Nature-Based Solutions in Marginalised Areas
What if the key to thriving cities lies in embracing nature rather than overpowering it?
In an age where cities face growing challenges- from climate change to urban overcrowding, nature-based solutions (Nbs) are emerging as reliable and powerful alternatives in creating resilient and sustainable urban environments.
What are nature based solutions first and foremost?
Nature-based solutions (Nbs) are strategies that prioritise natural processes to address environmental, social and economical urban challenges ((Kabisch et al., 2016)).
Unlike the traditional approaches, Nbs copy natural processes to provide sustainable natural outcomes. They include interventions such as urban forest, green forest, wetland restoration, biowales which help to address issues such as flooding, heat islands, and biodiversity loss while enhancing the quality iof life for city dwellers ((Raymond et al., 2017).
Why are Nbs essential in urban design?
As conveyed in the last paragraph, Nbs provide many benefits which can be categorised into 3 sub-sections, environmental, social and economic:
Figure 1: Nature- based solutions restoration example diagram by Communications, earth and environment, 2024
Environmental:
- Nbs help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase carbon sequestration. Urban forests for example act as carbon sinks, while green roofs and walls reduce the energy demand for cooling buildings (Gill et al., 2007)
- Solutions like bioswales and constructed wetlands mitigate flooding by improving water infiltration and storage. Copenhagen’s Cloudburst Management Plan is an excellent example of this in action (Danish Ministry of Climate, Energy, and Utilities, 2015).
- By incorporating green corridors and habitats, cities can foster greater biodiversity, supporting pollinators and other wildlife even in densely built environments (Tzoulas et al., 2007).
Social:
- Access to green spaces improves mental and physical health, reducing stress and promoting active lifestyles.
- Green infrastructure projects often provide opportunities for community involvement, fostering stronger neighborhood ties and a sense of ownership (Colding & Barthel, 2013).
- Green spaces and biophilic design enhance the visual appeal of cities, creating spaces where people want to live and spend time (Beatley, 2011).
Economic:
- Nbs provide cost-effective alternatives to traditional infrastructure. For example, maintaining a wetland for flood management is of course less expensive than building and maintaining a concrete storm water system (TEEB, 2010).
- Having close proximity to green spaces also boosts property values, providing economic incentives for urban developers to adopt Nbs (Wolch et al., 2014).
Successful examples and their stories
Singapore’s Green Plan – Vertical gardens and biophilic architecture
Singapore’s “City in a Garden” approach is a perfect example of how Nbs have transformed urban spaces into green hubs with rooftop gardens and living walls. These solutions have reduced the city’s ambient temperature and contributed to its goal of becoming carbon-neutral (Tan et al., 2013).
Copenhagen’s Cloudburst Management Plan -using Nbs to manage urban flooding
Copenhagen’s Cloudburst Management Plan further demonstrates how Nbs can be used to address urban flooding which is a growing issue in many cities due to climate change. The city has implemented green infrastructure such as permeable pavements, detention basins, and green streets(Planting) to channel excess rainwater. These measures not only reduce flood risks but also enhance existing urban aesthetics and biodiversity (Danish Ministry of Climate, Energy, and Utilities, 2015).
A Case for Poorer UK Communities
How can Nature-base solutions also be beneficial for addressing challenges in economically disadvantaged urban areas in the UK? These areas often experience disproportionate exposure to environmental risks, such as flooding and air pollution, while lacking access to green spaces.
Benefits of Nbs in Poorer Communities
- Many low-income neighborhoods in the UK are situated in flood-prone areas. Implementing Nbs such as rain gardens and community wetlands can help manage storm-water effectively, reducing flood risks while providing co-benefits like improved air quality and biodiversity (Kazmierczak & Carter, 2010).
- Residents in deprived areas also often have limited access to parks or green spaces. Introducing Nbs like pocket parks and urban tree planting can significantly improve mental and physical health outcomes by providing civilians with recreational spaces and reducing urban heat island effects (Maas et al., 2006).
