4.7 Article

Nature-based solutions in the urban context: terminology, classification and scoring for urban challenges and ecosystem services

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 779, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146237

关键词

NBS; Evaluation; Clustering; Nomenclature; Cities; Definition

资金

  1. European Union Horizon 2020 research project EdiCitNet [776665]
  2. COST Action Circular City [CA 17133]
  3. CLEaNTOUR project [CTM201785385C21R]
  4. Economy and Knowledge Department of the Catalan Government through Consolidated Research Group ICRA-ENV [2017SGR1124]
  5. Economy and Knowledge Department of the Catalan Government through Consolidated Research Group ICRAtech [2017SGR1318]
  6. CERCA program (Generalitat de Catalunya)
  7. Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness [RYC201314595]
  8. Slovenian Research Agency [J28162]
  9. H2020 Societal Challenges Programme [776665] Funding Source: H2020 Societal Challenges Programme

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The concept of Nature-Based Solutions aims to address urban challenges by integrating social, economic, and environmental aspects. This article consolidates knowledge from European projects to develop a common understanding of NBS through workshops and surveys, advancing the conceptualization of NBS. The results suggest that NBS units are more versatile than NBS interventions in terms of performance in urban challenges and ecosystem services, highlighting the importance of the 'green factor' in identifying NBS solutions.
The concept of Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) has emerged to foster sustainable development by transversally addressing social, economic, and environmental urban challenges. However, there is still a considerable lack of agreement on the conceptualization of NBS, especially concerning typologies, nomenclature, and performance assessments in terms of ecosystem services (ES) and urban challenges (UC). Therefore, this article consolidates the knowledge from 4 European projects to set a path for a common understanding of NBS and thus, facilitate their mainstreaming. To do so, firstly, we performed elicitation workshops to develop an integrative list of NBS, based on the identification of overlaps among NBS from different projects. The terminologies were formalized via web-based surveys. Secondly, the NBS were clustered, following a conceptual hierarchical classification. Thirdly, we developed an integrative assessment of NBS performance (ES and UC) based on the qualitative evaluations from each project. Afterwards, we run a PCA and calculated the evenness index to explore patterns among NBS. The main conceptual advancement resides in providing a list of 32 NBS and putting forward two novel NBS categories: NBS units (NBSu) that are stand-alone green technologies or green urban spaces, which can be combined with other solutions (nature-based or not); NBS interventions (NBSi) that refer to the act of intervening in existing ecosystems and in NBSu, by applying techniques to support natural processes. The statistical analysis suggests that NBSu are more versatile than NBSi in terms of UC and ES. Moreover, the results of the integrative assessment of NBS performance suggest a greater agreement concerning the role of NBS in addressing environmental UC, cultural and regulating ES than regarding socio-economic UC and supporting and provision ES. Finally, the 'green factor' and the replication of non-intensive practices occurring in nature seem to be key criteria for practitioners to identify a particular solution as an NBS. (c) 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据