Urban nature-based solutions (NBS) are increasingly embraced by academics and practitioners for their ability to contribute to sustainability by addressing various urban challenges such as air quality, urban heat stress, urban flood mitigation, biodiversity loss, and social cohesion. Research in the literature places a significant focus on the identification of synergies and win-win scenarios of urban NBS. However, this has caused a blind spot in necessary research on trade-offs. Specifically, the existing research on trade-offs lacks a holistic overview of empirical evidence on urban NBS trade-offs from diverse fields of research, and current discussions on trade-offs inadequately reflect on the political nature of the choices and consequences of trade-offs when planning and governing for and with urban NBS. This paper addresses these issues by providing an overarching typology of urban NBS related trade-offs and the environmental justice implications thereof through a scoping literature review of empirical research on urban NBS trade-offs from different fields of research. The review provides an overview of the variable understandings of trade-offs of NBS, the usage of spatial and temporal scales when addressing them, and categorizes trade-offs according to stages of the planning cycle. We identify three main groups of urban NBS trade-offs, namely, rigid, governance, and functional trade-offs, and illustrate their different manifestations across the planning cycle. The typology sheds new light on research of urban NBS trade-offs by explicitly placing an environmental justice perspective on the types of trade-offs, and linking these types with the planning cycle. Thereby, this paper contributes to a new understanding of urban NBS trade-offs for planning and governance by illuminating the implications of choices for who or what is recognized, participates, and benefits from nature in the city.

中文翻译：

---

拐弯抹角：对基于城市自然的解决方案进行公正规划和治理的权衡范围审查


基于城市自然的解决方案 （NBS） 越来越受到学术界和从业者的欢迎，因为它们能够通过解决各种城市挑战（如空气质量、城市热应力、城市防洪、生物多样性丧失和社会凝聚力）来为可持续发展做出贡献。文献研究非常注重确定城市 NBS 的协同效应和双赢方案。然而，这导致了对权衡的必要研究的盲点。具体来说，现有的权衡研究缺乏对来自不同研究领域的城市 NBS 权衡的经验证据的全面概述，并且当前关于权衡的讨论没有充分反映在规划和治理城市 NBS 时权衡的政治性质和权衡的后果。本文通过对来自不同研究领域的城市 NBS 权衡的实证研究进行范围界定的文献综述，提供城市 NBS 相关权衡的总体类型及其环境正义影响，从而解决了这些问题。该综述概述了对 NBS 权衡的不同理解，在解决这些问题时对空间和时间尺度的利用，并根据规划周期的各个阶段对权衡进行分类。我们确定了城市 NBS 权衡的三大类，即刚性、治理和功能权衡，并说明了它们在整个规划周期中的不同表现形式。该类型学通过明确地将环境正义视角置于权衡类型上，并将这些类型与规划周期联系起来，为城市 NBS 权衡的研究提供了新的视角。 因此，本文通过阐明选择对城市中自然的认可、参与和受益的人或事的影响，有助于对城市 NBS 在规划和治理中的权衡做出新的理解。