- Nbs projects, when also designed with community participation can foster engagement. Initiatives such as urban gardening and green roofs not only help to beautify grey estate neighborhoods but also provide opportunities for skills development and social interaction (Colding & Barthel, 2013).
- And finally, incorporating NbS in poorer areas can increase property values and attract investment, while also creating green jobs in the design, construction, and maintenance of these projects (Wolch et al., 2014).
Example in Practice
London’s Urban Greening Initiatives
Projects like the Greener City Fund in London have focused on bringing Nbs to poorer local areas, including urban tree planting and green roof construction, directly benefiting economically disadvantaged communities (Greater London Authority, 2018).
By addressing environmental challenges through the usage of Nbs in current city design, cities in the UK can ensure that the benefits of sustainable design are distributed more equitably, creating healthier and more resilient communities.
Conclusion
Nature-based solutions are more than a trend in urban design, these solutions represent a pattern shift towards more sustainable, resilient cities. By integrating the power of nature as explored in this blog, cities can address environmental challenges, improve quality of life, and foster economic growth, specially within the UK’s poorest communities. As urbanization continues to rise, the integration of Nbs will be a critical action to take for creating cities that are not just livable but thrive in harmony with nature.
References
Beatley, T. (2011). Biophilic Cities: Integrating Nature into Urban Design and Planning. Island Press.
Cavanagh, N., et al. (2014). Singapore’s Urban Ecosystem. Urban Studies Journal.
Colding, J., & Barthel, S. (2013). The Role of Urban Green Commons in Social-Ecological Resilience. Ecological Economics.
Danish Ministry of Climate, Energy, and Utilities. (2015). Copenhagen’s Cloudburst Management Plan.
Forestry Commission. (2011). The Mersey Forest Plan.
Gill, S. E., et al. (2007). Adapting Cities for Climate Change: The Role of Green Infrastructure. Built Environment.
Greater London Authority. (2018). Greener City Fund Projects.
Kabisch, N., et al. (2016). Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas: Linkages Between Science, Policy, and Practice. Springer.
Kazmierczak, A., & Carter, J. (2010). Adaptation to Climate Change Using Green and Blue Infrastructure: A Database of Case Studies. University of Manchester.
Raymond, C. M., et al. (2017). An Impact Evaluation Framework to Support Planning and Evaluation of Nature-Based Solutions Projects. Environmental Science & Policy.
TEEB. (2010). The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature.
Tzoulas, K., et al. (2007). Promoting Ecosystem and Human Health in Urban Areas Using Green Infrastructure: A Literature Review. Landscape and Urban Planning.
Wolch, J. R., et al. (2014). Urban Green Space, Public Health, and Environmental Justice: The Challenge of Making Cities ‘Just Green Enough.’ Landscape and Urban Planning.
*Published again with the right selected categories of #Blog as wasn’t selected before*
Hi! This blog has done a great job highlighting the benefits of nature-based solutions, it is equally important to think of the challenges and factors that would go into actually implementing those ideas so the strategy will at least be sustainable and equitable.
One of the key issues to be considered is green gentrification, where the increase in property value due to the installation of green infrastructure drives low-income communities out of their homes. For instance, green infrastructure enhancements in Chicago have been related to increased housing prices that shut out those disadvantaged individuals who may most need those benefits (Anguelovski et al., 2019). Consequently, urban planners should combine NbS deployment with policies of affordable housing so as not to displace people and ensure inclusion.
The lifespan and maintenance of NbS pose further challenges. Whereas NbS such as urban forests and bioswales offer immediate benefits, their long-term viability is based on sustainable funding and management. Over time, these solutions may become less effective or even have adverse impacts if not adequately maintained. Community stewardship and public-private partnerships are stressed in maintaining the sustainability of NbS by Arup’s urban rewilding research (Arup, 2022).
