Planning Ecologically Just Cities: A Framework to Assess Ecological Injustice Hotspots for Targeted Urban Design and Planning of Nature-Based Solutions

References

• Ache, P., 2019. Vision-making in large urban settings: unleashing anticipation? In: R Poli, ed. Handbook of anticipation. Cham: Springer, 1327–1348. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-31737-3_59-1.
   Google Scholar
• Aliseda, A., 2006. What is abduction? Overview and proposal for investigation. In: Abductive reasoning. Dordrecht: Springer. Synthese Library, vol 330. doi:10.1007/1-4020-3907-7_2.
   Google Scholar
• Andersson, E., et al., 2019. Enabling green and blue infrastructure to improve contributions to human well-being and equity in urban systems. Bioscience, 69 (7), 566–574. doi:10.1093/biosci/biz058.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersson, E., 2021. Reconnecting cities to the biosphere: stewardship of green infrastructure and urban ecosystem services – where did it come from and what happened next? Ambio, doi:10.1007/s13280-021-01515-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anguelovski, I., et al., 2020. Expanding the boundaries of justice in urban greening scholarship: toward an emancipatory, antisubordination, intersectional, and relational approach. Annals of the American association of geographers, 110 (6), 1743–1769.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102892.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Astell-Burt, T., et al., 2014. Do low-income neighbourhoods have the least green space? A cross-sectional study of Australia’s most populous cities. BMC public health, 14 (1), 1–11. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-292.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brain, P., Stanley, J., and Stanley, J., 2019. Melbourne: how big, how fast and at what cost? MSSI Research Paper, Melbourne Sustainable Society Institute. The University of Melbourne, Melbourne.
   Google Scholar
• Brenner, N., 2018. Debating planetary urbanization: for an engaged pluralism. Environment and planning D: Society and space, 36 (3), 570–590. doi:10.1177/0263775818757510.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buijs, A., and Jacobs, M., 2021. Avoiding negativity bias: towards a positive psychology of human-wildlife relationships. Ambio, 50, 281–288. doi:10.1007/s13280-020-01394-w.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bush, J., and Doyon, A., 2019. Building urban resilience with nature-based solutions: how can urban planning contribute?. Cities, 95, 102483, doi:10.1016/j.cities.2019.102483.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calderón-Argelich, A., et al., 2021. Tracing and building up environmental justice considerations in the urban ecosystem service literature: a systematic review. Landscape and urban planning, 214, 104130. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell, H., and Marshall, R., 2006. Towards justice in planning: a reappraisal. European planning studies, 14 (2), 239–252.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Celermajer, D., et al., 2021. Multispecies justice: theories, challenges, and a research agenda for environmental politics. Environmental politics, 30 (1–2), 119–140. doi:10.1080/09644016.2020.1827608.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan, K.M., et al., 2012. Where are cultural and social in ecosystem services? A framework for constructive engagement. Bioscience, 62 (8), 744–756. doi:10.1525/bio.2012.62.8.7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Commonwealth of Australia. 2011. Nationally threatened ecological communities of the victorian volcanic plain: Natural temperate grassland & grassy eucalypt woodland. Available from: https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/e97c2d51–08f2–45e0–9d2f-0d277c836fa/files/grasslands-victoria.pdf [Accessed 18.07.2020].
   Google Scholar
• Cousins, J.J., 2021. Justice in nature-based solutions: research and pathways. Ecological economics, 180 (July 2019), 106874. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106874.
   Google Scholar
• Denscombe, M., 2008. Communities of practice: a research paradigm for the mixed methods approach. Journal of mixed methods research, 2 (3), 270–283. doi:10.1177/1558689808316807.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Sherbinin, A., and Bardy, G., 2015. Social vulnerability to floods in two coastal megacities: New York City and Mumbai. Vienna yearbook of population research, 13, 131–165.
