In collaboration with

Arup and AlphaBeta

BiodiverCities by 2030:
Transforming Cities’
Relationship with Nature
INSIGHT REPORT
JANUARY 2022
Images: Getty Images

Contents
Foreword 3

Preface 4

Executive summary 6

1 Cities’ relationship with nature 7

1.1 Cities: The engine of the modern global economy 8

1.2 Cities’ impact on nature 8

1.3 Nature-related socioeconomic risks to cities 10

1.4 The cities of tomorrow: BiodiverCities by 2030 12

2 Making the economic case for BiodiverCities 14

2.1 Nature as a means for infrastructure in cities’ built environment 15

2.2 Cities’ current spending on nature-based solutions 16

for infrastructure

2.3 The opportunity for nature-based solutions for infrastructure 16

and land-sparing interventions in cities by 2030

2.4 Job creation through nature-based solutions for infrastructure 21

and land-sparing interventions in cities

2.5 The relevance of investment opportunities by sector 22

2.6 The relevance of investment opportunities by region 23

3 Enabling cities to live in harmony with nature 24

3.1 Three systemic shifts towards a nature-positive 25

urban development

3.2 U
 rban governance transition: The need for a systems approach 26
in decision-making

3.3 Spatial (re)integration: Reviving cities’ natural layer 29

3.4 Investment mobilization: Mainstreaming nature for investors 34

Conclusion: A call for multistakeholder action 38

Appendix: Methodology 40

Acknowledgements 41

Endnotes 44

Disclaimer
This document is published by the World Economic Forum as a contribution to a
project, insight area or interaction. The findings, interpretations and conclusions
expressed herein are a result of a collaborative process facilitated and endorsed by the
World Economic Forum but whose results do not necessarily represent the views of the
World Economic Forum, nor the entirety of its Members, Partners or other stakeholders.

© 2022 World Economic Forum and Alexander von Humboldt Biological Resources
Research Institute

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a

retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, or otherwise without the prior permission of the World Economic Forum.

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature 2

January 2022 BiodiverCities by 2030:
Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature

Foreword
Klaus Schwab
Iván Duque Márquez
Founder and
President of the
Executive Chairman,
Republic of Colombia
World Economic Forum

Cities are hubs of opportunity, cross-cultural voiceless - stakeholder in urban political and
interaction and cohesion. They concentrate the economic decision-making is now imperative to
majority of the world’s population and deliver benefit human livelihoods and planetary wellbeing.
services to large numbers of people, creating
jobs and driving innovation and economic growth. Cities that recognize biodiversity as the axis
Between now and 2030, 1.5 million people are of their development are directly contributing
expected to arrive in urban areas every week, and to urban sustainability, climate resilience
75% of the population on Earth will be living in and human wellbeing. Urban transformation
cities by 2050, compared with 56% today. and innovation efforts must continue,
embracing the opportunities offered by
The COVID-19 pandemic has put a spotlight new technological developments, and
on the fragility of our current economic models, addressing the global crises concurrently
including how we produce, consume and power through the untapped potential of nature.
our lives. Urban economies and livelihoods
provide the context which will be increasingly This report provides the guiding framework for
under pressure from climate impacts and nature cities to transform their relationship with nature
loss, therefore it is imperative that global and city and to drive an urban development that leaves
leaders have the tools to understand the relevant natural capital enriched and not depleted, a
risks and opportunities, and steer cities in a vision that the Colombian government has
direction of sustainable growth. defined as “BiodiverCities”. Building on this
country’s leadership, the World Economic Forum
A sustainable city is one that meets the needs and Colombia have partnered to scale a global
of its dwellers without putting unsustainable initiative with a major ambition: BiodiverCities
pressure on the natural resources on which by 2030. We have the opportunity to design more
it depends, both locally and globally. Nature resilient and adaptive futures for cities across
underpins the complex web of life and the life- the globe by drawing together multidisciplinary
sustaining ecosystems services upon which expertise and spurring nature-positive
human livelihoods depend. A healthy biosphere entrepreneurial approaches in the next decade.
is therefore fundamental to ensure inclusive,
equitable, resilient and safe urban spaces. We encourage city officials, the private sector and
the whole urban community to harvest and spread
Urban stakeholders have the opportunity to the evidence on the real opportunities for cities
unlock the potential of nature as a solution to to reverse their impact on nature and to build an
urban challenges, thereby paving the way for enabling environment in their own city contexts
sustainable and resilient development. Taking whereby biodiversity and nature-based solutions
nature into consideration as a key – albeit are brought to the centre of the urban agenda.

