The planning of nature-based solutions such as green roofs, green walls, bioswales and green boulevards has typically focussed on the assessment and scaling of co-benefits from the perspective of humans. Recent work on environmental justice highlights the importance of considering ‘benefits for whom, where and when’, recognising that benefits of nature-based solutions (NBS) are often distributed unevenly, whilst in some cases NBS plans can have even negative effects on individuals or specific groups of people.

Similarly other species, including desired or undesired plants and animals, are also affected in different ways by NBS plans, and often overlooked in both research and planning practices. A recently published paper entitled ‘Applying multispecies justice in nature-based solutions and urban sustainability planning: Tensions and prospects’ in npj Urban Sustainability by our MUST team highlights some of the problems and challenges associated with considering benefits only from the perspective of humans and invites us to rethinking NBS planning through a multispecies justice lens.

In our paper, we firstly define multispecies justice in terms of representation, distribution and agency. Representation concerns the extent to which opportunities exist for the diversity of human and other species to be recognised and meaningfully involved in decisions. Distribution requires consideration of the impacts of human actions on all species when assessing the spatial distribution of environmental bads and goods. Agency is understood in the broad sense of more-than-humans having effects on the world, and that their agency matters morally.

Based on our research, we offer a set of processes and practices for critically reflecting on dominant modes of NBS planning and assessment, and providing space for new meanings and modes of representation, distribution and agency. This includes critically reflecting on the languages and histories used to present other species (representation), moving beyond quantitative, area-based assessments of distribution (distribution) and critically reflecting on which human actions may need to be restricted or done differently for other species to flourish (agency).

Integrating Multispecies Justices considerations into existing urban planning tools, such as the green factor tool

The green factor tool provides urban and landscape planners with a numerical value that helps to define the desired level of greenery when developing housing areas in urban environments. The tool has proven effective in increasing urban greenery (Juhola, 2018), and has been used in cities like Berlin, Stockholm, Espoo, and Helsinki.

However, the green factor tool tends to overlook multispecies concerns and the diverse needs of various species when used alone. Expanding the green factor tool to incorporate both richer biodiversity and community engagement processes would enhance NBS planning and design, ensuring better consideration of the distributional needs of diverse human and non-human species.

For example, incorporating ways for recognising inherent power dynamics and the related multispecies concerns, would enable us to enhance NBS planning and the use of the green factor tool. This has been experimented recently in Espoo, Finland, where the city has developed a biodiversity calculator for the green factor tool with the aim of increasing urban biodiversity. The biodiversity calculator targets attention to measures that, for example, replace alien species with planting of wild species.

Viewing NBS planning as a process or practice rather than a set of ‘outcomes’ or ‘benefits’ includes complexities and trade-offs. As a principle, MSJ insists that the interests of all those affected by decisions be actively considered in decision-making processes, and that being human should not act as a criterion for inclusion, as it currently does. Doing so could foster our thinking about how diverse residents and other species share ‘being in’ ecological space and how they foster NBS planning with emphasis on care-making practices.

For more information, you can download an open access version of this paper at: https://doi.org/10.1038/s42949-025-00191-2

Text: Christopher Raymond, Pauliina Rautio
Photo: Roine Piirainen (CC0)