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.
Urban forests, as well as parks and trees in public and private spaces, play an important role in addressing environmental, economic and social challenges. We will introduce the variety of "services" urban forests provide to cities and their inhabitants in four different world regions (from Barcelona to Beijing). You will learn about activities taking place in Bonn (the European Forest City 2020). Finally, we will focus on examples of how local governments work together on urban forestry by integrating local stakeholders as part of the CLEARING HOUSE project.
Urban forests, as well as parks and trees in public and private spaces, play an important role in addressing environmental, economic and social challenges. We will introduce the variety of "services" urban forests provide to cities and their inhabitants in four different world regions (from Barcelona to Beijing). You will learn about activities taking place in Bonn (the European Forest City 2020). Finally, we will focus on examples of how local governments work together on urban forestry by integrating local stakeholders as part of the CLEARING HOUSE project.
Deliverable 1.2 is intended to be a guide, a structured interpretation and evaluation of the current knowledge used to collate evidence on intended outcomes and unintended impacts of UF-NBS for urban ecosystem regeneration and human wellbeing. The information reported herein is based on the compilation of a reference-recorded knowledge repository of UF-NBS and their impacts on urban liveability, public health, halting biodiversity loss and re-diversifying UF-NBS structures to enhance urban resilience; specifically, Task 1.2 - Reviewing the knowledge on the importance of UF-NBS for resilient cities - and M1.3 - the Repository on UF-NBS for resilient cities in China and Europe. Sections 2 and 3 of deliverable D1.2a are intended to provide a review of current UF-NBS practices in Europe and China. The in-depth coverage of these UF-NBS case studies is further expanded in Appendix 1 by reviewing the grey literature, i.e. the project and official reports, planning strategies, as well as scientific publications that span the territory of EU Member States and China. This documentation highlights the main goals and methodologies used in UF-NBS research and implementation, policy implications and NBS typology and functions, i.e., ecosystem services, within the frame of Task 1.2, as well as case history templates (Task 1.4). In Section 4, a comparative analysis of case histories provides conclusive insights into common or contrasting aspects in and between these two continents. Final considerations drawn from the comparative analysis of the intended outcomes of UF-NBS implementation include lessons that can be learned and existing knowledge gaps. In Section 5, a Sino-European analysis, in the form of a modelling exercise, was conducted of the selected case histories to explore shared themes, such as connectivity, multifunctionality and social cohesion, and macro-categories (i.e., ecological, engineering, social and economic macro-categories) for urban regeneration and renaturing. The second part, D1.2b, presents a review of ...
We are increasingly confronted with severe social and economic impacts of environmental degradation all over the world. From a valuation perspective, environmental problems and conflicts originate from trade-offs between values. The urgency and importance to integrate nature's diverse values in decisions and actions stand out more than ever. Valuation, in its broad sense of 'assigning importance', is inherently part of most decisions on natural resource and land use. Scholars from different traditions -while moving from heuristic interdisciplinary debate to applied transdisciplinary science- now acknowledge the need for combining multiple disciplines and methods to represent the diverse set of values of nature. This growing group of scientists and practitioners share the ambition to explore how combinations of ecological, socio-cultural and economic valuation tools can support real-life resource and land use decision-making. The current sustainability challenges and the ineffectiveness of single-value approaches to offer relief demonstrate that continuing along a single path is no option. We advocate for the adherence of a plural valuation culture and its establishment as a common practice, by contesting and complementing ineffective and discriminatory single-value approaches. In policy and decision contexts with a willingness to improve sustainability, integrated valuation approaches can be blended in existing processes, whereas in contexts of power asymmetries or environmental conflicts, integrated valuation can promote the inclusion of diverse values through action research and support the struggle for social and environmental justice. The special issue and this editorial synthesis paper bring together lessons from pioneer case studies and research papers, synthesizing main challenges and setting out priorities for the years to come for the field of integrated valuation. ; Peer reviewed
The EU Water Framework Directive aims to ensure restoration of Europe's water bodies to "good ecological status" by 2027. Many Member States will struggle to meet this target, with around half of EU river catchments currently reporting below standard water quality. Diffuse pollution from agriculture represents a major pressure, affecting over 90% of river basins. Accumulating evidence shows that recent improvements to agricultural practices are benefiting water quality but in many cases will be insufficient to achieve WFD objectives. There is growing support for land use change to help bridge the gap, with a particular focus on targeted tree planting to intercept and reduce the delivery of diffuse pollutants to water. This form of integrated catchment management offers multiple benefits to society but a significant cost to landowners and managers. New economic instruments, in combination with spatial targeting, need to be developed to ensure cost effective solutions – including tree planting for water benefits - are realised. Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) are flexible, incentive-based mechanisms that could play an important role in promoting land use change to deliver water quality targets. The PESFOR-W COST Action will consolidate learning from existing woodlands for water PES schemes in Europe and help standardize approaches to evaluating the environmental effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of woodland measures. It will also create a European network through which PES schemes can be facilitated, extended and improved, for example by incorporating other ecosystem services linking with aims of the wider forests-carbon policy nexus.
The EU Water Framework Directive aims to ensure restoration of Europe's water bodies to "good ecological status" by 2027. Many Member States will struggle to meet this target, with around half of EU river catchments currently reporting below standard water quality. Diffuse pollution from agriculture represents a major pressure, affecting over 90% of river basins. Accumulating evidence shows that recent improvements to agricultural practices are benefiting water quality but in many cases will be insufficient to achieve WFD objectives. There is growing support for land use change to help bridge the gap, with a particular focus on targeted tree planting to intercept and reduce the delivery of diffuse pollutants to water. This form of integrated catchment management offers multiple benefits to society but a significant cost to landowners and managers. New economic instruments, in combination with spatial targeting, need to be developed to ensure cost effective solutions – including tree planting for water benefits - are realised. Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) are flexible, incentive-based mechanisms that could play an important role in promoting land use change to deliver water quality targets. The PESFOR-W COST Action will consolidate learning from existing woodlands for water PES schemes in Europe and help standardize approaches to evaluating the environmental effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of woodland measures. It will also create a European network through which PES schemes can be facilitated, extended and improved, for example by incorporating other ecosystem services linking with aims of the wider forests-carbon policy nexus.