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship With Nature 3

Preface
Lena Chan
Senior Director, International
Biodiversity Conservation Division,
National Parks Board (NParks)
of Singapore

Co-Chair, Global Commission

on BiodiverCities by 2030

To many people, “biodiversity in cities” is an and achievement of being BiodiverCities by

oxymoron. On the contrary, there is much 2030. To ensure that this movement is holistic,
biodiversity in cities essential for sustainability, comprehensive, nature-based, multi-sectoral,
liveability and ecological resilience in urban life. As multi-disciplinary, integrated and all-inclusive,
today’s major challenges of climate change and we call for participatory and intergenerational
biodiversity loss are intricately interlinked, they approaches in urban design and planning which
must be addressed synergistically, leveraging include the voices of indigenous peoples, citizen
nature-based solutions at local, regional and global stewards of land, the majority of whom live in
levels. With more than half of the human population urban environments and local communities.
residing in cities, biodiversity conservation can only
succeed - and climate change can only be reversed We hereby provide the case for urban leaders from
- if cities take the lead. the public and private sectors, as well as citizen
movements, to conserve, connect, restore and
Recognizing that we are embedded in nature, we also enhance natural urban ecosystems, by outlining
wish to acknowledge its higher order and inherent actions for nature-spatial integration, urban
value. In this context, this white paper harnesses and governance and investment mobilization. The time
draws on current knowledge, data and workable to act is now. Every individual must be involved to
initiatives to guide cities towards the implementation make a world of BiodiverCities by 2030.

Mauricio Rodas Espinel

Visiting Scholar, University
of Pennsylvania, USA

Co-Chair, Global Commission

on BiodiverCities by 2030

The rapid global urbanization process, which coexistence between humans and nature and to
keeps adding pressure to cities’ service provision invest the resources needed to provide ecosystem
and infrastructure development, along with rising services to urban dwellers and protect and maintain
temperatures and increasingly severe natural biodiversity in urban areas.
disasters, has caused profound damage to the
environment in cities. As city officials consider In this report, we offer actionable solutions to
“building back better” towards the post-pandemic heal the relationship between cities and nature,
future, they have a priority to provide their citizens thus enabling a healthier and more responsible
with a more equitable and prosperous quality of life environment for people to thrive in. We count
by protecting natural resources. on the support of city networks like Local
Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI), the
Now, more than ever, the conservation of urban Resilient Cities Network and the C40 Urban
biodiversity and the reduction of cities’ ecological Nature Declaration to achieve the vision of
footprint are high priorities. We have in front of us BiodiverCities across the globe by 2030, and we
a great opportunity to reimagine a harmonious need all stakeholders to invest in urban nature.

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship With Nature 4

About the initiative for BiodiverCities by 2030

BiodiverCities by 2030 is a joint initiative of the This report was developed as an output of the
World Economic Forum and the Alexander von BiodiverCities by 2030 initiative and sets out:
Humboldt Institute, championed by the Government
of Colombia. This initiative aims to support city – The urgency of addressing cities’
governments, businesses and citizens, to enable untenable relationship with nature.
cities to live in harmony with nature by 2030.
– The opportunity to prioritize nature-
The initiative brings together multidisciplinary positive interventions and investments
expertize, combines existing initiatives and surfaces to fight cities’ challenges.
innovative solutions to promote sustainable, inclusive
and nature-positive urban development at a global – A clear path for city leaders to embrace
scale. To deliver on its objectives, the initiative has the BiodiverCities by 2030 vision
curated a high-level commission of experts and and increase urban competitiveness
practitioners from the public and private sectors, and liveability through nature.
academia and civil society - the Global Commission
on BiodiverCities by 2030 - to combine insights This report builds on the work of the World
and co-create a forward-looking perspective on Economic Forum’s New Nature Economy Report
nature-positive cities. Artificial intelligence and series, which identified nature-related economic
crowdsourcing technologies have also been set risks (affecting more than half the world’s GDP)
as key tools for the initiative through the Forum’s and opportunities from nature-positive pathways,
Strategic Intelligence and UpLink platforms to pool including an increase in business value by $10.1
the latest innovations and conceptual developments trillion and the creation of 395 million jobs by 2030.
linking biodiversity and urban development.

