Would you like to learn more about the methodological approach taken to the development of the Urban Nature Atlas? 

On this page, you will be able to find details on how we view and define nature-based solutions, how the projects included in the database were selected, and how the data was identified and reviewed.

Concepts and City Selection

Definition of nature-based solutions

The Atlas follows the definition of the Naturvation project, which defined nature-based solutions as deliberate interventions that can be inspired or supported by nature in order to address urban challenges, such as climate change mitigation, water management, land use and urban development (Bulkeley et al, 2017). 

Within the Naturvation project and the Urban Nature Atlas, existing green areas or structures are not considered to be de facto nature-based solutions. Instead, nature-based solutions are defined as being interventions that change or enhance the function of these green areas/structures in order to address current societal challenges. Nature-based solutions can exist on a small scale, with examples comprising pocket parks, community gardens or tree-lined streets, or they can also exist on a larger scale, for example through city-level projects which see creation of a green corridor, a riverbank restoration or a city-wide biodiversity strategy which itself might include several green space elements.

Categorisation of nature-based solutions

The Atlas distinguishes eight main types of nature-based solutions in urban and peri-urban areas. These main types are: allotments and community gardens; blue infrastructure; intentionally unmanaged or ‘derelict’ areas; nature on buildings; green areas for water management; green indoor areas; grey infrastructure with green features; and parks or semi-natural urban green areas. 

In many cases, categorising the type of nature-based solution is rather straightforward. However, nature-based solutions often belong to more than one domain. For example, development of a park (urban green area) could also include the creation of lakes (blue infrastructure) and rain gardens (green areas for water management). In such instances, projects being showcased within the Atlas will be categorised by all relevant types of nature-based solution, rather than just the one type. 

Definition of sustainability challenges 

The Naturvation project identified twelve challenges to which nature-based solutions can respond. Besides sustainable urban development, nature-based solutions can also address wider global development challenges, as defined by the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The categorisation of sustainability challenges used in the Urban Nature Atlas adheres to those twelve challenges identified by the Naturvation project and linked to the SDGs. 

When selecting which sustainability challenges have been, or are being, addressed by a specific nature-based solution case study in the Atlas, challenges have been selected if either the project description or a document presenting the project referred to an objective which aimed to address a specific challenge. For example, if an urban park aimed to increase the quality of life of the area’s residents and provide them with green recreational areas, the Atlas’ data collectors could conclude that the intervention aims to address the challenge of ‘health and well-being’, which is aligned with SDG3. 

Selection of cities 

During its initial creation in 2017, 100 European cities were included in the Urban Nature Atlas. A systematic approach was applied to select 94 of these 100 cities, with the remaining six constituting the project’s partner cities (Barcelona, Győr, Leipzig, Newcastle, Malmö and Utrecht). The aim was to select a city sample that ultimately represents the varied urban and environmental conditions across Europe and to have a broad geographical distribution. To provide a representative sample, indicators were used for the city selection process. Indicators applied focused on demographics, city size, unemployment, proportion of green space, access to green areas, and climate risk and vulnerability. By choosing a diverse sample of cities, the project aimed to analyse which types of nature-based solutions were being implemented, which issues they sought to address, how they were being delivered, and what characteristics they had, including their type, form, function and distribution.

To further expand the database, cases from other cities have been also been included in the Atlas as of 2021:

  • As part of the Naturvation project, non-European case studies were also analysed by various researchers. These nature-based solution cases were located in Winnipeg, Canada; Boston, USA; Mexico City, Mexico; Sao Paolo, Brazil; Cape Town, South Africa; and Melbourne, Australia.
  • In preparation for the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26) summit, nature-based solutions focusing on climate change adaptation or mitigation were collected from over 50 countries, covering all continents beyond Europe. Identification of case studies arose from a series of workshops organised by the British Academy over the summer of 2021 and took regional coverage into consideration as well as those varied urban and environmental conditions that were considered during the original data collection process. 
  • By enabling users of the Atlas to add their own nature-based solution case studies, additional cities are currently also being included in the Atlas.

 

Data Collection Process

Approach taken to the data collection

The original database was developed between January and August 2017. As a first task, the structure and attributes were developed and organised in a questionnaire format by research teams at Central European University (CEU) and the Ecologic Institute. The questionnaire was subsequently tested using case studies from the Naturvation partner cities. The database concept was finalised in April 2017 and technical design and testing of the web-based questionnaire occurred in May 2017. From June to Mid-August 2017, the database was populated with data which was collected by 20 interns enlisted from Master’s Programmes at CEU, Lund University and Utrecht University. Prior to data collection, all interns partook in a one-day training session which was delivered according to a training manual developed by CEU’s research team. Data collection was supervised by interns’ respective institutions, and all data collected was subject to quality control conducted by the project team at CEU. Data collection culminated end August 2017 and the development of the public database platform was launched in March 2018. 

