This session examines how greening measures in urban and peri-urban environments can maximize benefits for both ecosystems and society. It explores what good examples of biodiversity-inclusive planning, governance, and management processes look like, for example, by including both traditional and scientific knowledge about species and habitats in the territory. We invite contributions on land-use regulations, planning processes, and policies that foster biodiversity in urban and peri-urban areas. Greening measures can include, for example, non-sealing and greening policies, river restoration, urban forestry, native planting, and other nature-based solutions or blue-green infrastructures. We focus on approaches with transformative leverage, capable of turning urban environments into diverse and resilient habitats for human and non-human species.
By bringing together research that integrates natural and social sciences, showcases biodiversity mainstreaming, and reflects on barriers and enablers of implementation, the session will highlight how collaborative and integrated approaches can accelerate GBF implementation and expand the quantity, quality, connectivity, accessibility, and social benefits of urban green spaces.
Urban green spaces (UGS) are increasingly recognised as central to sustainable and liveable cities. Despite the growing importance of urban green spaces (UGS) in fostering sustainable and liveable cities, systematic longitudinal and comparative analyses of UGS integration into strategic urban plans remain scarce. Drawing on established normative criteria for “good” strategic plans and evidence from practice, we propose an evaluation framework to assess three key dimensions of plan quality: action-oriented (C), collaborative (D) and adaptive (E). We apply the framework to three generations of strategic plans from 18 Romanian cities.
Findings show a positive trend in the incorporation of UGS into successive plan iterations, with improvements suggesting growing awareness of the need for operationalisation of UGS goals. However, many plans articulate actions to create new or enhance existing UGS, but few allocate clear responsibilities or identify implementation pathways. On the collaborative dimension, stakeholder involvement and community engagement are still marginally addressed beyond formal consultation processes before plan adoption. While more recent plans increasingly acknowledge the need for cooperation across actors, most retain a formal approach with limited mechanisms for iterative engagement. The adaptive dimension shows more promising steep upward trajectories: newer plans more frequently acknowledge the need for capacity building and transdisciplinary approaches to UGS planning. Further, they increasingly document the learning process , feedback loops and revision provisions to respond to changing institutional, socio-economic or environmental conditions. Overall, our findings highlight that moving from vision to implementation for UGS in strategic spatial planning requires stronger emphasis on actionable pathways and actor-collaboration, while adaptive capacity appears to be advancing.
To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to use a longitudinal research design to systematically assess changes in the quality of strategic urban plans, with a particular focus on UGS. We discuss our framework and findings in the context of broader debates about the nature of strategic planning and the mainstreaming of environmental aspects into strategic plans.
How to cite: Gradinaru, S. R., Slave, A. R., Popa, A. M., Onose, D. A., Adem Esmail, B., Albert, C., Hossu, C. A., and Ioja, I. C.: A longitudinal assessment of action, collaboration and adaptation in strategic planning of urban green space, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-132, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-132, 2026.
Implementing the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) requires integrating biodiversity considerations across sectors and governance levels. Because land-use decisions are made locally, municipal land-use planning plays a pivotal role in shaping green, climate-resilient and ecologically functional settlement areas. In Switzerland, municipalities use building and zoning regulations to determine where development occurs, which blue and green areas are preserved, and which ecological standards apply to the construction sector. Yet little is known about how biodiversity-friendly standards are negotiated, institutionalized, and translated into binding rules during land-use plan revisions. We examined how biodiversity-friendly standards are incorporated into municipal regulations based on a qualitative assessment of six Swiss municipalities. We analysed ecological measures such as the protection of trees, watercourses, and urban green spaces, requirements for compensating lost green areas or trees, and strategies for increasing habitats through measures like plantings, daylighting streams, and promoting connectivity. These measures reflect a three-part urban ecology logic of preserving, compensating for construction, and expanding urban green, operationalized across seven areas of biodiversity promotion in settlement areas: green spaces, ecological quality, trees and hedgerows, water, soil and permeability, light/darkness, and animal-friendly construction.
Using document analysis and semi-structured interviews with planners, local politicians, and stakeholders, the study identified enablers and barriers influencing the uptake of biodiversity-friendly standards. Findings indicate that the latter varies across different stages of the revision process and is driven by expert inputs, local advocacy and public demands for liveable environments. At the same time, development pressures, feasibility concerns, and political opposition often constrain the ambition or consistency of ecological measures.
By situating these insights within the GBF Target 1 on spatial planning, the study shows how land-use plan revisions serve as a crucial arena where protection and use of urban green spaces are negotiated, and locally tailored solutions emerge. The analysis bridges urban ecology and biodiversity governance perspectives by unpacking how ecological principles are considered and contested within political processes. Overall, a trend towards stronger anchoring of biodiversity-friendly regulations can be observed, highlighting the potential of municipal planning as a lever for resilient, multifunctional, and biodiverse urban and peri-urban landscapes.
How to cite: Schwab Cammarano, S., Moretti, M., Holderegger, R., Altermatt, F., and Hersperger, A. M.: Planning for biodiversity: Insights from Swiss municipal land-use plan revisions, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-444, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-444, 2026.
Cities face increasing pressures from intensifying climate impacts, urban expansion and land conversion resulting in declining biodiversity and reduced ecosystem services. Loss of vegetated land has contributed to urban heat, pollution, and rising flood risk, which affect the quality of life for residents. At the same time, urban green areas such as parks, cemeteries, green roofs and other vegetated areas can support ecological processes and generate diverse ecosystem services. Biodiversity remains fundamental to these functions, since species and genetic and ecosystem variability regulate underlying ecological processes. Nevertheless, biodiversity in cities continues to decline due to habitat degradation, fragmentation and loss.
Although urban green areas may deliver multiple benefits, the extent to which they support biodiversity depends on vegetation structure, connectivity and land use history. Yet biophysical characteristics are only one part of the picture. Governance of urban green areas influences their ecological performance. Multiple public and private actors engage with these spaces through management, planning and informal stewardship. Their interests, responsibilities and interactions form governance networks that shape how urban green areas are maintained and developed over time. Collaboration within and across these networks can influence how effectively ecosystems are conserved and reconnected, which affects their capacity to sustain biodiversity and ecosystem services.
This study investigates how stakeholder networks associated with distinct types of urban green areas relate to varying levels of biodiversity. The research is based on the in-depth study of 20 urban green areas in the city of Zurich, Switzerland, and qualitative interviews with relevant stakeholders. Because biodiversity assessments are available for each area, it becomes possible to link governance arrangements to observed biophysical outcomes in a social-ecological network. We examine how differences in network composition and actor attributes relate to relatively high or low biodiversity, and whether particular configurations such as continuity of management, coordination or inclusive decision making are associated with richer biodiversity outcomes. The study clarifies how collaborative structures may correspond with biodiversity patterns and why similar types of urban green areas show different biodiversity outcomes. Understanding these dynamics is relevant for reflecting on how social processes and ecological conditions jointly shape a city’s resilience.
How to cite: Zinn, N., Fischer, M., and Lieberherr, E.: Linking Stakeholder Collaboration and Biodiversity Outcomes in Urban Green Areas, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-185, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-185, 2026.
Urban development represents a major challenge of the modern society. Compact cities, characterized by dense urban fabric, represent the standard of contemporary sustainable urban planning, aiming to limit land take while promoting resource efficiency and proximity to services. This planning model often struggles to provide sufficient green areas that support biodiversity and enhance residents’ well-being. Small urban green areas are a viable solution both for fostering biodiversity and for delivering social and recreational benefits—particularly when designed as multifunctional spaces such as playgrounds integrating nature.
The aim of the study is to explore the current NBS integration in playgrounds in Bucharest and to propose solutions aligned with the population’s perceptions and acceptance of nature-based interventions. We developed an observation form which we applied for the playgrounds in Bucharest. The sample used for the current study included mor than half of the 600 outdoor playgrounds in the city. The observation form included sections on playground characteristics, planning elements, vegetation features—including nature-based solutions—and perceived problems. We also administered a questionnaire to accompanying adults, exploring their attitudes toward the integration of more diverse natural elements in playgrounds.
Results showed that outdoor playgrounds in Bucharest have a high degree of artificialization, with a low representation of natural elements. The vegetation in most playgrounds consists only of shade-providing trees, with no nature-based solutions integrated into the design or functionality of the area. Biodiversity is also low, both for vegetation and fauna. Initiatives to increase natural elements in playgrounds may encounter opposition from accompanying adults, as many are uncomfortable with natural surroundings that they perceive as potentially dirty, harmful, or frightening for their children.
The potential of these results lies in developing viable solutions that could increase both the presence of natural elements in playgrounds and the multifunctionality of these areas. A better understanding of adults’ concerns regarding the naturalization of playgrounds may help identify optimal approaches for their multifunctional planning and design.
