The conceptual quantitative assessment framework for Nature-based Solutions (NbS)

Sumonrat Chairat , Shabbir H. Gheewala
{"title":"The conceptual quantitative assessment framework for Nature-based Solutions (NbS)","authors":"Sumonrat Chairat ,&nbsp;Shabbir H. Gheewala","doi":"10.1016/j.nbsj.2024.100152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Nature-based solutions (NbS) are recognized as one of the approaches that can address a range of environmental issues, often with conservation and natural resource management missions. However, the promotion of NbS often lacks a robust understanding of their actual impacts and effectiveness. To support the evaluation and implementation of NbS, there is a need for a comprehensive quantitative assessment framework. The main objectives of the study are to (1) develop an assessment framework that can be used to quantify the performance of NbS interventions and to (2) provide a step-by-step guideline for evaluating NbS. The assessment framework proposed in this study was built upon existing frameworks used in previous studies, designed to address specific gaps. Several aspects and tools were integrated in response to the NbS standard criteria provided by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), as a result, this quantitative assessment framework can provide a comprehensive evidence based on environmental, social, and economic aspects. The study introduced one approach, viz., the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting - Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EA), and three main assessment tools (i.e., Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA), and Cost-Benefit Assessment (CBA)) aimed at facilitating a comprehensive evaluation of NbS. The results provide a conceptual framework that offers a systematic approach for evaluating the performance of NbS, along with methods to address conflicting results among aspects and/or indicators. Ideas and approaches for assessing ecosystem services provided by NbS and primary concerns when conducting NbS assessments are also highlighted. In summary, the conceptual framework proposed in this study can be used to assess NbS performance and determine whether NbS interventions align with the NbS standard criteria provided by IUCN, utilizing the introduced assessment tools.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100945,"journal":{"name":"Nature-Based Solutions","volume":"6 ","pages":"Article 100152"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772411524000430/pdfft?md5=7d30ce004574a085ea3924c79286b35b&pid=1-s2.0-S2772411524000430-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature-Based Solutions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772411524000430","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Nature-based solutions (NbS) are recognized as one of the approaches that can address a range of environmental issues, often with conservation and natural resource management missions. However, the promotion of NbS often lacks a robust understanding of their actual impacts and effectiveness. To support the evaluation and implementation of NbS, there is a need for a comprehensive quantitative assessment framework. The main objectives of the study are to (1) develop an assessment framework that can be used to quantify the performance of NbS interventions and to (2) provide a step-by-step guideline for evaluating NbS. The assessment framework proposed in this study was built upon existing frameworks used in previous studies, designed to address specific gaps. Several aspects and tools were integrated in response to the NbS standard criteria provided by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), as a result, this quantitative assessment framework can provide a comprehensive evidence based on environmental, social, and economic aspects. The study introduced one approach, viz., the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting - Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EA), and three main assessment tools (i.e., Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA), and Cost-Benefit Assessment (CBA)) aimed at facilitating a comprehensive evaluation of NbS. The results provide a conceptual framework that offers a systematic approach for evaluating the performance of NbS, along with methods to address conflicting results among aspects and/or indicators. Ideas and approaches for assessing ecosystem services provided by NbS and primary concerns when conducting NbS assessments are also highlighted. In summary, the conceptual framework proposed in this study can be used to assess NbS performance and determine whether NbS interventions align with the NbS standard criteria provided by IUCN, utilizing the introduced assessment tools.

基于自然的解决方案(NbS)概念性量化评估框架
基于自然的解决方案(NbS)被认为是能够解决一系列环境问题的方法之一,通常具有保护和自然资源管理的使命。然而,NbS 的推广往往缺乏对其实际影响和有效性的深入了解。为了支持对净减排战略的评估和实施,有必要建立一个全面的定量评估框架。本研究的主要目标是:(1) 制定一个可用于量化无害环境管理干预措施绩效的评估框架;(2) 为评估无害环境管理提供一个循序渐进的指南。本研究提出的评估框架建立在以往研究中使用的现有框架基础上,旨在弥补具体差距。根据世界自然保护联盟(IUCN)提供的 NbS 标准,对多个方面和工具进行了整合,因此,该定量评估框架可提供基于环境、社会和经济方面的综合证据。该研究引入了一种方法,即环境经济核算体系--生态系统核算(SEEA EA)和三种主要评估工具(即生命周期评估(LCA)、社会生命周期评估(S-LCA)和成本效益评估(CBA)),旨在促进对 NbS 的全面评估。研究结果提供了一个概念框架,为评估非营利性机构的绩效提供了一种系统方法,以及解决各方面和/或指标之间结果冲突的方法。此外,还强调了评估 NbS 提供的生态系统服务的思路和方法,以及进行 NbS 评估时的主要关注点。总之,本研究提出的概念框架可用于评估 NbS 绩效,并利用引入的评估工具确定 NbS 干预措施是否符合世界自然保护联盟提供的 NbS 标准规范。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信