Search results

The benefits and impacts that nature-based solutions (NBS) provide on the relationships between people and nature are widely recognized (Raymond et al. 2017). The NBS concept advocates the inclusion of a broad range of relevant actors in decision making (Pauleit et al. 2017), and co-design strategies are powerful approaches to include stakeholders and individual citizens on the same footing as professional actors (researchers, planners, politicians, decision makers, experts, institutional stakeholders). Co-design is a creative approach that enables bringing together real life experiences, views and skills of many different perspectives to address a specific problem (Szebeko and Tan 2010). Co-design has considerable potential for jointly defining the challenges to be dealt with and the objectives for the solutions. Co-design supports jointly conceptualising and delivering NBS when planning green infrastructure networks in urban environments (Karrasch et al. 2017). However, important gaps in knowledge, practice and planning remain when it comes to co-design in relation to NBS, green infrastructure and 'green' governance. We argue that co-design can help planners and policy makers to design green infrastructure which addresses not only ecological priorities, but also incorporates user demands and needs. Moreover, we believe that co-design supports planners and policy makers to better mainstream NBS into urban planning (Kabisch et al. 2016). Limitations exist, but we feel that co-design has great potential for cities committed to transformative change based on a 'green' and 'sustainable' agenda. In the following, we will further elaborate on these arguments.

Aim Recent studies using vegetation plots have demonstrated that habitat type is a good predictor of the level of plant invasion, expressed as the proportion of alien to all species. At local scale, habitat types explain the level of invasion much better than alien propagule pressure. Moreover, it has been shown that patterns of habitat invasion are consistent among European regions with contrasting climates, bio- geography, history and socioeconomic background. Here we use these findings as a basis for mapping the level of plant invasion in Europe. Location European Union and some adjacent countries. Methods We used 52,480 vegetation plots from Catalonia (NE Spain), Czech Republic and Great Britain to quantify the levels of invasion by neophytes (alien plant species introduced after ad 1500) in 33 habitat types. Then we estimated the proportion of each of these habitat types in CORINE land-cover classes and calculated the level of invasion for each class. We projected the levels of invasion on the CORINE land-cover map of Europe, extrapolating Catalonian data to the Mediter- ranean bioregion, Czech data to the Continental bioregion, British data to the British Isles and combined Czech–British data to the Atlantic and Boreal bioregions. Results The highest levels of invasion were predicted for agricultural, urban and industrial land-cover classes, low levels for natural and semi-natural grasslands and most woodlands, and the lowest levels for sclerophyllous vegetation, heathlands and peatlands. The resulting map of the level of invasion reflected the distribution of these land-cover classes across Europe. Main conclusions High level of invasion is predicted in lowland areas of the temperate zone of western and central Europe and low level in the boreal zone and mountain regions across the continent. Low level of invasion is also predicted in the Mediterranean region except its coastline, river corridors and areas with irrigated agricultural land. ; Peer reviewed

Scientific and grey literature on invasive alien species (IAS) is conditioned by social, economic and political priorities, editorial preferences and species and ecosystem characteristics. This leads to knowledge gaps and mismatches between scientific research interests and management needs. We reviewed the literature on IAS management in Spain found in Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar and Dialnet to identify key deficiencies and priority research areas. The collected literature was classified, employing features describing formal aspects and content. We used bibliometric and keyword co-occurrence network analyses to assess the relationship between features and reveal the existence of additional topics. Most of the compiled documents (n = 388) were focused on terrestrial ecosystems and inland waters, whereas marine and urban ecosystems were under-represented. The literature was largely generic and not species-specific, focusing on raising awareness and proposing changes on current regulation as prominent approaches to prevent further introductions. The compiled authors exhibited many clear publishing preferences (e.g. language or document type), but less regarding target taxa. In addition, there was a strong association between species and the different features considered, especially between the methodological approach (e.g. review, field experiment) and the primary emphasis of study (i.e. basic/theoretical, applied or interdisciplinary). This indicates that research on IAS has had a strong species-specific focus. References about terrestrial species focused mainly on vascular plants, whereas references about inland waters were mostly on fishes and the giant reed (Arundo donax), which has been managed with partial success. Animal culling and plant removal were the most frequent eradication and small-scale control treatments, whereas the documents addressing wider spatial scales were largely theoretical. Consequently, the success of described treatments was largely uncertain. Spanish invasion science ...