, ENVI-met (for heatwaves), FUNWAVE-TVD, BROOK90 (for landslides), TELEMAC and ADCIRC (for storm surges) are more flexible to evaluate the performance and effectiveness of specific NBS such as wetlands, ponds, trees, parks, grass, green roof/walls, tree roots, vegetations, coral reefs, mangroves, sea grasses, oyster reefs, sea salt marshes, sandy beaches and dunes. We conclude that the models and tools that are capable of assessing the multiple benefits, particularly the performance and cost-effectiveness of NBS for HMR reduction and management are not readily available. Thus, our synthesis of modelling methods can facilitate their selection that can maximise opportunities and refute the current political hesitation of NBS deployment compared with grey solutions for HMR management but also for the provision of a wide range of social and economic co-benefits. However, there is still a need for bespoke modelling tools that can holistically assess the various components of NBS from an HMR reduction and management perspective. Such tools can facilitate impact assessment modelling under different NBS scenarios to build a solid evidence base for upscaling and replicating the implementation of NBS.
... Alongside multiple obvious benefits of NbS, the literature states also a number of challenges associated with their understanding, implementation, effectiveness, stakeholder participation (Nelson, Bledsoe, Ferreira, & Nibbelink, 2020), lack of standards for their evaluation , (Fernandes & Guiomar, 2018). However, it is crucial to mention that the success of NbS and the long-term effectiveness of their socio-economic benefits highly depend on the environmental awareness (Gómez Martín, Máñez Costa, Egerer, & Schneider, 2021), and thus perception and understanding of NbS and their potential benefits. ...
NbS have gained substantial attention in the academic literature recently as a potential approach for simultaneously tackling environmental issues and addressing societal challenges. Drylands, which are among the world’s most vulnerable areas to the impacts of climate change and cover a little less than the half of the global terrestrial surface, were the focus of this study. We conducted a systematic literature review to explore the potential opportunities for the application of NbS in rural drylands across the globe. We go on to specifically consider the possibility of applying selected NbS approaches in the Aral Sea region of Uzbekistan, as a case study of a dryland ecosystem illustrating major environmental and social challenges. We highlight which NbS show the most promise in the Aral Sea region and conclude with a discussion of existing gaps in the literature on NbS in drylands, and opportunities for further research.
... Given NBS affect processes at different spatial scales, modelling also enables extraction of results at relevant scales for e.g., cost-benefit analyses, to address issues specific to local surroundings or stakeholders. In Scotland for example, this could involve the whisky industry concerned with abstraction limits and water availability through low flow periods [50,51]. ...
Nature Based Solutions (NBS) for water resources management have potential to mitigate climate change impacts, including more frequent flooding and droughts. Successful uptake requires more knowledge on the effects of NBS type and design on high and low flows. The cost-benefits of NBS impacts on these and water yield are also essential. Here, we used a modelling framework to explore the impacts of two common NBS types (Runoff Attenuation Features [RAFs] and tree planting), both varying in design, specifically location and scale. Data from an upland Scottish catchment (∼1km2) informed a coupled physically-based hydrological (MIKE SHE) and hydraulic (MIKE 11) modelling approach. NBS scenario effects on high and low flows, as well as groundwater recharge were compared and hydrological indices specific to the whisky industry informed the study site's 25-year cost-benefit analysis. Overall, tree planting reduced low flows and recharge of groundwater, whereas RAFs had a positive but smaller effect. Both NBS types reduced high and medium flows, although tree planting reduced high flows less than RAFs. RAF design, particularly increases in storage volume spread over greater areas, increased effects on all aspects of flows and recharge. Greater areas of planting increased effects on all but the highest flows. NBS type and design affected timing of water storage availability, retention and transfer, but this also depended on antecedent wetness, so these should all be considered for optimal performance or avoiding negative effects. The cost-benefit analysis revealed that RAFs would be a financially feasible NBS approach for enhancing low flows, whereas tree planting would not. This study highlighted that implementing a modelling framework alongside cost-benefit analysis could help optimise type and design of NBS for cost-effective management of specific local water availability issues. Critically this could inform NBS implementation for management of flood and drought impacts, likely to become more frequent in future with climate change.
... This classically illustrates how support for and enthusiasm of NbS both politically and within civic society can be thwarted and progress stalled by bureaucratic systems and practices. There are also changes in associated infrastructure that are required for the full implementation of some NbS that need acknowledging -NbS is not a magic bullet -as Nelson et al (2020) caution. ...
Mining is a vital part of the global economy, providing minerals and metals, employment and supporting infrastructure development. It can however cause health problems for humans and ecosystems. Tin is one such metal, used mainly for solder in printed circuit boards (PCBs) and as a coating for canned-food packaging. The market for tin has rapidly grown in recent years as it is used in both the PCBs and screens of smart phones. The extraction of the tin bearing minerals, mainly cassiterite that is itself a stable mineral with relatively low toxicity, often happens in hazardous conditions and due to poor management there is consequential environmental damage due to mining processes. Environmental damage by erosion, deforestation in protected areas, resulting in biodiversity loss and water pollution is often linked to artisanal and small-scale mining. Radioactive minerals such as monazite are often obtained as by-products of tin mining or may be left as waste in mining sites. This has been linked to deaths connected to the high level of radiation from monazite-rich sand that was used for the construction of the houses for people who were unaware of the risks to radiation from these materials. This chapter explores the extent of this issue in a selection of countries, the level of exposure and some possible pathways of radiation into food chains. There are recommendations of how to address this through in-depth quality community education as well a call for rethinking our consumption patterns and models of economic growth.
... This classically illustrates how support for and enthusiasm of NbS both politically and within civic society can be thwarted and progress stalled by bureaucratic systems and practices. There are also changes in associated infrastructure that are required for the full implementation of some NbS that need acknowledging -NbS is not a magic bullet -as Nelson et al (2020) caution. ...
Citizen science has increased during recent decades from participatory data collection, to developing research questions and methodologies, analyzing results, reporting outcomes and recommending actions. Projects cover a very wide range including; simple species observations and ecological and biodiversity assessments, environmental monitoring such as air and water quality, epidemiological surveys, food consumption and agricultural process evaluations. The findings from citizen science has been used to inform nature conservation practices urban planning decisions, agricultural and health policies. This paper reviews the major benefits and pitfalls of citizen science, with particular reference to some ethical issues. It draws some comparisons to community education and proposes some recommendations for promoting more citizen engaged research in bioethics projects to promote planetary health.
... This classically illustrates how support for and enthusiasm of NbS both politically and within civic society can be thwarted and progress stalled by bureaucratic systems and practices. There are also changes in associated infrastructure that are required for the full implementation of some NbS that need acknowledging -NbS is not a magic bullet -as Nelson et al (2020) caution. ...
Many governments such as the UK and some countries within the European Union are evaluating the potential of Nature-based Systems (NbS) to help meet international agreements. According to the UNEP present challenges of climate change, biodiversity loss and human health are likely to be met at lower cost over the longer term by employing NbS rather than using conventional technical approaches. Establishing and maintaining both rural and urban hedges is just one example of how NbS can be an affordable low tech approach that not only increases carbon capture through photosynthesis but simultaneously provides many other benefits both to human health and also nature as a whole. Although hedgerows are not an ecosystem as such they do provide vital habitats and support many ecosystem services. Hedgerows contribute to providing functions including promoting soil health and reducing water runoff, habitats and food for a diverse range of species including pollinators, provision of field boundaries whilst acting as pathways or green corridors, food and material resources, shelter from wind that reduces soil erosion and organic carbon storage. Within the UK in 2019 the Climate Change Committee (CCC) advocated increasing hedgerows alongside other methods of carbon capture. In the report Net Zero: The UK’s contribution to stopping global warming it recommended planting 200 000 km of hedgerows and a pilot subsidy scheme is due to start before 2022. This chapter explores the benefits and feasibility of using hedgerows as NbS for carbon capture to reduce biodiversity decline and improve human health. There is also some discussion of the possibility to engage citizen scientists in hedgerow monitoring and management.
... This classically illustrates how support for and enthusiasm of NbS both politically and within civic society can be thwarted and progress stalled by bureaucratic systems and practices. There are also changes in associated infrastructure that are required for the full implementation of some NbS that need acknowledging -NbS is not a magic bullet -as Nelson et al (2020) caution. ...
Both authors are originally from the UK. Naomi lives and works in the Netherlands and Alex is working in Thailand. During the Covid-19 pandemic they were in conservation using an online chat platform. They both, independently, studied the Telessaúde Support Foundation of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul distance learning course. This massive open online course (MOOC) is designed for undergraduate or graduate students, health professionals, and any individuals who are interested in the topic of planetary health. It was created with the belief that education is a human right; to be free and accessible to all. Available at: https:// www.ufrgs.br/telessauders/documentos/step_by_step.pdf
... This classically illustrates how support for and enthusiasm of NbS both politically and within civic society can be thwarted and progress stalled by bureaucratic systems and practices. There are also changes in associated infrastructure that are required for the full implementation of some NbS that need acknowledging -NbS is not a magic bullet -as Nelson et al (2020) caution. ...
An introduction the planetary health background and how bioethics has developed to include ethical considerations of all bio or living organisms.
... This classically illustrates how support for and enthusiasm of NbS both politically and within civic society can be thwarted and progress stalled by bureaucratic systems and practices. There are also changes in associated infrastructure that are required for the full implementation of some NbS that need acknowledging -NbS is not a magic bullet -as Nelson et al (2020) caution. ...