The blog elucidates the social advantages of NbS-mostly how it might raise the living standards of people in weak economies. There, however, lies the secret to their successful application in such regions: genuinely true community involvement. Underutilization or resistance results from the top-down NbS programs which often fail to accommodate peculiar needs and preferences of the local people.
Participatory planning has the potential to develop tailor-made solutions for regional environmental and socio-economic issues while fostering a sense of ownership, as depicted in Arup’s work on the Dar es Salaam Urban Greening Initiative (Arup, 2021).
One example of this is the fantastic urban greening of London, but very large-scale action needs proactive policy to avoid discriminatory impacts. For example, combining social housing schemes with green infrastructure projects ensures that the benefits of the latter are not used to displace lower-income groups. NbS projects, through the inclusion of educational programs, skills training for the development of green jobs, and more, could provide other socioeconomic benefits.
NbS is indeed a strong tool in sustainable urban planning. Effective application of NbS nevertheless requires resolution in these challenges, among many others, which include green gentrification, and support by communities. To assure prosperous, resilient, inclusive cities for all, NbS needs to emphasize equality, take a long-term approach, and consider participatory approaches.
References:
Anguelovski, I., Connolly, J. J. T., Pearsall, H., Shokry, G., Checker, M., Maantay, J., Gould, K., Lewis, T. and Maroko, A. (2019). Why green ‘climate gentrification’ threatens poor and vulnerable populations. Nature Climate Change, 9(8), pp. 609–617.
Arup (2021). Dar es Salaam Urban Greening Initiative. Available at: https://www.arup.com/projects/dar-es-salaam-urban-greening.
Arup (2022). Urban Rewilding: The Value and Co-benefits of Nature in Urban Spaces. Available at: https://www.arup.com/insights/urban-rewilding.
Hi！I very like your post! I think his article analyzes the importance of nature-based solutions (Nbs) in urban design from multiple dimensions! Here have a aspect in the fight against climate change and social inequality. On the whole, I think the structure of the article is vert clear, using a wealth of literature and cases, so that its views have a strong persuasive. However, I also have some additional views and reflections, I hope can form a dialogue with this article.
Firstly, The paper highlights the combined environmental, social and economic benefits from nature-based solutions, such as reduce carbon emissions, enhance community cohesion, increase economic returns and so on. This win in many aspects indeed is one of Nbs’s core strengths that I can see. But I think the realization process of these benefits can be further developed. For example, the article mentions that Nbs can increase property values in low-income communities, but this may can lead to gentrification of green space, make these land price rising and forced to move out. This may contradict the article’s emphasis on fairness. I think when people mention Nbs economic benefits should consider these potential downsides and give some measures.
Secondly, I can see Singapore’s “Garden City” initiative and London’s “Green City Fund” these cases. But in practical application, Nbs may facing many obstacles in cities with limited resources. For instance, high input cost when people start this project, insufficient policy impetus and community insufficient participation. The article mentions the importance of community involvement, and I totally agree! We should think more about complex social background and make people get involved in green projects.
Overall, this article has given me a more complete view of the potential of nature-based solutions, this is a Pretty good project! At the same time, it also made me think more about how to better balance fairness, feasibility and long-term in the design. This is a very helpful article and I never thought so much about this before I saw it!
References:
1.Kabisch, N., et al. (2016). Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas: Linkages Between Science, Policy, and Practice.
2.Wolch, J. R., et al. (2014). Urban Green Space, Public Health, and Environmental Justice: The Challenge of Making Cities ‘Just Green Enough’. Landscape and Urban Planning.
Hey Catia! I really enjoyed reading this blog. It gave me some really insightful knowledge on the topic. This piece gave great examples that helped me understand the topic and highlighted the Social, Economic, and Environmental benefits of NbS.
