Towards mainstreaming nature-based solutions for achieving biodiverse, resilient, and inclusive cities

Reconnecting humanity to the biosphere must be a focus in cities. Transforming cities to be inclusive, equitable, resilient, and sustainable requires rethinking our relationship to nature, and investing in urban development, design, and governance that brings nature into the center. We provide seven key insights drawn from the chapters in this book: (1) put nature-based solutions (NBS) first in adaptation to climate change in cities; (2) make equity and justice central in the design, planning, management, and governance of NBS in cities; (3) ensure biodiversity is a priority in urban planning for NBS; (4) employ and design NBS to improve human health in cities; (5) realize NBS in cities with inclusive urban planning and innovative governance approaches that respond to local context dynamics; (6) assess the holistic value of urban nature to make a case for NBS in cities; and (7) bring art into NBS and position art as a NBS in cities

Nature-based solutions for sustainable, resilient, and equitable cities

Nature-based Solutions for Cities brings diverse perspectives from across the globe together to describe the state of the art in advancing nature-based solutions (NBS) for cities. Our goal is to provide a handbook for graduate students, early-career professionals, and emerging and advanced scholars to begin working with NBS in ways that consider multiple perspectives, disciplines, and ways of knowing. Together, the chapters in this book aim at understanding how NBS can be better managed, planned, and engaged with, and to center questions of NBS for whom and for what NBS are planned and implemented in cities. Through chapters led by experts in both global south and north contexts, we describe key knowledge and learning for advancing the interdisciplinary science of NBS in, for, and with cities and discuss the frontiers for next-generation NBS

Designing a knowledge co-production operating space for urban environmental governance lessons from Rotterdam, Netherlands and Berlin, Germany

Challenges for a sustainable urban development are increasingly important in cities because urbanization and related land take come up with negative challenges for the environment and for city residents. Searching for successful solutions to environmental problems requires combined efforts of different scientific disciplines and an active dialogue between stakeholders from policy and society. In this paper, we present a comparative assessment of the way policy-science dialogues have achieved knowledge co-production about strategic urban environmental governance action using the cities of Berlin in Germany and Rotterdam in the Netherlands as case studies. The ecosystem services framework is applied as a lens for policy-science interaction and a 'knowledge co-production operating space' is introduced. We show how policy officers, urban planners, practitioners and scientists learned from each other, and highlight the impact of this knowledge co-production for governance practice. We found that the concerted collaboration and co-creation between researchers and policy officers have led to mutual learning and establishment of relationships and trust in both cities. Not only the policy-relevance of research and its policy uptake were achieved but also new insights for research blind spots were created. In our conclusions we reflect on co-production processes with two types of conditions that we introduced to be most influential in the way knowledge can be co-created. These are conditions that relate to the way knowledge co-production processes are set-up and, conditions that relate to the expected value or benefit that the co-produced knowledge will bring across society, policy and practice

Nature-Based Solutions for Cities

Nature-based solutions (NBS) are increasingly being adopted to address climate change, health, and urban sustainability, yet ensuring they are effective and inclusive remains a challenge. Addressing these challenges through chapters by leading experts in both global south and north contexts, this forward-looking book advances the science of NBS in cities and discusses the frontiers for next-generation urban NBS

Principles for urban nature-based solutions

Nature-based solutions (NBS) were introduced as integrated, multifunctional and multi-beneficial solutions to a wide array of socio-ecological challenges. Although principles for a common understanding and implementation of NBS were already developed on a landscape scale, specific principles are needed with regard to an application in urban areas. Urban areas come with particular challenges including (i) spatial conflicts with urban system nestedness, (ii) specific urban biodiversity, fragmentation and altered environments, (iii) value plurality, multi-actor interdependencies and environmental injustices, (iv) path-dependencies with cultural and planning legacies and (v) a potential misconception of cities as being artificial landscapes disconnected from nature. Given these challenges, in this perspective paper, we build upon and integrate knowledge from the most recent academic work on NBS in urban areas and introduce five distinct, integrated principles for urban NBS design, planning and implementation. Our five principles should help to transcend governance gaps and advance the scientific discourse of urban NBS towards a more effective and sustainable urban development. To contribute to resilient urban futures, the design, planning, policy and governance of NBS should (1) consider the need for a systemic understanding, (2) contribute to benefiting people and biodiversity, (3) contribute to inclusive solutions for the long-term, (4) consider context conditions and (5) foster communication and learning

