This analysis addresses challenges in defining nature-based solutions and suggests a flexible evaluation framework, highlighting stakeholder inclusion and sustainability.
The expanding landscape of Nature-based Solutions (NbS) faces increasing complexity, marked by evolving definitions and a surge in projects. While standardized frameworks are advocated, they risk excluding context-specific, innovative initiatives. This piece addresses the challenges of defining NbS, integrating diverse knowledge systems, and evaluating project success. We argue that rigid criteria can hinder inclusivity and overlook valuable local and Indigenous practices, central to sustainable ecosystem management. To address this, we propose a shift towards flexible evaluation frameworks that prioritize project outcomes, stakeholder inclusion, and long-term sustainability. Emphasizing adaptability and transparency, we advocate for integrating NbS into broader sustainability efforts, recognizing diverse approaches and supporting community-driven initiatives. This perspective aims to ensure NbS effectively contributes to environmental resilience and social equity, promoting a more inclusive and dynamic approach to achieving sustainability goals.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Onselen et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: