NATURE BASED SOLUTIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESILIENCE IN URBAN AREAS

A POLICY BRIEF ON NATURE BASED SOLUTIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESILIENCE IN URBAN AREAS

1.????BACKGROUND

Climate change presents one of the greatest challenges to our today’s societies. Extreme effects on nature and people are been experienced majorly in cities as cities form microcosms with extreme temperature gradients. Further, climate stress leads to decrease in presence of typical native species and influences society through health-related effects and socio-economic impacts by increased numbers of heat waves, droughts and flooding events (Carter, 2011; CIGI, 2009; IPCC, 2014). In addition to climate change, urbanisation as another challenge together with the accompanying increases in the number and size of cities are influencing ecosystems with a number of interlinked pressures. These pressures include loss and degradation of natural areas, soil sealing and the densification of built-up areas, which pose additional significant challenges to ecosystem functionality, the provision of ecosystem services and human well-being in cities around the world. However, nature-based solutions have the potential to counteract these pressures.

IUCN defines nature-based solutions (NBS) as actions to protect, sustainably manage and restore natural or modified ecosystems, which address societal challenges (e.g., climate change, food and water security or natural disasters) effectively and adaptively, while simultaneously providing human well-being and biodiversity benefits (Cohen-Shacham, Walters, Janzen, & Maginnis, 2016). The European Commission defines the NBS as nature-based solutions to societal challenges as solutions that are inspired and supported by nature, which are cost-effective, simultaneously provide environmental, social and economic benefits and help build resilience. Such solutions bring more, and more diverse, nature and natural features and processes into cities, landscapes and seascapes, through locally adapted, resource-efficient and systemic interventions’ (European Union, 2020).

In this policy brief, we focus on some of the NBS, their impacts and implications in modern urban setting. The focus is to argue how public spaces as green infrastructure (GI) as lungs of urban areas are important in the whole scope of NBS. We assess some of the benefits related to these NBS and make policy recommendations including the implications of such policy direction. The policy brief is framed within several global framework that focus on climate change, public space as well as learn from some cases that NBS and GI have succeeded.

2.????NATURE BASED SOLUTIONS AND GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE

Green infrastructure (GI) and nature-based solutions (NBS) are increasingly recognised for their potential to contribute to a range of urban challenges and policy directions. It is important to understand how these two concepts relates and mean in the scope of urban resilience?that is, addressing climate change and urbanisation problems.

Green infrastructure (GI) is a concept that include all set of mitigation technologies and measures aimed at reducing the impact of climate change and urbanization by delivering diverse environmental, social, and economic benefits, including flood mitigation, water purification, climate adaptation, carbon sequestration and storage, enhancement of biodiversity, job creation, food production, and generation of spaces for recreation (Jato-Espino, Sa?udo-Fontaneda, & Andrés-Valeri, 2020)

Whereas NBS concept has emerged as an operationalisation of an ecosystem services concept within spatial planning policies and practices in many cities, the concept appears to be multidimensional and closely related to GI. NBS is recognised as a transdisciplinary umbrella concept that builds upon pre-existing concepts, such as blue-green infrastructure, natural capital, ecosystem services, and landscape functions in environmental planning. Since NBS are based, in large part, on natural areas and features in and around cities, the presence of green infrastructure (GI) such as public spaces which, is a strategically planned network of natural and semi-natural areas with other environmental features designed and managed to deliver a wide range of ecosystem services is fundamental (Zwierzchowska, Fagiewicz, Poni?y, Lupa, & Mizgajski, 2019). Thus, the discussion of NBS is closely tied to the provision of GI such as public space. As Zwierzchowska et al., (2019) argues, NBS may result from increased provisioning and improved availability of urban public spaces but the ?development of GI elements is a key issue. In this respect, GI can be recognized as a physical structure, whereas NBS are activities aimed at the conscious, goal oriented development and/or the use of GI potential to solve urban problems. They rely on the application of knowledge about environmental processes, ecosystem services and benefits provided by GI. In this context, if GI planning, design and management are intentionally oriented to tackle environmental, social and economic challenges, they can be recognized as NBS. In summary, the term GI describes spatial structure of ecosystems, whereas NBS is seen as a human action oriented on the GI functions (Jato-Espino et al., 2020; Zwierzchowska et al., 2019).

?3.????WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?