Bioethics is the love of life (Macer, 1998), and is the construction of all the decisions that we make across the entire planet. This collection of writings involving bioethical deliberations of situations, actions, events and policies that affect human wellbeing and fitness of the environment may at times appear to value more people in positions of authority for policy making, but it is the accumulated individual choices and actions that shape our planet. The way forward to align both improvements in human wellbeing whilst safeguarding all life and the natural environment are less subjects for debate which divides and polarizes opinion but should catalyse discussion and dialogue that unites parties. Many of the readers of this book will not be in positions of direct responsibility to make difficult policy decisions. However, we can all contribute to this discussion, and increasingly we can see that in many countries citizens can exert influence at different levels of governance and advocate for all stakeholders, and thus promote more ethical decision making.
The term “Planetary Health” has arisen within the last decade, and could be viewed as just another buzz word, but it clearly signifies concern for the wellbeing of Earth itself and by implication that includes all within the biosphere. Although the recognition that the natural environment has significant impact on human health has been voiced for at least thirty years since the WHO Commission on Health and 5 Planetary Health and Bioethics Environment (1992) published their report Our planet, our health. Yet declines in biodiversity, rising average global temperatures, soil degradation, deforestation, ocean acidification etc. etc. have continued unabated. Indeed, the human population alone has increased by more than 50% since that report was published.
There are diverse causes, impacts and approaches to improve both human health and the wellbeing of the living natural systems we are an integral part of. This book contains a selection of writings that reflect this diversity. As Sam Myers (2021) of the Planetary Health Alliance says, “It is not just climate change; It is everything change.” This is reminiscent of the WHO (1992) report that identified population, urbanization, poverty, resource use, macroeconomic frameworks, food production and agricultural systems, water management, industrialization and energy generation and consumption as all impacting on human health. To address this diversity there are contributions in this volume from writers around the world many of whom have extensive experience. Collectively they reflect a breadth of expertise including industry, governmental and academia – medical ethicists, environmentalists, education workers, energy researchers, agriculturists and health professionals. The collection in this book sheds some light onto a range of issues and makes some insightful recommendations for workable ways forward, that include ethical implications necessary to fully engage the actors involved. The initial chapters of this text include a transcript of an online discussion between two graduates from an online planetary health course. The second is a call for action on human population control, which in the authors opinion is often omitted or glossed over in debate and there is little policy directly addressing the fact that overpopulation puts enormous strain on natural resources and the environment. These two chapters give some insight into how some very different, but typical members of the public, perceive both planetary health issues and bioethics. The format of the remaining collection of essays, case studies and papers is divided into four sections: Bioethical principles; People and the environment; Hazards from the environment; and Moving forward.
... This classically illustrates how support for and enthusiasm of NbS both politically and within civic society can be thwarted and progress stalled by bureaucratic systems and practices. There are also changes in associated infrastructure that are required for the full implementation of some NbS that need acknowledging -NbS is not a magic bullet -as Nelson et al (2020) caution. ...
... In this report, we will give an overview of the status of nature-based solutions in the (Nelson et al., 2020). ...
The world is currently facing a biodiversity and climate crisis which are globally interlinked. Nature-based solutions (NBS), defined as “actions to protect, sustainably manage, and restore natural and modified ecosystems that address societal challenges effectively and adaptively, simultaneously benefiting people and
nature” is part of the solution to these challenges. Here we give a status overview of nature-based solutions in the Nordic countries, obtained within the S-ITUATION project1 focusing on 1) what is the current status of research on NBS in the Nordic countries? 2) what policy framework(s) exist for NBS in the Nordic countries? 3) what challenges do Nordic countries experience in the process of mainstreaming NBS? 4) what key examples of projects implementing NBS exist in the Nordic countries? We have done this using several approaches: 1) a review of the academic
literature, providing insights on the status of research on NBS in the Nordic countries; 2) a grey literature review in each Nordic country, to describe the policy framework for NBS and practical implementation of NBS projects across the Nordic countries; 3) compilation of a Nordic NBS case projects catalogue, which contains implemented case projects from each Nordic country, using NBS in all major ecosystems: terrestrial (forests and agricultural land), freshwater, coastal and marine, to show the breadth of NBS used in the Nordic countries, 4) Nordic NBS
stakeholder consultations.
Research on NBS across the Nordics includes several research initiatives. Currently the most central research initiatives are the Nordic Council of Ministers programme on NBS, which is a focused four-year programme. Many Nordic universities and research institutes are also involved in different research projects focusing on or including NBS and there is an exponential interest from researchers in this area. Most of these research projects are targeting NBS in urban areas. In a structured
peer-review of scientific publications using the term ‘nature-based solutions’, 64 research papers were found related to the Nordic countries. These studies varied from large-scale ecosystem-based approaches to small-scale NBS. Most of the studies assessed the NBS functions in relation to biophysical qualities, such as water retention capacity, flood risk reduction, health benefits and biodiversity contribution, but there were also studies focusing on potential economic benefits from NBS.
Regarding policy frameworks it is evident that these are at different stages of development when it comes to mainstreaming the concept of NBS into policy across the Nordics. Norway and Sweden have adopted the term to a larger degree than
Denmark, Finland and Iceland. Still, all five countries conserve, restore and work actively on developing sustainable use of nature, but use other terms (e.g., ‘bluegreen infrastructures or solutions’, ‘restoration’, or ‘ecosystem services’) in their policies and guidelines.
NBS governance and implementation is an area that is currently advancing rapidly. At the same time, there are still several challenges as well as also opportunities for using NBS to mitigate and adapt to climate change, protect biodiversity and ensure human well-being. Regarding challenges and gaps, we divide these into 1) natural scientific and technical knowledge gaps, 2) economic shortcomings, 3) regulatory, governance, and policy challenges, and 4) weak stakeholder collaboration. In the
project we have identified 54 key examples of projects implementing NBS in the Nordic countries. Most of these cases were related to freshwater, followed by urban/ artificial NBS. The number of implemented NBS projects has increased, especially in
the last couple of years. Our key messages and recommendations for future mainstreaming of NBS are: 1) clear political prioritization is needed to mainstream NBS into policy and practice, 2) appropriate institutional structures, procedures and policy instruments at all governance levels are essential to facilitate the implementation of NBS, 3) better funding structures for NBS are needed, 4) we need to develop common standards, long-term monitoring and better cost-benefit evaluations of NBS, and 5) the knowledge base in all phases of NBS projects needs to be strengthened.
... This classically illustrates how support for and enthusiasm of NbS both politically and within civic society can be thwarted and progress stalled by bureaucratic systems and practices. There are also changes in associated infrastructure that are required for the full implementation of some NbS that need acknowledging -NbS is not a magic bullet -as Nelson et al (2020) caution. ...
Modern society derives its strength from the design of institutions and technological instruments. Expert systems and advances in science require a critical analysis. In our age, the imprint of culture is apparent in the tools that make possible the present way of life. It is important to emphasize that technology is meant to serve the public good – a moral claim that must extend to global health – which is a realization that is brought about by the coronavirus crisis. Vulnerable communities suffer from the lack of means to respond to the present public health emergency. The gaps are clear. By tracing the background of the development of modern civilizations, the hegemonic order of the world is revealed. This study explores how integrating modern technological systems into the moral and socio-economic dimension of the community can empower people in a post-pandemic world.
... Despite considerable success of developing NbS approach (e.g., EU's Horizon 2020-funded NbS projects [16]), there are still some limitations of the existing NbS projects. Many of them lack broad public participation, are influenced by institutional path dependence, and take years to function appropriately [17]- [19]. Specifically, for NbS interventions that mitigate urban river floods, trade-offs are often made between the interest of humans and non-human biota. ...
Nature-based Solutions (NbS) gain popularity worldwide in the context of urban flood risk management. NbS for urban flood protection restore floodplains and lakes/ponds to retain periodic flooding and adopt green infrastructures to facilitate stormwater runoff. They are proven to be effective and able to provide co-benefits for human wellbeing. However, projects to implement NbS are often hampered by institutional challenges and a lack of specific knowledge. The flood catastrophes in European and Asian cities in June 2021 have shown that despite decade-long warnings by scientists, adaptive measures had not been implemented in time. We, therefore, make a plea for combining NbS and the River Culture Concept, an eco-social approach to mitigate the environmental crisis in riverscapes. River Culture recognizes pulsing hydrology as a baseline for biological and cultural diversity and encourages 'learning from the river' and 'living in the rhythm of the waters.' The aim is to support NbS interventions to improve human-river relationships and transform River Culture Concept into actions. We first compare NbS and River Culture Concept in principles, then produce a list of evaluation indicators with River Culture tenets serving as criteria. We furtherly use the tool to analyze three selected NbS examples in China, Germany, and the U.S.A. The results demonstrate a limited consideration of more comprehensive biodiversity benefits from floodplains and a disparity between using natural flow regimes and meeting human needs in current NbS approaches. Last, we conclude specific sustainability lessons with the combination of NbS and River Culture Concept in urban flood management. 766 ECOCITY BUILDERS
... 11,12 It can enhance ecosystem resilience and coordinate environmental and economic developments. 13,14 However, the unreasonable economic growth and extreme climate have caused increasing degradation in natural ecosystems over the last decades, seriously threatening sustainable development. 15 Hence, the introduction of NbS into natural ecosystem management is much needed for better conservation and rehabilitation. ...
We investigated a nature-based solution (NbS) via incorporating biocrust into alfalfa-maize intercropping system to test carbon sequestration in seriously eroded agricultural soils. Field investigation showed that the NbS (moss-dominated biocrust + intercropping) massively lowered surface soil erosion by 94.5% and soil carbon (C) & nitrogen (N) loss by 94.7% and 96.8% respectively, while promoting rainwater interception by 82.2% relative to bare land (CK). There generally existed positive interactions between biocrust and cropping in the integrated standing biodiversity system. Enhanced plant biomass input into soils substantially promoted soil fungal community diversity & abundance under NbS (p<0.05). This enabled NbS to evidently improve soil macroaggregate proportion and mean weight diameter. Critically, topsoil carbon storage was increased by 2.5% and 10.7%, compared with CK and pure intercropping (p<0.05). Conclusively, the standing diversity under such NbS fostered soil C sequestration via water interception and plant-soil-microbe interactions in degraded agricultural soils.
