As an experienced flood control specialist, I have witnessed firsthand the growing recognition of nature-based solutions (NBS) as innovative and cost-effective measures to address urban flooding challenges. NBS, which integrate more diverse natural features and processes into cities, have been widely advocated for their ability to deliver environmental, social, and economic co-benefits.
However, the implementation of NBS still lags behind ambitions, often remaining limited to isolated demonstration projects without adequate attention to long-term management and maintenance. The root of this implementation gap lies in the institutional, organizational, and cultural barriers that city governments face when planning and delivering NBS.
This article explores how policy officers in ten European cities have started to mainstream NBS by interacting with and changing incumbent governance arrangements. By experimenting with novel governance processes and mechanisms, these city teams have developed distinct capacities for systemic, inclusive and collaborative, and reflexive NBS planning, delivery, and stewardship.
Institutionalizing a Systems’ Approach to NBS
Existing sectoral approaches in cities, characterized by fragmented priorities, management responsibilities, and financing frameworks, have posed significant barriers to the prioritization and mobilization of resources for NBS. To overcome this, the city teams first needed to create narratives about how NBS contribute to broader social, political, and business goals for urban development.
For example, the urban garden networks in A Coruña and Nicosia were aligned with sustainable transport, health, and wellbeing policies by including active mobility connections through an integrated bicycle and pedestrian network. This spurred collaboration with other city departments and private stakeholders, as the co-benefits became evident.
Building on these connections, the city teams strategically recognized and linked their NBS demonstrator projects with ongoing policy, business, and community developments to obtain support from politicians and senior decision-makers. A tool was developed to support the mapping of NBS benefits against city strategic priorities and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), helping cities present how their NBS meet both local and global themes.
To further embed NBS into existing regulatory frameworks and decision-making procedures, some cities developed their NBS strategies as legally binding documents to secure political commitment and budgetary allocations. Burgas, for example, included the Saint Trinity Park in their municipal development plan, making it a priority site with secured future funding.
Additionally, the city teams formalized new working relations and organizational resources to mobilize the knowledge, skills, and collaborations needed for multi-functional NBS designs, engaging local communities, and ensuring long-term financing. Genk hired a social innovation officer with expertise in co-creation, positioning them across the Environment and Sustainable Development, and Social Departments to foster novel exchanges and collaborations.
Enabling Inclusive and Collaborative Governance
Collaborative governance approaches, involving diverse formal and informal partnerships and co-creative processes, have been crucial for activating a wider range of ideas, needs, and resources for NBS. However, the city teams initially struggled with these approaches due to a lack of experience, knowledge, and skills in design and facilitation, as well as substantial barriers from existing planning routines and cultures.
To create institutional space and support for collaborative approaches, the city teams first participated in learning webinars, workshops, and peer-to-peer activities organized by the project team. They also identified colleagues from other departments or external actors with co-production experience to support them.
The city teams then systematically defined the specific goals, contexts, and target audiences for their co-production processes, and chose appropriate engagement methods. Innovative tools like the Business Model Canvas (BMC) and the EM|Path approach were used to build partnerships, develop common understanding, and foster trust.
While co-production often takes temporary, project-based forms, the cities’ experiences underscored the need for lasting partnerships and continuing community participation for long-term co-management of NBS. Several cities formalized established collaborations between city government and citizens or entrepreneurs by clarifying roles, responsibilities, and decision-making procedures.
Genk pioneered a collaborative governance model to double-check that active citizen participation and engagement in all aspects of their Stiemer programme. A Coruña created municipal urban gardens associations to manage the plots, and made the gardens available to NGOs for educational projects and citizen engagement.
To support the diverse actors and local communities, the city teams developed capacity-building toolkits, educational projects, and initiatives. For example, Poznań initiated an “NBS Academy” to raise decision-makers’ awareness and provide training on good practices for contractors and nature-based enterprises.
Institutionalizing Reflexivity and Learning
For the city teams, institutionalizing reflexive and learning-based forms of governance meant stepping away from the institutional expectation to predefine problems and solutions, and instead reflecting and learning about the progress and direction of their NBS in real-time in relation to emerging context needs, barriers, and opportunities.
Reflexive monitoring provided the teams with a process tool to evaluate day-to-day activities, decisions, and progress, and how these aligned with long-term ambitions. Initially, many city teams were skeptical of its value, as it was quite different from their usual project management approach. However, as the cities became comfortable with the method and translated it to a format that suited their working style, it was highly appreciated and embraced.
The involvement of actors from different departments and, in some cities, private stakeholder groups, showcased the opportunities for social learning, raising broader insights, awareness, and support about barriers and follow-up actions. As a policy officer from Poznań noted, “This approach helps us to link the intangible results to the tangible ones, and this is crucial to double-check that long-term change.”
Reflexive monitoring turned into a crucial process for the city teams to navigate the complexities involved in NBS implementation, identify critical turning points, and be more proactive in anticipating possible problems. For instance, in Ioannina, a critical turning point was determining the key design elements in restoring an existing, underused urban park to transform it into an NBS with multiple benefits.
The city teams also developed impact assessment approaches to systematically select context-specific indicators and involve diverse actors in data collection and analysis. This helped them build an evidence base about the social, ecological, and economic impacts of NBS, which is vital for unlocking further mainstreaming.
Partnerships and shared platforms were identified as crucial processes for gaining access to existing data and embedding the learnings from reflexive monitoring and impact assessment into decision-making. Several cities established collaborations with academia to support impact monitoring and evaluation, and involved citizens in quantifying and qualifying impacts for different target groups.
Overcoming Persistent Barriers
While the city teams made significant strides in mainstreaming NBS through the strategies outlined, many barriers persisted that were beyond their direct influence. These included inconsistent political support, short-term financing and procurement frameworks, and insufficient organizational staffing and expertise.
Even in cities like Genk, which embraced reflexive monitoring, a policy officer noted the ongoing struggle to embed the methodology in the long-term due to a lack of trust, resistance, or commitment across the whole team. Similarly, the city teams felt there was still too little knowledge and expertise to engage a diversity of citizens in NBS co-production and stimulate their own initiatives.
These barriers indicate a requirement for changes in legislation, organizational norms, or administrative procedures that would depend on top-down action by executives, elected leaders, and novel policies at the national or EU levels. Unlocking significant private-sector financing, for instance, requires more fundamental changes in market conditions that were beyond the scope of the city teams’ governance processes.
The findings underline the critical role of institutional entrepreneurs – in this case, the city teams – in enacting the stepping stones for mainstreaming NBS. The co-creative research approach supported the teams’ entrepreneurship, providing space for them to raise questions, reflect on challenges, and make sense of the application of innovative governance processes.
Fruitful avenues for future research could focus on establishing and maintaining spaces for city dialogue and exchange to facilitate place-based institutional entrepreneurship in relation to on-ground implementation and learning. This involves interpreting, translating, and realizing a mix of agendas, policies, and strategies to overcome the persistent barriers to mainstreaming nature-based flood control solutions.
Visit Flood Control 2015 to explore more insights and best practices for sustainable water management and flood prevention.
Tip: Regularly inspect and maintain flood barriers and drainage systems
