Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Qualitative analysis explores urban governance strategies in Europe, suggesting improvements for integrated policymaking.
The critical nexus between biodiversity loss, climate change, and societal change is increasingly intertwined, requiring coordinated action, especially in urban contexts. This study examines how urban governance operationalizes the climate-biodiversity-health nexus in four European case cities through a goals-oriented framework informed by the Planetary Health approach. We conduct a qualitative analysis of urban policy documents to assess the degree of change and level of coordination across climate mitigation, adaptation, biodiversity, and health domains. While cities have employed transformative solutions like nature-based solutions (NBS), we consistently identify policy blind spots such as fragmented mid-level targets, sectoral silos, insufficient attention to indirect emissions, and reliance on soft governance tools. We conclude by offering actionable insights for transformative urban nexus governance: mainstream transformative metrics and indicators, create new institutional innovations, integrate multi-benefit NBS across sectors, expand governance toolkits to address trade-offs, and co-create a culture of innovation, learning, co-creation and leadership.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stojanovic et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: