Towards a typology of nature-based solutions for disaster risk reduction

• Published in: Nature-based solutions Vol. 3; p. 100057
• Main Authors: Nehren, U., Arce-Mojica, T., Barrett, A. Cara, Cueto, J., Doswald, N., Janzen, S., Lange, W., Vargas, A. Ortiz, Pirazan-Palomar, L., Renaud, F.G., Sandholz, S., Sebesvari, Z., Sudmeier-Rieux, K., Walz, Y.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier Inc 01-12-2023; Elsevier
• Subjects: Approaches; Disaster risk reduction; Nature-based solutions; Typology; Approaches; Typology; Disaster risk reduction; Nature-based solutions
• ISSN: 2772-4115; 2772-4115
• DOI: 10.1016/j.nbsj.2023.100057

•The paper reviews the scientific literature (2000–2021) on nature-based solutions for disaster risk reduction (NbS for DRR).•Based on the review, a typology for NbS for disaster risk reduction is proposed, comprising five main attributes, which are based on technical, environmental and management aspects.•The typology provides researchers, practitioners and policy makers with a systematic overview of the different NbS for DRR approaches available.
Disaster risk reduction (DRR) is one of the most important societal challenges addressed under the umbrella term nature-based solutions (NbS). One NbS approach that specifically addresses risk reduction is ecosystem-based disaster risk reduction (Eco-DRR). However, there are other approaches, such as integrated fire management or protective forests, which directly aim at reducing the risk of specific natural hazards. Other approaches, such as ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA), do not have DRR as a primary goal, but contribute to it in the form of synergies and co-benefits. Based on a comprehensive literature search of the Scopus database covering all articles published in English during the period 2000–2021, we analyze existing NbS approaches and those which address DRR. In a further step, we select all original research articles (n = 114) that refer to NbS for DRR projects or interventions conducted in a specific geographic area and analyze them in terms of (1) approach applied; (2) natural hazards mitigated; (3) ecosystem services for DRR provided; (4) geographic and biophysical site conditions, and (5) measures and techniques used. The analysis forms the basis for developing a typology of NbS for DRR, which we present for discussion. This typology helps scientists, policymakers, planners, and other stakeholders to gain a systematic overview of the NbS for DRR approaches currently addressed in the literature and to advance systematization of these approaches.