In recent past, the world is witnessing a state of economic, social and environmental change that has not previously been experienced. Cities are facing the enormous challenge of dealing with poverty alleviation and social and gender inequality, climate change, biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation against a background of a financial crisis and recession in significant portions of the global economy (UNEP, 2013). These effects are more severe in urban areas where over 50% of the world population currently lives (UN-Habitat, 2013).

Urban areas in low and middle-income countries have more than a third of the total world population and nearly three quarter of the population in these countries live in cities. These cities are likely to house most of the world population growth in the next decade as well as job creation and economic activities. In regard to climate change and related risks, these cities in developing world already houses a large proportion of the population that is at high risk of extreme weather events, sea rise, heat waves, among others (Satterthwaite, Huq, Pelling, Reid, & Lankao, 2007). As these is happening, cities around the world are found in a state of unpreparedness to address the challenges related to climate change and urbanisation. Thus, the need to have lasting solutions and policy direction to these challenges cannot be overlooked. ?

This policy brief argues the need of nature-based solutions and interventions for addressing climate change and urbanisation challenges and key responses to creating urban resilience.

4.????REFERENCE FRAMEWORKS

? 4.1 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDGs are set of 17 global goals. Although the goals are interrelated and speak to each other in terms of sustainable development, they can be grouped into five categories namely people, planet, prosperity, peace and partnership (Morton, Pencheon, & Squires, 2017). The relevant goals to climate change and ecosystem restoration (planet) include goal 13 on climate action, Goal 14 on Life below Water and goal 15 on life on land. Closely related in this context is goal 11 in prosperity category that focuses on Sustainable Cities and Communities (United Nation, 2018)

4.2 Paris Agreement (COP 21) 2015

Adopted during the 2015 COP 21 and came into effect in February 2016. The Paris Agreement requires all countries to make significant commitments to address climate change. Countries responsible for 97 percent of global emissions have already pledged their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) for how they will address climate change. Countries will continue to provide climate finance to help the most vulnerable adapt to climate change and build low-carbon economies. While the Paris Agreement does not “solve” climate change, it allows us to start the next wave of global climate actions, creating a virtuous cycle for more aggressive action in the decades to come (NRDC, 2017).

4.3 The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015)

The Framework was adopted at the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in Sendai, Japan, on March 18, 2015.

The Sendai Framework outlines seven clear targets and four priorities for action to prevent new and reduce existing disaster risks by understanding disaster risk, strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk, Investing in disaster reduction for resilience and, enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response, and to "Build Back Better" in recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction.

4. 4 New Urban Agenda

The New Urban Agenda (NUA) is an action-oriented framework that effectively provides guidance for achieving the urban dimensions of the SDGs. It outlines the three fundamental principles and accompanying concrete mechanisms that will be required to develop cities more sustainably and equitably through 2036. These include: ensure we leave no one behind, by ending poverty in all its forms and dimensions, ensure sustainable and inclusive urban economies by leveraging the agglomeration benefits

of well-planned urbanization, including high productivity, competitiveness and innovation, and ensure environmental sustainability by promoting clean energy and sustainable use of land and resources in urban development.

4.5 Convention on Biological Diversity

The Convention on Biological Diversity was inspired by the world community's growing commitment to sustainable development. It represents a dramatic step forward in the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of genetic resources.

4.6 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), formed in 1992 by 196 parties, set the ultimate objective to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.

5.????POLICY STATEMENT

The policy addresses the need to have nature-based solutions as ecosystem approaches for addressing challenges in urban areas. The policy is framed within the scope of urban setting and with understanding that many challenges in urban areas are wicked in nature and thus solutions to these problems need to be addressed in a multidimensional approach. The nature-based solutions in this context are argued to include all green infrastructure approaches and interventions that aims to address urban challenges overarching from climate change, food security, risk reduction, human health, water security, and socioeconomic development while ensuring ecosystem conservation and social cultural principles.

6.????NATURE BASED SOLUTIONS and URBAN RESILIENCE

Nature-based solutions Nature-based Solutions (NbS) use ecosystems and the services they provide to address societal challenges such as climate change, food security or natural disasters. In urban areas, the NBS approaches have been framed to address several challenges that aims to create resilience in these urban areas. We discuss these tracks of NBS and how each contribute to urban resilience.

6.1.Climate change

The WEF Global Risks Report lists extreme weather events and natural disasters as the top two greatest risks to the global economy and human wellbeing, both in terms of severity of impact and likelihood of occurrence. Several mitigation mechanisms in the past to combat the effect of climate change have not be successful in terms of ecosystem restoration.