About the Alexander von Humboldt Institute

The Alexander von Humboldt Biological and sustainable use of continental biodiversity
Resources Research Institute is an independent and its ecosystem services, supporting informed
research institute linked to Colombia’s Ministry of decision-making through a joint, coordinated and
Environment and Sustainable Development. The concerted action between the state, the private
Institute contributes to the knowledge, conservation sector, academia and civil society.

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship With Nature 5

Executive summary
BiodiverCities by 2030 is a vision for
cities as living systems, where the built
environment, social structure and natural
capital co-exist in harmony.

This report calls on cities, as one of the crucial infrastructure and on interventions that release
players in reversing nature loss and climate change, land to nature could create more than 59 million
to become BiodiverCities by 2030. It articulates jobs by 2030, including 21 million livelihood-
the opportunity for urban leaders and citizens enhancing jobs dedicated to restoring and
to transform their cities’ relationship with nature protecting natural ecosystems.
through nine key messages.
6. The impact of cities’ nature-positive
1. An “urban era” is taking place. Cities account actions (through both NbS and land-sparing
for 80% of global GDP and will host 75% of the interventions) varies by sector, region and
world’s population by 2050. Urban leaders and level of urbanization. NbS for infrastructure
decision-makers have a leading role to play in are best applied to water supply, pollution and
shaping a sustainable, resilient and prosperous climate adaptation and mitigation projects,
future for all. and are most effective for cities in Asia Pacific,
Africa and Latin America. The building and
2. Exponential growth of the global built transport sectors, as well as highly urbanized
environment undermines nature’s critical societies in Europe, China and India, may have
contributions to our societies and more to gain from land-sparing interventions.
economies. Rapid urban expansion has come
at the expense of climate, nature and the 7. Shifting to a systems approach to urban
economy. Business as usual is no longer governance is one of three key conditions
an option – 44% of global GDP in cities is to cities achieving the BiodiverCities vision
estimated to be at risk of disruption from nature and capturing these opportunities. This shift
loss. With the majority of future urban expansion must be steered by top levels of government,
forecast in the world’s most biodiverse coordinated across stakeholders using strong
regions, cities must act now to rebalance their city-level leadership and underpinned by policy
relationship with nature. that fosters innovation and accounts for the full
value of nature.
3. BiodiverCities by 2030 sets a vision of cities
as living systems, where their economic, 8. Restoring nature as the backbone of cities’
social and ecological functions come development is a foremost priority.
together in harmony. BiodiverCities have five Re-integrating local ecosystems in the urban
characteristics, guiding nature-positive actions planning process is a second condition to
on infrastructure, governance, economy, health realizing the BiodiverCities vision. It entails
and wellbeing. preserving existing natural habitats, re-naturing
degraded or sub-optimized land and “growing
4. By shifting investment to nature-based smart” with new or upgraded infrastructure.
solutions (NbS) for infrastructure, cities can
build a climate-resilient built environment 9. Increased investment in natural
while lessening their impact on biodiversity. capital unlocks the benefits of NbS for
NbS are, on average, 50% more cost-effective infrastructure and should be further
than “grey” alternatives and deliver 28% more incentivized. To be fulfilled, this third condition
added value, yet they received just 0.3% of requires mainstreaming biodiversity data
overall spending on urban infrastructure in 2021. for investment decision-making, creating
an inclusive market for investment and
5. Expanding nature in the built environment promoting new models to de-risk and
creates significant economic and social crowd-in private and institutional capital.
value. Spending $583 billion on NbS for

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature 6

1 Cities’ relationship
with nature
Rapid expansion of the built environment
has proven detrimental for cities’ natural
ecosystems, denting economic prospects
and necessitating a systemic transition in
urban development.

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature 7

 1.1 Cities: The engine of the modern global economy

Cities are at the heart of the global economy. consuming, creating, breeding and sheltering in
As the main stages for human activity, cities now urban areas by 2030 – up from 4.4 billion today.2
generate over 80% of global GDP and contain Cities, in turn, rely on nature to provide key services
56% of the global population (Figure 1).1 Cities for these activities, such as sufficient safe, and
around the world are projected to add 1.5 million clean water; productive and resilient food systems;
people to their populations each week before and energy, medicine, and other materials.3 By
2030. This means that over 5.5 billion humans will 2050, three out of every four people on Earth are
be interacting, eating, collaborating, producing, expected to be living in cities.

