Search

Nature-based solutions (NBS) for mitigating climate change are gaining popularity. The number of NBS is increasing, but research gaps still exist at the governance level. The objectives of this paper are (i) to give an overview of the implemented NBS for flood risk management and mitigation in Germany, (ii) to identify governance models that are applied, and (iii) to explore the differences between these models. The results of a hierarchical clustering procedure and a qualitative analysis show that while no one-size-fits-all governance model exists, polycentricism is an important commonality between the projects. The study concludes by highlighting the need for further research on traditional governance model reconversion and paradigm changes. We expect the findings to identify what has worked in the past, as well as what is important for the implementation of NBS for flood risk management in future projects.

Urban rivers deliver a broad range of contributions of nature to human development. The exploitation of the riverine ecosystem services evolves with uncertainty. In addition to the current decreasing of ecosystem health and changing climate, the impact of societal development on the river system directly reduces the potential delivery of future ecosystem services. What are the drivers of the design of urban river parks and what upcoming challenges will need to be addressed? This paper presents the results of an ex-post-analysis and comparative analysis of planning orientations of two urban river parks, the Isar River in Munich (Germany) and the American River in Sacramento (U.S.). The contribution describes the evolution of the urban rivers based on planning strategy, identifies drivers of changes and discusses the upcoming challenges for urban river parks that need to be addressed in the short and long term. The contribution shows that urban river park designs occur in a larger context of human demographic, technological, and economic changes. The contribution does not intend to solve the very complex and urgent challenges the case study sites face but rather to highlight research needs to support adaptation strategies.

Planners and engineers increasingly discovered nature as a source of inspiration to mitigate hydro-meteorological risks resulting from extreme weather events. Actors are realizing advantages of such solutions known as Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) to rapidly adapt to changing climate patterns and related impacts such as flooding, landslides, mudflows or rockfalls. NBS also provide multiple co-benefits such as an increased landscape value for society and biodiversity. Because of their inherent characteristics, NBS implementation are more efficient when supported by participative approaches. At the same time, strengthening democratic and collaborative planning into Living Labs approaches generates an increase in interest. This helps to overcome bottlenecks when implementing measures and provide common ground to provide space for new ideas, to promote innovation and to develop solutions with high acceptance. While co-design and implementing NBS has already been applied and well documented for urban areas, there are few publications on collaborative planning, stakeholder perception and NBS co-implementation in rural mountain areas. In our case study analysis from the EU-funded H2020 project PUSICOS, we present stakeholder views on NBS, their possibility to reduce natural hazards in different mountainous case study areas, different discussed measures, NBS types and stages of implementation. We analyze expectations on Living Lab processes to co-design NBS and important topics to be addressed in these processes from the view, perspective and perception of local stakeholders. Despite the importance of NBS on political and research agenda, in both the literature and the interviews, the concept and ideas are less familiar to stakeholders. NBS are mainly encountered within river restoration measures. The main interest was to reduce risks and to find solutions that were attractive and interesting also from an economical point of view e.g. business models for farmers and landowners and less of the multiple benefits that are most important for stakeholders in urban areas. The collaborative planning approach was seen as important for engaging stakeholders and creating knowledge about NBS. These insights will contribute to the understanding and address the management of intense stakeholder involvement processes, identify barriers that arise, and support in-depth participatory processes.

International audience; Human welfare depends on the health of nature. Decades of ill-conceived management practices caused a decline in the quality of human life, as well as in biological and cultural diversity. Simultaneously, they increased social and ecological risks. For instance, mismanagement of urban rivers jeopardizes their ecological health and ability to provide ecosystem services. While demands for responsible urban riverscape design that fulfill both human and ecosystem needs are increasing, explicit recommendations to achieve these ambitious goals are still lacking. We present a first attempt of a conceptualization of Human–River Encounter Sites for urban rivers that targets reconciliation between humans and nature within urban river corridors. It builds upon the River Culture Concept with literature reviews and experiences from river restoration projects. We identify six tenets that are important to develop guidelines for Human–River Encounter Sites: health, safety, functionality, accessibility, collaboration, and awareness. This paper presents how these tenets can collectively help to harmonize the needs of citizens and biota, and to mitigate the current urban river crisis. This contribution feeds the debate on sustainable socio-ecological management of urban rivers and provides guidelines for the implementation of future urban river restorations and management efforts.

Floodplain restoration measures are among the most well-known nature-based solutions for flood risk reduction but practitioners see their limitations in comparison to technical measures when considering both their effectiveness and profitability. The aim of this study is to show the co-benefits (besides flood risk reduction) of floodplain restoration and handle them in terms of monetized ecosystem services (ES). Our work focused on six ES groups for three study areas in the Danube catchment along the Krka, Morava, and Danube rivers. ES mapping through stakeholder engagement is also considered. We applied the methodologies suggested in the Toolkit for Ecosystem Service Site-Based Assessment (TESSA) complemented with alternative methodologies (e.g., questionnaires on social media). Results show annual combined benefits of floodplain restoration in a range from 237,000 USD2019 at Krka to 3.1 million USD2019 at Morava, suggesting the utility of ES assessment. The combination of stakeholder workshops and the TESSA guidelines, as well as the newly developed methods, were all central tools to provide decision-makers with arguments to use nature-based solutions for an integrated and holistic riparian land use management.

