Nature-based solutions, commonly known as NBS, use ecosystems or ecological processes to address social and environmental challenges. Examples include restoring rivers and wetlands to reduce flood risk, planting trees to lower urban temperatures, creating rain gardens to absorb stormwater and replacing sealed surfaces with permeable materials. Unlike conventional infrastructure, such as concrete drainage channels or air-conditioning systems, NBS can provide several functions simultaneously. Vegetation stores carbon, filters pollutants, offers habitat and reduces heat through shading and evapotranspiration—the release of water from plants and soil into the atmosphere. Their benefits, however, depend on location, maintenance, access and governance. A park built in a vulnerable neighborhood may reduce heat exposure, while a similar project in a wealthier district may increase property values and accelerate displacement.

The Belgrade case is significant because it brings together two trends that are often discussed separately: the spread of European environmental policy and the political realities of authoritarian urban governance. Europeanization refers broadly to the process through which European Union standards, funding mechanisms, administrative practices and policy ideas influence countries and cities, including those outside the EU. Nature-based solutions have become increasingly prominent in European climate and urban policy because they align with goals related to climate adaptation, biodiversity, public health and sustainable development. When these ideas enter local planning systems, they do not simply travel unchanged. They are translated into local institutions, funding applications and political narratives, where their meaning can be altered by the priorities of municipal authorities, developers and organized communities.

Pajvančić-Cizelj’s analysis focuses on collaborative NBS, an approach that treats residents, civil society groups, experts and public authorities as partners in designing and managing environmental interventions. Collaboration is often presented as a democratic alternative to top-down planning. In theory, residents contribute local knowledge about flooding, heat, neglected public spaces or access barriers, while planners and engineers provide technical expertise. This exchange can produce projects that are better adapted to everyday conditions than standardized designs. It can also build trust and increase public support. Yet participation is not automatically democratic. Meetings may be held without giving residents real decision-making power, while community input can be selectively accepted, delayed or used to validate plans already made elsewhere.

This tension is captured by the concept of co-optation. In political and social research, co-optation describes the process by which independent groups, critical ideas or participatory practices are absorbed into an existing institutional system and redirected toward its goals. Applied to NBS, the term does not mean that ecological measures are fake or technically ineffective. A rain garden may still capture stormwater, and trees may still cool streets. Rather, co-optation concerns the political conditions surrounding those interventions. A project promoted as community-led may provide authorities with an image of openness without transferring control over land, budgets or implementation. Participation can become a communication tool, a funding requirement or a way to manage dissent instead of a mechanism for shared power.

That possibility becomes especially important in authoritarian or semi-authoritarian urban environments, where formal institutions may exist but political competition, media independence and civic oversight are constrained. In such settings, governments can adopt the language of sustainability, resilience and citizen engagement while limiting the ability of residents to challenge major development decisions. Collaborative NBS may therefore perform a double function. They can deliver genuine ecological improvements and create valuable public spaces, but they can also help authorities demonstrate modernity, European alignment and administrative competence. The environmental project becomes part of a broader political story in which the city presents itself as progressive and internationally connected, even when participation remains tightly managed.

The study’s central contribution is to shift attention from the technical performance of NBS to the politics of their production. Researchers often evaluate green infrastructure through measurable indicators such as stormwater retention, surface temperature, carbon storage, species diversity or the number of residents served. These metrics are essential, but they do not reveal how land was acquired, whose knowledge influenced the design or whether benefits are distributed fairly. A project may achieve a strong ecological result while excluding informal users, displacing lower-income residents or prioritizing highly visible central districts over less politically influential neighborhoods. The research therefore treats NBS as socio-technical systems: arrangements in which ecological processes, engineering choices, public institutions, financial rules and social power operate together.

In Belgrade, this perspective also illuminates the ambiguous role of international policy models. European environmental frameworks can introduce new funding opportunities, technical standards and expectations for public participation. They can help local organizations gain visibility and give residents new language for demanding healthier and more accessible urban environments. At the same time, alignment with European agendas may encourage authorities to adopt selected elements of sustainability without embracing the deeper institutional reforms associated with transparency and accountability. The result is a selective form of Europeanization: ecological vocabulary and project formats travel quickly, while democratic safeguards may remain weak or unevenly applied. The city can appear greener and more participatory on paper than it is in practice.