FIGURE 1 Cities are at the heart of our economies and societies, accounting for 80% of global GDP
and 56% of global population

Global cities’ GDP Global cities’ population

Percentage of 2019 GDP originating in cities Percentage of global population living in cities

$70 trillion
GDP generated 2019 56% 1.5 million
in cities people
will be added
to cities every
80% week until 2030
2030 60%

20%
2050 75%

Cities Other areas 10%

Source: World Bank; UN Population Division; Alphabeta analysis

1.2 Cities’ impact on nature

Coupled with this urban rise, the world is The most noticeable direct impact of
witnessing a sharp decline in biodiversity.4 urban growth on biodiversity is the loss of
Cities have historically been established and natural habitats. The rapid expansion of the global
developed in or near ecosystems that provide built environment – a 66% area increase in the first
abundant contributions to urban societies, 12 years of the 21st century 5 – has significantly
including water, rich soils and areas protected impacted natural ecosystems. Much of the land in
from extreme weather events. This natural layer and around cities is degraded, threatening native
underpinning the built environment has been habitats, the genetic and functional diversity of flora
increasingly degraded through the direct and and fauna, and the quality of air and waterways.6 A
indirect impacts of urbanization. high proportion of the direct impact to nature from
this urban expansion is forecast to occur in some

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature 8

of the most biodiverse and environmentally-intact terrestrial vertebrates and driving endangered
regions in Africa, Asia and the Americas.7 Of the species to extinction.13
423 cities located in the world’s biological hotspots,
383 (90%) are projected to grow and expand Urban areas are responsible for over 75%
into tropical moist forest biomes, predominantly of global carbon emissions.14 Increased
in low- and middle-income countries.8,9 atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG)
concentrations affect biodiversity by leading
Moreover, cities spatial footprint has expanded to increased mean temperatures, altering
at a higher rate than urban populations. precipitation regimes, increasing the frequency
Between 1990 and 2015, the urban population of extreme weather events and acidifying15,16
increased an average of 1.9 times; in the same aquatic environments. Climate action in cities
period, the urban footprint increased an average remains insufficient. The 2021 State of Cities
of 2.5 times.10 This difference grows more stark Climate Finance Report, from the Cities Climate
when we look at developing countries, where Finance Leadership Alliance, the Climate
the population increased 2.3 times and the Policy Initiative and the World Bank, estimates
area increased 3.2 times in the same period. that a total of $384 billion was invested in
urban climate finance globally in 2017 and
From a spatial perspective, urban areas have 2018—an amount far below the estimated $5
a relatively small footprint, with just 1% of the trillion needed. This gulf between targets and
earth’s ice-free land surface being built-up. actual progress in limiting carbon emissions
However, the indirect impact of urban growth is leading to devastating climatic changes, as
on land use is vast. To feed the world’s cities we underscored by the IPCC at COP26.17,18
require an area 36 times larger than cities’ global
urban footprint;11 this leads to natural habitat Cities’ direct and indirect impacts on
destruction and biodiversity loss as we extract biodiversity have negative cascading effects
resources and create space to extract materials that are threatening ecosystem stability at local,
and produce food. The scale of this indirect regional and planetary scales.19
impact varies locally, regionally and globally. While there is an imperative need to reverse
this impact, day-to-day challenges such as
Climate change is one of the indirect impacts of food security, poverty, housing, mobility and
urbanization and accounts for 11-16% of global sanitation are often given higher priority. However,
biodiversity loss.12 Recent natural calamities, such the complex interactions and feedback loops
as the Australian “Black Summer” of 2019-2020, between climate, biodiversity and human activity
have evidenced the deep link between climate are producing pronounced and unpredictable
change and nature loss. During the event, an area outcomes; climate and nature-related risks should
of the size of Cambodia was ravaged by extreme therefore be regarded as factors that deepen the
fires, killing or displacing nearly three billion major constraints for future urban growth.