   Google Scholar
• Díaz, S., et al., 2018. Assessing nature’s contributions to people. Science, 359 (6373), 270–272. doi:10.1126/science.aap8826.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eggermont, H., et al., 2015. Nature-based solutions: new influence for environmental management and research in Europe. GAIA - Ecological perspectives for science and society, 24 (4), 243–248. doi:10.14512/gaia.24.4.9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Folke, C., et al., 2021. Our future in the antropocene biosphere. Ambio, 50, 834–869. doi:10.1007/s13280-021-01544-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frantzeskaki, N., et al., 2019. Nature-based solutions for urban climate change adaptation: linking the science, policy and practice communities for evidence-based decision-making. Bioscience, 69, 455–466. doi:10.1093/biosci/biz042.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frantzeskaki, N., 2019. Seven lessons for planning nature-based solutions in cities. Environmental science and policy, 93, 101–111. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2018.12.033.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frantzeskaki, N., et al., 2020. Examining the policy needs for implementing nature-based solutions in cities: findings from city-wide transdisciplinary experiences in Glasgow (UK), Genk (Belgium) and Poznań (Poland). Land use policy, 96, 104688. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104688.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frantzeskaki, N., et al., 2022. A transformative mission for prioritising nature in Australian cities. Ambio, 1–13. doi:10.1007/s13280-022-01725-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frantzeskaki, N., and Kabisch, N., 2016. Designing a knowledge co-production operating space for urban environmental governance—lessons from Rotterdam, Netherlands and Berlin, Germany. Environmental science & policy, 62, 90–98.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.01.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frantzeskaki, N., and McPhearson, T., 2021. Mainstream nature-based solutions for urban climate resilience. Bioscience, biab105, doi:10.1093/biosci/biab105.
   Google Scholar
• Fulfer, K., 2013. The capabilities approach to justice and the flourishing of nonsentient life. Ethics & the environment, 18, 19–42.
   Google Scholar
• Giachino, C., et al., 2021. Nature-based solutions and their potential to attract the young generations. Land use policy, 101, 105176. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105176.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haase, D., et al., 2017. Greening cities – To be socially inclusive? About the alleged paradox of society and ecology in cities. Habitat international, 64, 41–48. doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.04.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herreros-Cantis, P., et al., 2020. Shifting landscapes of coastal flood risk: environmental (in)justice of urban change, sea level rise, and differential vulnerability in New York City. Urban transformations, 2 (1), 9. doi:10.1186/s42854-020-00014-w.
   Google Scholar
• Herreros-Cantis, P., and McPhearson, T., 2021. Mapping supply of and demand for ecosystem services to assess environmental justice in New York City. Ecological applications, e2390, doi:10.1002/eap.2390.
   Google Scholar
• Hill, R., et al., 2021. Nature’s contributions to people: weaving plural perspectives. One earth, 4 (7), 910–915. doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2021.06.009.
   Google Scholar
• Houston, D., et al., 2018. Make kin, not cities! Multispecies entanglements and ‘becoming-world’ in planning theory. Planning theory, 17 (2), 190–212. doi:10.1177/1473095216688042.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ives, C.D., et al., 2013. Local assessment of Melbourne: the biodiversity and social-ecological dynamics of Melbourne, Australia. In: Urbanization, biodiversity and ecosystem services: challenges and opportunities. Dordrecht: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-7088-1_20.
   Google Scholar
• Jabareen, Y., 2009. Building a conceptual framework: philosophy, definitions, and procedure. International journal of qualitative methods, 8, 49–62. doi:10.1177/160940690900800406.
   Google Scholar
• Kabisch, N., 2019. Transformation of urban brownfields through co-creation: the multi-functional Lene-Voigt Park in Leipzig as a case in point. Journal of urban transformations, 1 (2), doi:10.1186/s42854-019-0002.
   Google Scholar
• Kabisch, N., and Haase, D., 2014. Green justice or just green? Provision of urban green spaces in Berlin, Germany. Landscape and urban planning, 122, 129–139.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.11.016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kortetmäki, T., 2017. Applying the capabilities approach to ecosystems: resilience as ecosystem capability. Environmental ethics, 39 (1), 39–56.https://doi.org/10.5840/enviroethics20179263.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langemeyer, J., and Connolly, J.J., 2020. Weaving notions of justice into urban ecosystem services research and practice. Environmental science & policy, 109, 1–14.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.03.021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levering, B., 2002. Concept analysis as empirical method. International journal of qualitative methods, 1 (1), 35–48.https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690200100104.
   Google Scholar
• Malekpour, S., Tawfik, S., and Chesterfield, C., 2021. Designing collaborative governance for nature-based solutions. Urban forestry and urban greening, 62, 127177. doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127177.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maller, C., 2021. Re-orienting nature-based solutions with more-than-human thinking. Cities, 113, 103155. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2021.103155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, A., et al., 2020. Justice and conservation: the need to incorporate recognition. Biological conservation, 197, 254–261.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.03.021.
   Google Scholar
• McPhearson, T. 2021. COP-26: Make nature-based solutions a top adaptation priority. Buildings and Cities. Available from: https://www.buildingsandcities.org/insights/commentaries/cop26-nature-based-.