... Those who receive the upstream benefits are often in different communities than those impacted by the land allocation or the payment required to fund the interventions, meaning that the benefits and the costs of establishing NbS may not be spatially equitable. Thus, there is a need to find appropriate mechanisms to improve cross-level and cross-jurisdictional coordination (Nelson et al., 2020). ...
1 Key messages • Despite the growing interest in the use of nature-based solutions (NbS) to adapt to climate change, little is known about how to effectively scale up such measures to achieve wider benefits for society, biodiversity and the climate. • NbS planning should thus seek to explicitly model cumulative and combined effects to inform the design of projects to address issues involving scales of time, landscapes, and jurisdictions involved. • NbS designs should set quantitative targets and create monitoring systems to systematically measure outcomes and report on progress. • NbS designs should implement "no regrets" options-that is, they should devise strategies to maximize positive outcomes and minimize negative outcomes in the short and long terms and irrespective of climate change. This is particularly important in light of the longer time scales that NbS often entail, the time pressures to adapt fast enough to reduce risk, and the desire of politicians facing short elective cycles to respond to constituents' needs.
... Overall, better understanding is required on the relative roles of different landscape characteristics, and the location, size and distribution of implementations in relation to their impact on catchment processes. Such knowledge is both important for cost-benefit analysis for broader uptake and for optimal performance (Cohen-Shacham et al., 2019;Nelson et al., 2020). Consequences of poor placement can then be avoided e.g. ...
Water resources management during drought is a significant challenge worldwide, particularly for upland areas. Additionally, variations in water availability are becoming more extreme with climate change. Nature Based Solutions (NBS) e.g. Runoff Attenuation Features (RAFs) could provide an alternative to hard-engineering. Using more natural processes, flow pathways are intercepted and attenuated in features during wet periods, increasing infiltration opportunity and thus water availability for use later. NBS research has primarily focused on flood mitigation, but little is known about low flow impacts; knowledge is required on where and at what scale to implement NBS. To explore these questions, we used a physically-based catchment model (MIKE SHE) integrated with a hydraulic river model (MIKE 11) to evaluate scenarios with varying RAF volumes and locations. We applied this to an intensively monitored upland Scottish catchment (0.9 km²) where 40 RAFs (∼2m³ storage each) were installed for low flow enhancement. Model results showed installed RAFs increase recharge (∼0.1%), groundwater contribution to streamflow (∼4%) and low flows (∼1%) and reduce high (∼5%) and mean flows (∼2%), suggesting RAFs could be used to mitigate extreme flows. The scenarios revealed that RAF location (primarily soil type) and scale (total storage volume and spread of features) were both important. Doubling installed RAF volumes increased impact on low flows by ∼25% and high flows by ∼40%, although lower additional benefits were predicted with further storage increases. RAFs had greater impact in freely-draining soils than poorly-draining, however distributing the same storage volume across many smaller RAFs over greater areas (both soil types) provided the largest effect. Absolute changes observed were relatively small, and given model uncertainty, should be treated with caution. Nevertheless, the direction of change was clear and given ecological systems and water supply rely on small margins of change, even slight increases in low flows will likely be beneficial. © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
... Their low uptake suggests difficulties in planning and decision-making. First, NBS typically cross both geographic and sectoral jurisdictional boundaries and affect diverse interests as they usually occur in a landscape context and claim land that is not freely available (Moss, 2007;Nelson et al., 2020;Seddon et al., 2020). Therefore, the planning of NBS normally involves multiple actors with different views and interests regarding the purpose, design, location, and costs of intervention, which can lead to trade-offs and conflicts (Nesshöver et al., 2016). ...
To address societal challenges in river landscapes, various options are conceivable that differ in the degree of adopting nature-based solutions (NBS) and the respective impacts on people and nature. Multi-criteria evaluation (MCE) can aid participatory deliberations about the performance and significance of such options. However, little experience and evidence exist from the application of participatory MCE in planning NBS in river landscapes. This study aims to expand the understanding of individual and collaborative judgments of agency representatives about river development options with varying levels of NBS interventions. A process tracing approach with a rigorous participatory MCE for four alternatives to develop an exemplary river in Germany is adopted, as well as weighted linear aggregation, descriptive statistics, principal component analysis, and decision tree modelling for data analysis. The results reveal a wide agreement among participants on the positive impacts of NBS on biodiversity and water quality. Participants also tended to judge those ecological dimensions as more important than non-ecological ones. The rankings of alternatives differed when elicited individually but seemed to converge during the deliberation process. Overall, the results indicate a relative preference of participants for medium NBS interventions, but also shed light on potential implementation hurdles. The study closes by proposing key questions to consider for MCE of NBS.
... There continues to be scholarly interest in indicators and frameworks (Shah, 2020), models, and tools (Sahani et al. 2019;Kumar, 2021). The creation of governance systems (Nelson et al. 2020), principles and strategies (Cohen-Shacham et al. 2019;Toxopeus and Polzin 2021), and pathways (Davies et al. 2021) of NBS is also an ongoing task. Many studies focus exclusively on the use of NBSs to address issue-specific cases such as water resources management (Boano et al. 2020;Ghafourian et al. 2021), disaster risk reduction (Jesús et al. 2019;Kumar, 2020;Kumar, 2021), sustainable urban planning (Dorst et al. 2019;Pedersen Zari et al. 2019), air quality (Prigioniero et al. 2021), and land restoration (Barbagli et al. 2019;Wong and Ogbonnaya 2021). ...
There is growing awareness that nature-based solutions (NBS) prevent negative effects and secure ecosystem services. However, the potential of NBS to provide intended benefits has not been rigorously assessed. Water, food, and energy (WFE) are essential for human well-being. This study highlights the importance of NBS in terms of water, food, and energy. A set of on-site NBS that includes permeable pavements, plant microbial fuel cells, bio-filtration basins, and rain gardens is used to determine the contribution of NBS to the environmental and economic development of urban environments. The results of this study show that NBSs benefit an urban environment in terms of water treatment, stormwater retention, food production and energy generation, carbon sequestration, pollination, sedimentation retention, and cultural services dimension. This research highlights an urgent need for the integration of water, food, and energy plans to ensure that NBSs contribute to the environment and for the conservation of ecosystem services.
... This also involves social learning and empowerment at the level of society, expressed in dynamic institutions and flexible management policies [48]. However, hybrid infrastructure designs will likely not be perceived as functionally equivalent and integrated systems until they have been thoroughly tested with the same level of analytical processes, performance standards, and assessment criteria as more conventional infrastructure [49]. ...
Urban infrastructure will require transformative changes to adapt to changing disturbance patterns. We ask what new opportunities hybrid infrastructure-built environments coupled with landscape-scale biophysical structures and processes-offer for building different layers of resilience critical for dealing with increased variation in the frequency, magnitude and different phases of climate-related disturbances. With its more diverse components and different internal logics, hybrid infrastructure opens up alternative and additive ways of building resilience for and through critical infrastructure, by providing a wider range of functions and responses. Second, hybrid infrastructure points toward greater opportunities for ongoing (re)design at the landscape level, where structure and function can be constantly renegotiated and recombined.
... Given that NBS are suitable for a range of applications and offer numerous potential benefits, it is necessary to agree on the urban challenges and priority problems to tackle before collaboratively determining, implementing and managing solutions (Nelson et al., 2020). This entails the inclusion of multiple stakeholders' perceptions. ...
Climate change is affecting cities worldwide. Accordingly, cities are required to find sustainable solutions to tackle climate change’s effects, designing bottom-up policies to enhance their success. The involvement of stakeholders plays a central role in the definition of appropriate policies to tackle the challenges posed to cities by climate change. Nature-based solutions (NBS) are increasingly proposed to adapt to and mitigate the adverse effects of climate change. This study aims to assess the coherence of the policies emerging from stakeholders’ perceptions of urban climate challenges and their preferred NBS to tackle them. Indeed, it considers whether departing from different urban climate challenges, stakeholders’ choices present a coherent articulation between priority interventions, proposed solutions and expected benefits. Using a survey applied to two Portuguese cities and the chi-squared automatic interaction detector (CHAID) algorithm, we analyse the answers provided by stakeholders. The stakeholders’ perceptions and preferences were not significantly influenced by their hierarchical position in their institutions, their city’s location and socioeconomic setting. Heatwaves and temperature rise together with drought and water scarcity are identified as future urban challenges in Portugal. Priority interventions, as well as preferred NBS and their expected benefits, are addressed. The results show that stakeholders may make decisions that form a coherent policy, in which acknowledgment of climate change’s effects interconnects with related priority interventions, suitable NBS and their benefits.
... The urgent need to mitigate severe water erosion and landsliding, especially in the current context of a changing climate and biodiversity loss, calls for an improved understanding of nature-based solutions and their efficacy in restoring disturbed heterogeneous landscapes in mountainous regions (Nelson et al. 2020). Determining the hotspots of soil erosion is a first step towards improving mitigation strategies and guiding the implementation of effective ecological restoration measures. ...
