Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Case analysis demonstrates tailored blended finance and governance facilitate nature-based solution adoption, indicating institutional capacity dictates urban climate resilience scaling.
Nature-based solutions (NBSs) are central to urban climate-neutrality strategies, but their implementation still lags behind policy ambition. One reason is that most NBS benefits are public goods and rarely generate direct revenue, so we know far less about the institutional and financial conditions needed to deliver them than about their ecological performance. This paper develops a business model framework linking NBS interventions to financing and governance configurations, applying established NBS typologies and the Pestoff Triangle of state, market, and community provision to thirteen interventions across eleven sites in the Railway District of Thessaloniki, Greece. The interventions are organised into five business model categories: public space greening, private space upgrades, public–private hybrids, building retrofits, and renewable energy. Their financing logic is shaped less by intervention type than by ownership structure and stakeholder configuration. To address this gap, we followed category-specific blended finance strategies combining grants, private investment, regulatory incentives, and community resources, underpinned by stewardship-oriented governance. The findings suggest that scaling NBSs depends less on technical readiness than on institutional capacity to match financing and governance to local ownership and stakeholder contexts, offering a pathway from climate-neutrality strategy to implementable urban regeneration.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Latinopoulos et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: