Nature‐based solutions (NbS) to climate change currently have considerable political traction. However, national intentions to deploy NbS have yet to be fully translated into evidence‐based targets ...and action on the ground. To enable NbS policy and practice to be better informed by science, we produced the first global systematic map of evidence on the effectiveness of nature‐based interventions for addressing the impacts of climate change and hydrometeorological hazards on people. Most of the interventions in natural or semi‐natural ecosystems were reported to have ameliorated adverse climate impacts. Conversely, interventions involving created ecosystems (e.g., afforestation) were associated with trade‐offs; such studies primarily reported reduced soil erosion or increased vegetation cover but lower water availability, although this evidence was geographically restricted. Overall, studies reported more synergies than trade‐offs between reduced climate impacts and broader ecological, social, and climate change mitigation outcomes. In addition, nature‐based interventions were most often shown to be as effective or more so than alternative interventions for addressing climate impacts. However, there were substantial gaps in the evidence base. Notably, there were few studies of the cost‐effectiveness of interventions compared to alternatives and few integrated assessments considering broader social and ecological outcomes. There was also a bias in evidence toward the Global North, despite communities in the Global South being generally more vulnerable to climate impacts. To build resilience to climate change worldwide, it is imperative that we protect and harness the benefits that nature can provide, which can only be done effectively if informed by a strengthened evidence base.
We present the first global systematic map of the effectiveness of nature‐based solutions (NbS) for addressing the impacts of climate change and hydrometeorological hazards on people. We found that most studies on NbS interventions in natural or semi‐natural ecosystems reported reduced climate impacts and that, overall, more synergies than trade‐offs were reported between addressing climate impacts and broader ecological, social and climate change mitigation outcomes. However, to strengthen the evidence base and support the upscaling of NbS, future studies should compare the cost‐effectiveness of NbS with engineered alternatives and consider social and ecological outcomes. More NbS research is also needed in the Global South.
•Nature-based Solutions (NbS) is an umbrella concept that covers a whole range of ecosystem-related approaches.•We compared the eight NbS principles to principles in five other ecosystem-related ...approaches.•Three NbS principles stand out from those in similar approaches: synergy with other solutions; landscape scale considerations; and policy integration.•The NbS framework and principles provide a foundation for the development of standards for successful implementation of NbS.
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.
This paper addresses the impact that changes in natural ecosystems can have on health and wellbeing focusing on the potential co-benefits that green spaces could provide when introduced as climate ...change adaptation measures. Ignoring such benefits could lead to sub-optimal planning and decision-making. A conceptual framework, building on the ecosystem-enriched Driver, Pressure, State, Exposure, Effect, Action model (eDPSEEA), is presented to aid in clarifying the relational structure between green spaces and human health, taking climate change as the key driver. The study has the double intention of (i) summarising the literature with a special emphasis on the ecosystem and health perspectives, as well as the main theories behind these impacts, and (ii) modelling these findings into a framework that allows for multidisciplinary approaches to the underlying relations between human health and green spaces. The paper shows that while the literature based on the ecosystem perspective presents a well-documented association between climate, health and green spaces, the literature using a health-based perspective presents mixed evidence in some cases. The role of contextual factors and the exposure mechanism are rarely addressed.
The proposed framework could serve as a multidisciplinary knowledge platform for multi-perspecitve analysis and discussion among experts and stakeholders, as well as to support the operationalization of quantitative assessment and modelling exercises.
Display omitted
•The model synthesises main links among climate, ecosystems and human health.•Adaptation to climate change must consider health's relation to the environment.•Adaptation actions could either increase or reduce existing pressure on ecosystems.•Contextual factors and behavioural change affect this relationship through exposure.•Multidisciplinary approaches are required when assessing ecosystem's health impacts.
Coastal communities in tropical environments are at increasing risk from both environmental degradation and climate change and require urgent local adaptation action. Evidences show coral reefs play ...a critical role in wave attenuation but relatively little direct connection has been drawn between these effects and impacts on shorelines. Reefs are rarely assessed for their coastal protection service and thus not managed for their infrastructure benefits, while widespread damage and degradation continues. This paper presents a systematic approach to assess the protective role of coral reefs and to examine solutions based on the reef's influence on wave propagation patterns. Portions of the shoreline of Grenville Bay, Grenada, have seen acute shoreline erosion and coastal flooding. This paper (i) analyzes the historical changes in the shoreline and the local marine, (ii) assess the role of coral reefs in shoreline positioning through a shoreline equilibrium model first applied to coral reef environments, and (iii) design and begin implementation of a reef-based solution to reduce erosion and flooding. Coastline changes in the bay over the past 6 decades are analyzed from bathymetry and benthic surveys, historical imagery, historical wave and sea level data and modeling of wave dynamics. The analysis shows that, at present, the healthy and well-developed coral reefs system in the southern bay keeps the shoreline in equilibrium and stable, whereas reef degradation in the northern bay is linked with severe coastal erosion. A comparison of wave energy modeling for past bathymetry indicates that degradation of the coral reefs better explains erosion than changes in climate and historical sea level rise. Using this knowledge on how reefs affect the hydrodynamics, a reef restoration solution is designed and studied to ameliorate the coastal erosion and flooding. A characteristic design provides a modular design that can meet specific engineering, ecological and implementation criteria. Four pilot units were implemented in 2015 and are currently being field-tested. This paper presents one of the few existing examples available to date of a reef restoration project designed and engineered to deliver risk reduction benefits. The case study shows how engineering and ecology can work together in community-based adaptation. Our findings are particularly important for Small Island States on the front lines of climate change, who have the most to gain from protecting and managing coral reefs as coastal infrastructure.
