Contenido

Las sociedades se enfrentan a desafíos como el cambio climático, la urbanización, la seguridad alimentaria, el suministro de recursos hídricos o el riesgo de desastres naturales. Un enfoque para responder a estos desafíos es confiar en estrategias tecnológicas. Un enfoque alternativo es gestionar de manera holística los sistemas socioecológicos para sostener, e incluso aumentar, la prestación de servicios del ecosistema a las poblaciones humanas. Con este segundo enfoque, las soluciones basadas en la naturaleza han sido presentadas recientemente por los técnicos, y poco después, por los formuladores de políticas.[11]​.

Si bien los servicios de los ecosistemas a menudo se valoran en términos de beneficios para el bienestar humano y la economía de los ecosistemas ya existentes, las NBS exploran qué cambios se pueden hacer en esos ecosistemas (plantar o repoblar bosques, construir humedales, propiciar praderas marinas, etc.) paraː.

Las NBS van más allá de los principios tradicionales de conservación y gestión de la biodiversidad al introducir a las personas e integrar específicamente factores sociales como el bienestar humano, la reducción de la pobreza, el desarrollo socioeconómico y los principios de gobernanza.

Respecto a cuestiones hídricas, según el Informe sobre el desarrollo de los recursos hídricos en el mundo 2018 de ONU-Agua, las NBS pueden:.

Related concepts

In 2015, the European network BiodivERsA highlighted that NBS relate to concepts such as ecosystem approaches and ecological engineering.[14]​[15]​[16]​.

NBS are also considered strongly connected to ideas such as natural systems agriculture,[17]​ natural solutions,[18]​ ecosystem-based climate change adaptation and other adaptive services,[19]​ biological engineering or bioengineering, and green infrastructure (also called natural infrastructure or ecological infrastructure).[20]​[21]​[22]​.

For example, organizations such as the United Nations Environment Program and non-governmental organizations such as The Nature Conservancy are increasingly promoting ecosystem-based approaches to climate change adaptation and mitigation. These organizations refer to "policies and measures that take into account the role of ecosystem services in reducing society's vulnerability to climate change, in a multi-sector and multi-scalar approach."[23]​.

Similarly, the concept of ecological engineering generally refers to "protecting, restoring, or modifying ecological systems to increase the quantity, quality, or sustainability of the services they provide, or to construct new ecological systems that provide services that, if provided through more conventional engineering, would rely on non-renewable resources."[15]​[16]​.

Definitions

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) defines NBS as actions to protect, sustainably manage and restore natural or modified ecosystems, which address societal challenges effectively and adaptively, while providing benefits for human well-being and biodiversity. These social challenges may include climate change, food security, disaster risks, water security, social and economic development or human health.

Other European groups see NBS as a restoration and infrastructure-based approach to providing social, economic and political benefits.[24] Another perspective of NBS is that of solutions that use ecological and environmental services to address contemporary environmental, social and economic challenges.[25]​.

Categories

The IUCN proposes to consider NBS as a general concept. Categories and examples of NBS according to the IUCN include:[26]​.

Many indigenous peoples have among their traditional knowledge the important role that the environment plays in human well-being, but this idea did not enter modern scientific literature until the 1970s with the concept of ecosystem services.[27]​ The term "nature-based solutions" was introduced by professionals in the late 2000-2010 period. It was used by international organizations, such as the International Union for Conservation of Nature and the World Bank, in the context of finding new solutions to mitigate climate change and adapt to its effects by working with natural ecosystems rather than relying solely on engineering interventions.[28]​[29][30][31]​.

The IUCN referred to NBS in a position paper for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.[32]​ The term was also adopted by European policymakers, particularly the European Commission, in a report[33]​ highlighting that NBS can offer innovative means to create jobs and growth as part of a green economy. The term began appearing in mainstream media around the time of the Global Climate Action Summit in California in September 2018.[34]​.

En 2014-2015, la red europea BiodivERsA[35]​ movilizó a numerosos científicos, donantes de investigación y partes interesadas, proponiendo una tipología que caracteriza las NBS a lo largo de dos gradientes:[14]​.

Esta tipología destaca que las NBS pueden implicar acciones muy diferentes sobre los ecosistemas (desde la protección hasta la gestión o incluso la creación de nuevos ecosistemas) y se basa en el supuesto de que, cuanto mayores sean los números de servicios y de grupos de interesados en ellos, menor será la capacidad para maximizar el suministro de cada servicio y satisfacer simultáneamente los deseos específicos de cada grupo. Se distinguen así 3 tipos de NBS:.