High mountain environments are among the most fragile on Earth. Due to anthropogenic disturbances and the exposure to extreme weather events, the rates of soil erosion have recently been accelerating, resulting in ecological degradation and geological hazards. Ecological restoration of mountains and an improved understanding of nature-based solutions to mitigate land degradation is therefore of utmost urgency. Identifying hotspots of soil erosion is a first step towards improving mitigation strategies. A promising methodology to identify erosion hotspots is sediment source fingerprinting, that differentiates the properties of soil from different sources, using signatures such as elemental geochemistry or radionuclides. However, in areas with complex lithologies or shallow and poorly developed soils, geochemical fingerprints allow only a rough distinction between erosion hotspots. In this opinion paper, we explore the relevance of environmental DNA (eDNA) that originates from plant litter and fixes onto fine soil particles, as a targeted sediment fingerprinting method sensitive to vegetation that could potentially allow the identification of erosion hotspots and their relative importance from sedimentary deposits. Pioneering studies indicate that eDNA allows not only the detection of specific vegetation communities, but also the identification of individual plant species. Supported by the increasing availability and quality of vegetation maps and eDNA reference libraries, we argue that sediment source fingerprinting using eDNA from plant litter, will evolve into a valuable method to identify hotspots of soil erosion and allow stakeholders to prioritize areas where ecological restoration is necessary in high mountain environments.
... In rethinking many aspects of life in the city, citizen engagement and the co-creation of NBS may contribute to a paradigm shift in society's relationship with nature, in line with the promotion of multisectoral and multidimensional approaches towards healthier cities [98][99][100]. In the context of a 'living' framework, citizen engagement constitutes a critical aspect of the development of NBS so that NBS reach their full potential, as well as the advancement of the science and practice of NBS not only as a scientific rethinking [101,102], but also as part of an ecology of knowledges where participation is seen as both a means and an end. Data Availability Statement: The initial URBiNAT guideline categories for citizen engagement emerged from the systematization of guidelines contained in written contributions as part of an URBiNAT-deliverable D1.2-Handbook on the theoretical and methodological foundations of the project [48]. ...
Participation and citizen engagement are fundamental elements in urban regeneration and in the deployment of nature-based solutions (NBS) to advance sustainable urban development. Various limitations inherent to participatory processes concerning NBS for inclusive urban regeneration have been addressed, and lessons have been learnt. This paper investigates participation and urban regeneration and focuses on the development of guidelines for citizen engagement and the co-creation of NBS in the H2020 URBiNAT project. The methodology first involves the collection of scientific and practical input on citizen engagement from a variety of stakeholders, such as researchers and practitioners, to constitute a corpus of qualitative data. This input is then systematized into guideline categories and serves as the basis for a deeper analysis with researchers, experts, and practitioners, both inside and outside URBiNAT, and in dialogue with other cases of participatory NBS implementation. The results highlight an ‘ecology of knowledges’ based on a ‘living’ framework, which aims to address the specific needs of various segments of citizens and to match citizen engagement to the participatory cultures of cities. Implications and further research are also discussed, with a special focus on the implementation of NBS. The conclusions broaden the research context to include the refinement of the NBS approach, with participation being seen as both a means and an end.
... The best management practices in the drylands are gaining popularity among stakeholders as are increasingly being recognized as nature-based solutions. In the USA and Europe, these practices support ecosystem services and are often related to reducing and diffusing loads of nutrients from agriculture (Bouzouidja et al., 2021), flood mitigation (Nelson et al., 2020). Given that more farmers are using agro-chemicals, these aspects of BMPs need a better understanding in the Indian context. ...
CONTEXT: A host of best water and soil management practices (BMPs) hold promise in addressing water scarcity
and land degradation to enable sustainable crop intensification in smallholder farming systems.
OBJECTIVE
This study quantifies the effect of BMPs on crop productivity, income, water saving and water balance components
and identifies gaps for future research.
METHODS: This paper synthesizes the performance of BMPs and the existing data gap by reviewing 108 published
studies from the Indian subcontinent which capture a diverse range of rainfall and cropping systems.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: In situ conservation measures helped enhance crop yields by 200–1000 kg/ha,
reduced cost of cultivation and enhanced incomes by US$ 10–200/ha/year. The BMPs were helpful in enabling
annual water saving in the range of 50 mm to 300 mm by either conserving residual soil moisture or saving
irrigation water resulting in enhanced water productivity
... Although the importance of NbS has been widely recognized around the world, there have been limited studies on the governance aspects of NbS (Albert et al., 2019;Nelson et al., 2020;Nesshöver et al., 2017). The majority of existing studies focus on possible plans for NbS in European countries (Faivre et al., 2017;Frantzeskaki, 2019;Nesshöver et al., 2017), especially in the urban context. ...
Nature-based solutions (NbS) are recognized under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Convention on Biological Diversity. This relatively new concept has become a key element in strategies for green recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic. NbS consist of a range of measures that address various societal challenges, including climate change, natural disasters, and water security, by combining human well-being and biodiversity benefits. Although the importance of NbS has been widely recognized, existing studies on aspects of their governance are limited and mainly focus on NbS in European countries. There is little relevant research in other regions, including Asia. This study aimed to explore challenges for NbS governance by analyzing the development and implementation of NbS in Asia. We focused on NbS in the fields of climate change mitigation and adaptation, disaster risk reduction, and infrastructure. In these three fields, NbS are linked to climate security issues and have been widely implemented in Asian countries. This analysis identified the challenges for NbS governance for countries at different stages of economic development, and for developing measures for NbS with different institutions and actors. It recognizes the importance of a framework that matches the need for NbS with relevant institutions and actors at various scales and in various sectors. Guidelines are required to integrate NbS into strategies and policies at national and local levels and also into international cooperation.
... Despite recent advancements and applications as innovative responses to promote adaptation and build resilience to tackle numerous environmental challenges, the benefits of NbS are not distributed equitably across social groups (e.g., wealthy vs. low income communities and among racial groups), time (e.g., present vs. future generations), or space (e.g., upstream vs. downstream; Nelson et al., 2020). Inequities may also exist in the process of prioritizing, designing, and managing water resource projects. ...
The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) manages hundreds of reservoirs and thousands of miles of navigation channels that provide invaluable flood control, commercial transport of materials, water supply, recreation, and stream flow regulation. This capability is being threatened by the continued occurrence of large‐scale wildfires across the western United States. The wildfires damage watersheds in part by denuding landscapes, reducing infiltration rates and increasing runoff rates, thereby dramatically increasing erosion potential of denuded slopes, destabilizing stream channels, increasing the infilling potential of reservoirs and, hence, reducing their capacity. The increased erosion rates highlight the need to develop innovative solutions to reduce erosion of watersheds laid bare after wildfires engulf the area. The Santa Clara Pueblo in northern New Mexico extends from the top of the eastern Jemez Mountains to the floodplains of the Rio Grande River. The Pueblo designed and constructed thousands of structures built from natural materials, consistent with Engineering with Nature principles for erosion control incorporating low‐cost and readily available materials such as logs, mulch, vegetation, and local rock to stabilize highly erodible parts of the watershed. The watersheds where these natural structures were constructed were monitored after construction to assess their effectiveness, guiding a series of recommendations for broader implementation. As part of a continued emphasis on updating USACE engineering guidance, research and development funding has been focused on developing sustainable and resilient project designs using natural materials like those implemented by the Santa Clara Pueblo. This paper focuses on the innovative EWN‐based watershed stabilization practices that were implemented in the upper section of this wildfire affected canyon and tributary streams. Recommendations for future implementation based on lessons learned from this project are also provided. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
... Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) are proliferating in response to challenges of climate change. The paper on 'Challenges to Realizing the Potential of Nature' by Nelson et al. [26] identified challenges and emerging responses to advancing the science and practice of NBS. Their analysis of findings in the literature signal that NBS may not entail quick solutions, and to reach their full potential will require a fundamental rethinking of society's relationship with nature. ...
A leading edge facet of the transition to sustainability is the development, implementation and extended use of new technologies and related system innovations. The two open issues, volumes 45 and 49, of Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability journal, are focused on a set of review pieces that evaluate a broad range of these emerging technologies and innovations and document how they are influencing the capacity to achieve the world’s sustainability goals. The advance of these varied new approaches and methods collectively present a period of dramatic transformation that illustrate the dawning of a new era of technological advance much in the same way that the advent of the steam engine, mechanization and mass production changed everyday life, economic structure, and human–environment interaction in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. These technologies and innovations connect with fundamental production and management questions within a range of carbon emission reduction technologies, land management and agricultural production strategies, data and information management, and material flows and logistics. For each, their current status and impact, relevant access and equity issues, and prospects for future development are discussed. It is our hope that the two issues will help to provoke new research questions and collaborative efforts around the world and shed light on future direction of sustainable technological interventions.
Wetlands and reservoirs are important water flow and storage regulators in a river basin; therefore, they can play a crucial role in mitigating flood and hydrological drought risks. Despite the advancement of river basin theory and modeling, our knowledge is still limited about the extent that these two regulators could have in performing such a role, especially under future climate extremes. To improve our understanding, we first developed a framework coupling wetlands and reservoir operations with a semi-spatially explicit hydrological model and then applied it in a case study involving a large river basin in Northeast China. The projection of future floods and hydrological droughts was performed using this framework during different periods (near-future: 2026–2050, mid-century: 2051–2075, and end-century: 2076–2100) under five future climate change scenarios. We found that the risk of future floods and hydrological droughts can vary across different periods, in particular, will experience relatively large increases and slight decreases. This large river basin will experience longer duration, larger peak flows and volume, and enhanced flashiness flood events than the historical period. Simultaneously, the hydrological droughts will be much more frequent with longer duration and more serious deficit. Therefore, the risk of floods and droughts will overall increase further under future climate change even under the combined influence of reservoirs and wetlands. These findings highlight the hydrological regulation function of wetlands and reservoirs and attest that the combining of wetlands with reservoir operation cannot fully eliminate the increasing future flood and drought risks. To improve a river basin’s resilience to the risks under future climate change, we argue that implementation of wetland restoration and development of accurate forecasting systems for effective reservoir operation are of great importance. Furthermore, this study demonstrated a wetland-reservoir integrated modeling and assessment framework that is conducive to risk assessment of floods and hydrological droughts, which can be used for other river basins in the world.
