Supporting Nature-Based Solutions via Nature-Based Thinking across European and Latin American cities.

Nature-Based Solutions concepts and practices are being used worldwide as part of attempts to address societal challenges but have also been criticised for not dealing with deeper transformations needed to face urgent issues including biodiversity loss, climate change and inclusion. In this paper, we explore how an inclusive, integrated and long-sighted approach, emphasising a more radical integration of nature within cities, might support the transformations needed to endure major contemporary challenges. Addressing important emerging critiques of Nature-Based Solutions, we consider the potential of a more incisive form of Nature-Based Thinking (NBT) in cities, based on more holistic perspectives. The paper draws on a reflective and iterative research process that engaged both the research and practice communities through a symposium and a series of futures workshops that together explored the potential of NBT to develop future nature-cities relations in Europe and Latin America. The results of the reflective process suggest that notions of nature with people-not for people- new organisational structures, and the intention and capacity to apply long-term perspectives, are needed when planning for NBS interventions aimed at sustainable urban development. This includes developing a cultural-structural change based on new and inclusive understandings of human-nature relations, and novel governance paradigms that allow cross-sectoral coordination and engagement of local stakeholders beyond formal organisational structures.

An action framework for the participatory assessment of nature-based solutions in cities.

Impact assessment is a key step in mainstreaming urban nature-based solutions (NBS). Yet, it remains unclear if and how assessment frameworks influence urban planning, design and management. We contend that the potential of current NBS assessment frameworks is not fully exploited due to: (1) limited contextualisation of monitoring and assessment to place-specific contexts and (2) the depoliticisation of co-production. To address this, we present a practical five-step action framework to guide inclusive participation across different stages of monitoring and assessment of urban NBS, including indicator selection. Unlike previous approaches, applying selection criteria at the level of individual indicators, we also use criteria at the aggregate level of the indicator set. We conclude that participatory assessment contributes to mainstreaming urban NBS for sustainable and just cities, provided data is contextualised to local decision-making contexts and the process is designed to amplify marginalised voices.

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

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".

Cultivating nature-based solutions: The governance of communal urban gardens in the European Union.

In many countries in the European Union (EU), the popularity of communal urban gardening (CUG) on allotments and community gardens is on the rise. Given the role of this practice in increasing urban resilience, most notably social resilience, municipalities in the Global North are promoting CUG as a nature-based solution (NbS). However, the mechanisms by which institutional actors can best support and facilitate CUG are understudied, which could create a gap between aspiration and reality. The aim of this study is therefore to identify what governance arrangements contribute to CUG delivering social resilience. Through the EU GREEN SURGE project, we studied six CUG initiatives from five EU-countries, representing different planning regimes and traditions. We selected cases taking a locally unique or innovative approach to dealing with urban challenges. A variety of actors associated with each of the cases were interviewed to achieve as complete a picture as possible regarding important governance arrangements. A cross-case comparison revealed a range of success factors, varying from clearly formulated objectives and regulations, municipal support, financial resources and social capital through to the availability of local food champions and facilitators engaging in community building. Municipalities can support CUG initiatives by moving beyond a rigid focus on top-down control, while involved citizens can increase the impact of CUG by pursuing political, in addition to hands-on, activities. We conclude that CUG has clear potential to act as a nature-based solution if managed with sensitivity to local dynamics and context.

Public support for river restoration. A mixed-method study into local residents' support for and framing of river management and ecological restoration in the Dutch floodplains.

In many European countries, accommodating water has become the dominant paradigm in river management. In the Netherlands, extensive river restoration projects are being implemented, many of which draw serious opposition from the public. To investigate the causes of such opposition, a comprehensive study of public attitudes towards river restoration was conducted in three floodplains, both before and after river restoration. The study combined quantitative questionnaires (N=562) with open interviews (N=29). This paper describes how local residents perceive the effects of river restoration on landscape quality and how residents and protest groups use landscape quality in combination with other arguments to strategically frame river management policies. Results show that measurement of the perceived outcomes of nature restoration needs to be complemented by a more dynamic type of research, focusing on the social processes of the framing of restoration plans. Theoretically, the paper aims to contribute to the development of a rigorous research strategy to study framing processes in environmental management, using a mixed-methods approach. In general, local residents are supportive of river restoration projects. Although restoration may diminish feelings of attachment to an area, for most people this negative effect is compensated by the positive effects on scenic beauty and perceived protection from flooding. However, these positive effects may become contested because of the active framing of river restoration by protest groups. Residents use three distinct frames to give meaning to river restoration projects: (i) an attachment frame, focusing on cultural heritage and place attachment (ii) an attractive nature frame, focusing on nature as attractive living space and the intrinsic value of nature (iii) a rurality frame, focusing on rural values, agriculture and cultural heritage. Resistance to river restoration plans stems from the attachment and rurality frames. People using these frames challenge safety arguments for river restoration and highlight potential threats to sense of place and to agriculture. In the areas surveyed, the project initiator's focus on biodiversity and safety did not resonate very well among the local community, because of their diverging views on nature. Practical implications of the study include the need to incorporate public perception into river restoration projects and the potential for project initiators to form strategic alliances with local residents to promote ecological restoration in combination with river restoration.