Type 1 – Minimal intervention in ecosystems

Type 1 NBS consist of minimal or no intervention in ecosystems, with the aim of maintaining or improving the delivery of a range of environmental services both within and outside these conserved ecosystems. Examples include protecting mangroves in coastal areas to limit risks associated with extreme weather conditions and provide benefits and opportunities to local populations; and the establishment of marine protected areas to conserve biodiversity within these areas while transmitting biomass "Biomass (ecology)") to fishing grounds and promoting fishing. This type of NBS is related, for example, to the concept of biosphere reserves that incorporate core protected areas for nature conservation, buffer zones and transition areas where people live and work sustainably.

Type 2 – Some interventions in ecosystems and landscapes

Type 2 NBS correspond to management approaches that develop sustainable and multifunctional ecosystems and landscapes (extensively or intensively managed). These types of solutions improve the delivery of selected ecosystem services, compared to what would be obtained through a more conventional intervention. Examples include innovative planning of agricultural landscapes to increase their multifunctionality; use existing agrobiodiversity to increase biodiversity, connectivity and resilience in landscapes; and approaches to improve tree species and genetic diversity to increase forest resilience to extreme events. This type of NBS is strongly related to concepts such as natural systems agriculture,[17]​ agroecology[36]​ (different from organic farming)[37]​ and evolution-oriented forestry[38]​.

Type 3 – Extensive ecosystem management

Type 3 NBS consist of managing ecosystems in very broad ways or even creating new ecosystems (e.g., artificial ecosystems with new sets of organisms for green roofs and walls to mitigate city warming and clean polluted air). Type 3 is linked to concepts such as green and blue infrastructure and objectives such as the restoration of highly degraded or contaminated areas or the greening of cities.

Types 1 and 2 would normally fall within the IUCN BSS framework, while type 2, and more so type 3, are often exemplified by the European Union (EU) to convert natural capital into a source of green growth and sustainable development.

Hybrid solutions

There are hybrid solutions between those based on nature and conventional ones. For example, it could be considered advisable to mix protected areas with other managed areas to meet the objectives of multifunctionality and sustainability. Similarly, a constructed wetland can be developed as a type 3 NBS but, when well established, can be conserved and studied as a type 1 solution. In the same situation, it is most likely that there will not be a single suitable NBS, but rather several, with different advantages, disadvantages, costs and performances.

NBS classes

A broad group of strategies to use ecosystems to help manage environmental challenges is currently called NBS. In the past, strategies within this group have been given other names. In the period 1970-1980, a popular approach in the US was best management practices (BMPs, which have nothing to do with the extension of a certain image file that uses the same acronym) to use nature as a model for infrastructure and development, while the UK had a model for flood management called "sustainable drainage systems".[24] Other framework, called "water-sensitive urban design" (WSUD) came out of Australia in the 1990s, while Low Impact Development (United States and Canada) (environmental, LID) came out of the US.[24] Eventually, New Zealand reformulated LID to create "low impact urban design and development" (LIUDD), focused on the use of diverse actors. Then, in the period 2000-2010, the Western Hemisphere largely adopted "green infrastructure" for stormwater management, as well as to improve social, economic and environmental conditions for sustainability.[24]​.

The overall objective of the NBS is clear: the sustainable management and use of nature to address societal challenges. However, different actors view these solutions from different perspectives.[14]​ For example, the IUCN defines them as “actions to protect, sustainably manage and restore natural or modified ecosystems, which address social challenges effectively and adaptively, while providing human well-being and biodiversity benefits.” This framework puts the need for well-managed and restored ecosystems at the core of the NBS, with the overall objective of “supporting the achievement of society's development objectives and safeguarding human well-being in a way that reflects cultural and social values ​​and improves the resilience of ecosystems, their capacity for renewal and service delivery.”

In the context of the ongoing political debate on jobs and growth (main drivers of the current EU policy agenda), the European Commission underlines that NBS can transform environmental and social challenges into opportunities for innovation, turning natural capital into a source of green growth and sustainable development.[33]​.