NBS focuses on ecosystem-based mitigation approaches that prevents degradation and loss of natural ecosystems. Challenges such as emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs), deforestation, soil pollution all continue to be on rising trend. NBS approaches proposes conservation restorations and sustainable management of urban forests, wetlands, oceans, green spaces as they play critical role in balancing carbon cycle and regulating earth climate. NBS does not only focus on environmental benefits but also socioeconomic benefits. Thus, restoration of urban forest and increase area under green infrastructure should be traded off with the amount of CO2 sequestrated per year and valued as per global standards in order to establish cost-benefit justification.

6.2.Disaster risk reduction

Many of the urban centers across the world that need to adapt most to avoid?severe impacts of climate change have large deficiencies in all of these preconditions for successful adaptation and for addressing the development deficiencies that underpin their lack of adaptation capacity. Most of the risk to urban populations is associated with the incapacity of local governments to ensure provision for infrastructure and for disaster risk reduction and disaster preparedness.

Disaster risk reduction efforts can significantly reduce the likelihood of a natural hazard event turning into a disaster through systematic efforts to analyse and manage the causal factors of disasters, including through reduced exposure to hazards, lessened vulnerability of people and property, wise management of land and the environment, and improved preparedness for adverse events (Kabisch, Korn, Stadler, & Bonn, 2017).

6.3.Water security in urban area

Built infrastructure alone is increasingly unlikely to provide future water security and resilience against predicted climate change impacts. Globally, there is a growing need to have lasting solutions to water security for over four billion people accounting for over 60% of world population who live in water-stressed areas. Mitigation measures that involves exploration of groundwater have proven to be unsustainable and results to more stress with no enough water for future uses. Further, Water stress in urban areas especially in developing countries is exacerbated by pollution. About 80-90% of all wastewater in developing countries is discharged directly into surface water bodies, creating severe risks for human health and ecosystem (Cohen-Shacham et al., 2016).

Applying NBS by use of natural infrastructure such as urban forests, wetlands, floodplains, green spaces and designing public spaces as lungs to absorb exceeds run off, will help reduce water stress in urban areas. Thus the focus is integrating natural approaches to existing grey infrastructure. For instance, in places prone to floods, construction of dams that often affect aquatic ecosystem by changing river flows, will be reconnected with river channels by preserving floodplains, wetlands (IUCN, 2018).

6.4.Food security

Food security is addressed by the Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 2 on zero hunger and under which there is provision, along with other solutions, to maintain ecosystems and ?develop sustainable food production systems. ?More than 795 million people are estimated to be undernourished, the vast majority of whom live in developing countries (FAO, IFAD, & WFP., 2015).

Nature-based Solutions are crucial to address food security issues. These include, for example, protecting animal and plant, managing wild species like fishes, and providing irrigation water. In addition, the efforts include restoration, conservation and management of ecosystems to deliver services can help stabilise food availability, access and use during periods of natural disaster, climate change, or political instability majorly in urban areas where we have over 60% of the world population.

6.5.Human health

The natural environment has a way of influencing and affecting the human health, well-being and social cohesion. The way in which NBS promote human health can be conceptualised in two types of ecosystem services namely cultural and regulatory. The cultural ecosystem services promote health through such avenues as physical activity, stress relief, and social interaction. The regulatory ecosystem services prevent disease by reducing risk factors, such as air pollution, noise, heat stress, densification, and flooding (Kabisch, van den Bosch, & Lafortezza, 2017).

Some of the NBS contributing to the human health include urban trees and other vegetation providing cooling, which reduces the impact of the urban heat island. Vegetation can also improve air quality by removing air pollutants. Public spaces in cities such as parks, gardens, playgrounds that can help prevent flooding through their water regulating functions as well as improve urban liveability and quality of life.

6.6.Socioeconomic development

The socio-economic benefits created by NbS, make these cost-effective solutions to address multiple societal challenges while generating economic opportunities and employment. NbS, such as greening cities, can make areas more attractive to new investors, residents and visitors (Lisa Kopsieker et al., 2021). Take for example the case below.

Case study 1: Zagreb’s public space greening project - Nature’s solutions to unemployment[1]

In 2005, the city of Zagreb in Croatia launched an education and training programme aimed at reducing unemployment while maintaining its green spaces. Zagreb has a number of parks, such as Medvednica and Park Maksimir, which require significant resources and skills to preserve and clean. The programme trains long-term unemployed people to work full-time maintaining green spaces in exchange for free training programmes on a range of skills that can help them re-enter the local labour market. Participants can choose courses ranging from high school education to vocational training in areas like health, construction, office administration and catering.

