You said “nature-based solution” to flooding?

When talking about the river Poddle flood alleviation scheme, those involved in its conception and promotion have outlined its “nature-based solutions focus“. What they don’t say, however, is that the definition of what constitutes a “nature-based solution” remains largely unsettled and open to discussion. Marcus Collier and Mary Bourke, for instance, describe how “nature-based” is used to qualify a wide range of river catchment management practices wich may include “soft” or even “hard” engineering. Their own stance on the concept of “nature-based solution” is that it must include multiple long-term social, environmental, ecological benefits, which in turn asks the question of what/whose benefits should be sought and prioritized.

In short, if you are told about a particular project that it is “nature-based solution” focused, don’t feel intimidated and that it is the end of the conversation ! Far from it, the conversation is just starting ! Ask what is meant by “nature-based solutions” and to be given practical examples of what these solutions may look like. Ask what/whose benefits are pursued through them. Bring in your own perspective, your own experience and your own ideas. In the end, if not democratically debated and scrutinized, “nature-based solutions” will amount to nothing more than greenwashing.