Knowledge synthesis: “Do Nature-based Solutions promote transformative change for sustainable use and management of biodiversity in socio-ecological systems? An evidence based approach”
Transformative change – a fundamental overhaul of technological, economic, and social systems (IPBES 2019) – is imperative to address the interconnected crises of climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution. Nature-based Solutions (NbS) are increasingly recognised as potential catalysts for such a shift. However, our understanding of how NbS contribute to this profound transformation remains limited.
To bridge this gap, we conducted a systematic literature review to assess the extent to which NbS support transformative change. In addition, we sought to identify which NbS have been successful in bringing about transformative change and which type of transformative change is most likely to occur.
Methodology
The study assessed the relationship between NbS interventions and transformative change by reviewing case studies from the grey and peer-reviewed literature. It first assessed NbS outcomes according to the IPBES conceptual framework (Díaz et al. 2015) and then compared these to evidence of transformative change based on six indicators (Palomo et al. 2021).
- 71 case studies from 46 academic articles and 35 grey literature sources
- 3 categories to assess NbS outcomes: Biodiversity & environment, Quality of life, and Nature’s Contributions to People
- 6 key indicators to assess transformative change: restructuring, path-shifting, innovative, multiscale, system-wide, and persistent nature
Hierarchy of categories used to assess outcomes of Nature based Solutions.
Hierarchy of categories used to assess transformative change in case studies.
NbS Outcomes
The case studies demonstrated positive outcomes across all three categories. However, there’s a need for more quantitative data. Additionally, the complex interplay between the three outcome categories highlights the importance of considering multiple perspectives when evaluating NbS projects.
- Quality of life was the most frequently assessed outcome.
- Nature’s Contributions to People exhibited the highest proportion of positive changes.
- Qualitative evidence was more common than quantitative evidence for all outcomes.
Distribution of evidence type for case studies where each outcome was assessed. The vertical axis shows the proportion of case studies that assessed that outcome. Bars are labelled with the frequencies of each category.
Distribution of case studies across the five ‘evidence’ categories: not assessed, and positive, negative, mixed, and no change. The vertical axis shows the proportion of all case studies.
Indicators of change
Path-shifting and restructuring were the most frequently assessed indicators, while innovative, system-wide, and persistent indicators showed change more often. The nature of some indicators may explain these differences. For example, some NbS interventions inherently involve path-shifting and restructuring, like reducing deforestation or changing agricultural practices. Local projects rarely show system-wide or multiscale change, innovative interventions are less common in mature NbS contexts, and persistence requires long-term monitoring, with the strongest evidence in studies over ten years. Only five studies assessed all indicators.
- The nature of the NbS intervention (e.g., scale & duration) influenced the occurrence of indicators.
- Restructuring and path-shifting changes were the most assessed indicators.
- Innovative, system-wide, and persistent indicators were less common but showed the highest rates of change.
Distribution of the three evidence categories across the six indicators of transformative change.
Linking outcomes to change
Many NbS interventions show potential for transformative change. However, the lack of consistent and explicit evaluation, along with challenges in assessing certain indicators, limit a comprehensive understanding. Case studies demonstrating positive impacts across all outcome categories were more likely to assess and evidence transformative change. Findings varied by ecosystem and intervention type.
- Biome variations: In urban areas, assessments more frequently considered path-shifting and persistent indicators, while the restructuring indicator received less attention. Conversely, agricultural landscapes were more likely to assess the restructuring indicator and mountain areas were more likely to assess the system-wide indicator. Coastal and marine areas tended to assess multiscale and persistent indicators, likely due to complex governance structures.
- Intervention type variations: Restore and Protect interventions assessed path-shifting slightly more often. Protect and Conserve assessed restructuring less often. Conserve interventions less frequently assessed multiscale, innovative, or persistent indicators. Manage and Restore interventions found change in path-shifting more often.
The grey literature analysis corroborated the findings from the scientific literature. NbS projects were found to deliver positive environmental and social outcomes, with a focus on urban areas and interventions related to restoration and management. However, limitations in data availability, project definitions, and geographic scope hindered a more comprehensive assessment of transformative change.
Evaluation of transformative change indicators for the ten case studies that found assessed positive change in all three NbS outcome categories.