From 2005-2015, over 3,000 unemployed people have participated in the programme with around 30% subsequently finding employment. This has helped with poverty reduction and has increased motivation and self-confidence amongst participants. Through the project, around 300 people were annually involved in maintaining green public spaces and removing illegally disposed waste from forests, lawns and waterbodies, which has become an important threat to biodiversity in the region. As such, the programme effectively shows how solutions like nature preservation in cities can deliver important social benefits through reskilling.

?Case study 2 Inner-City Tree Planting, Bologna, Italy[2]

Funded under the LIFE programme between 2012 and 2013, the GAIA project, in Bologna, Italy, established a public-private partnership through the ‘green areas inner-city agreement,’ where private firms pledged to plant trees in the inner city. This allowed local enterprises to decrease their carbon footprint while also generating environmental and social benefits for the community. To date some 2,300 of the target 3,000 trees have been planted, and a toolkit was created to monitor the contribution to carbon sequestration and air pollution.?Assuming that one tree will be sequestrating 1 ton of CO2 in 30 years, the summary of the project budget is estimated at euro 1,202,000. With the 2320 trees already planted the cost of one ton of CO2 sequestrated is estimated at euro 518. The intention is to continue until the tree-planting target is met.

7.????GUIDING PRINCIPLES IN NATURE BASED SOLUTIONS IN URBAN AREAS

The guiding principles in this policy brief are based on the NBS focus as outlined in the IUCN framework. ??The principles are based on three broad terminologies namely ecosystem, societal and actions.

Ecosystem within the NBS framework refers to and addresses all type of ecosystems including natural and man made both in urban and regional wide setting. Societal focuses on broadening NBS to also address social and economic issues alongside environmental challenges. Actions in NBS underlines the need for solutions to major societal challenges while to the extend, the approaches that are nature based or closely integrates with particular ecosystem. The guiding principles include

7.1. Ecosystem conservation

NBS in urban areas should embrace nature conservation norms and practices. In other words, while addressing climate change and urbanisation challenges, human interventions should focus on recreating the natural environment while putting into practices the best conservations norms in a particular jurisdiction.

7.2. interlinkages of solutions?

NBS in urban areas can be implemented alone or in an integrated manner with other solutions to societal challenges. For example while setting up a public space such as green parks in an urban area, the implementation of such intervention can be interlinked with ?use of modern and relevant technological and utilise the best engineering solutions.

7.3. Context based solution

NBS are determined by site-specific natural and cultural contexts that include traditional, local and scientific knowledge. Thus, specific interventions need to be well thought before adoption in any given urban area.

7.4. Equity and transparency

The application of NBS in any urban setting must produce societal benefits in a fair and equitable way, in a manner that promotes transparency and broad participation among all stakeholders or users. That means, while implementing NBS such as having public spaces in a city, the implementation and the scope of the public spaces should be in such as way that it is accessible, usable and beneficial to all city population. The aspect of transparency is key in NBS because it brings about the sense of ownership and possession of the interventions among the urban populations who benefits from the solutions.

?7.5. Diversity

The implementation of NBS in an urban area should focus on maintaining biological and cultural diversity and the ability of ecosystems to evolve over time. Thus intervention in any given areas must maintain biological protection and conservation that is relevant within that area, but also evolve to match the dynamic cultural and societal values.

7.6. City-wide approach

Interventions to have NBS should be conceptualised from a city wide scale rather than area based. This is to mean, interventions in location A should be well thought before implementation and integrated with location B with strategies on how ecological and cultural principles will contribute to whole ecosystem restoration.

7.7. Trade-offs

?NBS must recognise and address the trade-offs between the production of a few immediate economic benefits for development, and future options for the production of the full range of ecosystems services. Thus NBS in their sustainable approach must be thought within the short term and long term and trade-offs balanced to ensure benefits are realised across generations (Lechner et al., 2020).

7.8. Integration

One of the key principle of NBS is the need to integrate with existing or new physical (grey) infrastructure interventions. NBS or in other words the green infrastructures are an integral part of the overall design of policies, and measures or actions, to address a specific challenge and thus, the implementation of such solutions are compliment to existing policies, practices, designs, measures and actions. For example, while putting in place public spaces in urban area, the implementation must benefit from existing city values and engineering values such as designs. Further, the implementation must include all the intended benefits and assessed not only from environmental point of view but also social, economic and cultural aspects (Kabisch, Korn, et al., 2017).