The implications extend far beyond Belgrade. As climate adaptation accelerates, cities are competing for funds and public approval by promising greener, cooler and more resilient neighborhoods. The research suggests that policymakers should evaluate not only what NBS do for ecosystems, but also what they do to urban power relations. Effective safeguards would include transparent selection of project sites, publicly accessible budgets, independent monitoring, long-term maintenance commitments and clear evidence that residents can alter project decisions. Participation should be judged by influence rather than attendance: who sets the agenda, whose objections are recorded, who controls implementation and who can hold authorities accountable? Without those protections, nature-based solutions risk becoming attractive symbols of sustainable governance—visible, fundable and politically useful, but only partially shared.

The broader message is not that cities should reject nature-based solutions or collaboration. It is that ecological innovation cannot be separated from questions of ownership, representation and justice. Trees, wetlands and permeable landscapes can reduce climate risks, but they cannot by themselves create democratic urbanism. In Belgrade, the study shows how a language associated with environmental progress and European integration may be adapted within an authoritarian political context, producing projects whose ecological benefits coexist with limited public power. For the global urban sustainability movement, that finding is a warning and an opportunity: the next generation of green infrastructure must be designed not only to absorb water, capture carbon or cool streets, but also to distribute decision-making power as widely as the benefits it promises.

Subject of Research: Nature-based solutions, collaborative urban planning, Europeanization, political co-optation and environmental governance in authoritarian Belgrade.

Article Title: Nature-based solutions for whom – Europeanization and co-optation of collaborative NBS in authoritarian Belgrade.

Article References: Pajvančić-Cizelj, A. “Nature-based solutions for whom – Europeanization and co-optation of collaborative NBS in authoritarian Belgrade.” npj Urban Sustainability (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42949-026-00464-4

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1038/s42949-026-00464-4

Keywords: Nature-based solutions, urban sustainability, Belgrade, Europeanization, co-optation, authoritarian governance, collaborative planning, climate adaptation, green infrastructure, environmental justice.

The Stiemer Valley, with its rich biodiversity and unique landscapes, serves as an ideal case study for exploring how urban spaces can rejuvenate while addressing ecological challenges. The researchers systematically examined how local authorities, community groups, and private stakeholders engage with NbS initiatives, unveiling the myriad ways these governance structures operate. They found that successful NbS projects significantly rely on collaborative partnerships that integrate various actors, fostering a sense of shared responsibility towards environmental stewardship.

One of the most striking revelations from the study is the critical role of financing in the success of nature-based solutions. The researchers discovered that financial resources are often fragmented and inadequately aligned with the long-term objectives of NbS initiatives. Accessing adequate funding pools remains a formidable barrier for many urban projects, which can limit their implementation and sustainability. This challenge necessitates innovative financial models that consider the multi-faceted benefits of NbS, ranging from enhanced urban resilience to improved public health and social cohesion.

Governance mechanisms play a pivotal role in shaping the trajectory of nature-based solutions. The study found that inclusive decision-making processes that involve local communities tend to yield more successful outcomes. Transparency and accountability in governance emerged as vital factors that build trust among stakeholders, facilitating collaboration and encouraging long-term commitment to NbS. Moreover, promoting an inclusive culture that engages marginalized groups is crucial to ensuring that the benefits of urban nature reach all community members.

The interplay between policy frameworks and nature-based solutions was another focal point of the research. The authors argue that existing policies often lack the flexibility needed to accommodate innovative NbS approaches. By advocating for policy adjustments that facilitate adaptive management, the study highlights the importance of aligning ecological objectives with urban planning processes. Adaptive governance can enable cities to respond more effectively to the changing dynamics of environmental challenges, ensuring that NbS remain relevant and impactful over time.