Advancing social equity has been implicitly and explicitly central to water resources policy for decades. Yet, equity remains largely outside of standard water resources planning and management practices. Inclusion of equity within water resources infrastructure is inhibited by barriers including an incomplete conceptual understanding of equity, a perceived lack of quantitative and qualitative equity metrics, unclear connections between equity and standard project planning frameworks, and the absence of concrete examples. To facilitate greater practical inclusion of social equity in water resources practices, we describe equity relative to dimensions of distribution, procedure, and recognition and identify metrics associated with each. We then map these dimensions of equity onto different stages of a water resources project life cycle. We discuss how inequities are often perpetuated by current approaches and highlight case studies that promote one or more of the facets of equity. Rather than providing a prescriptive solution to “achieve” equity within water resources practices, we emphasize the need for contextualized approaches that include pragmatic steps toward more equitable practices and outcomes.
The current state of nature is concerning. The levels of biodiversity are rapidly decreasing; existing policies sketch ambitious objectives, but their effectiveness is relatively low. This is caused by a combination of three main elements: physical elements, planning processes, and psychological reasons. In dealing with these deeply rooted problems, following qualities are missing: attention to planning and design in nature-based solution policies, the gap between plan and execution of plans, and the transformation to eco-leadership of young people. In four consecutive years, research design studios have been executed, in which students collaboratively design eco-solutions for complex and urgent problems. The core subjects of each of these studios were four interlinked aspects of eco-design: (1) designing in parallel at master plan and concrete project level, (2) planning, designing and building within a short period, (3) the emergence and succession of ecosystems on site, and (4) ecological leadership practice. By investigating these aspects year after year, designing integrated and coherent solutions, and realizing these solutions in built form, an ecological spatial framework emerged within which smaller projects were and will be embedded. This way, the ecosystem on campus grows, matures, and develops as a self-regulating system. Moreover, new leadership emerged amongst the young participants in the research design studios.
This paper argues that acknowledging the wide diversity of current recreational practices on English wetlands enables governance practitioners and site managers to appreciate the full extent of contemporary human engagements with these watery ecosystems. These insights can assist those tasked with managing wetland resources to develop more inclusive and sustainable development plans to support a wide range of actors whose connections to wetland spaces are important for their health, well‐being and sense of self. Enabling sustainable future uses of wetlands will involve recognising and engaging with differential articulations of place‐making within these diverse waterscapes which themselves are in a constant state of transition. This calls our attention to the dynamic nature of wetlands, and the ways in which place‐making in these spaces shifts and adapts to the changing topography and biota within these waterscapes; each encounter with the space is slightly reconfigured and recast every time. Wetlands’ liminality also extends to the diverse and often esoteric uses of these ecosystems for recreation in its most encompassing sense; as leisure spaces, places of renewal and as locations of place‐making practices. Drawing upon Barbara Bender’s exploration of landscape as phenomenological palimpsest, this paper utilises empirical interview data drawn from a recent research project, ‘WetlandLIFE’, to explore how far contemporary human uses of wetlands engage with processes of restoration and reanimation. Making use of the different leisure narratives of the research participants across five English wetland sites, the paper explores the ways in which ‘place’ is differentially interpreted, enabled and enacted in these saturated spaces. These practises and performances can be functional, prosaic engagements with wetlands; painting, walking, photographing, sitting, reflecting. They can also be anarchic, counter‐cultural and ‘delinquent’; wild‐camping, raving, poaching, partying. The wide spectrum of behaviours and attitudes catalogued reveal the contested use and value of these waterscapes in contemporary contexts.
This paper reports on the process and results of stakeholder focus groups conducted as part of a larger multi-year, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration-sponsored, transdisciplinary coastal resilience research project in the northern US Gulf of Mexico. The focus groups’ purpose was to better understand local coastal professionals’ and decision-makers’ (e.g., natural resource managers, community planners, extension and outreach specialists) views on mitigation options for coastal hazards (e.g., storm surge, nuisance flooding, sea level rise) including use of natural and nature-based features (NNBF; e.g., sand dunes, living shorelines, oyster reefs). Overall, results revealed that participants were aware of various mitigation options, had favorable views toward NNBF infrastructure, and perceived five major benefits and six major barriers or challenges with such approaches. Designing and implementing NNBF infrastructure was perceived as complex and requiring several types of ecological and socioeconomic considerations and information for decision-making. We conclude with a discussion of findings, practical implications for coastal resilience planning and management, and recommendations for future research.
Nowadays many cities around the world are affected by climate change consequences that require them to adopt resilient risk mitigation solutions. ‘Nature-based solutions (NBS)’ can be an effective measure to help resolve climate adaptation and develop resilient and livable cities. However, various types of barriers limit the adoption and implementation of these solutions. This paper, developed within the framework of the Nature4Cities (N4C) Horizon 2020 project, aims at identifying a strategy that can help municipalities with NBS implementation, analyzing the main barriers and opportunities for their exploitation of these innovative green solutions. Through four case studies, a methodology was developed and presented herein which can support municipalities to implement NBS in new urban developments, consisting of the organization of training activities to support stakeholders throughout NBS implementation. An overview will be provided on barriers to NBS effectiveness and stakeholders involved, as well as insights on (and understanding of) the main solutions and tools developed within the N4C Project. The results demonstrate that the complexity of the issue and knowledge-related barriers are the most dominant limitations to consider when cities plan the adoption of NBS. This highlights why an investment in training and educational programs is suggested, which could potentially result in an increase in municipal, regional, and national awareness about the benefits of NBS and encourage their uptake.
The paper contributes to the literature on urban forestry and urban sustainability by filling gaps in the knowledge on viable business, financing, and governance models for nature-based solutions. Through two case studies, we provide empirical illustrations for business models based on nature-based solutions that are both viable and scalable. We confront the financial and governance challenges identified in the literature with empirical evidence that is grounded in a specific urban territory (the cities of Montreal and Brussels) and a well-identified type of nature-based solutions (the sourcing of sustainable materials from natural local ecosystems). Given the relative novelty and absence of comprehensive scientific accounts about the emergence, current state and future potential of the local wood movement, another important contribution of this paper is to characterize local wood businesses.
There is growing awareness that ‘nature-based solutions' (NbS) can help to protect us from climate change impacts while slowing further warming, supporting biodiversity and securing ecosystem services. However, the potential of NbS to provide the intended benefits has not been rigorously assessed. There are concerns over their reliability and cost-effectiveness compared to engineered alternatives, and their resilience to climate change. Trade-offs can arise if climate mitigation policy encourages NbS with low biodiversity value, such as afforestation with non-native monocultures. This can result in maladaptation, especially in a rapidly changing world where biodiversity-based resilience and multi-functional landscapes are key. Here, we highlight the rise of NbS in climate policy—focusing on their potential for climate change adaptation as well as mitigation—and discuss barriers to their evidence-based implementation. We outline the major financial and governance challenges to implementing NbS at scale, highlighting avenues for further research. As climate policy turns increasingly towards greenhouse gas removal approaches such as afforestation, we stress the urgent need for natural and social scientists to engage with policy makers. They must ensure that NbS can achieve their potential to tackle both the climate and biodiversity crisis while also contributing to sustainable development. This will require systemic change in the way we conduct research and run our institutions.
This article is part of the theme issue ‘Climate change and ecosystems: threats, opportunities and solutions’.
The U.S. highway system is an iconic example of civil infrastructure. Yet it also exemplifies the challenges of infrastructure sustainability. The American Society for Civil Engineers gave the American road infrastructure a grade of “D” since the roads “are often crowded, frequently in poor condition, chronically underfunded, and are becoming more dangerous.” In this paper, we seek to understand the intertwined social and technical processes that lead to this unsustainability by examining the U.S. highway system from the perspective of coupled infrastructure systems (CIS), a transdisciplinary framework that aims to analyze governance challenges of shared resources from a dynamic systems perspective. We use highways as a special example of the broader challenge of providing and maintaining the shared infrastructure of all types. Our analysis of historical data concludes that the unsustainability of highways as coupled infrastructure systems can be explained from dysfunctional information feedbacks.
Around the world today, the magnitude and rates of environmental, social, and economic change are undermining the sustainability of many rural societies that rely directly on natural resources for their livelihoods. Sustainable development efforts seek to promote livelihood adaptations that enhance food security and reduce social-ecological vulnerability, but these efforts are hampered by the difficulty of understanding the complexity and dynamism of rural livelihood systems. Disparate research avenues are strengthening our ability to grapple with complexity. But we are only just beginning to find ways to simultaneously account for problematic complexities, including multiscalar feedbacks in the ecosystems that that support livelihoods, the heterogeneous benefits garnered by different segments of society, and the complex contingencies that constrain people’s decisions and capacities to adapt. To provide a more nuanced analysis of the dynamics of transformation in rural livelihood systems, we identified key complementarities between four different research approaches, enabling us to integrate them in a novel research framework that can guide empirical and modeling research on livelihood adaptation. The framework capitalizes upon parallel concepts of sequentiality in (1) ecosystem services and (2) livelihood adaptation scholarship, then incorporates principles from (3) adaptation in social-ecological systems research to account for the dynamism inherent in these often rapidly-transforming systems. Lastly, we include advances in (4) agent-based modeling, which couples human decisions and land use change and provides tools to incorporate complex social-ecological feedbacks in simulation studies of livelihood adaptation. Here we describe the new Ecosystem Services—Livelihood Adaptation (ESLA) framework, explain how it links the contributing approaches, and illustrate its application with two case studies. We offer guidance for its implementation in empirical and modeling research, and conclude with a discussion of current challenges in sustainability science and the contributions that could be gained through research guided by the ESLA framework.
Urbanization deletes and degrades natural ecosystems, threatens biodiversity, and alienates people from the experience of nature. Nature-based solutions (NbS) that are inspired and supported by nature have the potential to deliver multifunctional environmental and social benefits to address these challenges in urban areas under context-specific conditions. NbS implementation often relies on a one-size-fits-all approach, although interventions that maximize one benefit (e.g., biodiversity conservation) may have no influence on, or even negatively affect, others (e.g., social justice). Furthermore, the current pathways from NbS to various benefits do not rely on a deep understanding of the underlying processes, prohibiting the identification of optimal solutions that maximize synergies across pathways. We present a comprehensive socio-ecological framework that addresses these issues by recognizing that cities are human-dominated environments that are foremost built and maintained to support humans. Our framework demonstrates how we can use experiments and niche species models to understand and predict where species will be and where people will be healthy and happy in a comparable manner. This knowledge can then be integrated into decision support tools that use optimization algorithms to understand trade-offs, identify synergies, and provide planners with the tools needed to tailor context-specific NbS to yield greener, more resilient cities with happier people and reduced inequality.
A growing body of research shows that healthy watersheds are a vital component of a wellfunctioning water supply infrastructure system. When green infrastructure is used to complement, substitute, or safeguard traditional gray infrastructure, it can achieve optimal service delivery and save water suppliers (and water customers) money. Main costributions of natural infrastructure are (1) better moderate sediment and nutrient fluxes and improve downstream water quality, (2) lower costs for water suppliers, (3) help mitigate the impacts of climate change and natural hazards, and (5) generate numerous co-benefits for local communities and society.
Despite substantial increases in the scope and magnitude of biodiversity conservation and ecological restoration, there remains ongoing degradation of natural resources that adversely affects both biodiversity and human well-being. Nature-based Solutions (NbS) can be an effective framework for reversing this trend, by increasing the alignment between conservation and sustainable development objectives. However, unless there is clarity on its evolution, definition and principles, and relationship with related approaches, it will not be possible to develop evidence-based standards and guidelines, or to implement, assess, improve and upscale NbS interventions globally. In order to address this gap, we present the definition and principles underpinning the NbS framework, recently adopted by the International Union for Conservation of Nature, and compare it to (1) the Ecosystem Approach that was the foundation for developing the NbS definitional framework, and (2) four specific ecosystem based approaches (Forest Landscape Restoration, Ecosystem-based Adaptation, Ecological Restoration and Protected Areas) that can be considered as falling under the NbS framework. Although we found substantial alignment between NbS principles and the principles of the other frameworks, three of the eight NbS principles stand out from other approaches: NbS can be implemented alone or in an integrated manner with other solutions ; NbS should be applied at a landscape scale; and, NbS are integral to the overall design of policies, measures and actions, to address societal challenges. Reversely, concepts such as adaptive management/governance, effectiveness , uncertainty, multi-stakeholder participation, and temporal scale are present in other frameworks but not captured at all or detailed enough in the NbS principles. This critical analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the NbS principles can inform the review and revision of principles supporting specific types of NbS (such as the approaches reviewed here), as well as serve as the foundation for the development of standards for the successful implementation of NbS.
Ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) to climate change is an approach claimed to deliver social benefits relevant to marginalized groups. Based on a structured literature review, we interrogate such claims, asking whether such approaches may (or may not) contribute to social change and, more specifically, empowerment. We present a review of the predominant meaning and interlinkages of the EbA and empowerment concepts, which shows that EbA pays insufficient attention to issues of empowerment and agency. On this basis, we discuss how an empowerment lens could be (better) integrated into the conceptualization of EbA, suggesting key dimensions through which this could be supported. We show that the emphasis on empowerment theory and the merits that it brings to the EbA literature are helpful, leading to a number of important questions to adaptation projects on the ground. Incorporating an empowerment lens leads to an increased consideration of issues of power more broadly, especially the way marginalized groups’ agency, access, and aspirations are conditioned by social structures that may prevent strategic adaptation choices. We conclude that EbA will facilitate empowerment better by explicitly considering how social benefits can emerge from the interplay between particular types of actions, marginalized people’s adaptive strategies, and their relational context.
Investment decisions about capital-intensive, long-lived infrastructure are challenging due to uncertainty about their future performance, particularly if the performance is sensitive to climate change. Such investments, like those made for water infrastructure, are rarely evaluated over their total operational lifetime, during which socio-economic and environmental changes can cause potential lock-ins and reduced options for future choices that lead to high costs to transfer to other options. We propose an economic evaluation framework to explore adaptation pathways, or sequences of strategic investments options, that can be implemented if needed due to changing conditions. A novel feature is the inclusion of “transfer costs” associated with a switch to alternative pathways to allow adaptive decision-making and to minimize the cost of adjustment over time. Implementing a pathway-driven approach represents a break with most institutional decision-making processes and can significantly improve decision-making under uncertainty compared to the conventional single-investment perspective. We present a case study on flood risk management in the Netherlands to show the long-term socio-economic consequences of short-term decisions by going beyond the project cycle horizon.
Evidences from flood risk management demonstrated that a deep understanding of the main physical phenomena to be addressed is often not enough but should be also integrated with stakeholders' knowledge and risk perception. Particularly, the effectiveness of flood risk management strategies is highly dependent on stakeholders' perception and attitudes, which play a critical role on how individuals and institutions act to mitigate risks. Furthermore , practitioners and policy-makers realized that grey infrastructures may not be the most suitable solution to reduce flood risk, and that a shift from grey solutions to Nature Based Solutions is required. Within this framework, the present work describes a methodology to enhance the Nature Based Solutions implementation by facilitating the generation, acquisition and diffusion of different stakeholders' risk perceptions. It is based on the combination of Problem Structuring Methods for the elicitation of stakeholders' risk perceptions through individual Fuzzy Cognitive Maps, and Ambiguity Analysis for the investigation of differences in risk perceptions and problem framing. The outputs of the Ambiguity Analysis, used during a participatory workshop, facilitated a dialogue aligning the divergences and promoting the social acceptance of Nature Based Solutions. These results of the implementation of this multi-step methodology in the Glinščica river basin (Slovenia) are discussed.
Non-technical summary
It is no longer possible nor desirable to address the dual challenges of equity and sustainability separately. Instead, they require new thinking and approaches which recognize their interlinkages, as well as the multiple perspectives and dimensions involved. We illustrate how equity and sustainability are intertwined, and how a complex social–ecological systems lens brings together advances from across the social and natural sciences to show how (in)equity and (un)sustainability are produced by the interactions and dynamics of coupled social–ecological systems. This should help understand which possible pathways could lead to sustainable and fair futures.
An integrated understanding of both social and ecological aspects of environmental issues is essential to address pressing sustainability challenges. An integrated social-ecological systems perspective is purported to provide a better understanding of the complex relationships between humans and nature. Despite a threefold increase in the amount of social-ecological research published between 2010 and 2015, it is unclear whether these approaches have been truly integrative. We conducted a systematic literature review to investigate the conceptual, methodological, disciplinary, and functional aspects of social-ecological integration. In general, we found that overall integration is still lacking in social-ecological research. Some social variables deemed important for addressing sustainability challenges are underrepresented in social-ecological studies, e.g., culture, politics, and power. Disciplines such as ecology, urban studies, and geography are better integrated than others, e.g., sociology, biology, and public administration. In addition to ecology and urban studies, biodiversity conservation plays a key brokerage role in integrating other disciplines into social-ecological research. Studies founded on systems theory have the highest rates of integration. Highly integrative studies combine different types of tools, involve stakeholders at appropriate stages, and tend to deliver practical recommendations. Better social-ecological integration must underpin sustainability science. To achieve this potential, future social-ecological research will require greater attention to the following: the interdisciplinary composition of project teams, strategic stakeholder involvement, application of multiple tools, incorporation of both social and ecological variables, consideration of bidirectional relationships between variables, and identification of implications and articulation of clear policy recommendations.
An effective and efficient stewardship of natural resources requires consistency across all decision-informing approaches and components involved, i.e., managerial, governmental, political, and legal. To achieve this consistency, these elements must be aligned under an overarching management goal that is consistent with
current and well-accepted knowledge. In this article, we investigate the adoption by the US Bureau of Ocean Energy Management of an environmental resilience-centered system that manages for resilience of marine ecological resources and its associated social elements. Although the framework is generally tailored for this Bureau, it could also be adapted to other federal or non-federal organizations. This paper presents a dynamic framework that regards change as an inherent element of the socio-ecological system in which management structures, e.g., federal agencies, are embedded. The overall functioning of the management framework being
considered seeks to mimic and anticipate environmental change in line with well-accepted elements of resilience- thinking. We also investigate the goal of using management for resilience as a platform to enhance socio-ecological sustainability by setting specific performance metrics embedded in pre-defined and desired social
and/or ecological scenarios. Dynamic management frameworks that couple social and ecological systems as described in this paper can facilitate the efficient and effective utilization of resources, reduce uncertainty for decision and policy makers, and lead to more defensible decisions on resources.
