Training material

In the literature, nature-based solutions have predominantly been categorised into green, grey, blue, and hybrid types based on physical ecological attributes, with little attention paid to non-physical, integrated, beneficial aspects. This categorisation however does not fully capture the plural and socio-economic realities of NbS particularly in urban low-income communities. In this paper we build on the contestation surrounding the NbS categorisation, through a rapid assessment, key informant interviews, and focus group discussions, we question solutions to what and how to profile NbS, as understood by communities and stakeholders. The findings of NbS in Dar es Salaam city demonstrate the role of nature and community leadership in addressing not only the climate change risks but also serve as solutions to meet local communities’ social, ecological, and economic needs. Understanding and appreciating these typologies in their multiple dimensions provides critical entry point for academic discourse, for stakeholders in the co-designing, assessment, and scaling-up nature-based solutions beyond hitherto dominant ecological principles.

The IUCN defines NbS as actions to protect, sustainably manage, and restore natural or modified ecosystems in ways that address societal challenges—such as climate change, food and water security, and natural disasters—while simultaneously enhancing human well-being and biodiversity (WCC 2016, Resolution 06).
NbS are increasingly recognised as sustainable approaches to agriculture due to their triple benefits: improved long-term food security and farmer livelihoods, strengthened climate resilience through mitigation and adaptation, and enhanced biodiversity.

Overall, NbS provide scalable, cost-effective, and long-term solutions, hence should be mainstreamed across agricultural and allied sectors for optimum benefits.

The presentation focuses on mainstreaming NBS into spatial planning, with a special emphasis on utilising private land. It argues that NBS need a stronger evidence base, are highly place-specific, and require local capacity building. Using the Land4Climate project as a framework, it demonstrates climate risk assessments and impact chains to identify effective “no-regret” measures. Simulations show the quantifiable benefits of interventions like tiny forests (reducing heat stress) and reforestation (mitigating floods). However, implementing NBS on private land presents unique challenges: it complicates sequential engineering, demands investment certainty for authorities, and is hindered by diverse landowner interests. The presentation concludes that dedicated public policies and adapted funding schemes are essential to activate private landowners and successfully upscale NBS for climate resilience.