Notably, the research emphasizes the educational aspect of NbS. Engaging local populations through awareness campaigns and educational initiatives is pivotal in promoting participation and understanding of ecological practices. By fostering a culture of environmental literacy, cities can empower residents to contribute to NbS initiatives actively. This community engagement not only enhances project outcomes but also strengthens the social fabric, as people connect with their surroundings and each other through shared environmental goals.

The case of the Stiemer Valley reveals how NbS can be integrated into urban contexts in a manner that is both transformative and pragmatic. The researchers highlight several successful projects that have introduced green roofs, urban forests, and other ecological infrastructures, demonstrating significant enhancements in urban resilience and quality of life. These projects serve as powerful examples of how cities can leverage their green assets to combat urban heat, stormwater runoff, and air pollution, thereby improving public health outcomes.

As cities continue to grapple with the dual challenges of climate change and urban sprawl, the study offers valuable insights into the potential for NbS to shape urban futures positively. The research advocates for a paradigm shift in how urban planning is approached, urging city planners, policymakers, and community leaders to view nature not merely as a backdrop but as an integral component of urban life. Integrating ecological considerations into the urban planning and governance framework can yield multifaceted benefits, ultimately contributing to more livable, sustainable cities.

In conclusion, Op de Beeck and Coppens’ research contributes to a growing body of evidence underscoring the necessity of governance and financing mechanisms in realizing the full potential of nature-based solutions. By effectively cultivating collaborative approaches, ensuring equitable financial access, and fostering community engagement, cities can unlock the myriad benefits that NbS offer. The insights gleaned from the Stiemer Valley case study underpin the transformative potential of urban ecological strategies, converging toward a future where cities thrive in harmony with nature rather than at its expense.

This study not only addresses the pressing need for innovative urban strategies but also serves as a clarion call for action. As urban areas expand and evolve, the findings offer an actionable framework for leveraging nature as a pivotal ally in addressing the multifaceted challenges that modern cities face today. The vision of resilient, equitable, and green urban spaces is not just a dream but an achievable reality through the thoughtful implementation of nature-based solutions.

Subject of Research:
The governance and financing mechanisms supporting urban nature-based solutions in the Stiemer Valley, Genk.

Article Title:
Uncovering the governance and financing mechanisms supporting urban nature-based solutions: Case Stiemer Valley, Genk.

Article References:
Op de Beeck, T., Coppens, T. Uncovering the governance and financing mechanisms supporting urban nature-based solutions: Case Stiemer Valley, Genk.
Ambio (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-025-02314-6

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s13280-025-02314-6

Keywords: Governance, Financing, Nature-Based Solutions, Urban Sustainability, Stiemer Valley, Climate Change, Community Engagement, Urban Planning, Biodiversity, Resilience.

At the core of the findings is the role of citizen participation in enhancing the design and functional quality of NBS. Residents engaged in co-creating urban greening initiatives contribute novel perspectives that elevate the biodiversity value and multifunctionality of public spaces. This participatory approach leads to improvements not only in environmental attributes but also in the social and health dimensions of urban life, including access to recreation and well-being benefits. By integrating local knowledge and preferences, NBS projects become more responsive and adaptive to community needs, fostering stronger stewardship of urban ecosystems.

The study underscores the critical importance of cross-sectoral policymaking in amplifying the positive outcomes of NBS. Policymakers who collaborate beyond departmental silos—encompassing urban planning, environmental management, public health, and social services—create a governance framework where nature restoration initiatives thrive. Importantly, alignment with established government policies and strategic plans reinforces the sustainability of NBS interventions, securing political and financial support necessary for long-term success.

Contrasting governance structures and urban complexities across cities emerged as significant factors influencing NBS effectiveness. Research conducted in Paris Region, Velika Gorica in Croatia, and Aarhus in Denmark revealed that larger and more complex urban centers face unique challenges and opportunities. For example, Paris witnessed grassroots-driven initiatives led by citizens and NGOs, often independent of immediate government involvement, indicating a fertile environment for bottom-up innovation. In contrast, Velika Gorica encountered pronounced barriers including limited funding and administrative hurdles, which constrained local actors from initiating their own NBS projects.

