From instrumentalization to commoning: A critical review of participation in urban nature-based solutions

Abstract

Nature-based solutions (NBS) are becoming a widely recognized approach to urban sustainability. Most of the literature and policy handbooks on the topic emphasize the importance of participation in some form but interpretations and levels of commitment vary. While the mainstream discourse often presents NBS as a set of win-win solutions for urban sustainability, there is a tendency to romanticize both nature and participatory planning processes in the institutional language and practices of NBS. In this paper, we review critical perspectives on the mainstream NBS discourse. Then we bring scholarship concerning the relationship between cities, nature and social change into conversation with scholarship on commoning, to outline an approach for rethinking the democratic and transformative potential of NBS. In this approach, we argue for moving beyond the instrumentalization of nature inherent to mainstream NBS, and locate, within diverse strands of theory, perspectives that contribute to a vision of commoning as a frame for ecological spaces in cities. We contrast the tendency for instrumentalization and enclosure of NBS and urban space to the opportunities opened by the commoning approach, particularly in terms of equality of access, public and shared resources, and distribution of benefits.

Beyond Biodiversity: Eliciting Diverse Values of Urban Green Spaces in Flanders

“…This research also examined the correlation between reported participation and the distribution of the values. Notably, this study found a substantial number of reported citizen-powered participatory efforts, which is not frequently found in the literature [73]. While no clear correlation was found between participation and the distribution of values, it should be noted that almost half of the analyzed projects did not report on their participatory efforts, leaving room for uncertainty.…”

Stakeholder Participation for Nature-Based Solutions: Inspiration for Rural Area’s Sustainability in China

“…Moreover, role-playing and games are used to increase interest and awareness with respect to stakeholder participation. The advantage of these activities is that they will clearly enhance the openness and transparency of democracy; the disadvantage is that citizens have less initiative in participating at the early and later stages of developing or evaluating solutions, wherein they would be involved in the decision-making process in a meaningful capacity [37].…”

“…Moreover, programs such as Horizon 2020 promote the use of Living Labs in the NbS field and may help to systematize and build bottom-up processes [9]. Remme [37] concluded that with the support of NbS, the Living Lab will hopefully create a platform for equal exchange in rural areas to enhance trust and understanding with respect to stakeholder's co-creation.…”

“…Moreover, the EU's research and innovation (R&I) program has fostered interdisciplinary R&I and stakeholder communities with the goal to build a public platform for the exchange of knowledge and practical experience [35]. With the implementation of R&I projects, NbS is expected to become a mainstream measure at the planning and environmental management policy level in the future, but there are still many processes to be conducted [37].…”

“…The European Commission's (2021) handbook for practitioners evaluating the impact of NbS contains a specific explanation for "participatory planning and governance" among the 12 social challenges [31]. The European Commission proposes to enhance support for the social, political, and financial aspects of NbS, to advocate for participatory planning and the governance of NbS, and to emphasize the necessity of innovation and continuous learning, interdisciplinary collaboration, and citizen participation [31,37].…”