Why scale is vital to plan optimal Nature-Based Solutions for resilient cities
Why scale is vital to plan optimal Nature-Based Solutions for resilient cities
复制标题
DOI：
10.1088/1748-9326/abd9f4
复制
发表时间：
2021-01
影响因子：
6.7
通讯作者：
Mike Hutchins;David E. Fletcher;A. Hagen‐Zanker;Haifeng Jia;Laurence Jones;Hong Li;Steven Loiselle;James Miller;Stefan Reis;Isabel Seifert Dähnn;Vanessa Wilde;Chong-Yu Xu;Dawen Yang;Jingyan Yu;Shen Yu
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mike Hutchins;David E. Fletcher;A. Hagen‐Zanker;Haifeng Jia;Laurence Jones;Hong Li;Steven Loiselle;James Miller;Stefan Reis;Isabel Seifert Dähnn;Vanessa Wilde;Chong-Yu Xu;Dawen Yang;Jingyan Yu;Shen Yu
近年来，越来越多的人认识到需要多功能评估工具来评估各种基于自然的解决方案（NBS）的权衡和共同利益。在方法上，提出了一种工具的概念，包括量化国家统计局加强生态系统服务（ES）提供的需求和潜力，并将ESs与易于量化和立法相关的环境质量指标（EQIs）联系起来。工具应用的目标是在一系列不同的社会环境指标中确定最佳的国家统计局位置，同时也考虑到实施领域的相对位置和收益累积问题。该工具包含了从经济效益和可持续发展目标角度评估成果的重要性。这些概念通过简化的例子加以说明，并以实施城市林业作为国家统计局范例的案例为例。通过总结知识库，证明了NBS的效益在两个主要方面基本上依赖于规模；受感受器的范围和接近程度。评估工具应该能够量化量表依赖性。这些考虑因素的实质重要性以及它们的动态如何在指标和服务之间变化，通过图示函数以图形方式加以说明。开发后，该工具应作为咨询和共同设计的重点，以确定为实现特定受体的充分受益水平所需的NBS的大小。这可以根据每个指标的目标效益水平来衡量，区分主要预期结果和次要或非预期的共同效益或权衡。
A need for multi-functional assessment tools evaluating trade-offs and co-benefits for various types of Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) has been increasingly identified in recent years. Methodologically, concepts for a tool are presented which include quantifying the demand and potential for NBS to enhance ecosystem service (ES) provision, and linking ESs to readily quantifiable and legislatively-relevant environmental quality indicators (EQIs). The objective of tool application is to identify optimal NBS placement across a diverse set of socio-environmental indicators, whilst also incorporating issues of relative location of areas of implementation and benefit accrual. Embedded within the tool is the importance of evaluating outcomes in terms of economic benefits and of sustainable development goals. The concepts are illustrated with simplified examples, relating to the case of implementing urban forestry as an exemplar NBS. By summarising the knowledge base it is demonstrated that benefits of NBS are substantially scale-dependent in two main respects; those of extent and proximity to receptors. Evaluation tools should be capable of quantifying scale-dependence. The substantive importance of these considerations and how their dynamics vary between indicators and services is illustrated graphically through schematic functions. When developed, the tool should be used as a focus for consultation and co-design to pinpoint the size of NBS necessary to achieve a sufficient level of benefit for a particular receptor. This could be measured against target levels of benefit for each indicator, distinguishing between primary intended outcomes and those co-benefits or trade-offs that are secondary or unintended.