Traditionally, municipal budgets often do not include the value of ecosystem services, even when these services provide critical benefits to communities. Often it is only when an essential ecosystem service is at risk or no longer being provided that investments in natural infrastructure are sought.[1] Local governments and developers can increase the resiliency of communities by taking these ecosystem services into account before any problems arise.
Planning for Resilience
Leveraging NBS
Resilience encompasses adaptation to ongoing system stressors and gradual changes as well as acute shocks, which can include climate change-related disasters and risks. Communities with high levels of resilience can “thrive during times of stability, and adapt, organize and grow in response to change or disruption.”[2]
In order to increase resilience at a municipal level, governance needs to be proactive and risk management planning across sectors can be key in this process. Nature-based solutions (NBS) are multidisciplinary by nature and thus need to bring together several municipal departments in planning and policy development in order to be mainstreamed.
NBS are “ecosystem-based approaches to address the societal challenges of climate change, natural disasters, food and water security, human health and well-being, and economic and social development.”[3] Implementing NBS contributes to resiliency by increasing the provision of valuable ecosystem services. These include flood attenuation, decreasing the urban heat island and decreasing energy costs for cooling, providing clean water, improving air quality and positively contributing to biodiversity and nutrient cycling. NBS also provide “cultural ecosystem services that bring social, cultural and community benefits and wellbeing.”[4]
Mainstreaming NBS
To be effectively used, NBS need to be mainstreamed into policy and implementation. This will help municipalities and land developers reduce or avoid hazard exposure due to climate change and reduce the vulnerability of areas and infrastructure exposed to climate hazards. NBS also improve the effectiveness of responses to more frequent extreme weather events and the recovery from impacts, while providing multiple benefits to nature and community liveability. Planning can act as the bridge between policy and implementation of NBS in communities and help urban and periurban communities become more resilient.
The first step in planning for NBS implementation by municipalities and developers is asset assessments and management, including natural assets and the ecosystem services they provide. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities has resources to help local governments integrate climate risks into their planning processes. Asset and risk management planning are essential for addressing climate change in urban and periurban areas. This integration can help municipal governments[5]:
- Identify and align priorities
- Increase transparency in decision making
- Involve and educate stakeholders and the broader community
- Improve the efficiency of asset investments
- Increase flexibility and adaptive capacity for changing conditions
- Measure progress towards actionable climate goals and identify tradeoffs
- Develop and implement adaptation measures to ensure community resiliency
Municipalities can mainstream NBS into their planning by taking a collaborative approach. Various stakeholders, local Indigenous communities and traditional-knowledge holders as well as multiple departments of local government should be at the table to plan and implement NBS. Multiple policy areas, climate experts and academia, Indigenous experts or Elders, the private sector, citizens, local stewardship groups and developers should all be included in the process.[6]
Planning “can play a critical role in operationalizing or implementing nature-based solutions to contribute to urban resilience and increasing social equity”[7] and planners should keep in mind the following principles when incorporating NBS into municipal governance[8]:
- NBS should be aesthetically-pleasing
- NBS create new green urban commons
- Trial and error with NBS requires trust in the local government and adaptive management
- NBS planning should include diversity and lessons from social innovation
- Collaborative governance is key
- Creating an inclusive mission for NBS aids in integrating multiple stakeholders and municipal departments in the planning and implementation
- NBS are long-term solutions and can be scaled up as the municipality learns from experience (direct or from another jurisdiction’s experience)
Thoughtful and strategic planning for and implementation of NBS by municipalities and developers alike increases resiliency and can be a cost-effective way to mitigate risks associated with climate hazards.
[1] Vajjhala S. and Roy, D. 2020. Mobilizing Capital for Natural Infrastructure in Canada: A guide for project champions. International Institute for Sustainable Development.
[2] Gardner, J. 2019. The inclusive healthy places framework: A new tool for social resilience and public infrastructure. Biophilic Cities Journal, 2 (2) pp. 10-15.
[3] Cohen-Shacham, E., Andrade, A., Dalton, J., Dudley, N., Jones, M., Kumar, C., & Walters, G. 2019. Core principles for successfully implementing and upscaling nature-based solutions. Environmental Science & Policy, 98, pp. 20-29.
[4] Jennings, V. & Bamkole, O. 2019. The relationship between social cohesion and urban green space: An avenue for health promotion. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16 (3).
[5] Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM). 2021. Guide for Integrating Climate Change Considerations into Municipal Asset Management. Federation of Canadian Municipalities.
[6] & [7] Bush, J. & Doyon, A. 2019. Building urban resilience with nature-based solutions: How can urban planning contribute? Cities (95).
[8] Frantzeskaki, N. 2019. Seven lessons for planning nature-based solutions in cities. Environmental Science and Policy, 93(101-111).
Bush, J. & Doyon, A. 2019. Building urban resilience with nature-based solutions: How can urban planning contribute? Cities (95).
Cohen-Shacham, E., Andrade, A., Dalton, J., Dudley, N., Jones, M., Kumar, C., & Walters, G. 2019. Core principles for successfully implementing and upscaling nature-based solutions. Environmental Science & Policy, 98, pp. 20-29.
Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM). 2021. Guide for Integrating Climate Change Considerations into Municipal Asset Management. Federation of Canadian Municipalities.
Frantzeskaki, N. 2019. Seven lessons for planning nature-based solutions in cities. Environmental Science and Policy, 93(101-111).
Gardner, J. 2019. The inclusive healthy places framework: A new tool for social resilience and public infrastructure. Biophilic Cities Journal, 2 (2) pp. 10-15.
Jennings, V. & Bamkole, O. 2019. The relationship between social cohesion and urban green space: An avenue for health promotion. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16 (3).
McCormick, Kes, ed. 2020. Cities, Nature and Innovation: New Directions. Lund University.
Scott, M., Lennon, M., Haase, D., Kazmierczak, A., Clabby, G. & Beatley, T. 2016. Nature-based solutions for the contemporary city/Re-naturing the city/Reflections on urban landscapes, ecosystems services and nature-based solutions in cities/ Multifunctional green infrastructure and climate change adaptation: brownfield greening as an adaptation strategy for vulnerable communities?/Delivering green infrastructure through planning: insights from practice in Fingal, Ireland/Planning for biophilic cities: from theory to practice. Planning Theory & Practice, 17:2, 267-300.
Vajjhala S. and Roy, D. 2020. Mobilizing Capital for Natural Infrastructure in Canada: A guide for project champions. International Institute for Sustainable Development.