IUCN pioneered the concept of Nature-based Solutions (NbS) twenty years ago, first defining the term as ‘actions to protect, sustainably use, manage and restore natural or modified ecosystems, which address societal challenges, effectively and adaptively, providing human well-being and biodiversity benefits.’ Since then, the organization has developed the IUCN Global Standard for Nature-based Solutions™ - a rigorous framework for designing, implementing, and evaluating NbS interventions. The Second Edition of this standard was officially launched at the IUCN World Conservation Congress 2025. 

IUCN Europe: The definition of the Nature-based Solutions is “actions to protect, sustainably manage, and restore natural and modified ecosystems, benefiting people and nature at the same time”. While most discussions about NbS understandably focus on the benefits for ecosystems, could you give examples where NbS delivered measurable social benefits?

Charles Karangwa: One important aspect of Nature-based Solutions is, of course, their ecological benefits. But they must also deliver socioeconomic benefits and support human well-being. And this includes jobs, for example. We have seen Nature-based Solution projects in Europe, Africa and Asia that create stable, year-round jobs, such as community work in mangrove restoration or in the agricultural sector.

In fact, we did a study two years ago showing that if you use Nature-based Solutions in the agricultural sector - for example, through regenerative farming within an NBS framework – you can increase yields by almost 54%, and income diversification can rise by nearly 100%. These findings highlight the broader socioeconomic benefits.

More importantly, we have also seen projects where Nature-based Solutions have worked to capacitate communities to make informed decisions about their land through improved land-use planning and integrated management of shared resources. In these cases, communities themselves set principles and bylaws, strengthening local governance and supporting collective stewardship of shared ecosystem services - such as water, food, timber, and non-timber forest products.

How has the latest scientific evidence shaped the second edition of the IUCN Global Standard for Nature-based Solutions? Can you explain a few key differences between the first and second editions. 

When the first Global Standard was developed, it considered what we call ecosystem-based adaptation approaches. This is why Nature-based Solutions operate and function within an ecosystem context. Over the past four years, we have been implementing this standard extensively. More than 3,200 people have used it to assess projects and make investment decisions. It has been downloaded over 69,000 times from our website.

When we began developing the second version, we collected feedback from all these people. In total, more than 3,000 people were consulted through different mechanisms: structured interviews as well as an open feedback process. The feedback was very rich and clustered into three main areas, which helped shape the updated standard. The first theme was the need to make the standard easier to understand. Technical terms that practitioners found difficult were revised. 

For example, in Criterion 4, which previously focused on “financial viability,” we expanded and clarified the language to “financial feasibility and economic viability.” In Criterion 3, which originally referred to “biodiversity net gain,” we updated the language to “positive biodiversity outcome,” explicitly including ecosystem integrity and connectivity. This aligns the standard with the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework’s terminology. 

More importantly, we strengthened the governance dimension - particularly the role of Indigenous Peoples and local landholders, and how they participate in decision-making around the design and implementation of Nature-based Solution actions. The revised standard now reflects a stronger systems perspective, improved governance aspects, and more robust, metrics-oriented requirements for biodiversity outcomes.

Is there a risk that NbS can become a “greenwashing tool” - emphasising carbon capture or flood control at the expense of biodiversity, equity and long-term sustainability?

This has long been a concern among Indigenous peoples and local communities that Nature-based Solutions could be used to greenwash actions that don’t actually deliver real benefits for communities and for biodiversity. 

Nature-based Solutions have become an open concept - used by investors and banks - and, unfortunately, sometimes misused, especially when they are reduced to tools for generating carbon credits.

These risks are real. But there are also opportunities if we collectively recognize that greenwashing benefits no one - not nature, not people, and not investors. Ultimately, it comes back to bite back those involved. We have already seen projects and companies face reputational damage because they chose to greenwash core principles.

To help prevent this, IUCN has introduced a voluntary global framework - the Nature-based Solutions Standard - which provides a benchmark for determining whether an intervention truly qualifies as a Nature-based Solution. We have also developed an open, online self-assessment tool that anyone can use to evaluate their project against the standard. And we are now going a step further by creating sectoral guidance that interprets the Standard for specific contexts, such as agriculture, water investments, and urban development. These tools are meant to help reduce the risk of greenwashing.

In the end, greenwashing - or “green-hushing” - benefits no one: not nature, not people, and not the investors themselves. It is a lose-lose situation that no one should want to be part of.

What is the mission of the IUCN Nature-based Solutions Hub, and how does your role shape that mission?

The Global Nature-based Solutions Hub was established with four clear mandates. The first is to stay attuned to market needs so that IUCN can effectively respond to the growing demand for Nature-based Solutions. This demand spans four main areas, beginning with policy. IUCN has been working intensively to support multilateral environmental conventions and to mainstream Nature-based Solutions into their core decisions. This has already been achieved across several COPs. And we are very grateful to all institutions and partners who have really worked very hard to get us there. But after getting the Nature-based Solutions into the decisions at the COP and in other multilateral environmental agreements, I think the next question was, what does it mean at the national level? 

The IUCN NbS European Hub plays a key role in supporting the translation of policy into practice and implementation.

The second mandate is finance. Here, we collaborate closely with financial institutions and governments to mobilize investment for Nature-based Solutions. A growing body of research shows that every dollar invested in Nature-based Solutions can yield up to five dollars in returns for both public and private investors. The Hub develops tools that support decision-making and help guide effective financing.

The third mandate is capacity building. After the development of the Global Standard for Nature-based Solutions, it became essential to ensure that practitioners understand how to apply it. We provide extensive capacity-building opportunities for professionals through webinars, training programs, and summer schools.

Finally, the fourth mandate is communication. Although NbS offer strong potential to advance biodiversity, climate, and development goals, they remain contested - particularly due to concerns about greenwashing. The Hub develops communication materials aimed at overcoming these barriers, improving uptake and accelerating action.

What has been the most surprising lesson from your work at the IUCN NbS Hub?

I was recently impressed by the level of interest in NbS from the finance sector, including insurance. It’s no longer just about meeting ESG principles or enhancing visibility for the private sector.

Nature-based Solutions are now being recognized as a tool for sustainable investment: sustaining returns, managing risk, increasing resilience, and achieving climate and biodiversity goals.

The momentum in this space is extremely high. I was particularly motivated to see how much Nature-based Solution are being adopted and integrated by the private sector. This progress is exciting, and I’m thrilled to be part of this work and look forward to engaging with these institutions. 

Which emerging scientific or technological developments could transform the impact of NbS? What innovations have potential to influence the next generation of NbS?

One of the big areas where technology and innovation need to continue being leveraged is in the definition and development of metrics. Nature-based Solutions address multiple challenges simultaneously. They can help manage floods, restore biodiversity, and even generate carbon credits.

All too often, we focus on just one benefit, but the true value of NbS lies in their multi-benefit nature. This includes social equity and governance aspects for communities, yet we still lack metrics to fully capture every benefit these solutions provide.

My colleagues, many partners, and I are working hard to harness technology and innovation to track and quantify the full range of benefits that Nature-based Solutions deliver.

And where do you hope the NBS agenda will be in the next 5 to 10 years? 

Nature-based Solutions are an unstoppable framework. They have the potential to be transformative and impactful, guiding not only investment but also decision-making and policy frameworks more broadly.

They are going to be an enabler for cross-sectoral collaboration, sustainable finance, and community-led management of shared or transboundary resources and ecosystems.

Nature-based Solutions are designed to break down silos - enabling us to move forward together, accelerate action, and achieve shared benefits for both people and nature.