Research Roundup: Feb. ’22 - IUCN Urban AllianceIUCN Urban Alliance

To help you keep abreast of the latest research and development in urban nature, we collate and summarise leading journal articles. In February 2022, topics include (1) shifting notions of nature in post-war landscapes, (2) Buen Vivir – the rights of nature – in urban regeneration, (3) nature-based solutions for ecologically just cities, and (4) future nature scenarios for the urban century. Enjoy!

By Eline van Remortel

1. From sparse to compact city–shifting notions of nature in post-war residential landscapes in the Helsinki region (geographical scope: Helsinki, Finland)

Hautamäki, R. (2022): From sparse to compact city – shifting notions of nature in post-war residential landscapes in the Helsinki region. Planning Perspectives, 1-25. DOI: 10.1080/02665433.2022.2036224

1. The appropriate level of density and status of urban nature have been points of discussion that has varied over the years. This paper examines the history of urban nature in planning strategies used in post-war residential landscapes. Four ‘regreening frames’ are identified.
2. Nature as relief, 1850-1900: the idea of nature as a way to escape from noise and pollution of the city
3. Nature as boundary, 1920-1950: the exclusion of ‘untouched nature’ and implementation of compact, standardised nature to make room for high-density urban growth
4. Nature as greening, 1960-1990: a more holistic approach and see nature as a systemic part of the city
5. Today, urban planning is moving towards the notion of sustainability, multifunctionality and the global environment.
6. It is important to acknowledge that nature is not a neutral planning principle but highly connected to its cultural context and urban planning ideals. It is defined by the density and sparsity of urban structure, organisation, functional or aesthetic ideas and the kinds of benefits nature is expected to produce. Politics often define the kind of nature that is regarded as desirable in a city, and the status nature is given.

2. The materialisation of the Buen Vivir and the Rights of Nature: Rhetoric and Realities of Guayaquil Ecológico urban regeneration project (geographical scope: Ecuador)

Ordóñez, M.F., Shannon, K. & d’Auria, V. (2022). The materialization of the Buen Vivir and the Rights of Nature: Rhetoric and Realities of Guayaquil Ecológico urban regeneration project. City Territ Archit 9, 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40410-021-00147-w

1. In 2008, Ecuador became the first country in the world to declare nature as a subject of rights. Rights of Nature – known as the ‘Buen Vivir’ philosophy – is based on indigenous principles that envision a world where humans are an integral part of nature. Although Ecuador’s constitution is ground-breaking from a legal standpoint, the question arises how the rights of nature are spatially manifested into urban planning. This paper investigates the use of Buen Vivir in an urban regeneration case study (Guayaquil Ecológico).
2. For the Guayaquil Ecológico case study, the authors take a critical stance: in opposition to the principles behind Buen Vivir, it was mobilised from a hierarchised, top-down design approach with an emphasis on aesthetic dimensions. The Rights of Nature rhetoric was inappropriately used to legitimise eviction processes and justify the abandonment and exclusion of informal settlements in the name of ‘restoring nature’. Furthermore, its implementation was dependent on specific political momentum. After ten years, the project was no longer a national priority; budget cuts implied reducing personnel, leaving it in a state of abandonment and neglect.
3. An important lesson from the Guayaquil Ecológical case-study is that local knowledge, needs and socio-economic dynamics are essential for the successful implementation of Buen Vivir. There is a need to move away from a ‘one-moment’ top-down approach where a unilateral vision and ideal of public green space is imposed on a place with its own dynamics and logistics.
4. Buen Vivir, as a philosophical stance, has the potential to challenge western forms of development. The Buen Vivir cannot be improvised – it must be planned in harmony, equality and solidarity. To do so, urban planners need to recognise and deal with the dualism of formal-informal, city-nature, rural-urban, humans and non-humans. Through design and creative capacity, Buen Vivir can help influence policy and mobilise structural change by embracing realities, visions, and actors that aim for urban development to be socially and ecologically just.

3. The potential of nature-based solutions to deliver ecologically just cities: Lessons for research and urban planning from a systematic literature review (geographical scope: global)

Pineda-Pinto, M., Frantzeskaki, N. & Nygaard, C.A. (2022). The potential of nature-based solutions to deliver ecologically just cities: Lessons for research and urban planning from a systematic literature review. Ambio 51, 167–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-021-01553-7

1. While it is assumed that nature-based solutions – when providing benefits for humans – simultaneously benefit non-human nature, this is not always the case. This paper investigates how ecological justice can advance the understanding of nature-based solutions.
2. The multifunctionality of nature-based solutions are generally understood on two levels: (1) the functional performance and measurement of ecosystems (e.g. tree biomass), and (2) the socio-economical contributions to humans (e.g. climate adaptation). While the former is based on objective measurements, the latter is primarily driven by the values people place on nature. How we define nature’s contributions is essential in discussions about justice because understanding the multifunctionality of nature-based solutions is directly related to who benefits and how they benefit.
3. According to this study, current literature and practice on nature-based solutions remains highly human-centred and lacks explicit incorporation of ecological justice dimensions. Ecological justice seeks the following four dimensions for human and non-human communities and their ecologies: (1) distribution (equitability of environmental bads and goods), (2) participation (equitable, legitimate and empowering collaboration), (3) recognition (acknowledge different and diverse social and ecological groups), and (4) capabilities (the abilities that all living beings must have to live in a state of well-being). An ecological justice perspective can help design and plan nature-based solutions in a non-anthropocentric manner that enhances co-benefits for humans and non-human living organisms.
4. Future research should focus on recognising the capabilities and needs of non-human living beings and enabling their participation in decision-making and co-design processes. This can be done through input from ecology sciences and evidence-based analysis of ecosystems’ long-term integrity, multiple functions and a multispecies approach to the design of nature-based solutions.

4. Nature futures for the urban century: Integrating multiple values into urban management (geographical scope: global)

Mansur, A. V., McDonald, R. I., Güneralp, B., Kim, H., de Oliveira, J. A. P., Callaghan, C. T., … & Pereira, H. M. (2022). Nature futures for the urban century: Integrating multiple values into urban management. Environmental Science & Policy, 131, 46-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2022.01.013.

1. To address the specificities of the urban context in future nature scenario thinking, this paper develops the Urban Nature Futures Framework (UNFF). The framework is based on scenario building in cities and maps stakeholders’ preferences for the future through three transformative future scenarios: Nature for Nature (values of nature dominate), Nature for Society (utilitarian values dominate) and Nature as Culture (relational values dominate).
2. To better consolidate equity in the creation of visions and scenarios, three interconnected dimensions of equity need to be considered in the framework: (1) recognitional (recognition of different life experiences and values), (2) procedural (inclusive and meaningful incorporation of multiple voices in the decision-making process) and (3) distribution (fair allocation of benefits and burdens among different groups within the city, including current and future generations)
3. Stakeholders in cities need frameworks and tools to incorporate nature and envision the future of their cities in various dimensions. Visioning and scenario building can help stakeholders communicate expectations, co-design strategies, explore key uncertainties and envision pathways of action. While the three scenarios will never exist in complete isolation, illustrating them at these extremes helps to emphasise both the contrasts among them as well as the wide range of future possibilities for cities.