Moving beyond the nature-based solutions discourse: introducing nature-based thinking

Randrup, Thomas B.; Buijs, Arjen; Konijnendijk, Cecil C.; Wild, Tom

doi:10.1007/s11252-020-00964-w

Cited by 81 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This strategic, yet cost-effective, intervention has manifested as an innovative conceptualisation and operationalisation of "nature-based solutions" (NBS) initiated, guided and promoted by influential inter-governmental institutions such as the World Bank (The World Bank, 2008Bank, , 2019, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN, 2009(IUCN, , 2012, and particularly the European Union (EU) and its executive branch: the European Commission (EC) (European Commission, 2015a, 2015b. The explicitly envisaged aims include (but are not limited to) restoring and rebalancing relationships between nature and human society (Hanson et al, 2020;Randrup et al, 2020;van der Jagt et al, 2020), constructing resilient and adaptive urban ecosystems (Cohen-Shacham et al, 2016;Kabisch et al, 2016;Faivre et al, 2017;Raymond et al, 2017a), revitalizing and stimulating business and economy (Nesshöver et al, 2017;Mussinelli et al, 2020;Swart and Groot, 2020), as well as improving quality of life, health and wellbeing (Panno et al, 2017;Dick et al, 2019;Lafortezza and Sanesi, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is worth mentioning that instead of a scientific meta-analysis on the topic of NBS, this paper attempts to provide a brief overview of NBS progress led by the EU. All this has been done in view of the pivotal importance to articulate NBS more clearly, avoid ineffective implementation, and provide a direction of travel towards sustainable societies (Nesshöver et al, 2017;Dorst et al, 2019;Randrup et al, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The European Union roadmap for implementing nature-based solutions: A review

Davies

Chen

Sanesi

et al. 2021

Environmental Science & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present paper traces a chronological history, or roadmap, of the documentation produced by the European Union (EU) to promote and implement nature-based solutions (NBS) as an innovation action aiming to establish a socially inclusive, economically vibrant and ecologically resilient society. The EU's ambition is to position Europe as the world leader in NBS Research (via scientific research aiming at generating knowledge and theories) and Innovation (NBS implementation via identifying innovative approaches and best practices), as well as in a global market (for sharing, communicating, collaborating and promoting NBS). Considerable efforts have been made by the European Commission (the executive branch of the EU) as featured in a number of documents, funding programmes and Horizon 2020 (Research and Innovation) projects that span the period from 2012 to 2020. While the European Commission's commitment to promoting NBS within its Member States and beyond is still an ongoing process, we aim to review the efforts undertaken, knowledge gained, and practices accomplished. This roadmap intends to provide interested practitioners, policymakers, researchers, as well as civil organisations with an updated understanding of the leading role of the EU in NBS conceptualisation and operationalisation. This can inform future directions of NBS Research and Innovation actions, which in turn address environmental and societal challenges prompted by urbanisation/re-urbanisation, globalisation/de-globalisation, climate change and, more recently, the COVID-19 pandemic.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The European Union roadmap for implementing nature-based solutions: A review

Davies

Chen

Sanesi

et al. 2021

Environmental Science & Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recently, new approaches to wildlife management are being developed, shifting from mitigating human–wildlife conflicts towards cohabitation of humans and wildlife (Woodroffe et al 2005 ; Frank and Glikman 2019 ). Coexistence management, Convivial Conservation, and Nature-Based Thinking are proposed as new strategies to develop practices in which humans and wildlife inhabit the same landscape and can broadly satisfy their interests without posing severe mutual threats and competition for the same resources (Carter and Linnell 2016 ; Chapron and López-Bao 2016 ; Soulsbury and White 2016 ; Büscher and Fletcher 2019 ; Frank and Glikman 2019 ; Randrup et al 2020 ). These approaches combine the normative ideal of cohabitation with a practical call to develop coexistence management approaches (Frank and Glikman 2019 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Avoiding negativity bias: Towards a positive psychology of human–wildlife relationships

