UrbanStudyUrban Research Radar
Urban Ecology & Green Space
Journal articleOpen access

A social equity perspective on Nature-based Solutions for urban heat resilience

Published 1 May 2026 · Added to radar 5 Nov 2026

Source abstract

Nature-based Solutions (NbS) are gaining prominence as key instruments of transformative adaptation, particularly in addressing the escalating impacts of climate change on human systems. However, the extent to which NbS can be considered as ‘just’ or contributing to equitable outcomes beyond fostering heat resilience, is rarely assessed in a comprehensive, systemic manner. To understand this, our research examines how social equity is addressed in the academic literature on NbS for urban heat resilience and assesses the extent to which distributional, recognitional, and procedural equity are integrated into prevailing conceptualizations of adaptation. We conducted an integrative literature review that combines a purposive review with a systematic review of peer-reviewed empirical studies published between 2008 and 2025 through a PRISMA method. Our findings show that 26 publications (81%) explicitly engage with at least one dimension of social equity, yet they vary significantly in how centrally they treat equity. Drawing on this analysis, we identify three key pathways through which NbS research is moving toward a more just and transformative urban heat resilience agenda: unpacking governance arrangements within NbS, adopting an intersectional lens to urban heat vulnerability, and fostering knowledge co-production. These reflections can inform policy and planning strategies to more effectively integrate NbS into equitable and context-sensitive urban climate adaptation efforts.

Abstract metadata supplied by the research index; wording belongs to the original source.

Structured record

Source-reported findings
  • Our findings show that 26 publications (81%) explicitly engage with at least one dimension of social equity, yet they vary significantly in how centrally they treat equity.
Methods
systematic review

Read the original ↗ DOI ↗