During the period June - November 2020, an in-depth review of the database took place. This revision process was undertaken by a large team, led by CEU with the support of 14 data collectors. A new version of the questionnaire was devised for this review, in which additional attention was given to subjects and questions which had emerged as important research topics since the original 2017 data collection process. The updated questionnaire included follow-up questions to originally posed questions and also new topics to be investigated. Besides answering new questions, data originally reported in the database was reviewed to reflect any developments which had occurred in relation to those previously published cases Information sources were also reviewed and updated as required, such as weblinks which were no longer working.

As of May 2021, the database was opened up to allow the submission of new projects from across the globe. This global expansion began with the inclusion of international Naturvation case studies into the Atlas and continued with the collection of non-European nature-based solutions which support climate change adaptation or mitigation. Users can now also submit projects to the Atlas. To find out more about how to create a user account and submit a new project, visit the Add a Project page.

Nature-based solution selection criteria

Projects included in the Urban Nature Atlas fulfill the following criteria: 

  1. Address various urban societal challenges (e.g. climate change mitigation, water management, coastal protection, human health and recreation, social justice); 
  2. Have function enhancing features which change or enhance the function of an area or structure; 
  3. Use nature as an inspiration to address an urban problem, manifesting as either a physical intervention or a discursive intervention. 

Method applied to the data collection process

The analysis of identified nature-based solutions is based on secondary sources, such as project reports and other project documents, websites, news articles, research articles, studies and blog posts. Data collected from these sources is examined using discourse analysis. During analysis, the intention is not simply to look for terms (e.g. climate change) but rather to search for patterns of discourse connected to these terms (e.g. flooding, heatwaves and droughts). 

Answers to some questionnaire queries, such as challenges addressed and project impacts, were also derived via discourse analysis of the studied documents. However, researchers also considered the perceived or intended beneficiaries, and challenges addressed by, or impacts of, nature-based solutions. Nevertheless, all data reported in the database is based, without exception, on factual and referenced information.

Type of collected data

Data collected is all submitted in a questionnaire format. The questionnaire covers general information about the project, including its location, size and implementation timeline. Other aspects covered by the questionnaire focus on the project objectives; sustainability challenges that the project aims to address; implementation activities; key characteristics of the project including its urban settings; an indication of the project’s spatial scale; governance and financing details; a discussion of impacts found or expected to be found in connection to the project; and presentation of evidence of impact assessments and monitoring activities undertaken in relation to the project.

 

Data Validation

Quality control process

During the primary data collection process in 2017, collected data was verified in two stages. The first stage took place parallel to data collection and submission (June - August 2017), with data collectors submitting questionnaires for review by supervisors at CEU, Utrecht and Lund Universities. Supervisors checked all questionnaires for inconsistencies, questions which might have been forgotten, mistakes which might have been made or instances of incorrect data input formats. After the data collection process was finalised, a second round of data quality checks were completed by the database team at CEU in January 2018. This was undertaken in order to ensure consistency among all submitted questionnaires. 

For the database update in 2020, a similar approach was taken to that outlined above. Three supervisors at CEU were responsible for overseeing data collectors' work. Between June and November 2020, data collectors worked closely with the project team to complete the questionnaires, following which all questionnaires were reviewed by the project team. Data validation was performed as a continuous task throughout the data collection period and continued until December 2020, once all data had been collected.

The process of expanding the database to include both global cases and cases submitted by external users follows the same two-step quality control approach as the previous data collection processes, outlined above.

Limitations of the data collection process and the applied methodology 

Some limitations were encountered in relation to the data collection process and also the applied methodology. The nature of these limitations are outlined below.

Regarding data collection, project documents were in some instances found to be confidential, limiting access to information available. In some cities, identifiable nature-based solutions were limited to certain types such as small-scale green infrastructure projects funded from participatory city budgets or allotment and community gardens, or some cases exhibited a relatively weak innovation level. Further limitations to accessing relevant sources also resulted from the time scale of the project (e.g. if the project was relatively novel or remained in its planning stage) and occasionally also from language barriers. 

Beyond limited data availability, some methodological issues were also identified, with one constraint in the accuracy of data reported being the high dependency on sources from which the data is referenced. To ensure consistency, information was only included in the Atlas if there was a reference document which could support the validity of the obtained data.

If you are looking for further details which have not been covered by this page, please visit our frequently asked questions (FAQ) page.

 

FAQ