Evaluating Nature-Based Solutions through the Lens of Nature’s Contributions to People in Urban Areas
M.E. Ooms (TU Delft - Technology, Policy and Management)
Nazli Yonca Aydin – Mentor (TU Delft - System Engineering)
E. M. Van Bueren – Graduation committee member (TU Delft - Management in the Built Environment)
Andrea Gammon – Graduation committee member (TU Delft - Ethics & Philosophy of Technology)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
Urban areas face increasing pressure from climate change, pollution, biodiversity loss, and rapid urbanization. In response, nature-based solutions (NbS) have gained attention for their potential to address these complex challenges while enhancing urban resilience and sustainability. However, the evaluation of NbS benefits has largely relied on the ecosystem services (ES) framework, which tends to overlook relational, cultural, and context-specific values. These gaps can limit the effectiveness and fairness of NbS, especially in diverse urban contexts. To address this gap, this thesis explores whether the nature’s contributions to people (NCP) framework can offer a more inclusive approach to evaluating the benefits of NbS in urban areas.
The main research question guiding this thesis is: “How can the Nature’s Contributions to People framework be applied to evaluate the benefits of nature-based solutions in urban environments?” To answer this, the thesis follows four steps. First, it compares existing evaluation frameworks, highlighting limitations of the ES approach and how they can undermine just NbS implementation. Second, it narrows down NCP categories most relevant to urban environments, confirming the relevance of NCP for cities. It then analyses how urban NbS contribute to those categories, which formed a basis for selecting a promising NCP category for further spatial analysis. Third, it compiles suitable indicators for each NCP category. Lastly, to validate the approach, a focused selection of NCP 16 indicators was tested through a spatial analysis using ArcGIS, applied to the case study of park Frankendael in Amsterdam.
The analysis demonstrates that the NCP framework adds value by not only capturing biophysical and economic benefits but also revealing who receives these benefits, who is excluded, and how access is distributed. These insights support more inclusive and equitable urban NbS evaluation. While this study focused on one NCP category, it provides a replicable methodology for broader applications. Future research should expand indicator testing across additional NCP categories, urban context, and NbS types to further strengthen inclusive NbS evaluations.