Metropolitan governance in action? Learning from metropolitan Melbourne’s urban forest strategy

Coenen, Lars; Davidson, Kathryn; Frantzeskaki, Niki; Grenfell, Maree; Håkansson, Irene; Hartigan, Martin

doi:10.1080/07293682.2020.1740286

Cited by 16 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Approaches (based on IUCN categories) to NbS were also varied and were being applied mostly in major cities, in particular Melbourne and Sydney (Maller, 2021;Kuller et al 2021;Frantzeskaki & Bush 2021) , water sensitive urban design (Moosavi, Browne & Bush 2021), urban green spaces (Escobedo et al 2019), urban forests (Esperon-Rodriguez et al 2022), and an ecosystem-related protection/restoration term blue carbon ecosystems (Friess et al 2020), are being used to refer to NbS in Australia the most frequently (Table 2). However globally accepted NbS terminology, as defined first by the IUCN (2020) and more recently revised and adopted by the United Nations Environment Assembly, has yet to be fully adopted in the Australian literature (Bush, Coffey & Fastenrath 2020;Uebel et al 2021;Castonguay et al 2018;Coenen et al 2020;Pineda-Pinto et al 2021;Wang et al 2022). As a result, projects, research and studies which may technically be considered NbS may not use that terminology (Zhang et al 2019 ecosystems'), actions ('to protect, conserve, restore, sustainably use and manage' nature), problems to be addressed ('social, economic and environmental challenges') and the outcomes sought ('simultaneously providing human well-being, ecosystem services and resilience and biodiversity benefits').…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This was being led by international and local policy, with 37% of the papers discussing the Paris Climate Agreement. Local governments are using urban NbS in policy to help minimize adverse effects of climate change in cities and urban areas (Bayulken et al 2021;Bush et al 2020;Coenen et al 2020;Croeser et al 2020;Fastenrath et al 2020;Frantzeskaki and Bush 2021;Gulsrud et al 2018;Ordonez 2019;Pineda-Pinto et al 2021;Zhang et al 2019). For that reason, NbS for adaptation and effective climate policy is occuring from the "bottom-up" in Australia (Rayner 2010; Figure 6).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Nature-based solutions in Australia: a systematic quantitative literature review of terms, application and policy relevance

Zhu

Fraser

Kendal

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nature-based Solutions (NbS) are emerging as an approach to sustainable environmental management and addressing environmental and social issues in ways that benefit human well-being and biodiversity. NbS have been applied to social-environmental challenges such as climate change and urbanization, but with diverse conceptualisations and applications that may impact their effectiveness and broader uptake. Much of the literature and implementation of NbS has emerged from Europe and though NbS use is rising in Australia, the context is unclear. This systematic quantitative literature review aims to understand Nature-based Solutions in an Australian context. Here we explore the meaning and practical uses of NbS in Australia, through three research questions: In Australia, 1) what is meant by the term 'nature-based solutions'? 2) what socio-ecological challenges do NbS aim to address and how? 3) are there gaps in NbS research and policy application that are hindering uptake of NbS approaches? We show that in Australia, local governments are using NbS in urban planning to address the compounding challenges brought on by climate change in the human-environment interfaces. However, there is no consensus on NbS definitions and approaches, research is focussed on urban areas and problems, and NbS implementation follows a bottom-up, localised pattern without an integrated policy framework. Based on these findings, we provide recommendations for improving the implementation of NbS in Australia including: 1) a consistency of NbS definition and awareness of NbS approaches; 2) interdisciplinary and interdepartmental collaboration on NbS methods and effectiveness and; 3) an integrated policy framework supporting NbS nationwide.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nature-based solutions in Australia: a systematic quantitative literature review of terms, application and policy relevance

Zhu

Fraser

Kendal

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some of our cases contain seeds of reflexive governance practices. NBS in the City of Melbourne, for instance, showcase that it is possible to transform current institutional structures into partnerships, and proactively engage with citizens in challenging discussions on urban re‐naturing and climate resilience (Coenen et al, 2020; Gulsrud et al, 2018). Place‐based storytelling created space for collaborating actors “to affect the construction of the objects of governance” (Feindt & Weiland, 2018, p. 663), while allowing them to continuously question and adapt to the changing environment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citizen participation in the governance of nature‐based solutions

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The last half‐a‐century has seen a marked demand for authentic citizen participation in public policy‐and decision‐making, not least in the field of sustainability. The depth and forms of citizen engagement in nature‐based solutions (NBS), for example, and how such participation shapes their trajectories is gaining increasing attention. In this paper, we analyze current forms and implications of citizen participation in 58 NBS case studies conducted in 21 cities in the light of supporting wider sustainability goals. Our results show that while tokenistic forms dominate citizen participation across a variety of NBS contexts, collaborative multi‐stakeholder forms of engagement do not automatically lead to enhanced ecological functions. Deeper forms of engagement, however, strengthen and diversify both expected and unexpected social outcomes, including social learning, enhanced sense of belonging, environmental stewardship, and inclusiveness and equity, in general. Driven by neoliberal austerity logic governments often cede power to NBS promoters whose interests predefine an intervention's vision of nature. Deeper levels of participation are hence limited by inherent institutional structures, neoliberal regimes and the lack of trust among actors involved. These limitations can be partially bridged by strengthening relational and reflexive capacities of public institutions. Focusing on the process of citizen engagement and creating multiple arenas for discussion could bring out new voices and narratives and also transform the culture of participation.

show abstract

“…This can be illustrated by the three-tier government system in which there is an ongoing absence of federal-level urban policy (Gleeson 2007;Burton 2017;Hu 2020) and an urban planning structure that is fragmented between state and local competencies (Davidson and Gleeson, 2018). A deeper understanding of the city-level and metropolitan-level governance attributes, influences, and enabling institutions is integral to the implementation of transformational urban nature initiatives such as urban forestry across Greater Melbourne (Bush et al 2020;Coenen et al 2020;Moloney and Doyon 2021).…”

Section: Governance Of and With Nature-based Solutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%