Nature-based solutions (NBS) are inspired and supported by nature but designed by humans. Historically, governmental stakeholders have aimed to control nature using a top-down approach; more recently, environmental governance has shifted to collaborative planning. Polycentric governance and co-creation procedures, which include a large spectrum of stakeholders, are assumed to be more effective in the management of public goods than traditional approaches. In this context, NBS projects should benefit from strong collaborative governance models, and the European Union is facilitating and encouraging such models. While some theoretical approaches exist, setting-up the NBS co-creation process (namely co-design and co-implementation) currently relies mostly on self-organized stakeholders rather than on strategic decisions. As such, systematic methods to identify relevant stakeholders seem to be crucial to enable higher planning efficiency, reduce bottlenecks and time needed for planning, designing, and implementing NBS. In this context, this contribution is based on the analysis of 16 NBS and 359 stakeholders. Real-life constellations are compared to theoretical typologies, and a systematic stakeholder mapping method to support co-creation is presented. Rather than making one-fit-all statements about the "right" stakeholders, the contribution provides insights for those "in charge" to strategically consider who might be involved at each stage of the NBS project.

Living Labs are recognized as a progressive form to foster innovation and the strengthening of collaborative planning. The concept has received strong attention by the European Union (EU) research and innovation agendas recently. This contribution investigates how a Living Lab approach could be used for the design and implementation of Nature-Based Solutions (NBS). NBS are gaining acceptance as a more sustainable solution for reducing the exposure to natural hazards and vulnerability to events, such as increased flooding in changing climate. However, a lack of collaborative approaches hinders their broader implementation. A literature review on the theoretical aspects of the Living Labs concept in the context of NBS is conducted, and we compare the theoretical findings with practices that were observed by case studies implementing NBS in a collaborative manner. The Isar-Plan River Restoration in Munich, Germany, and the Mountain Forest Initiative (Bergwaldoffensive). Both of the case studies have already started well before the concept of Living Labs gained wider popularity. Both award-winning cases are recognized good practice for their exemplary in-depth stakeholder involvement. The paper discusses the concepts and approaches of Living Labs and reflects on how it can serve and support in-depth participatory stakeholder involvement.

Rivers are hotspots for biological diversity and sources of ecosystem services. After centuries of degradations, river restoration has been recognized as essential to reestablish their socio-ecological quality. This research aims (1) to identify the different restoration practices and drivers, and examine the particularities of urban river restorations, and (2) to assess the potential conflicts inside the socio-ecological system. It concludes, that the better consideration of the socio-ecological system should allow the maximum benefit for both humans and the environment. Die Flussrenaturierung wurde zur Wiederherstellung der sozio-ökologischen Qualität der Flüsse erkannt. Diese Studie hat sich zum Ziel gesetzt unterschiedliche Renaturierungspraktiken und deren Triebkräfte zu identifizieren, die Besonderheiten städtischer Flussrenaturierungen zu untersuchen und die potenziellen Interessenskonflikte im sozio-ökologischen System zu bewerten. Eine wichtige Schlussfolgerung ist, dass eine verbesserte Einbeziehung des sozio-ökologischen Systems, zu besseren Ergebnisse führen könnte, und dadurch der Nutzen für Mensch und Ökologie maximiert wird.

The increase in minimum flows has rarely been considered to mitigate the ecological impact of hydroelectric power plants because it requires a site-specific design and expensive long-term monitoring procedure to identify the most beneficial scenario. This study presents a model-based method to estimate, within the model constraints, the most sustainable scenario of water resource sharing between nature and human needs. We studied physical habitat suitability of the Isar River in Munich (Germany) for three protected fish species: Thymallus thymallus L., Hucho hucho L., and Chondostroma nasus L. The analysis combined a high-resolution two-dimensional (2D) hydromorphological model with expert-based procedures using Computer Aided Simulation Model for Instream Flow Requirements (CASiMIR). We simulated a range of minimum discharges from 5 to 68.5 m³/s and four scenarios: (A) maximum use of the resource for humans; (B) slight increase in the minimum water flow; (C) medium increase in the minimum water flow; and, (D) without diversion for hydroelectric production. Under the current hydromorphological conditions, model outputs showed that different life stages of the fish species showed preferences for different scenarios, and that none of the four scenarios provided permanently suitable habitat conditions for the three species. We suggest that discharge management should be combined with hydromorphological restoration actions to re-establish parts of the modified channel slope and/or parts of the previously lost floodplain habitat in order to implement a solution that favors all species at the same time. The modeling procedure that is presented may be helpful to identify the discharge scenario that is most efficient for maintaining target fish species under realistic usage conditions.