The role of nature-based solutions and senses of place in enabling just city transitions

Discussions about just transitions and nature-based solutions (NBS) often articulate an essentialist sense of place perspective that emphasises stasis through combinations of belonging, rootedness, continuity, attachment and connections among sites, scales and subjectivities. In response, we demonstrate how a progressive understanding of "senses" of place that embraces fluid place meanings accessible at different temporal and spatial scales enables a new understanding of the interface between structural and emotional transformation of place, as well as rethinking of just urban transitions. We present four transformation modalities that reconsider people-place, people-nature, and people-institutional relations pertinent to environmental justice and use case examples to demonstrate their relevance to NBS planning. We conclude by offering two overarching principles for urban policy, planning, and governance for fostering just transitions through NBS. First, NBS planning needs to pur-posively activate structural and emotional transformations through experimentation to enhance procedural justice. Second, NBS co-design and implementation should consider the dynamic interplay between recognition and distribution justice to engage multiple senses of place

The role of nature-based solutions and senses of place in enabling just city transitions

Discussions about just transitions and nature-based solutions (NBS) often articulate an essentialist sense of place perspective that emphasises stasis through combinations of belonging, rootedness, continuity, attachment and connections among sites, scales and subjectivities. In response, we demonstrate how a progressive understanding of "senses" of place that embraces fluid place meanings accessible at different temporal and spatial scales enables a new understanding of the interface between structural and emotional transformation of place, as well as rethinking of just urban transitions. We present four transformation modalities that reconsider people-place, people-nature, and people-institutional relations pertinent to environmental justice and use case examples to demonstrate their relevance to NBS planning. We conclude by offering two overarching principles for urban policy, planning, and governance for fostering just transitions through NBS. First, NBS planning needs to pur-posively activate structural and emotional transformations through experimentation to enhance procedural justice. Second, NBS co-design and implementation should consider the dynamic interplay between recognition and distribution justice to engage multiple senses of place.Peer reviewe

Transitions governance: Towards a new governance paradigm

This paper presents a framework for governance in the context of large scale and long term societal change (transitions). We argue that existing theories of governance offer interesting descriptive insights for such a framework, but do not present innovative prescriptive ideas for governance of transitions. In this paper we distill and abstract the basic and more generic notions in a number of key governance fields, and try to relate these to emerging theory on transitions and their governance. More specific, we build upon the interactive governance paradigm and link it to transition thinking and transition management. Our paper thus seeks to outline the contours of transitions governance and develop two operational links in the form of transition governance frameworks for detecting the societal potential for system’s change and for orienting the societal system towards transitions

Steering transformations under climate change

In light of the persistent failure to reduce emissions decisively, facilitate long-term resilience against climate change and account for the connectedness of climate change with other social, environmental and economic concerns, we present a conceptual framework of capacities for transformative climate governance. Transformative climate governance enables climate mitigation and adaptation while purposefully steering societies towards low-carbon, resilient and sustainable objectives. The framework provides a systematic analytical tool for understanding and supporting the already ongoing changes of the climate governance landscape towards more experimental approaches that include multi-scale, cross-sectoral and public-private collaborations. It distinguishes between different types of capacities needed to address transformation dynamics, including responding to disturbances (stewarding capacity), phasing-out drivers of path dependency (unlocking capacity), creating and embedding novelties (transformative capacity) and coordinating multi-actor processes (orchestrating capacity). Our case study of climate governance in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, demonstrates how the framework helps to map the activities by which multiple actors create new types of conditions for transformative climate governance, assess the effectiveness of the capacities and identify capacity gaps. Transformative and orchestrating capacities in Rotterdam emerged through the creation of space and informal networks for strategic and operational innovation, which also propelled new types of governance arrangements and structures. Both capacities support stewarding and unlocking by integrating and mainstreaming different goals, connecting actors to each other for the development of solutions and mediating interests. Key challenges across capacities remain because of limited mainstreaming of long-term and integrated thinking into institutional and regulatory frameworks. As the ongoing changes in climate governance open up multiple questions about actor roles, effective governance processes, legitimacy and how effective climate governance in the context of transformations can be supported, we invite future research to apply the capacities framework to explore these questions