How ‘just’ is hybrid governance of urban nature-based solutions?

Publication date

2020

Authors

Toxopeus, HelenISNI 0000000391858936
Kotsila, Panagiota
Conde, Marta
Katona, Attila
van der Jagt, A.P.N.ISNI 0000000453500674
Polzin, FriedemannORCID 0000-0002-9768-8694ISNI 0000000452150318

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article
Open Access logo

License

Abstract

Hybrid (or multi-actor) governance has been identified as a key opportunity for upscaling urban nature-based solutions (referred to as urban NBS), representing a demand-driven and cost-effective realization of urban green infrastructure. However it is unclear how such hybrid governance affects the justice outcomes of urban NBS. Through six in-depth cases of urban NBS we show that hybrid governance can lead to both improvements and deterioration of distributional, procedural and recognition justice, depending on the hybrid governance choices. By exploring the tensions between these justice impacts we formulate three main policy implications for hybrid governance settings: the need for transparent decision-making on the distribution of costs and benefits; safeguarding public control over the urban NBS and the use of scientific expertise in combination with bottom-up consultation procedures to recognize both current and future voices.

Keywords

Environmental justice, Hybrid governance, Public-private partnerships, Urban greening, Urban nature-based solutions, Development, Sociology and Political Science, Urban Studies, Tourism, Leisure and Hospitality Management, SDG 11 - Sustainable Cities and Communities

Citation

Toxopeus, H, Kotsila, P, Conde, M, Katona, A, van der Jagt, A P N & Polzin, F 2020, 'How ‘just’ is hybrid governance of urban nature-based solutions?', Cities, vol. 105, 102839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102839