The potential of nature-based solutions to deliver ecologically just cities: Lessons for research and urban planning from a systematic literature review
Open accessAbstract
Planning for and implementing multifunctional nature-based solutions can improve urban ecosystems' adaptation to climate change, foster urban resilience, and enable social and environmental innovation. There is, however, a knowledge gap in how to design and plan nature-based solutions in a nonanthropocentric manner that enhances co-benefits for humans and nonhuman living organisms. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic literature review to explore how an ecological justice perspective can advance the understanding of nature-based solutions. We argue that ecological justice, which builds on the equitable distribution of environmental goods and bads, social-ecological interconnectedness, nature's agency and capabilities, and participation and inclusion in decision-making, provides a transformative framework for rethinking nature-based solutions in and for cities. A qualitative analysis of 121 peer-reviewed records shows a highly human-centred worldview for delivering nature-based solutions and a relationship to social justice with no direct reference to the dimensions of ecological justice. There is, however, an underlying recognition of the importance of nonhumans, ecosystem integrity and well-being, and a need to consider their needs and capacities through multispecies nature-based solutions design and planning. We conclude with a discussion of the critical aspects for designing and planning ecologically just cities through nature-based solutions and future research directions to further integrate these fields.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Particular aspects of justice like ecological or multispecies justice are inconsistently researched, notably because benefits are often assumed.
“However, particular aspects of justice like ecological or multispecies justice are inconsistently researched, notably because benefits are often assumed (54, 55).”
From Global synthesis and regional insights for mainstreaming urban nature-based solutions (2025) · cites this paper as [55]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 141 · Cited by 155
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Egorov AI, Mudu P, Braubach M, Martuzzi M, editors. Urban green spaces and health: A review of evidence. Copenhagen: World Health Organization; 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Authors
- Pineda-Pinto, M., Frantzeskaki, N., & Nygaard, C. A.
- Affiliations
- Swinburne University of Technology (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Pineda-Pinto, Melissa
- Venue
- Ambio
- Published
- 2021-04-16
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 167-182
- ISSN
- 0044-7447 (ISSN-L)
- 1654-7209
- PMC
- PMC8651950
- OpenAlex
- W3154216554
- Cited by
- 155
- References
- 141
- Citations by year
- 2026: 24 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 3
- FWCI
- 3.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- AMBIO (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Urban Planning and Landscape Design
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Urban Green Space and Health
- Keywords
- nature-based solutions, ecological justice, urban ecosystems, climate change adaptation, urban resilience, non-human agency, social justice, ecological integrity, urban planning, participatory decision-making
- MeSH terms
- Cities, City Planning, Humans, Ecosystem, Knowledge, Climate Change
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review