•Coral reefs coastal protection is studied based on the effect on wave hydrodynamics.•Six decades of historical coastline changes and wave climate are analyzed.•A equilibrium long-term planform model shows reefs control the shoreline positioning.•Severe coastal erosion occurs in areas not in equilibrium and with coral degradation.•An innovative artificial reef design is described and field-tested.
•The emerging concept of Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) resembles related concepts such as Ecosystem-based Adaptation and Green Infrastructure.•NBS covers a wide variety of interventions, a broad range ...of perspectives on what qualifies as nature-based, and is explicitly solution-oriented.•NBS has value as an umbrella concept that connects previously segregated bodies of knowledge on urban greening.•Multifunctionality is a valuable asset of NBS, but necessitates flexible and collaborative governance and planning models.•Performance-based planning can promote NBS as it accommodates flexibility, multifunctionality and considers urban complexity.
As a result of urbanisation and climate change, many cities experience the necessity of efficient and sustainable land use. Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) are interventions that address social, economic and environmental sustainability issues simultaneously, thereby presenting a multifunctional, solution-oriented approach to increasing urban sustainability. As elements of the emerging NBS concept resemble related, existing approaches to urban greening, this review assesses the implications of this concept for discourse and practice in urban greening. The paper identifies key NBS principles and compares them with those of Ecosystem-Based Adaptation (EBA) and Green Infrastructure (GI). Key differences emerge: the NBS concept incorporates a broader array of interventions and a broader range of perspectives on what qualifies as ‘nature-based’, and it is most explicitly oriented towards providing solutions to complex challenges. NBS implementation could therefore benefit from a more performance-based planning approach; a flexible approach to urban planning which accommodates the integration of multiple land uses and considers urban complexity. We conclude that the NBS concept has potential to unite currently segregated bodies of knowledge generated as part of related approaches to urban greening, and can enable researchers and policymakers to more explicitly discuss the role of nature in addressing a broad range of sustainability challenges.
The lack of progress in establishing ambitious and legally binding global mitigation targets means that the need for locally based climate change adaptation will increase in vulnerable localities ...such as Africa. Within this context, “ecosystem-based adaptation” (EBA) is being promoted as a cost-effective and sustainable approach to improving adaptive capacity. Experience with the ongoing development of Durban’s Municipal Climate Protection Programme indicates that achieving EBA in cities means moving beyond the conceptualization of a uniform, one-size-fits-all layer of street trees and parks to a more detailed understanding of the complex ecology of indigenous ecosystems and their resilience under climate change conditions. It also means engaging with the role that this “bio-infrastructure” plays in improving the quality of life and socioeconomic opportunities of the most vulnerable human communities. Despite the long-term sustainability gains of this approach, implementation in Durban has been shown to be both technically challenging and resource intensive. The close association between human and ecological systems in addressing climate change adaptation has also led to the development of the concept of “community ecosystem-based adaptation”.
•Smallholders’ farmers are vulnerable to the impacts of climate extreme events.•Ecosystem-based Adaptation (EbA) practices can help reduce or avoid these impacts.•Adoption of these practices by ...smallholders is conditioned by key barriers and trade-offs.•Existing experiences in promoting agroecology and agroforestry provide key lessons to promote adoption.
Despite the growing interest in Ecosystem-based Adaptation, there has been little discussion of how this approach could be used to help smallholder farmers adapt to climate change, while ensuring the continued provision of ecosystem services on which farming depends. Here we provide a framework for identifying which agricultural practices could be considered ‘Ecosystem-based Adaptation’ practices, and highlight the opportunities and constraints for using these practices to help smallholder farmers adapt to climate change. We argue that these practices are (a) based on the conservation, restoration or management of biodiversity, ecosystem processes or services, and (b) improve the ability of crops and livestock to maintain crop yields under climate change and/or by buffering biophysical impacts of extreme weather events or increased temperatures. To be appropriate for smallholder farmers, these practices must also help increase their food security, increase or diversify their sources of income generation, take advantage of local or traditional knowledge, be based on local inputs, and have low implementation and labor costs. To illustrate the application of this definition, we provide some examples from smallholders’ coffee management practices in Mesoamerica. We also highlight three key obstacles that currently constrain the use of Ecosystem-based Adaptation practices (i) the need for greater understanding of their effectiveness and the factors that drive their adoption, (ii) the development supportive and integrated agriculture and climate change policies that specifically promote them as part of a broader agricultural adaptation program; and (iii) the establishment and maintaining strong and innovative extension programs for smallholder farmers. Our framework is an important starting point for identifying which Ecosystem-based Adaptation practices are appropriate for smallholder farmers and merit attention in international and national adaptation efforts.