This is a somewhat broader framework of the concept, which places economics and social assets at the heart of NBS on the same level as the maintenance of environmental conditions. It shares similarities with the definition proposed by Maes and Jacobs (2015),[39]​ which describes NBS as "any transition to a use of ecosystem services with a lower contribution of non-renewable natural capital and greater investment in renewable natural processes." According to this definition, the development and evaluation of NBS covers 3 basic requirements:

Within this definition, therefore, nature is seen as a tool to inspire more systemic solutions to social problems.

Whatever the definition used, the promotion of sustainability and the increasing role of self-sustaining natural processes that depend on biodiversity are inherent characteristics of NBS. It is easy to demonstrate to numerous actors that these solutions are positive, since they generate environmental, economic and social benefits. As a consequence, NBS are gaining acceptance outside the conservation community (e.g. urban planning) and are now on the way to being integrated into policies and programs (climate change policy, laws, infrastructure investment and financing mechanisms),[2]​[11]​[40]​ although they still face many implementation barriers and challenges.[41]​[42]​.

The potential of NBS for transformative change towards sustainability has recently been explored.[43]​ One study found that these solutions can drive profound changes towards sustainability in local socio-ecological systems through a combination of nature values, knowledge, community participation and sustainable management.[44]​ More studies are needed that assess the contributions of NBS towards transformative change at broader scales, for example in relation to planetary boundaries.

Demostrar los beneficios de la naturaleza y los ecosistemas saludables, así como el retorno de la inversión que pueden ofrecer, es necesario no solo para aumentar el conocimiento de estas soluciones (mucha gente ni siquiera sabe que existen), sino también para brindar apoyo y orientación sobre cómo aplicarlas. Una gran cantidad de iniciativas en todo el mundo ya destacan la eficacia de los enfoques NBS para abordar una amplia gama de desafíos sociales.

all over the world

The following table shows examples from around the world:.

India

In 2018, The Hindu reported that East Kolkata Wetlands, the world's largest organic wastewater treatment facility, had been used to organically clean Kolkata's wastewater for several decades using algae. This natural system, in use since the 1930s, was discovered by Dhrubajyoti Ghosh, an ecologist and municipal engineer in the 1970s, while working in the region.[46]​ Ghosh worked for decades to protect wetlands.[47]​ In Calcutta, one of the five largest cities in India, municipal authorities pumped wastewater into shallow ponds (bheris).[48]​ Under the heat of the tropical sun, algae proliferated in these bheris, converting wastewater into clean water, which in turn was used by the villagers to grow rice and vegetables. This nearly 100-year-old system treats 750 million liters of wastewater per day, providing livelihoods to 100,000 people in the surrounding area.[49]​ For his work, Ghosh was named to the UN Global 500 Honor Roll in 1990 and received the Luc Hoffmann Award in 2016.[50]​.

Actualmente no existe un estándar aceptado por el cual un organismo público, municipio o empresa privada pueda evaluar sistemáticamente la eficiencia, la eficacia y la sostenibilidad de una determinada solución basada en la naturaleza. Sin embargo, una serie de estudios e informes han propuesto principios y marcos para la aplicación eficaz de estas soluciones.[8]​[10]​[51]​ Un principio fundamental, por ejemplo, es que las NBS buscan adoptar las normas de conservación de la naturaleza, no reemplazarlas.[52]​[53]​.

Las NBS también están determinadas por los contextos naturales y culturales específicos de la zona en que se aplican, lo que incluye conocimientos tradicionales, locales y científicos. Los sistemas de información geográfica (SIG) se pueden utilizar como una herramienta de análisis para determinar los sitios en que una determinada NBS podría funcionar.[54]​ Un SIG puede detallar las condiciones del sitio, como la inclinación de las pendiente, los cursos de agua o los usos del suelo.[54]​ Los mapas resultantes a menudo se usan junto con mapas históricos de inundaciones para determinar la capacidad de almacenamiento de agua de inundación en sitios específicos, utilizando herramientas de modelado 3D.[54]​ La comparación de mapas de idoneidad con imágenes digitales de Google Earth también se practica a menudo para garantizar que los mapas de idoneidad sean representativos de las condiciones reales. Las NBS se pueden aplicar aisladamente o junto a soluciones convencionales. Se utilizan a escala de paisaje.

Aplicar NBS supone desafíos políticos, económicos y científicos. En primer lugar, puede ser necesaria inversión del sector privado para complementar las fuentes tradicionales de capital, como la financiación pública o la filantropía. Por lo tanto, el desafío es proporcionar evidencias sólidas de que estas soluciones son viables y contribuyen al crecimiento económico y al empleo más que sus alternativas tradicionales.

Múltiples estudios de casos ya han demostrado que las NBS son más viables económicamente que las infraestructuras tecnológicas convencionales.[25]​[55]​ Además, requieren medidas como la adaptación de los esquemas de subsidios económicos y la creación de oportunidades para la financiación de la conservación de la naturaleza por nombrar algunas. De hecho, tales medidas serán necesarias para ampliar las intervenciones de NBS y fortalecer su impacto en la mitigación de los desafíos más apremiantes del mundo.[53]​.

Projects supported by the European Union

Since 2016, the EU has supported a multi-stakeholder dialogue platform (ThinkNature[56]​) to promote the co-design, testing and deployment of improved and innovative NBS in an integrated manner.[1]​ The creation of such science-policy-business-society interfaces could promote the market adoption of NBS.[57]​ The project is part of the EU's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program and will have a duration of 3 years. There are a total of 17 international partners involved, including the Technical University of Crete (project leader), the University of Helsinki and BiodivERsA.

In 2017, as part of Estonia's presidency of the Council of the European Union, the Estonian Ministry of Environment and Tallinn University organized[58] This a conference to strengthen synergies between several recent NBS-related initiatives and programs launched by the European Commission and EU member countries, focusing on NBS policy and governance, research and innovation.

The NBS in the Paris Agreement

The Paris Agreement calls on all Parties to recognize the role of ecosystems in providing services such as carbon sinks.[59] Article 5.2 encourages Parties to adopt conservation and management as tools to increase natural elements that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere (e.g. forests) called "carbon stocks" and Article 7.1 encourages Parties to develop the resilience of socio-economic systems and ecological through economic diversification and sustainable management of natural resources. The agreement refers to nature (ecosystems, natural resources, forests) in 13 different places. An in-depth analysis[60]​ of all Nationally Determined Contributions[61]​ (NDCs) submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) revealed that around 130 NDCs, or 65% of signatories, commit to nature-based solutions in their climate commitments, suggesting broad consensus on nature's role in helping meet climate change goals. However, high-level commitments rarely translate into robust, measurable actions on the ground.[62]​.

NBS at the September 2019 UN Climate Action Summit

At the 2019 UN Climate Action Summit, nature-based solutions were one of the main topics discussed and were considered an effective method to combat climate change. A "Nature-based Solutions Coalition" was created, including dozens of countries, led by China and New Zealand.[12]​.

Se elaboró un mapa sistemático mundial de resultados de uso de NBS para determinar e ilustrar su eficacia.[63]​ Después de revisar 386 estudios de casos con programas de ordenador, el estudio encontró que las NBS eran tan eficaces como las estrategias tradicionales de manejo de inundaciones, si no más.[42]​ El 66 % de los casos evaluados reportaron resultados ecológicos positivos, el 24 % no identificó un cambio en las condiciones ecológicas y menos del 1 % reportó impactos negativos. Además, las NBS siempre tuvieron mejores impactos sociales y de mitigación del cambio climático.[42]​.

La evidencia recopilada de otros estudios de casos respalda estas afirmaciones en el sentido de que las NBS son eficacesː logran los objetivos deseados. Sin embargo, se advierte de que la infraestructura verde, habitual en las NBS, debe usarse junto con la infraestructura gris (denominación de la infraestructura tradicional,[64]​ por componerse a menudo de hormigón o cemento).[65]​ Usar solo infraestructura verde o solo infraestructura gris es menos eficaz que utilizar ambas a la vez, cada una de forma que produzca los mayores efectos.[65]​.

Efficacy warnings

While NBS are appropriate for flood management, they are largely used in developed countries, resulting in a lack of data for many low- and middle-income nations.[42]​ Consequently, many ecosystems and climates are excluded from existing studies as well as cost analyzes in these locations. More research is needed in developing countries to determine the effectiveness of NBS in their climatic, social and ecological standards.

It is also essential that gray infrastructure continues to be used alongside green infrastructure.[65]​ Multiple studies recognize that, although NBS are very effective and in simulations improve flood resistance, they should not act alone, but rather in coordination with gray infrastructure.[65]​[66]​ When NBS are used in conjunction with gray infrastructure, the benefits transcend flood management and improve social conditions, increase carbon sequestration, and prepare cities for the flood. resilience planning.[25]​.