8.????WHAT CAN BE DONE?

In framing NBS and considering its applications, it is useful to think of it as an umbrella concept that covers a whole range of ecosystem-related approaches all of which address societal challenges. In this policy, we propose the approach to fall into five categories:

(1) Restoration approaches (Ecological restoration, Ecological Engineering and Forest landscape restoration

(2) Issue-specific approaches ( Ecosystem-based adaptation, Ecosystem-based mitigation, Climate adaptation services, Ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction,

(3) Infrastructure-related approaches (Natural infrastructure and Green infrastructure)

(4) Management approaches (Integrated coastal zone management and Integrated water resources management)

(5) Protection approaches (Area-based conservation approaches including protected area management)

9.????LIMITATIONS AND CHALLENGES

9.1 Measuring effectiveness:

Up to date, there is no clear framework identifying appropriate indicators and metrics for the social–ecological effectiveness of nature-based interventions. Effectiveness in delivering a specific climatic adaptation benefit—for example, reducing the impact of floods arising through increased precipitation—is influenced by many interacting, context-specific factors that fluctuate over time (Seddon et al., 2020).

9.2 Human–nature relationships and conflicts

Such issues exist where NBS are applied in cities and is potentially exacerbated when ecosystems are restored in order to bring back nature and wildlife for biodiversity conservation. Of particular concern, though an often neglected point, is by increasing local floodwater storage through the construction of small retention ponds we unwittingly create new habitats for mosquitos, which if poorly maintained can result in the development of malarial hotspots (Seddon et al., 2020).

City manager need to consider conflict mitigation methods when planning NBS projects to minimise such unwanted outcomes. The acceptance of the type of NBS utilised will vary with the city's levels of acceptance of naturalness

9.3 Policy and governance context

NBS and GI at large are intended to promote transparency and inclusion in decision making. However, in many developing countries are marred with illiberal politics and authoritarian leadership styles. Many countries even lack strong democracy and pro-environmental policies. For instance, While low- to middle-income countries in Southeast Asia are facing serious environmental problems, the political context and economic factors are drivers for most decisions in development planning, which favour market-driven infrastructure projects (Lechner et al., 2020).

9.4 What about wicked problems?

They are multidimensional challenges that are difficult to resolve due to incomplete or contradictory information, differing views on the nature of the problem, or complex interactions with other issues. Wicked problems often blend into other issues and only become visible when their serious effects are felt. Climate change is a “super wicked problem”: its causes are multiple and complex, its impacts are uncertain and interrelated, and potential solutions to climate change might well cause further problems.

10.??CONCLUSION?

In conclusion, addressing effect of climate change and urbanisation requires application of forward reasoning and planning. As Riedy (2013) argue for a new epistemological approach to policy development called applied forward reasoning. This kind of approach looks forward to identify ways in which new policies can consciously generate path-dependence through lock in, self-reinforcing, increasing returns and positive feedback (Kovats et al., 2003; Riedy, 2013). In this approach, which best fits the NBS and creation of GI in urban areas, the key strategies will thus include:

Identifying interventions that have the potential to create nature conservation, perhaps by focusing on small changes to existing sticky institutions or looking at lower policy levels where small changes could ratchet up over time. This way NBS practices and principles will be realised from small scale and intra urban areas and accrue to the larger city context.

Short-term coalition building, to expand the supportive population and entrench that support over time in NBS and development of GI in cities. The coalitions aims to

Creating new interests whose identities align with NBS and GI, for example through training and education to build skills needed to address such issues as climate change and urbanisation challenges and model local based solutions and design best fit-to-purpose GI such as public spaces, green roofs, drainage channels among others.

Paying attention to how norms and values might play a role in policy trajectories, generating new “logics of appropriateness” that are self-reinforcing. The success of future policies addressing wicked problems such as climate change and urbanisation will depend majorly on how such policies integrate with norms and cultural values in any locality. It is important for policy framers and implementers to take into considerations how norms and cultural values play a key role in ecosystem restoration or biodiversity conservation measures as envisioned in NBS.

