Search

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., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

To counteract the effects of climate change and biodiversity loss, sustainable transformations of societal systems and processes, as well as spatial planning, are required. Ecosystem services are considered as a concept that could transform the management of natural resources towards more sustainability. On the basis of six application-oriented research projects, this paper analyses the extent to which transformation has played a role in planning-related research on ecosystem services so far and what potential experts see for contributing to transformative change in the context of spatial planning by means of ecosystem services. The current research projects on ecosystem services predominantly do not directly refer to transformative processes and strive for changes within the existing planning framework. However, if research would be designed accordingly, it would be possible to contribute to transformative processes. Among other things, the concept of ecosystemservices can be used to promote systemthinking, cross sectorial boundaries, or involve civic stakeholders to a greater extent. Experiments in research could be the basis for transforming the planning system starting at the niche level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of green infrastructure has the potential to promote planning and implementation of multifunctional green and blue spaces that tackle several urban sustainability issues. Around 2016, German governmental institutions initiated a discourse on green infrastructure as a planning approach at the federal level. This initiative resulted, amongst other, in an urban green infrastructure planning concept tailored for the German planning context. This initial framing of the concept was broad and relatively open. It was supposed to address a wide range of disciplines in field of urban green and blue spaces and integrate their perspectives. In this short communication, we use the example from Germany to discuss how concepts such urban green infrastructure could, or should, evolve in the light of changing socio-political priorities. In response to calls for action on ecosystem and biodiversity loss, we propose shifting the focus of green infrastructure planning explicitly to biodiversity. However, reframing around a specific topic might exclude actors with other priorities and reduce the integrative potential of the concept. Therefore, we suggest how biodiversity can be defined as a cross-cutting issue that creates synergies with other urban sustainability goals such as climate adaptation or social cohesion and avoids narrowing the integrative idea. We use eight best practice cases to illustrate that biodiversity goals can go hand in hand with other urban sustainability goals. Based on these cases, we conclude that urban green infrastructure provides a solid framework that allows a shift in priorities towards biodiversity, while the integrated approach is maintained. These considerations are derived from an on-going research and development project that aims to make the green infrastructure concept actionable for German cities. • Green infrastructure planning can evolve in line with societal and political developments. • Biodiversity should be a crosscutting issue in urban green infrastructure planning. • Numerous synergies are possible between biodiversity and urban sustainability goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]