Contenido

Las sociedades se enfrentan a desafíos como el cambio climático, la urbanización, la seguridad alimentaria, el suministro de recursos hídricos o el riesgo de desastres naturales. Un enfoque para responder a estos desafíos es confiar en estrategias tecnológicas. Un enfoque alternativo es gestionar de manera holística los sistemas socioecológicos para sostener, e incluso aumentar, la prestación de servicios del ecosistema a las poblaciones humanas. Con este segundo enfoque, las soluciones basadas en la naturaleza han sido presentadas recientemente por los técnicos, y poco después, por los formuladores de políticas.[11]​.

Si bien los servicios de los ecosistemas a menudo se valoran en términos de beneficios para el bienestar humano y la economía de los ecosistemas ya existentes, las NBS exploran qué cambios se pueden hacer en esos ecosistemas (plantar o repoblar bosques, construir humedales, propiciar praderas marinas, etc.) paraː.

Las NBS van más allá de los principios tradicionales de conservación y gestión de la biodiversidad al introducir a las personas e integrar específicamente factores sociales como el bienestar humano, la reducción de la pobreza, el desarrollo socioeconómico y los principios de gobernanza.

Respecto a cuestiones hídricas, según el Informe sobre el desarrollo de los recursos hídricos en el mundo 2018 de ONU-Agua, las NBS pueden:.

Related concepts

In 2015, the European network BiodivERsA highlighted that NBS relate to concepts such as ecosystem approaches and ecological engineering.[14]​[15]​[16]​.

NBS are also considered strongly connected to ideas such as natural systems agriculture,[17]​ natural solutions,[18]​ ecosystem-based climate change adaptation and other adaptive services,[19]​ biological engineering or bioengineering, and green infrastructure (also called natural infrastructure or ecological infrastructure).[20]​[21]​[22]​.

For example, organizations such as the United Nations Environment Program and non-governmental organizations such as The Nature Conservancy are increasingly promoting ecosystem-based approaches to climate change adaptation and mitigation. These organizations refer to "policies and measures that take into account the role of ecosystem services in reducing society's vulnerability to climate change, in a multi-sector and multi-scalar approach."[23]​.

Similarly, the concept of ecological engineering generally refers to "protecting, restoring, or modifying ecological systems to increase the quantity, quality, or sustainability of the services they provide, or to construct new ecological systems that provide services that, if provided through more conventional engineering, would rely on non-renewable resources."[15]​[16]​.

Definitions

The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) defines NBS as actions to protect, sustainably manage and restore natural or modified ecosystems, which address societal challenges effectively and adaptively, while providing benefits for human well-being and biodiversity. These social challenges may include climate change, food security, disaster risks, water security, social and economic development or human health.

Other European groups see NBS as a restoration and infrastructure-based approach to providing social, economic and political benefits.[24] Another perspective of NBS is that of solutions that use ecological and environmental services to address contemporary environmental, social and economic challenges.[25]​.

Categories

The IUCN proposes to consider NBS as a general concept. Categories and examples of NBS according to the IUCN include:[26]​.

Many indigenous peoples have among their traditional knowledge the important role that the environment plays in human well-being, but this idea did not enter modern scientific literature until the 1970s with the concept of ecosystem services.[27]​ The term "nature-based solutions" was introduced by professionals in the late 2000-2010 period. It was used by international organizations, such as the International Union for Conservation of Nature and the World Bank, in the context of finding new solutions to mitigate climate change and adapt to its effects by working with natural ecosystems rather than relying solely on engineering interventions.[28]​[29][30][31]​.

The IUCN referred to NBS in a position paper for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.[32]​ The term was also adopted by European policymakers, particularly the European Commission, in a report[33]​ highlighting that NBS can offer innovative means to create jobs and growth as part of a green economy. The term began appearing in mainstream media around the time of the Global Climate Action Summit in California in September 2018.[34]​.

En 2014-2015, la red europea BiodivERsA[35]​ movilizó a numerosos científicos, donantes de investigación y partes interesadas, proponiendo una tipología que caracteriza las NBS a lo largo de dos gradientes:[14]​.

Esta tipología destaca que las NBS pueden implicar acciones muy diferentes sobre los ecosistemas (desde la protección hasta la gestión o incluso la creación de nuevos ecosistemas) y se basa en el supuesto de que, cuanto mayores sean los números de servicios y de grupos de interesados en ellos, menor será la capacidad para maximizar el suministro de cada servicio y satisfacer simultáneamente los deseos específicos de cada grupo. Se distinguen así 3 tipos de NBS:.

