Can Nature-Based Solutions Deliver a Win-Win for Biodiversity and Climate Change Adaptation?

Abstract

Nature-based solutions (NbS) are increasingly recognised for their potential to address both the climate and biodiversity crises. These outcomes are interdependent, and both rely on the capacity of NbS to support and enhance the health of an ecosystem: its biodiversity, the condition of its abiotic and biotic elements, and its capacity to function normally despite environmental change. However, while understanding of ecosystem health outcomes of nature-based interventions for climate change mitigation is growing, the outcomes of those implemented for adaptation remain poorly understood with evidence scattered across multiple disciplines. To address this, we conducted a systematic review of the outcomes of 109 nature-based interventions for climate change adaptation using 33 indicators of ecosystem health across eight broad categories (e.g. diversity, biomass, ecosystem functioning and population dynamics). We showed that 88% of interventions with positive outcomes for climate change adaptation also reported measurable benefits for ecosystem health. We also showed that interventions were associated with a 67% average increase in local species richness. All eight studies that reported benefits in terms of both climate change mitigation and adaptation also supported ecosystem health, leading to a triple win. However, there were also trade-offs, mainly for forest management and creation of novel ecosystems such as monoculture plantations of non-native species. Our review highlights two major limitations of research to date. First, only a limited selection of metrics are used to assess ecosystem health and these rarely include key aspects such as functional diversity and habitat connectivity. Second, taxonomic coverage is poor: 67% of outcomes assessed only plants and 57% did not distinguish between native and non-native species. Future research addressing these issues will allow the design and adaptive management of NbS to support healthy and resilient ecosystems, and thereby enhance their effectiveness for meeting both climate and biodiversity targets.

Identifying and prioritizing demersal fisheries restricted areas based on combined ecological and fisheries criteria: the western Mediterranean

“…The potential of NbS for supporting fisheries sustainability and climate change adaptation is increasingly recognized (Key et al, 2021; Cooley et al, 2022; Seddon, 2022; Turner et al, 2022), yet further efforts are needed to better guide its operationalization (Riisager-Simonsen et al, 2022; Seddon, 2022).…”

Synergies between climate and biodiversity objectives in laws, policies and management practices

“…IUCN (2020) 16. Seddon et al (2021) Table 1. NbS guidelines developed by a large number of researchers and practitioners in the UK.…”

“…Municipal workers who often are responsible for the implementation of NbS, might lack awareness of NbS and its 17. Seddon et al (2021) 18. Pörtner et al (2021) possibilities, or do not feel properly educated to practice it.…”

An integrated process for planning, delivery, and stewardship of urban nature-based solutions: The Connecting Nature Framework

“…It is true that many cities have been experimenting and testing countless site-specific or culturally specific solutions and strategies (from micro to macro scale), and these continue to be living local or case-specific examples of effective urban successful transition strategies. But how do we scale nature-based solutions upwards and outwards, from local contexts to city-wide contexts, in order to deliver on urban challenges such as climate impacts [26][27][28], biodiversity loss [29][30][31], and just transitions [16,19,[32][33][34]? Drawing on the body of knowledge generated by and with selected cities engaged in such experimentation, this paper synthesises the work of the Connecting Nature project.…”