In: Valatin , G , Abildtrup , J , Accastello , C , Said Al-Tawaha , A R M , Andreucci , M-B , Atanasova , S , Avdibegović , M , Baksic , N , Banasik , K , Barquin , J , Barstad , J , Bastakova , V , Becirovic , D , Begueria , S , Bethers , U , Bihunova , M , Blagojevic , B , Bösch , M , Bournaris , T , Cao , Y , Carvalho-Santos , C , Chikalanov , A , A. Cunha e Sá , M , Czyżyk , K , Daly , H , Davies , H , Del Campo , A , de Groot , R , De Vreese , R , Dostál , T , El Mokaddem , A , Finér , L , Evans , R , Fiquepron , J , Frac , M , Futter , M , Garcia , S , Gatto , P , Geneletti , D , Gezik , V , Giupponi , C , González-Sanchís , M , Gordillo , F , Gorriz , E , Grigorova , Y , Heinsoo , K , Hochbichler , E , Högbom , L , Image , M , Jacobsen , J B , Japelj , A , Jelic , S , Junk , J , Juhasz , C , Kagalou , I , Kelly-Quinn , M , Klamerus-Iwan , A , Kluvankova , T , Koeck , R , Konovska , I , Krajter Ostoic , S , Krc , J , Lavnyy , V , Leonardi , A , Libiete , Z , Little , D , Lo Porto , A , Loukas , A , Lyubenova , M I , Maric , B , Martínez-López , J , Martinez , I , Maxim , A , Metslaid , M , Melvin , A , Costică , M , Mincev , I , Morkvenas , Z , Nevenic , R , Nisbet , T , O'hUallachain , D , Olschewski , R , Östberg , J , Oszust , K , Ovando , P , Paletto , A , Parpan , T , Pettenella , D , Pezdevšek Malovrh , Š , Planinšek , Š , Podlipná , R , Posavec , S , Potočki , K , Prokofieva , I , Quinteiro , P , Radocz , L , Ristic , R , Robert , N , Rugani , B , Sabanovic , J , Sarvasova , Z , Savoska , S , Schleppi , P , Schueler , G , Shannon , M , Silgram , M , Srdjevic , B , Stefan , G , Stijovic , A , Strange , N , Tattari , S , Teofilovski , A , Termansen , M , Thorsen , B J , Toth , A , Trebs , I , Tmušić , N , Vasiliades , L , Vedel , S E , Ventrubová , K , Vuletic , D , Winkel , G , Yao , R , Young , S , Yousefpour , R , Zahvoyska , L , Zhang , D , Zhou , J & Žižková , E 2017 , ' PESFOR-W : improving the design and environmental effectiveness of woodlands for water payments for ecosystem services ' , Research Ideas and Outcomes , vol. 3 , e13828 . https://doi.org/10.3897/rio.3.e13828
The EU Water Framework Directive aims to ensure restoration of Europe's water bodies to "good ecological status" by 2027. Many Member States will struggle to meet this target, with around half of EU river catchments currently reporting below standard water quality. Diffuse pollution from agriculture represents a major pressure, affecting over 90% of river basins. Accumulating evidence shows that recent improvements to agricultural practices are benefiting water quality but in many cases will be insufficient to achieve WFD objectives. There is growing support for land use change to help bridge the gap, with a particular focus on targeted tree planting to intercept and reduce the delivery of diffuse pollutants to water. This form of integrated catchment management offers multiple benefits to society but a significant cost to landowners and managers. New economic instruments, in combination with spatial targeting, need to be developed to ensure cost effective solutions – including tree planting for water benefits - are realised. Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) are flexible, incentive-based mechanisms that could play an important role in promoting land use change to deliver water quality targets. The PESFOR-W COST Action will consolidate learning from existing woodlands for water PES schemes in Europe and help standardize approaches to evaluating the environmental effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of woodland measures. It will also create a European network through which PES schemes can be facilitated, extended and improved, for example by incorporating other ecosystem services linking with aims of the wider forests-carbon policy nexus. ; The EU Water Framework Directive aims to ensure restoration of Europe's water bodies to "good ecological status" by 2027. Many Member States will struggle to meet this target, with around half of EU river catchments currently reporting below standard water quality. Diffuse pollution from agriculture represents a major pressure, affecting over 90% of river basins. Accumulating evidence shows that recent improvements to agricultural practices are benefiting water quality but in many cases will be insufficient to achieve WFD objectives. There is growing support for land use change to help bridge the gap, with a particular focus on targeted tree planting to intercept and reduce the delivery of diffuse pollutants to water. This form of integrated catchment management offers multiple benefits to society but a significant cost to landowners and managers. New economic instruments, in combination with spatial targeting, need to be developed to ensure cost effective solutions – including tree planting for water benefits - are realised. Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) are flexible, incentive-based mechanisms that could play an important role in promoting land use change to deliver water quality targets. The PESFOR-W COST Action will consolidate learning from existing woodlands for water PES schemes in Europe and help standardize approaches to evaluating the environmental effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of woodland measures. It will also create a European network through which PES schemes can be facilitated, extended and improved, for example by incorporating other ecosystem services linking with aims of the wider forests-carbon policy nexus.