Climatic pressures, such as increased frequency of flooding and heatwaves, serve as potent catalysts for innovation in urban nature-based efforts. Across the case study cities, escalating awareness of these risks galvanized communities and governments alike to prioritize NBS as adaptive measures. Moreover, exposure to international precedents and media coverage influenced public and political attitudes, creating a conducive environment for experimentation and progressive policy adoption.

The study also reveals that while resident engagement and participatory processes inject creativity and enhance local relevance, such bottom-up dynamics may falter in contexts dominated by rigid top-down drivers like intensive housing development. These external pressures can undermine community agency, stifle innovation, and skew project goals away from ecological rejuvenation toward more immediate economic or infrastructural objectives. This tension highlights the necessity for balanced governance that harmonizes developmental priorities with ecological and social values.

Through detailed interviews and facilitated workshops, researchers documented how participatory co-design contributed to diverse forms of urban nature enhancement. Techniques ranged from the greening of underutilized schoolyards to the restoration of urban waterways. Such interventions not only improved environmental functions but also catalyzed social cohesion and civic pride. By enabling residents to actively shape their surroundings, these projects fostered a sense of ownership that is vital for ongoing maintenance and resilience against future climate impacts.

The interplay between governance scale and citizen empowerment emerged as a key theme. In smaller or less administratively layered cities, fewer bureaucratic obstacles and closer proximity of officials to communities allowed more fluid collaboration and innovation. Conversely, larger metropolitan regions often grapple with fragmented governance that dilutes citizen influence, necessitating deliberate institutional reforms to embed participatory governance into policy frameworks.

Integral to successful NBS implementation is political leadership that legitimizes and champions community involvement. The presence of committed local leaders aligned with government strategies proved instrumental in stimulating innovation and securing resource allocation. Their advocacy bridged the gap between formal institutions and grassroots movements, enabling the integration of diverse stakeholder perspectives into cohesive policy action.

This research, funded under the EU Horizon 2020 REGREEN project, marks a significant contribution to our understanding of how socio-political dynamics shape ecological interventions in urban contexts. The transnational comparative approach enriches insights by contextualizing findings within a broader European governance landscape, revealing patterns and divergences in NBS trajectories. Such knowledge is essential for replicating successful models and avoiding pitfalls in diverse urban settings worldwide.

By documenting both successes and challenges, the study offers nuanced lessons for practitioners, policymakers, and researchers committed to advancing sustainable urban development. It emphasizes that technical solutions alone are insufficient; rather, genuine innovation and sustainability arise from inclusive processes that mirror the complexity of urban ecosystems and societies. Embedding these principles amplifies the transformative potential of urban nature-based solutions in addressing climate resilience and environmental justice.

Dr. Carolyn Petersen and colleagues from the University of Exeter, alongside researchers from Aarhus University, collectively stress that fostering co-design and integrating NBS within governance architectures offer pathways toward more resilient, equitable, and biodiverse cities. Their findings affirm that citizen participation is not a peripheral task but a central pillar in operationalizing nature-based innovation to safeguard urban futures.

In sum, this research advocates for a paradigm where urban nature restoration and climate adaptation are co-produced with community partners and supported across governmental sectors. Such collaborative governance not only optimizes ecological benefits but also nurtures socially inclusive and empowering urban transformations. As climate and environmental challenges escalate, these insights illuminate robust strategies for mobilizing local knowledge, political will, and adaptive policy instruments towards sustainable cities.

Subject of Research: Evaluation of innovative policy for nature‑based solutions in urban climate and environmental challenges through multi-city European case studies.

Article Title: Evaluation of innovative policy for nature‑based solutions: analysis from three European city case studies

News Publication Date: 2-May-2025

Web References:

• REGREEN Project: https://www.regreen-project.eu/
• Article DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s44327-025-00083-1

References:
Petersen, C. J., Russel, D. J., Kirsop-Taylor, N., Jensen, A., & Branth Pedersen, A. (2025). Evaluation of innovative policy for nature‑based solutions: analysis from three European city case studies. Discover Cities. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44327-025-00083-1

Keywords: Environmental economics, Environmental policy, Human geography, Economics, Political science, Social research, Social studies of science