The potential for nature-based solutions to combat the freshwater biodiversity crisis

Rees, Charles B. van; Jumani, Suman; Abera, Liya E.; Rack, Laura; McKay, S. Kyle; Wenger, Seth J.

doi:10.1371/journal.pwat.0000126

Cited by 15 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 104 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Notably, a recent review has stressed how the science base for assessing restoration proposals and novel NBS techniques in freshwaters is still very weak (van Rees et al, 2023).…”

Section: Lack Of a Scientific Evidence Base For Restoration Activitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ecohydrology of rewilding: A pressing need for evidence in the restoration of upland Atlantic salmon streams

Soulsby,

Youngson,

Webb

2024

Hydrological Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent interest in landscape re‐wilding and ecological restoration has resulted in a proliferation of large‐scale projects in many countries that have the potential to cause significant ecohydrological change. In Scotland an increasing number of watershed “restoration” schemes are motivated by declining Atlantic salmon populations and the threat of climate change. These usually involve riparian planting to shade salmon streams and re‐engineering of river channels to “enhance” salmon habitat. However, the need for, and objectives of, these schemes are often highly uncertain and there is no compelling scientific evidence to suggest that they are likely to be successful in halting salmon declines. Remarkably, these schemes ‐ which affect can affect rivers with the highest conservation designations in protected landscapes ‐ have been subject to limited environmental assessment. In some cases, engineering activities pose significant potential risk to juvenile salmon, and existing high quality salmon habitat may be degraded in the re‐engineering of streams. This commentary highlights the urgent need for more evidence‐based approaches in the management of complex ecohydrological systems.

show abstract

“…Notably, a recent review has stressed how the science base for assessing restoration proposals and novel NBS techniques in freshwaters is still very weak (van Rees et al, 2023).…”

Section: Lack Of a Scientific Evidence Base For Restoration Activitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ecohydrology of rewilding: A pressing need for evidence in the restoration of upland Atlantic salmon streams

Soulsby,

Youngson,

Webb

2024

Hydrological Processes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The emerging field of NbS, which involves deliberately harnessing ecosystem services and ecological functions to deliver infrastructure outcomes, ostensibly provides another step forward, with greater integration of ecological and societal outcomes ( 20 , 48 ). However, the evidence base for their value to biodiversity conservation and to promoting social justice is limited and in need of thorough assessment ( 18 , 49 ).…”

Section: Infrastructure and Biodiversity—the Historical Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Importantly, biodiversity underpins the delivery of ecosystem services by NbS and natural infrastructure, necessitating its careful stewardship ( 59 ). Although many governments are calling for increased use of NbS worldwide, their implementation has not been explicitly tied to relevant and mission-critical biodiversity goals ( 18 , 60 ).…”

Section: A Vision For Civil Infrastructure and Biodiversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent research acknowledges the potential for NbS to combat societal inequity by providing more nuanced alternatives to the exclusionary practice of establishing protected areas ( 18 , 49 ). Our paradigm broadens this approach to include other forms of conventional and green infrastructure, emphasizing the potential for promoting environmentally just outcomes where biodiversity enhancement becomes an infrastructure planning and management objective.…”

Section: A Vision For Civil Infrastructure and Biodiversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Due to the scale and lifespan of planned investments, infrastructure development decisions in the present decade will likely determine our global social–ecological trajectory for the next century or more. To help ensure a just and sustainable trajectory over that lengthy time horizon, it will be necessary to conceptualize biodiversity and environmental justice as an integrated part of infrastructure ( 17 , 18 ). In other words, there is an urgent need for a new paradigm to guide infrastructure development and ensure that the coming wave of infrastructure investments delivers a sustainable and equitable future for all ( 1 , 6 , 19 , 20 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Reimagining infrastructure for a biodiverse future

van Rees,

Hernández-Abrams,

Shudtz

et al. 2023

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Civil infrastructure will be essential to face the interlinked existential threats of climate change and rising resource demands while ensuring a livable Anthropocene for all. However, conventional infrastructure planning largely neglects the contributions and maintenance of Earth’s ecological life support systems, which provide irreplaceable services supporting human well-being. The stability and performance of these services depend on biodiversity, but conventional infrastructure practices, narrowly focused on controlling natural capital, have inadvertently degraded biodiversity while perpetuating social inequities. Here, we envision a new infrastructure paradigm wherein biodiversity and ecosystem services are a central objective of civil engineering. In particular, we reimagine infrastructure practice such that 1) ecosystem integrity and species conservation are explicit objectives from the outset of project planning; 2) infrastructure practices integrate biodiversity into diverse project portfolios along a spectrum from conventional to nature-based solutions and natural habitats; 3) ecosystem functions reinforce and enhance the performance and lifespan of infrastructure assets; and 4) civil engineering promotes environmental justice by counteracting legacies of social inequity in infrastructure development and nature conservation. This vision calls for a fundamental rethinking of the standards, practices, and mission of infrastructure development agencies and a broadening of scope for conservation science. We critically examine the legal and professional precedents for this paradigm shift, as well as the moral and economic imperatives for manifesting equitable infrastructure planning that mainstreams biodiversity and nature’s benefits to people. Finally, we set an applied research agenda for supporting this vision and highlight financial, professional, and policy pathways for achieving it.

show abstract

An interdisciplinary overview of levee setback benefits: Supporting spatial planning and implementation of riverine nature‐based solutions

van Rees,

Chambers,

Catalano

et al. 2024

WIREs Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nature‐based solutions (NbS, and related concepts like natural infrastructure, Ecosystem‐based Adaptation, and green infrastructure) are increasingly recognized as multi‐benefit strategies for addressing the critical sustainability challenges of the Anthropocene, including the climate emergency and biodiversity crisis. Mainstreaming NbS in professional practice requires strategic, landscape‐level planning integrating multiple sources of benefits and their synergies and trade‐offs. Levee setbacks (LS) are among the best‐studied riverine NbS with recognized benefits for flood risk management, drought resilience, water quality management, recreational opportunities, and ecological restoration for biodiversity. Although awareness of the multifarious benefits of LS as forms of Natural Capital is growing, implementation remains ad‐hoc and opportunistic. To address this critical implementation gap for one major example of NbS, we review and synthesize literature across diverse disciplines to provide an overview of the primary social, economic, and ecological mechanisms that affect the co‐benefit delivery of LS projects. Next, to make this information relevant to NbS practitioners, we link these mechanisms to spatial metrics that can be used to approximate the relative magnitude of project benefits and costs across these mechanisms. Finally, we highlight examples of key synergies and trade‐offs among benefits that should be considered for LS planning. This synthetic approach is intended to familiarize readers with the diverse potential benefits of LS, and provide an understanding of how to select and prioritize potential sites for further study and implementation. Synergies and trade‐offs among important benefit drivers abound, and social equity concerns will be paramount in ensuring the successful implementation of LS and other NbS in the future.This article is categorized under: Engineering Water > Sustainable Engineering of Water Engineering Water > Planning Water Water and Life > Nature of Freshwater Ecosystems

show abstract

The potential for nature-based solutions to combat the freshwater biodiversity crisis

Cited by 15 publications

References 104 publications

The ecohydrology of rewilding: A pressing need for evidence in the restoration of upland Atlantic salmon streams

The ecohydrology of rewilding: A pressing need for evidence in the restoration of upland Atlantic salmon streams

Reimagining infrastructure for a biodiverse future

An interdisciplinary overview of levee setback benefits: Supporting spatial planning and implementation of riverine nature‐based solutions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About