Type 1 – Minimal intervention in ecosystems

Type 1 NBS consist of minimal or no intervention in ecosystems, with the aim of maintaining or improving the delivery of a range of environmental services both within and outside these conserved ecosystems. Examples include protecting mangroves in coastal areas to limit risks associated with extreme weather conditions and provide benefits and opportunities to local populations; and the establishment of marine protected areas to conserve biodiversity within these areas while transmitting biomass "Biomass (ecology)") to fishing grounds and promoting fishing. This type of NBS is related, for example, to the concept of biosphere reserves that incorporate core protected areas for nature conservation, buffer zones and transition areas where people live and work sustainably.

Type 2 – Some interventions in ecosystems and landscapes

Type 2 NBS correspond to management approaches that develop sustainable and multifunctional ecosystems and landscapes (extensively or intensively managed). These types of solutions improve the delivery of selected ecosystem services, compared to what would be obtained through a more conventional intervention. Examples include innovative planning of agricultural landscapes to increase their multifunctionality; use existing agrobiodiversity to increase biodiversity, connectivity and resilience in landscapes; and approaches to improve tree species and genetic diversity to increase forest resilience to extreme events. This type of NBS is strongly related to concepts such as natural systems agriculture,[17]​ agroecology[36]​ (different from organic farming)[37]​ and evolution-oriented forestry[38]​.

Type 3 – Extensive ecosystem management

Type 3 NBS consist of managing ecosystems in very broad ways or even creating new ecosystems (e.g., artificial ecosystems with new sets of organisms for green roofs and walls to mitigate city warming and clean polluted air). Type 3 is linked to concepts such as green and blue infrastructure and objectives such as the restoration of highly degraded or contaminated areas or the greening of cities.

Types 1 and 2 would normally fall within the IUCN BSS framework, while type 2, and more so type 3, are often exemplified by the European Union (EU) to convert natural capital into a source of green growth and sustainable development.

Hybrid solutions

There are hybrid solutions between those based on nature and conventional ones. For example, it could be considered advisable to mix protected areas with other managed areas to meet the objectives of multifunctionality and sustainability. Similarly, a constructed wetland can be developed as a type 3 NBS but, when well established, can be conserved and studied as a type 1 solution. In the same situation, it is most likely that there will not be a single suitable NBS, but rather several, with different advantages, disadvantages, costs and performances.

NBS classes

A broad group of strategies to use ecosystems to help manage environmental challenges is currently called NBS. In the past, strategies within this group have been given other names. In the period 1970-1980, a popular approach in the US was best management practices (BMPs, which have nothing to do with the extension of a certain image file that uses the same acronym) to use nature as a model for infrastructure and development, while the UK had a model for flood management called "sustainable drainage systems".[24] Other framework, called "water-sensitive urban design" (WSUD) came out of Australia in the 1990s, while Low Impact Development (United States and Canada) (environmental, LID) came out of the US.[24] Eventually, New Zealand reformulated LID to create "low impact urban design and development" (LIUDD), focused on the use of diverse actors. Then, in the period 2000-2010, the Western Hemisphere largely adopted "green infrastructure" for stormwater management, as well as to improve social, economic and environmental conditions for sustainability.[24]​.

The overall objective of the NBS is clear: the sustainable management and use of nature to address societal challenges. However, different actors view these solutions from different perspectives.[14]​ For example, the IUCN defines them as “actions to protect, sustainably manage and restore natural or modified ecosystems, which address social challenges effectively and adaptively, while providing human well-being and biodiversity benefits.” This framework puts the need for well-managed and restored ecosystems at the core of the NBS, with the overall objective of “supporting the achievement of society's development objectives and safeguarding human well-being in a way that reflects cultural and social values ​​and improves the resilience of ecosystems, their capacity for renewal and service delivery.”

In the context of the ongoing political debate on jobs and growth (main drivers of the current EU policy agenda), the European Commission underlines that NBS can transform environmental and social challenges into opportunities for innovation, turning natural capital into a source of green growth and sustainable development.[33]​.