Essential services such as electricity are critical to human well-being and the functioning of modern society. These services are produced by complex adaptive socio-technical systems and emerge from the interplay of technical infrastructure with people and governing institutions. Ongoing global changes such as urbanization and increasing prevalence of extreme weather events are generating much interest in strategies for building the resilience of essential services. However, much of the emphasis has been on reliable and resilient technical infrastructure. This focus is insufficient; resilience also needs to be built into the human and institutional processes within which these technical systems are embedded. Here, we propose a conceptual framework, based on a complex adaptive systems perspective, that identifies four key domains that require investment to build the resilience of essential services. This framework addresses both the technical and social components of the socio-technical systems that underlie essential services and incorporates specified and general resilience considerations. The framework can be used to guide resilience assessments and to identify strategies for building resilience across different organizational levels.
This paper analyses the concept of nature‐based solutions as instruments to turn anthromes more nature‐compatible, efficient, causing less degradation and developing new biodiversity hotspots. It is mainly focused in solutions using living organisms (in particular plants and microorganisms) to perform functions such as those of soil‐ and water‐bioengineering interventions in order to ensure the safety of human infrastructures and constructions in contexts of conflict between natural processes and human needs. Further it handles the problematic of reintroducing natural processes and functions in the built environment (urban, industrial, infrastructures etc.) in order to recover, recreate or reinvent nature in humanized landscapes and developing a more creative relation between humans and natural elements, processes and functions. It presents, furthermore, the contribution of natural solutions to a wide variety of decontamination processes and prevention and recovery of degraded land and natural resources. Finally, it discusses the way these solutions can be implemented and the cultural, organizational, administrative and governance paradigmatic and practice changes it implies. Examples are given on the different issues presented as well on the possible implementation solutions.
Payments for Environmental Services (PES) constitute an innovative economic intervention to counteract the global loss of biodiversity and ecosystem functions. In theory, some appealing features should enable PES to perform well in achieving conservation and welfare goals. In practice, outcomes depend on the interplay between context, design and implementation. Inspecting a new global dataset, we find that some PES design principles pre-identified in the social-science literature as desirable, such as spatial targeting and payment differentiation, are only partially being applied in practice. More importantly, the PES-defining principle of conditionality—monitoring compliance and sanctioning detected non-compliance—is seldom being implemented. Administrative ease, multiple non-environmental side objectives and social equity concerns may jointly help explain the reluctance to adopt more sophisticated, theoretically informed practices. However, by taking simplifying shortcuts in design and implementation, PES programmes may become less environmentally effective and efficient as economic incentives, thus underperforming their conservation potential. A curated global dataset of Payments for Environmental Services (PES) reveals that theoretical principles are only partially applied in practice, particularly conditionality, which makes payments underperform.
Infrastructure development is central to the processes that abate and produce vulnerabilities in cities. Urban actors, especially those with power and authority, perceive and interpret vulnerability and decide when and how to adapt. When city managers use infrastructure to reduce urban risk in the complex, interconnected city system, new fragilities are introduced because of inherent system feedbacks. We trace the interactions between system dynamics and decision-making processes over 700 years of Mexico City’s adaptations to water risks, focusing on the decision cycles of public infrastructure providers (in this case, government authorities). We bring together two lenses in examining this history: robustness-vulnerability trade-offs to explain the evolution of systemic risk dynamics mediated by feedback control, and adaptation pathways to focus on the evolution of decision cycles that motivate significant infrastructure investments. Drawing from historical accounts, archeological evidence, and original research on water, engineering, and cultural history, we examine adaptation pathways of humans settlement, water supply, and flood risk. Mexico City’s history reveals insights that expand the theory of coupled infrastructure and lessons salient to contemporary urban risk management: (1) adapting by spatially externalizing risks can backfire: as cities expand, such risks become endogenous; (2) over time, adaptation pathways initiated to address specific risks may begin to intersect, creating complex trade-offs in risk management; and (3) city authorities are agents of risk production: even in the face of new exogenous risks (climate change), acknowledging and managing risks produced endogenously may prove more adaptive. History demonstrates that the very best solutions today may present critical challenges for tomorrow, and that collectively people have far more agency in and influence over the complex systems we live in than is often acknowledged.
To address challenges associated with climate resilience, health and well-being in urban areas, current policy platforms are shifting their focus from ecosystem-based to nature-based solutions (NBS), broadly defined as solutions to societal challenges that are inspired and supported by nature. NBS result in the provision of co-benefits, such as the improvement of place attractiveness, of health and quality of life, and creation of green jobs. Few frameworks exist for acknowledging and assessing the value of such co-benefits of NBS and to guide cross-sectoral project and policy design and implementation. In this paper, we firstly developed a holistic framework for assessing co-benefits (and costs) of NBS across elements of socio-cultural and socioeconomic systems, biodiversity , ecosystems and climate. The framework was guided by a review of over 1700 documents from science and practice within and across 10 societal challenges relevant to cities globally. We found that NBS can have environmental, social and economic co-benefits and/or costs both within and across these 10 societal challenges. On that base, we develop and propose a seven-stage process for situating co-benefit assessment within policy and project implementation. The seven stages include: 1) identify problem or opportunity; 2) select and assess NBS and related actions; 3) design NBS implementation processes; 4) implement NBS; 5) frequently engage stake-holders and communicate co-benefits; 6) transfer and upscale NBS; and 7) monitor and evaluate co-benefits across all stages. We conclude that the developed framework together with the seven-stage co-benefit assessment process represent a valuable tool for guiding thinking and identifying the multiple values of NBS implementation .
Wetlands are often considered as nature-based solutions that can provide a multitude of services of great social, economic and environmental value to humankind. Changes in land-use, water-use and climate can all impact wetland functions and services. These changes occur at scales extending well beyond the local scale of an individual wetland. However, in practical applications, engineering and management decisions usually focus on individual wetland projects and local site conditions. Here, we systematically investigate if and to what extent research has addressed the large-scale dynamics of landscape systems with multiple wetlands, hereafter referred to as wetlandscapes, which are likely to be relevant for understanding impacts of regional to global change. Although knowledge in many cases is still limited, evidence suggests that the aggregated effects of multiple wetlands in the landscape can differ considerably from the functions observed at individual wetland scales. This applies to provisioning of ecosystem services such as coastal protection, biodiversity support, groundwater level and soil moisture regulation, flood regulation and contaminant retention. We show that parallel and circular flow-paths, through which wetlands are interconnected in the landscape, may largely control such scale-function differences. We suggest ways forward for addressing the mismatch between the scales at which changes take place and the scale at which observations and implementation are currently made. These suggestions can help bridge gaps between researchers and engineers, which is critical for improving wetland function-effect predictability and management.
Cities are high emitters of greenhouse gases and are drivers of environmental modification, often leading to degradation and fragmentation of ecosystems at local and regional scales. Linked to these trends is a growing threat experienced by urban areas: the risk from hydro-meteorological and climatological hazards, further accentuated by climate change. Ecosystems and their services, though often overlooked or degraded, can provide multiple hazard regulating functions such as coastal and surface flood regulation, temperature regulation and erosion control. Engineering or grey approaches often do not tackle the root causes of risk and can increase the vulnerability of populations over the long-term. However, evidence of alternative approaches such as the role of healthy, functioning ecosystems in disaster risk reduction are still scarce, contentious, and with limited applicability in the urban context. This chapter explores the role of grey, green, and blue infrastructure and in particular hybrid approaches for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation to shed light on available sustainable adaptation opportunities in cities and urban areas. We highlight the dependence of cities on ecosystems as a key component of climate resilience building through case studies and literature review. At the same time, we highlight the limitation and drawbacks in the adoption of merely grey or merely green infrastructures. We suggest that an intermediate ‘hybrid’ approach, which combines both blue, green and grey approaches, may be the most effective strategy for reducing risk to hazards in the urban context.
Nature has provided humankind with food, fuel, and shelter throughout evolutionary history. However, in contemporary cities, many natural landscapes have become degraded and replaced with impermeable hard surfaces (e.g., roads, paving, car parks and buildings). The reversal of this trend is dynamic, complex and still in its infancy. There are many facets of urban greening initiatives involving multiple benefits, sensitivities and limitations. The aim of this paper is to develop a characterisation method of nature based solutions for designing and retrofitting in the built environment, and to facilitate knowledge transfer between disciplines and for design optimisation. Based on a review of the literature across disciplines, key characteristics could be organised into four groups: policy and community initiatives, multiple benefits assessment, topology, and design options. Challenges and opportunities for developing a characterisation framework to improve the use of nature based solutions in the built environment are discussed
Improving urban resilience could help cities better cope with natural disasters, such as neighborhood flood events in Mexico City pictured here. Data source: Unidad Tormenta, Sistema de Aguas de la Ciudad de Mexico.
In this paper, we reflect on the implications for science, policy and practice of the recently introduced concept of Nature-Based Solutions (NBS), with a focus on the European context. First, we analyse NBS in relation to similar concepts, and reflect on its relationship to sustainability as an overarching framework. From this, we derive a set of questions to be addressed and propose a general framework for how these might be addressed in NBS projects by funders, researchers, policy-makers and practitioners. We conclude that:
Transformative governance is an approach to environmental governance that has the capacity to respond to, manage, and trigger regime shifts in coupled social-ecological systems (SESs) at multiple scales. The goal of transformative governance is to actively shift degraded SESs to alternative, more desirable, or more functional regimes by altering the structures and processes that define the system. Transformative governance is rooted in ecological theories to explain cross-scale dynamics in complex systems, as well as social theories of change, innovation, and technological transformation. Similar to adaptive governance, transformative governance involves a broad set of governance components, but requires additional capacity to foster new social-ecological regimes including increased risk tolerance, significant systemic investment, and restructured economies and power relations. Transformative governance has the potential to actively respond to regime shifts triggered by climate change, and thus future research should focus on identifying system drivers and leading indicators associated with social-ecological thresholds.