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature 9

 1.3 Nature-related socioeconomic risks to cities

More than Cities’ impact on nature is a critical economic expected to grow more than 300% in the next
1.4 billion people issue. Climate action failure, extreme weather fifty years,28 residual damage costs in cities could
living in the world’s and biodiversity loss have been ranked as the amount to over $5 trillion in this century.29,30
largest urban top three risks humanity will face in the next 10
centres are at high years, according to the World Economic Forum’s Droughts are considered the second most
2022 Global Risks Report.20 But how or why hazardous urban risk, affecting 411 million
or extreme risk
does this matter for economic actors in cities? people worldwide.31 One in four cities today
of environmental
The IPBES Global Assessment Report outlines are already water-stressed, with the situation
disaster. eighteen life-supporting contributions biodiversity projected to deteriorate further in the coming
makes to humanity. It supports key economic decades.32 According to the United Nations,
activities through air quality, water cycles and half of all countries worldwide will face water
flood regulation, and underpins the production stress or shortages by 2050, driven by drought,
of energy, food and medicine.21 Despite cities population growth and rapid urbanization. By
around the world occupying different ecosystems, 2050, three out of four people globally could be
these contributions are essential to support the affected by water scarcity.33 Water challenges are
economies and societies of all. As a consequence further aggravated by unsound waste disposal
of biodiversity loss, critical economic activities and wastewater management, and the costs
depending on nature are at risk of disruption. from urban water pollution can be significant,
both for human and environmental health.34
Environmental change is compromising cities’
stability. Among the 576 largest urban centres in Another economic/health risk in built-up
the world, 414 (over 70% of the total) – and their areas is urban heat, often related to a lack of
more than 1.4 billion inhabitants – are deemed to be green areas or smart surfaces. As a result,
at high or extreme risk from pollution, compromised energy use soars and labour productivity
water supplies, extreme heat and natural hazards.22 eases. Tokyo’s temperature, for example, has
As of July 2018, nearly 58% of global cities were increased by 3°C over the last 100 years due
highly exposed to at least one of the six main to the city’s heat island effect.35 As a side effect
natural hazards – cyclones, floods, droughts, of increased heating, air conditioning use now
earthquakes, landslides and volcanic eruptions.23 amounts to 10% of global electricity use and is
projected to triple by 2050.36 In 2016, carbon
Flooding has been identified as the most emissions from air-conditioning already amounted
common natural risk across more than 1,600 to 1.25 gigatons, equivalent to almost 3% of
cities, each with over 300,000 inhabitants. the global annual anthropogenic emissions. 
The loss of coastal habitats, such as carbon-rich
and biodiverse mangrove forests, has significantly Poor air quality and lack of urban green space
increased the risk from floods and hurricanes are also risk factors for human health and cities’
for cities within coastal zones.24 In 2019, floods productivity.37 Exposure to air pollution cost the
caused almost $46 billion in economic losses and world’s economy around $5.1 trillion in welfare
4,500 deaths globally, accounting for almost half losses in 2013, with a higher impact felt in low- and
the deaths from natural disasters in that year.25 middle-income regions; welfare losses in South
The World Bank estimates that over 1.47 billion Asia, East Asia and the Pacific were equivalent to
people globally are highly vulnerable to flood- around 7.5% of regional GDP.
related economic losses and mortality26 and over
600 million of these are already living below the Accounting for all potential disruptions to
poverty line. economic activities, 44% of GDP ($31 trillion)
in cities is currently estimated to be at risk from
Recent studies have found that capital stock biodiversity and nature loss (Figure 2). While
damage due to flood risk is expected to double this is lower than the global average (50% of GDP)
by 2030 (from 2020 levels) and - in terms of due to cities hosting fewer primary activities relying
freshwater flooding events in cities- quadruple on nature (i.e. agriculture and mining), multiple
by 2050. This equates to an increase from $35 downstream sectors with activities concentrated in
billion per year to $140 billion per year.27 In terms cities (i.e. transport, utilities and retail) are severely
of sea-level rise, and with coastal populations affected by disruptions to their supply of inputs.

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship With Nature 10

 FIGURE 2 44% of GDP in cities around the world – $31 trillion – is at risk of disruption
from nature loss

Economic value at risk in global citiesi Top 10 industry sectors at risk of disruption

Percentage of 2019 GDP by disruption risk Disruption risk (Max =100)

posed by biodiversity and nature loss

7% Supply chain and transport 84

Energy and utilities 81

Retail, consumer goods and lifestyle 76

56%
$31 trillion
37%
44% Aviation, travel and tourism 76

at risk at high or IT and digital communications 68

of disruption moderate risk
Infrastructure and urban development 60

Automotive 56

Advanced manufacturing 52

Healthcare 51
Disruption risk: ii
Electronics 39
High Moderate Low

Notes: i. GDP in cities considered in 2019. Total GDP was estimated at $69.9 trillion for 2019.
ii. Disruption risk was calculated for 19 industry sectors as classified by the World Economic Forum and their estimated contributions to cities’ GDP. Sectors
were assigned disruption risk scores out of 100 based on the average number (up to 85%) of business operations disrupted by up to 27 drivers of environmental
change through their impact on natural capital assets (through the form of up to 21 ecosystem services). A sector with over 80% of its production processes
materially disrupted is considered “High” risk; over 55% is “Moderate” risk; and less than 55% is “Low” risk.

