kth.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Urban flood risk management needs nature-based solutions: a coupled social-ecological system perspective
Nanjing Univ, Sch Geog & Ocean Sci, Nanjing, Peoples R China..
Nanjing Univ, Sch Geog & Ocean Sci, Nanjing, Peoples R China..ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4031-0519
Nanjing Univ, Sch Architecture & Urban Planning, Nanjing, Peoples R China..ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1238-223X
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Sustainable development, Environmental science and Engineering, Water and Environmental Engineering. Stockholm Univ, Dept Phys Geog, Stockholm, Sweden.; Stellenbosch Inst Adv Study, Stellenbosch, South Africa..ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9408-4425
Show others and affiliations
2024 (English)In: npj Urban Sustainability, E-ISSN 2661-8001, Vol. 4, no 1, article id 25Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

A growing number of Nature-based Solutions (NbS) has been advocated for urban flood risk management (FRM). However, whether NbS for FRM (NbS-FRM) achieves both social and ecological co-benefits remains largely unknown. We here propose and use a conceptual framework with a coupled social-ecological perspective to explore and identify such "win-win" potential in NbS-FRM. Through a scoping-review we find that ecological FRM measures are unevenly distributed around the world, and those solely targeting flood mitigation may have unintended negative consequences for society and ecosystems. In elaborating this framework with evidence from the reviewed studies, we find that NbS-FRM has the potential to provide both social and ecological co-benefits, with remaining gaps including a lack of resilience thinking, inadequate consideration of environmental changes, and limited collaborative efforts to manage trade-offs. The proposed framework shows how to move forward to leverage NbS for equitable and sustainable FRM with improved human well-being and ecosystem health.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer Nature , 2024. Vol. 4, no 1, article id 25
National Category
Environmental Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-346087DOI: 10.1038/s42949-024-00162-zISI: 001206102300001Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85190870455OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-346087DiVA, id: diva2:1855834
Note

QC 20240503

Available from: 2024-05-03 Created: 2024-05-03 Last updated: 2024-05-03Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Destouni, Georgia

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Kong, FanhuaYin, HaiweiDestouni, GeorgiaAndersson, Erik
By organisation
Water and Environmental Engineering
In the same journal
npj Urban Sustainability
Environmental Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 48 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf