Competing narratives of nature-based solutions: Leveraging the power of nature or dangerous distraction?

Nature-based Solutions (NbS) are increasingly proposed in international environmental governance settings to address the interlinked crises of climate change, biodiversity loss, and growing inequality. Thus far, scholarly research on NbS has been largely conceptual, and empirical research from the social sciences is widely absent, as are insights into the narratives that surround them. Using the 2019 United Nations Climate Action Summit and the 2019 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP 25) as a case study, we set out to analyze the range of narratives associated with proposals for (and against) NbS. We used a discourse coalition approach, drawing data from a systematic document analysis of public-facing texts from a range of actors, and expert interviews. Results reveal two central and opposing NbS narratives: 1) Leveraging the power of nature —NbS are multifunctional, powerful, and must play a critical role in addressing global challenges, especially climate change (held by NbS proponents): and 2) Dangerous distraction —NbS are being co-opted to continue with what is seen as the unsustainable, unjust, status-quo (held by NbS critics). Both narratives make use of the ambiguity of NbS, though in contrasting ways, and their respective coalitions reflect and reproduce existing fault-lines in international environmental governance. Our findings indicate that, despite its promise, ‘NbS’ is currently unable to foster inclusive participation and support transformative change. • Two central and opposing narratives characterize Nature-based Solutions (NbS) discourses. • Proponents position NbS as key to addressing climate change and bridging siloes. • Critics warn that NbS are being co-opted to maintain the status-quo. • Ambiguity is leveraged implicitly and explicitly across NbS narratives. • NbS narratives reflect and reproduce longstanding power asymmetries.