Policy mixes for mainstreaming urban nature-based solutions: An analysis of six European countries and the European Union
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nature-based solutions (NBS) are multifunctional and cost-effective innovations delivering urban sustainability, but they are not yet mainstream in urban development. This can be explained by persistent structural conditions in the urban infrastructure regime, resulting in barriers such as lack of collaborative governance, inadequate knowledge and limited funding availability. In this paper we argue that (supra)national governments could play an important role in breaking down these barriers by employing policy instruments and strategically combining these into policy mixes targeting multiple regime structures. By means of an empirical analysis across six European countries and the European Union (EU), we provide an overview of regulatory, financial and soft (supra)national policy instruments supporting urban NBS mainstreaming and how these are combined in policy mixes across cases. In addition, we investigate policy mix comprehensiveness by mapping the extent to which these target each of the relevant urban infrastructure regime structures underpinning barriers to urban NBS mainstreaming. We demonstrate that, with the exception of the EU, none of the studied cases employs a fully comprehensive policy mix. We conclude that by strategically adopting policy instruments with the aim of crafting a comprehensive policy mix, obstacles in pathways to urban NBS mainstreaming could be overcome.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it