This is a somewhat broader framework of the concept, which places economics and social assets at the heart of NBS on the same level as the maintenance of environmental conditions. It shares similarities with the definition proposed by Maes and Jacobs (2015),[39]​ which describes NBS as "any transition to a use of ecosystem services with a lower contribution of non-renewable natural capital and greater investment in renewable natural processes." According to this definition, the development and evaluation of NBS covers 3 basic requirements:

Within this definition, therefore, nature is seen as a tool to inspire more systemic solutions to social problems.

Whatever the definition used, the promotion of sustainability and the increasing role of self-sustaining natural processes that depend on biodiversity are inherent characteristics of NBS. It is easy to demonstrate to numerous actors that these solutions are positive, since they generate environmental, economic and social benefits. As a consequence, NBS are gaining acceptance outside the conservation community (e.g. urban planning) and are now on the way to being integrated into policies and programs (climate change policy, laws, infrastructure investment and financing mechanisms),[2]​[11]​[40]​ although they still face many implementation barriers and challenges.[41]​[42]​.

The potential of NBS for transformative change towards sustainability has recently been explored.[43]​ One study found that these solutions can drive profound changes towards sustainability in local socio-ecological systems through a combination of nature values, knowledge, community participation and sustainable management.[44]​ More studies are needed that assess the contributions of NBS towards transformative change at broader scales, for example in relation to planetary boundaries.

Demostrar los beneficios de la naturaleza y los ecosistemas saludables, así como el retorno de la inversión que pueden ofrecer, es necesario no solo para aumentar el conocimiento de estas soluciones (mucha gente ni siquiera sabe que existen), sino también para brindar apoyo y orientación sobre cómo aplicarlas. Una gran cantidad de iniciativas en todo el mundo ya destacan la eficacia de los enfoques NBS para abordar una amplia gama de desafíos sociales.

all over the world

The following table shows examples from around the world:.

India

In 2018, The Hindu reported that East Kolkata Wetlands, the world's largest organic wastewater treatment facility, had been used to organically clean Kolkata's wastewater for several decades using algae. This natural system, in use since the 1930s, was discovered by Dhrubajyoti Ghosh, an ecologist and municipal engineer in the 1970s, while working in the region.[46]​ Ghosh worked for decades to protect wetlands.[47]​ In Calcutta, one of the five largest cities in India, municipal authorities pumped wastewater into shallow ponds (bheris).[48]​ Under the heat of the tropical sun, algae proliferated in these bheris, converting wastewater into clean water, which in turn was used by the villagers to grow rice and vegetables. This nearly 100-year-old system treats 750 million liters of wastewater per day, providing livelihoods to 100,000 people in the surrounding area.[49]​ For his work, Ghosh was named to the UN Global 500 Honor Roll in 1990 and received the Luc Hoffmann Award in 2016.[50]​.

Actualmente no existe un estándar aceptado por el cual un organismo público, municipio o empresa privada pueda evaluar sistemáticamente la eficiencia, la eficacia y la sostenibilidad de una determinada solución basada en la naturaleza. Sin embargo, una serie de estudios e informes han propuesto principios y marcos para la aplicación eficaz de estas soluciones.[8]​[10]​[51]​ Un principio fundamental, por ejemplo, es que las NBS buscan adoptar las normas de conservación de la naturaleza, no reemplazarlas.[52]​[53]​.

Las NBS también están determinadas por los contextos naturales y culturales específicos de la zona en que se aplican, lo que incluye conocimientos tradicionales, locales y científicos. Los sistemas de información geográfica (SIG) se pueden utilizar como una herramienta de análisis para determinar los sitios en que una determinada NBS podría funcionar.[54]​ Un SIG puede detallar las condiciones del sitio, como la inclinación de las pendiente, los cursos de agua o los usos del suelo.[54]​ Los mapas resultantes a menudo se usan junto con mapas históricos de inundaciones para determinar la capacidad de almacenamiento de agua de inundación en sitios específicos, utilizando herramientas de modelado 3D.[54]​ La comparación de mapas de idoneidad con imágenes digitales de Google Earth también se practica a menudo para garantizar que los mapas de idoneidad sean representativos de las condiciones reales. Las NBS se pueden aplicar aisladamente o junto a soluciones convencionales. Se utilizan a escala de paisaje.

Aplicar NBS supone desafíos políticos, económicos y científicos. En primer lugar, puede ser necesaria inversión del sector privado para complementar las fuentes tradicionales de capital, como la financiación pública o la filantropía. Por lo tanto, el desafío es proporcionar evidencias sólidas de que estas soluciones son viables y contribuyen al crecimiento económico y al empleo más que sus alternativas tradicionales.

