城市洪水风险管理需要基于自然的解决方案:社会-生态系统耦合视角

IF 9.1 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Kejing Zhou, Fanhua Kong, Haiwei Yin, Georgia Destouni, Michael E. Meadows, Erik Andersson, Liding Chen, Bin Chen, Zhenya Li, Jie Su
{"title":"城市洪水风险管理需要基于自然的解决方案:社会-生态系统耦合视角","authors":"Kejing Zhou, Fanhua Kong, Haiwei Yin, Georgia Destouni, Michael E. Meadows, Erik Andersson, Liding Chen, Bin Chen, Zhenya Li, Jie Su","doi":"10.1038/s42949-024-00162-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A growing number of Nature-based Solutions (NbS) has been advocated for urban flood risk management (FRM). However, whether NbS for FRM (NbS-FRM) achieves both social and ecological co-benefits remains largely unknown. We here propose and use a conceptual framework with a coupled social-ecological perspective to explore and identify such “win-win” potential in NbS-FRM. Through a scoping-review we find that ecological FRM measures are unevenly distributed around the world, and those solely targeting flood mitigation may have unintended negative consequences for society and ecosystems. In elaborating this framework with evidence from the reviewed studies, we find that NbS-FRM has the potential to provide both social and ecological co-benefits, with remaining gaps including a lack of resilience thinking, inadequate consideration of environmental changes, and limited collaborative efforts to manage trade-offs. The proposed framework shows how to move forward to leverage NbS for equitable and sustainable FRM with improved human well-being and ecosystem health.","PeriodicalId":74322,"journal":{"name":"npj urban sustainability","volume":" ","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s42949-024-00162-z.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Urban flood risk management needs nature-based solutions: a coupled social-ecological system perspective\",\"authors\":\"Kejing Zhou, Fanhua Kong, Haiwei Yin, Georgia Destouni, Michael E. Meadows, Erik Andersson, Liding Chen, Bin Chen, Zhenya Li, Jie Su\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s42949-024-00162-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A growing number of Nature-based Solutions (NbS) has been advocated for urban flood risk management (FRM). However, whether NbS for FRM (NbS-FRM) achieves both social and ecological co-benefits remains largely unknown. We here propose and use a conceptual framework with a coupled social-ecological perspective to explore and identify such “win-win” potential in NbS-FRM. Through a scoping-review we find that ecological FRM measures are unevenly distributed around the world, and those solely targeting flood mitigation may have unintended negative consequences for society and ecosystems. In elaborating this framework with evidence from the reviewed studies, we find that NbS-FRM has the potential to provide both social and ecological co-benefits, with remaining gaps including a lack of resilience thinking, inadequate consideration of environmental changes, and limited collaborative efforts to manage trade-offs. The proposed framework shows how to move forward to leverage NbS for equitable and sustainable FRM with improved human well-being and ecosystem health.\",\"PeriodicalId\":74322,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"npj urban sustainability\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s42949-024-00162-z.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"npj urban sustainability\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s42949-024-00162-z\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"npj urban sustainability","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s42949-024-00162-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

越来越多的基于自然的解决方案(NbS)被提倡用于城市洪水风险管理(FRM)。然而,用于洪水风险管理的 NbS(NbS-FRM)是否能同时实现社会和生态的共同利益在很大程度上仍是未知数。在此,我们提出并使用了一个社会-生态耦合视角的概念框架,以探索和确定 NbS-FRM 的这种 "双赢 "潜力。通过范围审查,我们发现生态型 FRM 措施在世界各地的分布并不均衡,而那些仅以减轻洪灾为目标的措施可能会对社会和生态系统造成意想不到的负面影响。在利用所审查研究的证据阐述该框架时,我们发现 NbS-FRM 有潜力提供社会和生态共同效益,但仍存在差距,包括缺乏复原力思维、对环境变化考虑不足以及管理权衡的合作努力有限。建议的框架说明了如何向前迈进,利用 NbS 实现公平、可持续的 FRM,改善人类福祉和生态系统健康。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Urban flood risk management needs nature-based solutions: a coupled social-ecological system perspective

Urban flood risk management needs nature-based solutions: a coupled social-ecological system perspective
A growing number of Nature-based Solutions (NbS) has been advocated for urban flood risk management (FRM). However, whether NbS for FRM (NbS-FRM) achieves both social and ecological co-benefits remains largely unknown. We here propose and use a conceptual framework with a coupled social-ecological perspective to explore and identify such “win-win” potential in NbS-FRM. Through a scoping-review we find that ecological FRM measures are unevenly distributed around the world, and those solely targeting flood mitigation may have unintended negative consequences for society and ecosystems. In elaborating this framework with evidence from the reviewed studies, we find that NbS-FRM has the potential to provide both social and ecological co-benefits, with remaining gaps including a lack of resilience thinking, inadequate consideration of environmental changes, and limited collaborative efforts to manage trade-offs. The proposed framework shows how to move forward to leverage NbS for equitable and sustainable FRM with improved human well-being and ecosystem health.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.00
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