ABSTRACT. Nature-based solutions promoting green and blue urban areas have significant potential to decrease the vulnerability and enhance the resilience of cities in light of climatic change. They can thereby help to mitigate climate change-induced impacts and serve as proactive adaptation options for municipalities. We explore the various contexts in which nature-based solutions are relevant for climate mitigation and adaptation in urban areas, identify indicators for assessing the effectiveness of nature-based solutions and related knowledge gaps. In addition, we explore existing barriers and potential opportunities for increasing the scale and effectiveness of nature-based solution implementation. The results were derived from an inter-and transdisciplinary workshop with experts from research, municipalities, policy, and society. As an outcome of the workshop discussions and building on existing evidence, we highlight three main needs for future science and policy agendas when dealing with nature-based solutions: (i) produce stronger evidence on nature-based solutions for climate change adaptation and mitigation and raise awareness by increasing implementation; (ii) adapt for governance challenges in implementing nature-based solutions by using reflexive approaches, which implies bringing together new networks of society, nature-based solution ambassadors, and practitioners; (iii) consider socio-environmental justice and social cohesion when implementing nature-based solutions by using integrated governance approaches that take into account an integrative and transdisciplinary participation of diverse actors. Taking these needs into account, nature-based solutions can serve as climate mitigation and adaptation tools that produce additional cobenefits for societal well-being, thereby serving as strong investment options for sustainable urban planning.
The characteristics of hydroclimatic risk in the 21st Century are rapidly changing. Increases in extreme weather events and population densities alter exposure to floods and droughts. Water infrastructure is unable to keep pace and deterministic models can mislead. Yet, predominant strategies for managing risk continue to follow historical precedent, striving to tame nature's outbursts and mitigate disasters through conventional engineering structures. In this Viewpoint article, scholars from three disciplines address underlying limitations in contemporary risk management, each of which is rooted in the concept of hubris. They argue that effective risk management must extend beyond hubris-thinking to an approach based on humility. Extending from the three types of limitations—described as Disconnect from Nature, Engineers of a Fixed Nature. and Modelers of Nature— a collective and synthetic consideration provides insights into potential pathways forward for both science and practice. More satisfactory strategies for managing hydroclimatic risk will require a shift from a hubris-based paradigm to a more humility-based approach.
Nature Based Solutions (NBS) are currently gaining importance in the EU policy agenda as a promising approach to mitigate and adapt to environmental and climate change. The main advantage of NBS over other adaptation strategies is their capability to deliver multiple benefits. They support the resilience of natural processes and help in reducing adaptation costs. In this paper, we address the current gaps in the literature by providing a comprehensive, easy-to-use classification scheme focussing on hydrological extreme events. The classification scheme is presented as a matrix and contains a portfolio of known NBS as well as the important criteria for their selection. Specifically, we have included disservices/ barriers, and the potential impacts of climate change on NBS. The matrix provides decision-makers with a tool that will guide them through the first phase of the complex process when choosing the most appropriative NBS for a specific challenge. In that way, we aim to support the spread of NBS in the scientific literature as well as their practical application.
Significance
International and national law have not stemmed the tide of rapidly accelerating environmental change. In response to this challenge, we highlight examples from the United States and the European Union of the untapped capacity of existing laws to enhance social-ecological resilience to these continual changes. The recommendations we advance regarding how to mine existing legal instruments to enhance resilience are agenda-setting, and they represent a far more feasible approach to addressing emerging environmental challenges than proposing politically untenable new laws or major amendments to existing laws. We show that governance can make substantial advances in addressing environmental change in the short term by exploiting those existing untapped capacities, and we offer principles and strategies to guide such initiatives.
Ecosystems can buffer against adverse events and, by so doing, reduce the costs of risk-bearing to society; benefits which have been termed 'insurance value'. Although the terminology is recent, the concept is older and has its roots in ecological resilience. However, a synthesis of studies through the lens of the insurance value concept is lacking. Here we fill this important knowledge gap by conducting a rapid evidence assessment on how, where and why the insurance value of ecosystems has been measured. The review highlighted the often substantial positive values that were associated with restoration, rehabilitation or avoidance of loss of natural ecosystems. However, many regions, ecosystems and hazards are not widely researched. Most studies focused on forests, agriculture and wetlands, often with an emphasis on habitat restoration to reduce flood risks. Over half the studies provided non-monetary or monetary estimates of value, reporting, for example, improved ecological function, achieved/achievable cost reductions or willingness-to-pay. Nevertheless, the evidence-base remains fragmentary and is characterised by inconsistent reporting of valuation methodologies. This precludes drawing general conclusions. We recommend that future studies of insurance value adopt a common approach to facilitate the development of a more robust evidence-base.
This article proposes contemporary best-practice recommendations for stated preference (SP) studies used to inform decision making, grounded in the accumulated body of peer-reviewed literature. These recommendations consider the use of SP methods to estimate both use and non-use (passive-use) values, and cover the broad SP domain, including contingent valuation and discrete choice experiments. We focus on applications to public goods in the context of the environment and human health but also consider ways in which the proposed recommendations might apply to other common areas of application. The recommendations recognize that SP results may be used and reused (benefit transfers) by governmental agencies and nongovernmental organizations, and that all such applications must be considered. The intended result is a set of guidelines for SP studies that is more comprehensive than that of the original National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Blue Ribbon Panel on contingent valuation, is more germane to contemporary applications, and reflects the two decades of research since that time. We also distinguish between practices for which accumulated research is sufficient to support recommendations and those for which greater uncertainty remains. The goal of this article is to raise the quality of SP studies used to support decision making and promote research that will further enhance the practice of these studies worldwide.
Urban nature has the potential to improve air and water quality, mitigate flooding, enhance physical and mental health, and promote social and cultural well-being. However, the value of urban ecosystem services remains highly uncertain, especially across the diverse social, ecological and technological contexts represented in cities around the world. We review and synthesize research on the contextual factors that moderate the value and equitable distribution of ten of the most commonly cited urban ecosystem services. Our work helps to identify strategies to more efficiently, effectively and equitably implement nature-based solutions.
Conventional markets can underprovide ecosystem services. Deliberate creation of a market for ecosystem services [e.g., a payments for ecosystem services (PES) scheme] can close the gap. The new ecosystem service market alters behaviors and quantities of ecosystem service provided and reveals prices for the ecosystems service: a market-clearing equilibrium. Assessing the potential for PES programs, which often act as ecological infrastructure investment mechanisms, requires forecasting the market-clearing equilibrium. Forecasting the equilibrium is complicated, especially at relevant social and ecological scales. It requires greater disciplinary integration than valuing ecosystem services or computing the marginal cost of making a land-use change to produce a service. We conduct an ex ante benefit–cost assessment and forecast market-clearing prices and quantities for ecological infrastructure investment contracts in the Panama Canal Watershed. The Panama Canal Authority could offer contracts to private farmers to change land use to increase dry-season water flow and reduce sedimentation. A feasible voluntary contracting system yields a small program of about 1,840 ha of land conversion in a 279,000-ha watershed and generates a 4.9 benefit–cost ratio. Physical and social constraints limit market supply and scalability. Service delays, caused by lags between the time payments must be made and the time services stemming from ecosystem change are realized, hinder program feasibility. Targeting opportunities raise the benefit–cost ratio but reduce the hectares likely to be converted. We compare and contrast our results with prior state-of-the-art assessments on this system.
The term “Nature-based solutions” (NbS) has now entered the lexicon of natural resource managers. Yet there is still a lack of clarity regarding what Nature-based solutions offer to a world pining for sustainability. This is shown in sharp relief by the different definitions and positions taken by IUCN and, among others, the European Commission. Although NbS are applicable worldwide the origin of the idea from two European-based agencies has given it a strong Eurocentric focus. Recent literature has expanded the focus to a more global one. Yet, in striving for sustainability in today's world, with rapid and unpredictable change and real questions on how close we are to crossing planetary boundaries (if, indeed, such boundaries exist), we need to resolve what “nature” we are talking about and what “solutions” we see it providing. There are 10 clear, interrelated principles, governed by feedbacks between and among them that can be derived from the thinking behind NbS. These principles echo those of the Ecosystem Approach of the Convention on Biological Diversity and can be linked to the whole theoretical and practical base included under the discipline of Ecohydrology. UNESCO's work in Ecohydrology and Biosphere Reserves under the International Hydrological and Man and the Biosphere Programmes continues to provide practical solutions for global management of water and ecosystems on a rapidly evolving theoretical base. To be fully effective NbS must focus on twenty-first century environmental problems and what solutions nature can contribute in resolving known, known-unknown and unknown-unknown problems. © 2018 European Regional Centre for Ecohydrology of the Polish Academy of Sciences
Raising interest in ‘nature-based solutions’ (NBS) has inspired attempts to organise their principles and qualities within comprehensive and internally consistent evaluation frameworks, so as to demonstrate the superior performance of ‘working with nature’. However, the proposed frameworks stop short of taking into account the changing conditions in which NBS are set to operate. Climate change, in particular, can alter ecosystems and their services, and may undermine the performance of green solutions that rely on them. We present here a ‘dynamic’ assessment framework that explicitly accounts for the impact of climate change on the effectiveness of the proposed NBS. The framework is based on an innovative approach that integrates system analysis and backcasting. Although it has not yet been applied to the NBS context, backcasting is well-suited to seize the transformational character of NBS, as it encourages ‘breakthrough’ leaps rather than incremental improvements. Our framework factors in the multifunctional character of NBS and is designed to capture associated direct benefits/costs and co-benefits/costs. It is meant to be applied ex ante to ideally support the choice between innovative NBS and traditional options, in an effort to respond to the societal challenges identified by the EU Research & Innovation agenda on the environment.