Múltiples estudios de casos ya han demostrado que las NBS son más viables económicamente que las infraestructuras tecnológicas convencionales.[25]​[55]​ Además, requieren medidas como la adaptación de los esquemas de subsidios económicos y la creación de oportunidades para la financiación de la conservación de la naturaleza por nombrar algunas. De hecho, tales medidas serán necesarias para ampliar las intervenciones de NBS y fortalecer su impacto en la mitigación de los desafíos más apremiantes del mundo.[53]​.

Projects supported by the European Union

Since 2016, the EU has supported a multi-stakeholder dialogue platform (ThinkNature[56]​) to promote the co-design, testing and deployment of improved and innovative NBS in an integrated manner.[1]​ The creation of such science-policy-business-society interfaces could promote the market adoption of NBS.[57]​ The project is part of the EU's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program and will have a duration of 3 years. There are a total of 17 international partners involved, including the Technical University of Crete (project leader), the University of Helsinki and BiodivERsA.

In 2017, as part of Estonia's presidency of the Council of the European Union, the Estonian Ministry of Environment and Tallinn University organized[58] This a conference to strengthen synergies between several recent NBS-related initiatives and programs launched by the European Commission and EU member countries, focusing on NBS policy and governance, research and innovation.

The NBS in the Paris Agreement

The Paris Agreement calls on all Parties to recognize the role of ecosystems in providing services such as carbon sinks.[59] Article 5.2 encourages Parties to adopt conservation and management as tools to increase natural elements that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere (e.g. forests) called "carbon stocks" and Article 7.1 encourages Parties to develop the resilience of socio-economic systems and ecological through economic diversification and sustainable management of natural resources. The agreement refers to nature (ecosystems, natural resources, forests) in 13 different places. An in-depth analysis[60]​ of all Nationally Determined Contributions[61]​ (NDCs) submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) revealed that around 130 NDCs, or 65% of signatories, commit to nature-based solutions in their climate commitments, suggesting broad consensus on nature's role in helping meet climate change goals. However, high-level commitments rarely translate into robust, measurable actions on the ground.[62]​.

NBS at the September 2019 UN Climate Action Summit

At the 2019 UN Climate Action Summit, nature-based solutions were one of the main topics discussed and were considered an effective method to combat climate change. A "Nature-based Solutions Coalition" was created, including dozens of countries, led by China and New Zealand.[12]​.

Se elaboró un mapa sistemático mundial de resultados de uso de NBS para determinar e ilustrar su eficacia.[63]​ Después de revisar 386 estudios de casos con programas de ordenador, el estudio encontró que las NBS eran tan eficaces como las estrategias tradicionales de manejo de inundaciones, si no más.[42]​ El 66 % de los casos evaluados reportaron resultados ecológicos positivos, el 24 % no identificó un cambio en las condiciones ecológicas y menos del 1 % reportó impactos negativos. Además, las NBS siempre tuvieron mejores impactos sociales y de mitigación del cambio climático.[42]​.

La evidencia recopilada de otros estudios de casos respalda estas afirmaciones en el sentido de que las NBS son eficacesː logran los objetivos deseados. Sin embargo, se advierte de que la infraestructura verde, habitual en las NBS, debe usarse junto con la infraestructura gris (denominación de la infraestructura tradicional,[64]​ por componerse a menudo de hormigón o cemento).[65]​ Usar solo infraestructura verde o solo infraestructura gris es menos eficaz que utilizar ambas a la vez, cada una de forma que produzca los mayores efectos.[65]​.

Efficacy warnings

While NBS are appropriate for flood management, they are largely used in developed countries, resulting in a lack of data for many low- and middle-income nations.[42]​ Consequently, many ecosystems and climates are excluded from existing studies as well as cost analyzes in these locations. More research is needed in developing countries to determine the effectiveness of NBS in their climatic, social and ecological standards.

It is also essential that gray infrastructure continues to be used alongside green infrastructure.[65]​ Multiple studies recognize that, although NBS are very effective and in simulations improve flood resistance, they should not act alone, but rather in coordination with gray infrastructure.[65]​[66]​ When NBS are used in conjunction with gray infrastructure, the benefits transcend flood management and improve social conditions, increase carbon sequestration, and prepare cities for the flood. resilience planning.[25]​.