Source: World Bank; Natural Capital Finance Alliance; ENCORE database; World Economic Forum; Alphabeta

Strengthening the resilience of global and the urgency of physical risks from climate
urban centres is, therefore, a matter of change implies that policy alone will not suffice.
urgency for humanity, the economy and the
Earth’s stability. Cities need to be prepared By investing in the right infrastructure and
to cope with the social, environmental and services, cities can both improve the lives
financial consequences of ever-increasing natural of their citizens and build resilience against
hazards and act systemically to reverse such natural hazards and nature-related risks,
risks. Available data shows that cities are already while addressing the twin challenges of
enacting and reporting policies to advance this climate change and biodiversity loss. Cities
matter and build resilience. Of over 620 cities are centres of innovation and offer enormous
disclosing climate and environmental data to opportunities to reimagine a future where
the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), flood humans and other species can thrive. Urban
mapping (167 cities), crisis management (126), green spaces such as parks, urban meadows,
community engagement (106), tree planting wetlands and forests, greenways and green
(99) and long-term planning (88) are the most roofs are important examples, yielding multiple
reported actions used to build resilience.38 These benefits for carbon storage, heat reduction,
activities largely remain at policy level, however, preserving biodiversity and improving wellbeing.

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature 11

 1.4 The cities of tomorrow: BiodiverCities by 2030

Healing or resetting cities’ relationship with vision of “Living in harmony with nature by 2050” –
nature requires a brighter paradigm of urban reaffirmed within the post-2020 Global Biodiversity
development. The vision for BiodiverCities by 2030 Framework.39 BiodiverCities are defined by five key
is one such paradigm: a vision of cities as living characteristics - each is a seed for transformation
systems, wherein economic, social and ecological from which cities can start navigating towards a
functions are in harmony. This is consistent with nature-positive future (Figure 3).
the UN Convention on Biological Diversity’s (CBD)

FIGURE 3 BiodiverCities as seeds for transformation

BiodiverCities can restore balance

between cities and nature by…

Increasing nature in their infrastructure and

1 built environment.

Improving urban governance models to support

2 nature-based solutions for cities' challenges.

Forging positive links between urban and rural

3 settings and helping to safeguard global biodiversity.

Prioritizing bio-circular economy and bio-inspired

4 innovations for economic competitiveness.

Nurturing nature-positive values in citizens

5 for health and wellbeing.

Source: World Economic Forum, Alexander von Humboldt Institute

Infrastructure and the built environment are from natural ecosystems - often in combination with
critical entry points for cultivating nature- conventional engineering - can provide far more
positive cities. Reversing the impact of cities’ viable and sustainable solutions (explored in detail in
built environment on nature remains critical as a Section 2). Beyond transitions to address the built
larger, wealthier global urban population continues environment’s impact on nature, future research
to materialize, and demands for housing, offices, will explore how cities can address the larger,
commercial space, transport, energy, power and indirect impact on natural ecosystems beyond their
utilities increase. Societies have long relied on purely immediate surroundings, including via food and
human-engineered solutions to fulfil these needs, energy systems (Case study 1).
however strategically deploying ecosystem services

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature 12

 CASE STUDY 1 Transitions to address cities’ impact on nature

Through their built environment,

cities disturb their immediate natural
surroundings; however, through the
production and consumption models they
support, cities’ true impact on nature ranges
far beyond the immediate space they occupy.
The ever-greater production of food, fibre,
energy and materials that support cities’
societies, and the global supply chains that
enable this consumption, are responsible for
most land-use change, largely in ecosystems
far away from cities’ immediate vicinities. As
such, socioeconomic transitions necessary to
realize the BiodiverCities vision must address
cities’ impact on natural ecosystems both
within and outside their territories. The World
Economic Forum’s Future of Nature and
Business report identified 15 socioeconomic
transitions for a “nature-positive economy”, five
of which are relevant to cities’ built environment
(Figure 4).40 Future research by the World
Economic Forum is intended to cover the other
10 transitions for a nature-positive economy in
the light of urban development.

