Mapping of innovative governance models to overcome barriers for nature based urban regeneration

Abstract

The implementation of urban Nature Based Solutions (NBS) projects is deeply determined by the novelty of the concept. Its innovation is both an opportunity and a challenge: as a new concept, it generates uncertainty due to lack of technical and operational preparedness, but it also allows to deploy innovative approaches, new ways to address old problems and more inclusive practices. Nature4Cities project has systematically conceptualized the barriers and drivers on NBS projects implementation by a review of the state of the art. To see how these barriers can be overcome by governance strategies, different urban and environmental governance models have been mapped and characterized to assess their suitability for different NBS projects. Five clusters have been identified where models are grouped according to the involved actors, their position in the spectrum from high to low government involvement and their level of participation. This theorical model has been applied to real cases to check the incidence of the different clusters. Results show that urban and environmental governance is a map where the different models coexist in different degrees regarding some key axes such as level of innovation, polycentric vs. monocentric, involved sectors, level of participation and scale. Collaborative, multisector, polycentric and adaptive governance models address significant number of previously identified cross-domain barriers showing their suitability. The work presented in this paper can be the basis to define new institutional and governance arrangements that will foster multi-stakeholder involvement, citizens’ engagement, leveraging both public and private funding of NBS in cities

State of the Art and Latest Advances in Exploring Business Models for Nature-Based Solutions

“…An implementation model is defined as 'the combination of governance, business, and financial models under which the NBS is planned, developed and managed' [34]. The conceptual integration involves the characterisation and mapping of the models based on their suitability for NBS projects and the extent of involvement of three main stakeholder typologies: government, market, and community [9]. Governance and finance models and market-shaping strategies were then clustered, and an IM-integrated typology was developed, reflecting 'packages' of baseline governance, financing, and market-shaping strategies for decision making on NBS implementation.…”

“…One reason for this lack of collaboration across public sector departments and agencies is the widely acknowledged silo gaps in the public sector [8][9][10]. Responsibility for NBS planning and implementation often resides in one public sector department/agency, such as planning or greening.…”

“…Furthermore, NBS often fall into the category of common-pool resources or public goods, with benefits accruing to multiple stakeholders while the majority of public NBS benefit particular interests [18]. Given the 'public good' nature of many NBS, there is a lack of clarity on investment return/performance and a lack of widely accepted and implemented indicators that could communicate the social and environmental impact of NBS [9,17].…”

Public International Funding of Nature-based Solutions for Adaptation: A Landscape Assessment

“…▪ NbS are not prioritized among potential categories of adaptation investment, leading to more limited demand from developing countries (Egusquiza et al 2019;Sarabi et al 2020). Even when cited in NDCs and NAPs, NbS are often not prioritized in public budgets and investment plans.…”

Innovating with Nature: Factors Influencing the Success of Nature-Based Enterprises

“…Nature-based solutions have been widely endorsed by international policy makers, including the United Nations, IPBES, IPCC, European Commission, IUCN and the World Economic Forum [2][3][4][5][6][7], and are increasingly integrated into national and local government planning [8]. NBS capacity to create economic opportunities and green jobs is well cited in the literature [9][10][11], yet there is a dearth of empirical literature showing evidence of these economic benefits or green jobs or how they might be achieved [12,13].…”