Evidence for nature based solutions (NBSGap)

为了制定有利于英国公民利益的明智战略，并通过有根据和明智的政策来实施，政策制定者需要证据。他们需要知道在一个领域中什么是已知的，什么还有待研究。证据需要结构化和系统化，以便决策者和所有利益相关者能够理解决策者做出决策的原因。NBSGap项目将系统地审查英国四个地区的多部门政策制定者优先考虑的基于自然的解决方案方面的广泛来源的证据。自然基础设施有各种定义，但其核心都集中在向自然学习和利用自然创造可持续社会的总主题上，从而在地方、区域或全球范围内增进人类福祉。国家统计局的举措是多方面的，突出了生态系统的保护和多样化对人类福祉的根本影响。这些措施包括气候调节和限制洪水和流行病爆发等自然灾害的影响，以及通过使公民与自然重新联系来直接促进改善人类身心健康。与此同时，基于自然的解决方案解决和应对在环境持续退化的情况下自然保护的挑战。然而，在国家统计局干预措施的共同利益和共同危害之间可能存在权衡，例如，在与野生动物或节肢动物病媒有关的传染病的暴露增加的情况下。有人声称，基于自然的解决方案应纳入许多政策部门，包括交通，住房，能源和卫生政策，气候调节战略和领土规划，因为国家统计局的目标行动所产生的相互作用，权衡，协同作用和冲突。因此，政策制定者需要了解国家统计局在政策领域的有效性、共同利益和共同危害的证据。特别是，我们希望确定与跨政策领域的以网络为中心的技术解决方案相比的具体好处和坏处。只有这样，政策制定者和监管机构才能做出明智的决定，制定适当的国家统计局行动，与公众价值观产生共鸣，并导致更可持续的未来。由此产生的报告将侧重于提供与国家统计局和英国有关的证据的系统地图，以实现与指导小组商定的目标成果。

In order to make informed strategy for the good of UK citizens and to implement it through well-founded and informed policy, the policy-makers need evidence. They need to know what is known in an area and what has yet to be researched. The evidence needs to be structured and systematically obtained so the policy maker and all the interested stakeholders can understand the reasons the policy makers make their decisions. The NBSGap project will systematically review the evidence available in a wide range of sources on aspects of nature-based solutions prioritised by multiple-sector policy makers in each of the four regions of the UK. There are various definitions of NBS but at their core, they cluster into the general theme of learning from and using nature to create sustainable societies, which enhance human well-being, locally, regionally or globally. NBS initiatives are multidimensional and highlight the fundamental influences that preservation and diversification of ecosystems can have on human wellbeing. These ranges from climate regulation and limiting the impacts of natural disasters such as flooding and epidemic disease outbreaks, to promoting improved human physical and mental health directly by reconnecting citizens with nature. At the same time, nature-based solutions address and respond to the challenges of nature conservation in the face of ongoing environmental degradation. However, there may be a trade-off between the co-benefits of NBS interventions and co-harms, where exposure to infectious diseases linked to wildlife or arthropod vectors is increased for example. It is claimed that solutions based on nature should be integrated into many policy sectors including transport, housing, energy and health policies, climate regulation strategies and territorial planning because of the interactions, trade-offs, synergies and conflicts resulting from NBS target actions. As such policy makers need to understand the evidence for the effectiveness of NBS co- benefits and co-harms across policy domains. In particular, we want to ascertain the specific benefits and disbenefits in comparison to anthropocentric technological solutions across policy domains. Only then can policy-makers and regulators make informed decisions to enact appropriate NBS actions which resonate with public values and lead to a more sustainable future.The resultant reporting will focus on providing a systematic map of the evidence relating to NBS and the UK for the targeted outcomes agreed with the steering group.