Buijs

Jacobs

2020

Ambio

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, new approaches to wildlife management are being developed, such as coexistence management and convivial conservation. These approaches aim to shift management practices from mitigating human–wildlife conflicts towards cohabitation and explore mutual benefits. To align empirical research to these new approaches, we argue for the relevance of positive psychology theory to inspire and structure research into the benefits of human–wildlife interactions. Positive psychology suggests three pathways through which human–wildlife interactions may lead to happiness and well-being: pleasure, engagement, and meaning. Applying these pathways to human–wildlife research may (i) structure existing research into the benefits of human–wildlife interactions, (ii) disclose unidentified benefits of human–wildlife interactions, and (iii) unravel mechanisms which make experiencing and protecting wildlife worthwhile and rewarding. Also, we suggest a potential feedback loop between wildlife experiences, happiness and well-being, and pro-environmental behaviours. More in-depth research into these mechanisms may improve our understanding of attitudes towards conservation of wildlife and its habitat and may suggest strategies to strengthen stewardship actions and public support for conservation strategies. Together, these strands of research could initiate research into what could be called a “Positive Ecology”.

show abstract

“…Moreover, the municipality showed a preparedness to critically evaluate and possibly improve their structural support mechanisms for social-impact grassroots initiatives. Such outcomes are suggestive of Nature-Based Thinking (Randrup et al, 2020), where different departments acknowledge the intricate relationship between people, nature, and economy, and work together by, e.g., developing shared visions to ensure the improved integration of nature into the urban fabric. This also suggests that reflexivity can extend beyond the actors involved in a particular experiment to involve regime, i.e., system-level, actors, effectively taking place both within and beyond a single initiative, as also illustrated in Figure 2.…”

Section: Case Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consequently, a bourgeoning body of literature is exploring normative questions around who is involved, how, and to which ends in these governance processes, resulting in the emergence of concepts and approaches such as polycentric governance (Pahl-Wostl, 2009;Ostrom, 2010), adaptive or integrated governance (Gupta et al, 2013), and reflexive governance . More recently, the mosaic governance (Buijs et al, 2016b(Buijs et al, , 2018 and "Nature-Based Thinking" (Randrup et al, 2020) frameworks were developed presenting a normative perspective on governing urban NBSs. In line with these developments, recent studies show that collaborative governance of NBSs such as urban green and blue infrastructure has become commonplace in many European cities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nature-Based Solutions or Debacles? The Politics of Reflexive Governance for Sustainable and Just Cities

Jagt

Kiss

Hirose

et al. 2021

Front. Sustain. Cities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With their potential to effectively address multiple urban sustainability challenges, the emerging policy discourse on nature-based solutions seeks to encourage the development of multifunctional nature for sustainable and just cities. Nature-based solutions, however, are vulnerable to co-option by powerful interests in ways that limit their contribution to a broad range of sustainability goals. Reflexive governance arrangements between different types of actors, engaging in continuous and iterative processes of learning and readjustment of institutions and practices, provide a way to address this issue. However, the potential of reflexive governance in increasing commitment to sustainable and just cities, and the role of power struggles in such processes, remains underexplored. To study this question, we undertake a comparative case study analysis of nature-based solutions in Utrecht (The Netherlands), Malmö (Sweden), and Utsunomiya (Japan). These are analyzed using a framework structured around the dimensions of system analysis, goal formulation, and strategy implementation, to which we apply a justice lens. The findings demonstrate reflexive processes in each of the studied cases, but the justice dimension is not always explicitly taken into account or clearly influenced in positive ways. We unveil tensions between the ideal of sustainable and just cities and the reality of urban nature-based solution initiatives being partially dependent on the power structures they seek to influence for their continued existence. We argue against dismissing the studied cases as neoliberal projects on these grounds. Reflexive governance for sustainable and just cities entails a continuous struggle for dominance between different ideas and interests. Moreover, the battlegrounds for these struggles may look very different across sociopolitical contexts. Provided that justice considerations are continually present, reflexive governance of urban nature-based solutions is likely to contribute to more sustainable and just cities.

show abstract

Moving beyond the nature-based solutions discourse: introducing nature-based thinking

Cited by 81 publications

References 51 publications

The European Union roadmap for implementing nature-based solutions: A review

The European Union roadmap for implementing nature-based solutions: A review

Avoiding negativity bias: Towards a positive psychology of human–wildlife relationships

Nature-Based Solutions or Debacles? The Politics of Reflexive Governance for Sustainable and Just Cities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About