Stakeholder Perceptions of Nature-Based Solutions and Their Collaborative Co-Design and Implementation Processes in Rural Mountain Areas—A Case Study From PHUSICOS

Abstract

Planners and engineers increasingly discovered nature as a source of inspiration to mitigate hydro-meteorological risks resulting from extreme weather events. Actors are realizing advantages of such solutions known as Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) to rapidly adapt to changing climate patterns and related impacts such as flooding, landslides, mudflows or rockfalls. NBS also provide multiple co-benefits such as an increased landscape value for society and biodiversity. Because of their inherent characteristics, NBS implementation are more efficient when supported by participative approaches. At the same time, strengthening democratic and collaborative planning into Living Labs approaches generates an increase in interest. This helps to overcome bottlenecks when implementing measures and provide common ground to provide space for new ideas, to promote innovation and to develop solutions with high acceptance. While co-design and implementing NBS has already been applied and well documented for urban areas, there are few publications on collaborative planning, stakeholder perception and NBS co-implementation in rural mountain areas. In our case study analysis from the EU-funded H2020 project PUSICOS, we present stakeholder views on NBS, their possibility to reduce natural hazards in different mountainous case study areas, different discussed measures, NBS types and stages of implementation. We analyze expectations on Living Lab processes to co-design NBS and important topics to be addressed in these processes from the view, perspective and perception of local stakeholders. Despite the importance of NBS on political and research agenda, in both the literature and the interviews, the concept and ideas are less familiar to stakeholders. NBS are mainly encountered within river restoration measures. The main interest was to reduce risks and to find solutions that were attractive and interesting also from an economical point of view e.g. business models for farmers and landowners and less of the multiple benefits that are most important for stakeholders in urban areas. The collaborative planning approach was seen as important for engaging stakeholders and creating knowledge about NBS. These insights will contribute to the understanding and address the management of intense stakeholder involvement processes, identify barriers that arise, and support in-depth participatory processes.

Nature-based solutions for climate change adaptation are not located where they are most needed across the Alps

“…To support the future scaling of NbS and their spatial planning, future research needs to determine the personal, institutional and economic drivers of NbS implementation, such as previous experiences of climate change impacts (Demski et al 2017;Harmanny and Malek 2019), stakeholder visions for adaptation (Lupp et al 2021;Bergeret and Lavorel 2022), governance processes (Zingraff-Hamed et al 2021a) and funding (Jones et al 2017;Bruley et al 2021a). Improving knowledge on NbS effectiveness and their cost-benefit balance compared to other types of solutions is also essential to support decision-maker choices and avoid maladaptation (Seddon et al 2020;Seddon 2022).…”

Site selection for European native oyster (Ostrea edulis) habitat restoration projects: An expert‐derived consensus

“…The resulting list of factors therefore provides a comprehensive overview of not only the key abiotic factors which may be included in habitat suitability modelling, but also factors relating to project logistics (Figure 3b), biotic (Figure 3d) and socio‐economic factors (Figure 3e), which are critical in project planning and execution (Fitzsimons et al, 2019; Preston et al, 2020a). The listed ‘Essential’ socio‐economic factors, such as stakeholder interest and support (Figure 4), underpin project acceptance and can be pivotal in acquiring funding, project approval and/or social licence to operate (Imeson & van den Bergh, 2006; Deitch et al, 2021; Lupp et al, 2021). By considering such a range of factors at the site selection stage, the potential success – biologically, socially and logistically – as well as the potential benefits of the restoration activities can be maximized.…”

Levers for transformative nature-based adaptation initiatives in the Alps

“…For each NbS, we conducted interviews with only one manager involved in the implementation process. Although the perception of the NbS can depend on the interviewee (107,115), we reduced the perception bias by asking structured questions related to the implementation process. Moreover, in four cases, two interviewees were involved in the same network but not for the same NbS, and their responses were consistent.…”