FIGURE 4 15 socioeconomic transitions for a nature-positive economy

Food, land and ocean use Infrastructure and Energy and extractives
built environment
1 Ecosystem restoration and 1 Circular and resource-efficient
avoided ecosystem expansion 1 Compact built environment models for materials

2 Productive and regenerative Nature-positive built Nature-positive mineral and

2 2
agriculture metals extraction
environment design
3 Sustainable management
of forests 3 Planet-compatible urban 3 Sustainable materials
utilities supply chains
4 A healthy and productive ocean
4 Nature as infrastructure 4 Nature-positive energy transition
5 Planet-compatible consumption
Transparent and sustainable
5 Nature-positive connecting
6 infrastructure
supply chains

Relevant transitions for cities’

direct impact on nature

Source: World Economic Forum

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature 13

2 Making the economic
case for BiodiverCities
A potential $589 billion investment opportunity
for NbS for infrastructure and land-sparing
interventions in cities awaits in 2030, paving the
way for nature-based urban transformation.

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature 14

 2.1 Nature as an opportunity for infrastructure in cities

Nature-based The rapid and often unplanned expansion of competing demands of preserving/restoring nature
solutions for cities’ built environment has led to substantial in cities while keeping pace with urban growth is to
infrastructure are negative impacts on nature and society globally. strategically deploy nature-based solutions (NbS)
50% cheaper than The creation of grey assets is invariably harmful to for infrastructure. NbS seek to restore or utilize the
grey alternatives nature, fostering land-use change, intense resource existing natural extent, connectivity and diversity of
use, pollution, natural habitat degradation and long- cities’ natural ecosystems to provide key functions
and deliver 28%
term disruption of natural ecosystem functions. The of infrastructure, negating the long-term ecological
greater added
evidence clearly shows that our current approach disruptions caused by land conversion for grey
value in terms to traditionally-engineered grey infrastructure is no infrastructure in the built environment. The difference
of direct and longer viable.41 between “nature” and “NbS” is that the latter entails
environmental conserving and intentionally managing critical,
benefits. The continued expansion of urban infrastructure naturally-occurring ecosystems such as wetlands,
and buildings could lead to the loss of around mangroves and forests, to provide targeted and
two million hectares of arable land every enhanced gains in community resilience, water quality
year.42 Over 80% of the world’s wastewater is and floodwater retention, among other benefits.45
discharged, untreated, from the built environment
into decreasingly biodiverse freshwater and coastal Practitioners and decision-makers have
ecosystems in urban and peri-urban areas, which are been pushing for the deployment of NbS for
then expected to support human consumption and infrastructure since the late 2000s.46 In most
irrigate cropland, with numerous knock-on effects.43 instances, NbS could cost 50% less than grey
infrastructure alternatives and deliver 28% in
The impact of buildings, roads and connecting added value (measured in terms of infrastructure
infrastructure on biodiversity have also been productivity), as well as providing gains from positive
widely studied, including the effects on mammal externalities in the built environment, such as the
and bird populations within and around the areas creation of carbon sinks, cleaner air and water,
of intervention.44 Grey infrastructure tends to be better health, recreational services, job creation
inflexible (i.e. serving specific needs), and incurs high and opportunities for growth in other sectors47 (e.g.
lock-in costs, as design and operational details are urban tourism). In addition, intact and/or functional
often hard to change within a building’s lifespan. natural ecosystems can limit human exposure to
Today’s decisions, then, on what, where, why and - pathogens,48 improve mental health,49,50,51 encourage
most importantly - how to build have important long- use of public and/or active transport52 and enable a
term socio-ecological and economic implications. sense of belonging and community stewardship.53

And yet, the ever-increasing urban population’s By and large, NbS for infrastructure have
needs for housing, office space, public space, unequivocal value in expanding nature within the
commercial land, transport, energy and utilities built environment and are compatible with the
cannot be neglected. A smart way to reconcile the BiodiverCities by 2030 vision.54

CASE STUDY 2 The economic case for NbS for infrastructure using the Sustainable
Asset Valuation (SAVi) methodology55

Infrastructure assessments carried out in urban areas

using the SAVi methodology have shown that the
potential returns from using NbS for infrastructure
are superior to human-engineered alternatives. For instance,
SAVi assessments show that in Johannesburg, South Africa,
using nature for stormwater management offers a 47% cost
reduction (as opposed to a grey culvert) in terms of upfront
capital requirements. By reducing flood risk, avoided costs
are forecast at up to three times the investment required.
Overall, while the culvert barely breaks even, the nature-based
alternative offers returns of up to $5 per dollar.56
Overall, when using the infrastructure lens, a healthy
ecosystem is an asset that appreciates over time, in contrast
with grey infrastructure. This is especially important under
climate change scenarios that show the impact of increased
variability, frequency and strength of extreme events.
Authored by Andrea M. Bassi and Liesbeth
Casier from the International Institute for
Sustainable Development