   Google Scholar
• McPhearson, T., et al., 2021. Radical changes are needed for transformations to a good anthropocene. Npj urban sustainability, 1 (1), 1–13. doi:10.1038/s42949-021-00017-x.
   Google Scholar
• Metzger, J., 2019. A more-than-human approach to environmental planning. In: S. Davoudi, et al., ed. The Routledge companion to environmental planning. New York: Routledge, 190–199.
   Google Scholar
• Muradian, R., and Gómez-Baggethun, E., 2021. Beyond ecosystem services and nature’s contributions: is it time to leave utilitarian environmentalism behind? Ecological economics, 185, 107038. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107038.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, M.C., 2006. Beyond “compassion and humanity” justice for nonhuman animals. In: Animal rights: current debates and new directions. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 325–407. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195305104.003.0015.
   Google Scholar
• Palomo, I., et al., 2021. Assessing nature-based solutions for transformative change. One earth, 4 (5), 730–741. doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2021.04.013.
   Google Scholar
• Pascual, U., et al., 2017. Valuing nature’s contributions to people: the IPBES approach. Current opinion in environmental sustainability, 26, 7–16. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2016.12.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patel, V., et al., 2021. Why bees are critical for achieving sustainable development. Ambio, 50, 49–59. doi:10.1007/s13280-020-01333-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterson, G.D., et al., 2018. Welcoming different perspectives in IPBES. Ecology and society, 23 (1), doi:10.5751/ES-10134-230139.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pineda-Pinto, M., et al., 2021b. Examining ecological justice within the social-ecological-technological system of New York City, USA. Landscape and urban planning, 215, 104228. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pineda-Pinto, M., et al., 2021c. Mapping social-ecological injustice in Melbourne, Australia: an innovative systematic methodology for planning just cities. Land use policy, 104, 105361. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105361.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pineda-Pinto, M., Frantzeskaki, N., and Nygaard, C.A., 2021a. The potential of nature-based solutions to deliver ecologically just cities: lessons for research and urban planning from a systematic literature review. Ambio, doi:10.1007/s13280-021-01553-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pörtner, H.O., et al. 2021. IPBES-IPCC co-sponsored workshop report on biodiversity and climate change. Available from: https://www.ipbes.net/events/ipbes-ipcc-co-sponsored-workshop-report-biodiversity-and-climate-change.
   Google Scholar
• Raina, R.S., and Dey, D., 2020. How we know biodiversity: institutions and knowledge-policy relationships. Sustainability science, 15, 975–984. doi:10.1007/s11625-019-00774-w.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raymond, C.M., et al., 2013. Ecosystem services and beyond: using multiple metaphors to understand human–environment relationships. Bioscience, 63 (7), 536–546. doi:10.1525/bio.2013.63.7.7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raymond, C.M., Berry, P., Breil, M., et al., 2017. An impact evaluation framework to support planning and evaluation of nature-based solutions projects. Wallingford, UK: Centre for Ecology & Hydrology.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosberg, D., 2007. Defining environmental justice: theories, movements, and nature. OUP Oxford. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199286294.001.0001.
   Google Scholar
• Schlosberg, D., 2012. Climate justice and capabilities: a framework for adaptation policy. Ethics & international affairs, 26 (4), 445–461.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlosberg, D., 2013. Theorising environmental justice: the expanding sphere of a discourse. Environmental politics, 22 (1), 37–55. doi:10.1080/09644016.2013.755387.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharifi, F., et al., 2021. Green gentrification or gentrified greening: Metropolitan Melbourne. Land use policy, 108, 105577. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.104004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steele, W., et al., 2012. Planning the climate-just city. International planning studies, 17 (1), 67–83. doi:10.1080/13563475.2011.638188.
   Google Scholar
• Steele, W., Wiesel, I., and Maller, C., 2019. More-than-human cities: where the wild things are. Geoforum, 106 (April), 411–415. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.04.007.
   Google Scholar
• Strang, V., 2017. Justice for all: inconvenient truths and reconciliation in human-non-human relations. In: H. Kopnina and E. Shoreman-Ouimet, eds. Routledge handbook of environmental anthropology. London: Routledge, 259–275.
   Google Scholar
• Tozer, L., et al., 2020. Whose city? Whose nature? Towards inclusive nature-based solution governance. Cities, 107, 102892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102892.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wickenberg, B., McCormick, K., and Olsson, J.A., 2021. Advancing the implementation of nature-based solutions in cities: a review of frameworks. Environmental science & policy, 125, 44–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wienhues, A., 2020. Ecological justice and the extinction crisis: giving living beings their due. Bristol University Press. doi:10.46692/9781529208528.
   Google Scholar