?11.???????????????????????REFERENCES

1. Carter, J. G. (2011). Climate change adaptation in European cities. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 3(3), 193–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2010.12.015
2. CIGI. (2009). Climate Change in Africa: Adaptation, Mitigation and Governance Challenges. Retrieved from https://www.unicef.org/esaro/Climate_Change_in_Africa.pdf
3. Cohen-Shacham, Walters, G., Janzen, C., & Maginnis, S. (2016). Nature-based Solutions to address global societal challenges. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. https://doi.org/https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2016.13.en
4. European Union. (2020). Nature-based solutions: State of the art in EU-funded projects. https://doi.org/10.2777/236007
5. FAO, IFAD, & WFP. (2015). The State of Food Insecurity in the World: Meeting the 2015 international hunger targets: taking stock of uneven progress. FAO, IFAD and WFP. https://doi.org/I4646E/1/05.15
6. IPCC. (2014). Summary for Policymakers. Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability - Contributions of the Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2009.11.012
7. IUCN. (2018). Protected Area Categories | IUCN. Retrieved January 30, 2018, from https://www.iucn.org/theme/protected-areas/about/protected-area-categories
8. Jato-Espino, D., Sa?udo-Fontaneda, L. A., & Andrés-Valeri, V. C. (2020). Green Infrastructure: Cost-Effective Nature-Based Solutions for Safeguarding the Environment and Protecting Human Health and Well-Being. In Handbook of Environmental Materials Management. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58538-3
9. Kabisch, N., Korn, H., Stadler, J., & Bonn, A. (2017). Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas — Linkages Between Science , Policy and Practice (pp. 1–11). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56091-5
10. Kabisch, N., van den Bosch, M., & Lafortezza, R. (2017). The health benefits of nature-based solutions to urbanization challenges for children and the elderly – A systematic review. Environmental Research, 159, 362–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2017.08.004
11. Kovats, S., Ebi, K. L., Menne, B., Campbell-Lendrum, D., Canziani, O. F., Githeko, A., … Seguin, J. (2003). Health and Global Environmental Change Methods of assessing human health vulnerability and public health adaptation to climate change. Copenhagen: WHO. Retrieved from https://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/91098/E81923.pdf
12. Lechner, A. M., Gomes, R. L., Rodrigues, L., Ashfold, M. J., Selvam, S. B., Wong, E. P., … Gibbins, C. (2020). Challenges and considerations of applying nature-based solutions in low- and middle-income countries in Southeast and East Asia. Blue-Green Systems, 2(1), 331–351. https://doi.org/10.2166/bgs.2020.014
13. Lisa Kopsieker, Erik Gerritsen, Thorfinn Stainforth, Antoine Lucic, Giulia Costa Domingo, Sandra Naumann, … McKenna Davis. (2021). Nature-based solutions and their socio-economic benefits for Europe’s recovery Enhancing the uptake of nature-based solutions across EU policies . Retrieved from www.ieep.eu
14. Morton, S., Pencheon, D., & Squires, N. (2017, December 1). Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and their implementation. British Medical Bulletin. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/bmb/ldx031
15. NRDC. (2017). The Paris Agreement on Climate Change . Retrieved from https://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/overview.
16. Riedy, C. (2013). Climate change is a super wicked problem. Retrieved April 5, 2021, from https://medium.com/@chrisjriedy/climate-change-is-a-super-wicked-problem-b2e2b77d947d
17. Satterthwaite, D., Huq, S., Pelling, M., Reid, H., & Lankao, P. R. (2007). Adapting to Climate Change in Urban Areas. Human Settlments (Vol. 58). Retrieved from https://pubs.iied.org/pubs/pdfs/10549IIED.pdf
18. Seddon, N., Chausson, A., Berry, P., Girardin, C. A. J., Smith, A., & Turner, B. (2020, March 16). Understanding the value and limits of nature-based solutions to climate change and other global challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. Royal Society Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0120
19. UN-Habitat. (2013). StaSTATE OF THE WORLD’S CITIES 2010/2011. Bridging the Urban Divide (Vol. 53). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
20. UNEP. (2013). The Social Dimension of Ecosystem-based Adaptation. Nairobi. Retrieved from https://www.ecologic.eu/sites/files/publication/2013/unep_2013_eba_social_dimension_policy_series_12-small_nov_2013.pdf
21. United Nation. (2018). The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Retrieved from https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/news/communications-material/
22. Zwierzchowska, I., Fagiewicz, K., Poni?y, L., Lupa, P., & Mizgajski, A. (2019). Introducing nature-based solutions into urban policy – facts and gaps. Case study of Poznań. Land Use Policy, 85, 161–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.03.025

[1] Obtained from https://citiesatwork.eu/images/green_jobs_for_social_inclusion_FINAL.pdf

[2] Obtained from European Union (2020)