ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025
Inter- and transdisciplinary knowledge is critical for nature-based solutions to contribute to just urban transformations.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Dataset for Multiple Structural Representations of Urban Road Maps Across Chinese Cities.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Article
- Nature-based solutions for urban sustainability.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Nature-based solutions (NBS) are used to transform existing unsustainable and undesirable path dependencies in cities. For NBS to contribute to just urban transformations, a stronger inter- and transdisciplinary knowledge base is needed. This knowledge base is essential to engage with six complex yet crucial questions about NBS, including "for what?," "which nature?," "where?," "how?," "when," and "for whom?." To address these questions, we identify two critical opportunities to advance the knowledge of NBS. First, we argue for solidifying interdisciplinary approaches to examine how NBS can be designed, planned, and implemented for multifunctionality. Second, we argue that researchers need to work transdisciplinarily with diverse stakeholders to ensure the design, siting, and planning of NBS are appropriate to the context. In both critical opportunities, justice should be a core guiding principle from the beginning of planning the NBS, starting with the foundational understanding that NBS are not inherently just or unjust. Instead, their value depends on a holistic examination of the context in which they operate and the institutional logic that guides their planning. To center justice in the inter- and transdisciplinary research and practice of NBS, a knowledge shift from epistemological injustice to epistemological inclusivity is a critical way forward.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.