Path-shifting | Restructuring | Multiscale | Innovative | System-wide | Persistent | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Change in indicator | 100% | 70% | 60% | 60% | 50% | 50% |
No change in indicator | 0% | 10% | 0% | 0% | 10% | 0% |
Not assessed | 0% | 20% | 40% | 40% | 40% | 50% |
Assessment of transformative change across biomes
Number of case studies* | Path-shifting | Restructuring | Multiscale | Innovative | System-wide | Persistent | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tropical Forests | 17 | 88% | 53% | 18% | 18% | 12% | 29% |
Agricultural Landscape | 16 | 50% | 88% | 25% | 25% | 25% | 6% |
Freshwater | 13 | 92% | 62% | 46% | 38% | 46% | 38% |
Coastal | 12 | 92% | 58% | 83% | 42% | 25% | 67% |
Marine | 8 | 88% | 100% | 63% | 38% | 50% | 75% |
Grasslands/Savannas | 7 | 57% | 71% | 29% | 29% | 57% | 14% |
Urban | 7 | 100% | 29% | 14% | 14% | 14% | 43% |
Mountain areas | 6 | 67% | 83% | 50% | 33% | 67% | 33% |
Mangroves | 2 | 100% | 50% | 50% | 50% | 0% | 50% |
Deserts | 1 | 100% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
Unclear | 1 | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 0% |
All Biomes | 71 | 79% | 72% | 42% | 31% | 30% | 35% |
Proportion of case studies in each intervention type that provided evidence that assessed each of the six indicators of transformative change
Path-shifting | Restructuring | Multiscale | Innovative | Systemwide | Persistent | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Manage | 87% | 67% | 47% | 40% | 30% | 43% |
Protect | 75% | 78% | 45% | 33% | 38% | 35% |
Restore | 93% | 80% | 40% | 33% | 27% | 47% |
Conserve | 76% | 76% | 24% | 18% | 29% | 24% |
Conclusions
Despite their potential, there’s limited research on how NbS can drive transformative change. The gap in explicit assessment of different NbS outcomes and indicators of transformative change is a result in itself. Evidence is often incomplete and lacks comprehensive evaluations across diverse scales and timeframes. Additionally, research tends to focus on specific biomes and regions.
Despite these limitations, available data strongly suggests a link between NbS interventions and transformative change. These findings underscore the urgent need for expanded research to better understand NbS’s full potential, including a wider geographic scope and a more precise definition of transformative change in NbS policies.
Hierarchy of categories used to assess outcomes of Nature based Solutions.
Hierarchy of categories used to assess transformative change in case studies.
Distribution of case studies across the five ‘evidence’ categories: not assessed, and positive, negative, mixed, and no change.
Distribution of evidence type for case studies where each outcome was assessed.
Distribution of the three evidence categories across the six indicators of transformative change.
Evaluation of transformative change indicators for the ten case studies that found assessed positive change in all three NbS outcome categories.
Path-shifting | Restructuring | Multiscale | Innovative | System-wide | Persistent | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Change in indicator | 100% | 70% | 60% | 60% | 50% | 50% |
No change in indicator | 0% | 10% | 0% | 0% | 10% | 0% |
Not assessed | 0% | 20% | 40% | 40% | 40% | 50% |
Assessment of transformative change across biomes
Number of case studies* | Path-shifting | Restructuring | Multiscale | Innovative | System-wide | Persistent | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tropical Forests | 17 | 88% | 53% | 18% | 18% | 12% | 29% |
Agricultural Landscape | 16 | 50% | 88% | 25% | 25% | 25% | 6% |
Freshwater | 13 | 92% | 62% | 46% | 38% | 46% | 38% |
Coastal | 12 | 92% | 58% | 83% | 42% | 25% | 67% |
Marine | 8 | 88% | 100% | 63% | 38% | 50% | 75% |
Grasslands/Savannas | 7 | 57% | 71% | 29% | 29% | 57% | 14% |
Urban | 7 | 100% | 29% | 14% | 14% | 14% | 43% |
Mountain areas | 6 | 67% | 83% | 50% | 33% | 67% | 33% |
Mangroves | 2 | 100% | 50% | 50% | 50% | 0% | 50% |
Deserts | 1 | 100% | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
Unclear | 1 | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 0% |
All Biomes | 71 | 79% | 72% | 42% | 31% | 30% | 35% |
Proportion of case studies in each intervention type that provided evidence that assessed each of the six indicators of transformative change
Path-shifting | Restructuring | Multiscale | Innovative | Systemwide | Persistent | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Manage | 87% | 67% | 47% | 40% | 30% | 43% |
Protect | 75% | 78% | 45% | 33% | 38% | 35% |
Restore | 93% | 80% | 40% | 33% | 27% | 47% |
Conserve | 76% | 76% | 24% | 18% | 29% | 24% |