How to cite: Onose, D. A., Iojă, I. C., Popa, A. M., Niță, M. R., Călin, P. E., and Todoran, A. M.: Co-Designing Urban Playgrounds with Nature: Pathways Toward Multifunctional and Biodiverse Green Areas, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-918, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-918, 2026.
Urban green spaces have significant potential to advance the goals of the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), yet this potential remains underused due to fragmented data systems, weak regulatory integration, inadequate biodiversity monitoring, and disconnected planning practices. As cities densify, the multifunctionality of urban green areas, which provide habitat, ecosystem services, enhance climate resilience, and support human well-being, continues to be undervalued in decision-making. This contribution presents findings from the Measuring Urban Forests Outcomes (MUFO) project, which has developed a standardised, scalable framework linking urban forestry indicators with biodiversity metrics to support biodiversity-inclusive urban planning and the emerging field of urban biodiversity credits.
Drawing on a review of existing biodiversity metric frameworks, interviews with practitioners in urban ecology and ecosystem valuation, and an assessment of policy and governance needs, the MUFO framework identifies a set of ecological, structural, and social indicators that serve as reliable, cost-effective proxies for broader urban biodiversity outcomes. Indicators such as canopy cover and habitat connectivity enable cities to assess ecological performance using data that is widely collected or easily obtainable.
The framework illustrates how urban forestry metrics can inform land-use planning and greening requirements, and other nature-based solutions by making biodiversity gains measurable, verifiable, and comparable across spatial scales. In doing so, it supports implementation of GBF Targets 2, 3, and 12 by enabling cities to monitor restoration progress, identify priority areas, and communicate ecological and social benefits in ways that resonate with policymakers, investors, and communities. The project further underscores the transformative potential of integrating scientific data with traditional and local knowledge, participatory monitoring, and inclusive governance as key elements for overcoming institutional barriers and mobilising civil society as long-term biodiversity stewards.
By embedding standardised biodiversity and urban forestry indicators into planning, regulatory, and investment processes, cities can enhance the quantity, quality, connectivity, and accessibility of green spaces while laying the groundwork for innovative mechanisms such as biodiversity credits. This pragmatic and scalable approach offers a viable pathway for accelerating GBF implementation and transforming urban environments into biodiverse and resilient habitats.
How to cite: Wilkes-Allemann, J.: From Metrics to Mechanisms: Leveraging Urban Forestry for Biodiversity-Positive Urban Transformation, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-693, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-693, 2026.
Urban soils are often neglected in spatial planning and management due to limited awareness of their properties, functions and ecosystem services (ES). Even the European targets of “no net land take” and “no net soil sealing” focus only on quantitative aspects, neglecting soil quality (i.e., the capacity of soil to function effectively within ecosystems and land uses). Explicitly integrating urban soil properties, functions and ES into spatial planning could help minimise negative impacts while promoting compensation and restoration measures that enhance environmental and human well-being. This gap has also been highlighted in the Outlook on the knowledge gaps to reduce soil sealing and increase the reuse of urban soil, published by the SOLO (Soils for Europe) project, funded by the EU Soil Mission.
This study compares indicator frameworks and indices that consider properties, functions, and ES of urban soils to support planning and management. From a systematic search through scientific databases, four frameworks were identified, some of which were described in more than one publication. The screening criteria considered were: the links established between soil properties, soil functions, and ES; the methods proposed for their assessment; and the type of application in planning and management.
In the selected frameworks, soil properties were measured either in situ or in the laboratory and used as inputs or proxies to evaluate soil functions. Pedo-transfer functions were applied to establish relationships between soil properties and functions, while links between soil functions and ES were derived from literature analysis and expert knowledge. The frameworks primarily considered regulating ES, especially those related to climate and water regulation, followed by provisioning services. Urban soil quality indices were developed based on soil functions and ES, using averaged or weighted aggregation methods. These indices aim to monitor urban soil management and provide soil information to support spatial planning.
By identifying indicators and methods, the study supports an assessment of urban soil quality that can inform decisions to reduce and compensate for soil function losses caused by urban development. Additionally, it promotes the identification and protection of high-quality soils, contributing to more sustainable urban development in spatial planning.
How to cite: Frezzi, S., Cortinovis, C., and Geneletti, D.: Integrating urban soil quality into spatial planning: a comparative review of indicator frameworks and indices in urban and peri-urban areas, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-152, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-152, 2026.