Display omitted
•Components that mainly determine the cooling capacity of a GUI are: tree canopy coverage, soil cover, and size.•The best combination of components is the one considering that ...generally the most important component is size, followed by tree canopy coverage and soil cover.•The application to the case-study shows that our approach works with limited and easy to collect input-data and is able differentiate among the cooling capacity provided by different types of GUI.
Heatwaves are threatening human wellbeing in our cities, but Green Urban Infrastructures (GUI) can contribute to reduce temperatures and the associated health risks, by virtue of their cooling capacity. GUI present different typologies and consequently different key components, such as soil cover, tree canopy cover and shape, which determines their capacity to provide cooling. The aim of this study is to propose an approach to estimate the cooling capacity provided by GUI in order to generate useful information for urban planners. The methods are based on the review of the literature to identify the functions of GUI that are involved in providing cooling, and the components of GUI that determine those functions, and then to combine them to provide an overall assessment of the cooling capacity. The approach was used to assess 50 different typologies of GUI, which are result of different combinations of the components that influence the cooling, for three climatic regions. An illustrative case study in the city of Amsterdam show the applicability of the approach. This work provides a contribution in the panorama of Ecosystem Service assessment tools to support the mainstreaming of Ecosystem-based measures (such as the creation of GUI) in the planning practice.
Co-producing ecosystem services for adapting to climate change Lavorel, Sandra; Locatelli, Bruno; Colloff, Matthew J ...
Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological sciences,
03/2020, Letnik:
375, Številka:
1794
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
Ecosystems can sustain social adaptation to environmental change by protecting people from climate change effects and providing options for sustaining material and non-material benefits as ecological ...structure and functions transform. Along adaptation pathways, people navigate the trade-offs between different ecosystem contributions to adaptation, or adaptation services (AS), and can enhance their synergies and co-benefits as environmental change unfolds. Understanding trade-offs and co-benefits of AS is therefore essential to support social adaptation and requires analysing how people co-produce AS. We analysed co-production along the three steps of the ecosystem cascade: (i) ecosystem management; (ii) mobilization; and (iii) appropriation, social access and appreciation. Using five exemplary case studies across socio-ecosystems and continents, we show how five broad mechanisms already active for current ecosystem services can enhance co-benefits and minimize trade-offs between AS: (1) traditional and multi-functional land/sea management targeting ecological resilience; (2) pro-active management for ecosystem transformation; (3) co-production of novel services in landscapes without compromising other services; (4) collective governance of all co-production steps; and (5) feedbacks from appropriation, appreciation of and social access to main AS. We conclude that knowledge and recognition of co-production mechanisms will enable pro-active management and governance for collective adaptation to ecosystem transformation. This article is part of the theme issue 'Climate change and ecosystems: threats, opportunities and solutions'.
•Nature is neither passive nor external to human society but expressed in frames.•Frames are modes of expression that transmit power between social actors.•Power affects nature-based practices and ...knowledge produced about them.•We demonstrate these links in five cases with a social-change agenda.•We show how frames of nature condition the potential for social transformation
Nature-based solutions (NbS) are gaining traction in high-level, decision-making arenas as a response to global policy challenges. Claiming to be transformative and pluralistic, NbS aim to resolve societal problems through a focus on nature, which is understood to be a benign ally. This uncritical framing of nature may have unintended and inequitable consequences that undermine the emancipatory potential of NbS.
In this paper, we highlight the need to pay attention to epistemic and power dimensions that tend to be hidden in NbS. We assume that nature is neither passive nor external to human society, but is instead expressed in frames (reifying modes of expression) that reflect both knowledge and power in social encounters where NbS are used. Drawing upon five cases, we analyse how particular ways of framing nature express and reinforce the power relations that structure people’s interactions. Each of the five cases relies on a nature-based frame to produce knowledge on climate adaptation, peacebuilding and justice.
The analysis reveals how frames of nature are enacted in particular contexts, and how this conditions the potential for societal transformation towards sustainability and pluralistic knowledge. We demonstrate how frames of nature can constrain or enable opportunities for various groups to respond to environmental change. We discuss how the NbS paradigm might better incorporate diverse, situated knowledge and subjectivities, and conclude that this will require a more critical evaluation of NbS practice and research.
PDF