I think it was fascinating to read how you linked it well to marginalised communities, focusing on the potential benefits of nature-based solutions (NbS) for economically disadvantaged urban areas. This is very relevant and important as disadvantaged UK neighbourhoods usually face disproportionate exposure to environmental risks in factors such as higher air, water, and sound pollution, residential crowding, and lower housing quality (Evans and Kantrowitz, 2002). Evans and Kantrowitz (2002) write that socioeconomic status is associated with environmental quality, which has a knock-on effect on health.
After reading your blog post, I thought it would have been interesting to touch on the drawbacks of NbS if you were to continue on this blog. This was something I found interesting as NbS are predominantly positive solutions, but one main issue that became prevalent when doing some further reading is that enthusiasm for NbS can sometimes detract from the urgent need to rapidly decarbonise our economies (Seddon et al., 2020).
You mention examples of successful NbS in Singapore and Copenhagen, which are two relatively wealthy areas. It could be interesting to explore how these expensive solutions could be scaled down for more cost-effective solutions to be used in marginalised areas in the UK.
Your blog inspired me to do some further reading on the topic, and I found it really interesting how important education is on NbS. Education on the topic can help change the publics’ attitude and inform them of long-term benefits; also, being aware of successful cases abroad can help the UK have an example and utilise other success stories and case studies (Martins, Mata and Costa, 2006).
Overall, a great read clearly outlined the benefits of NbS and covered a wide range of information using real-world examples and their impact on the area. The blog effectively demonstrates that NbS is not just a trend but crucial for addressing environmental challenges, supporting economic development in marginalised areas, and improving quality of life. This really is a call to action!
Reference list
Evans, G.W. and Kantrowitz, E. (2002) ‘Socioeconomic Status and Health: The Potential Role of Environmental Risk Exposure’, Annual Review of Public Health, 23(1), pp. 303–331. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.23.112001.112349.
Martins, A.A., Mata, T.M. and Costa, C.A.V. (2006) ‘Education for sustainability: challenges and trends’, Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 8(1), pp. 31–37. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-005-0026-3.
Seddon, N. et al. (2020) ‘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, 375(1794), p. 20190120. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0120.
Hi Catia! I really enjoyed reading your blog—it’s such an insightful and engaging paper about nature-based solutions (NbS). You did a great job explaining how NbS can help urban design and make a real difference in disadvantaged communities. The way you broke down the benefits into environmental, social, and economic categories made it super easy to understand, and the real-world examples were so helpful.
I found the section on environmental benefits especially interesting. You showed how NbS, like urban forests and green roofs, can reduce greenhouse gases and increase biodiversity. These are such essential steps for creating sustainable cities. Frantzeskaki et al. (2019) also point out that proper management and funding are key to ensuring these projects can be successful and fair for everyone.
Your focus on community participation was really inspiring, too. It’s great to see how NbS can improve not just the environment but also social connections within neighborhoods. As Kabisch et al. (2016) mention, these programs can bring people together and foster a sense of belonging. With support from local governments or NGOs, even communities with fewer resources could take part in these initiatives and see the benefits.
I also loved the examples you included from London and Copenhagen. They show how NbS can transform cities into more livable places while tackling real challenges like flooding and urban heat. Maes and Jacob (2017) suggest that adapting these ideas to fit local contexts could help bring similar successes to areas with fewer resources, which would be amazing to explore further.
Overall, your blog was a fantastic read. It clearly highlighted the potential of NbS to improve cities and people’s lives, and it’s such a timely and important topic. You’ve shown how these solutions aren’t just about the environment—they’re about creating better communities for everyone. Great job!
References：
Frantzeskaki, N., & Kabisch, N. (2019). Designing a knowledge co-production operating space for urban environmental governance—Lessons from Rotterdam, Netherlands and Berlin, Germany. Environmental Science & Policy, 95, 117-125.
Maes, J., & Jacobs, S. (2017). Nature-based solutions for Europe’s sustainable development. Conservation Letters, 10(1), 121-124.