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature 15

2.2 Cities’ current spending on nature-based solutions
for infrastructure

Despite the clear benefits, cities currently Low investment in NbS in cities, in terms of
invest less than 0.3% of their infrastructure both volume and involvement beyond the
spending on NbS – equivalent to around $28 public sector, constitutes a clear market failure
billion.57 The majority of these applications (likely all in relevant investment networks. Given cities’
stemming from domestic government investment) significant spending on infrastructure, capital
include harnessing natural systems to enhance availability does not appear to be a major challenge.
water supplies and existing urban watersheds, Sufficient evidence also indicates that NbS generate
soil management and pollution control, as well as better returns and create greater socioeconomic
pollution abatement through natural carbon sinks value than traditional alternatives.58 The major
for air quality and wastewater management. challenges to attracting the required investment for
NbS for infrastructure (and associated solutions) are
further discussed in Section 3.

2.3 The opportunity for nature-based solutions

for infrastructure and land-sparing
interventions in cities by 2030

There is significant potential for cities to harness While these opportunities do not directly invest in
NbS beyond current levels of investment. The natural capital and its management, they reduce
evidence suggests that the investment opportunity59 “business as usual” land requirements (e.g.
- used in the same major applications as today - by encouraging residential and office sharing,
could reach $113 billion annually in 2030, which retrofitting stranded assets, reducing space used for
is more than four times greater than current levels landfill and repurposing areas such as car parks).
(Figure 6). While this constitutes just over 1% of In 2030, land-sparing interventions could be worth
cities’ overall projected spending on infrastructure in an additional $469 billion in annual investment
2030, this is markedly larger than today’s share of opportunities. While this estimate includes direct
0.3%. It is therefore critical for cities to harness this investment opportunities that alleviate the need for
opportunity if they are to reverse nature loss and land in cities, it does not include adjacent business
nature-related risks, to commit to a nature-positive opportunities created by land-sparing/restoration
future and realize the BiodiverCities by 2030 vision. that could offer cities even greater options for value
creation (i.e. increased liveability, attractiveness
Beyond NbS for infrastructure, land-sparing and tourism).60 As an example, New York’s High
interventions in cities can have a significant Line park, built on a former freight railway, attracts
positive impact, bringing nature back to almost eight million visitors annually and hosts a
the built environment, reducing the footprint of diverse line-up of free public events, community
projected infrastructure spending, releasing land and teen engagement programmes, performances,
to nature and generating new economic value. and art shows, making it one of the most popular

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature 16

 attractions in the city.61 Amager Nature Park in at the cost of liveability and resilience - other
Copenhagen, Denmark used to be a military important components of the BiodiverCities vision.
training facility and landfill site but now boasts over The conservation of high-quality, accessible, green,
1,200 hectares of biodiverse landscape, attracting connected and communal urban spaces is essential
important wildlife and hosting popular activities such for an equitable and liveable built-up environment.63
as hiking, horseback riding, camping, windsurfing
and bird watching.62 The overall investment opportunity related
to NbS for infrastructure and land-sparing
It is important to note that the relative benefits interventions in cities’ built environment can
of land sparing depend on numerous factors, be broken down into 11 distinct investment
including levels of urbanization, the ecosystem opportunities; the capital expenditure required
services provided by restored or repurposed for each of these to enable business opportunities
land, the time lag required for ecosystems to is detailed in Figure 6. Case study 3 provides
recover, and the ecological requirements for further details on the methodology used to derive
different species to thrive long-term, among these estimates. The rest of Section 2.3 details
others. It should also be noted that the increased two of these investment/business opportunities
density of the built environment, which is implied (sustainable transport infrastructure and nature-
by releasing more land to nature, should not come based systems for water supply) in greater detail.

FIGURE 5 Nature-based solutions and land-sparing interventions could constitute 5.2%

of infrastructure spending in cities by 2030 – equal to $583 billion annually

Global cities’ investment in nature-based solutions and land-sparing interventions by 2030i

Percentage of total infrastructure investment

Annual investment in 2030
Infrastructure category US$ billions
1.0%

5.2% Nature-based solutionsii 113

4.2% of total annual
$53 billion
investment
annual investment
in nature-based Land-sparing interventionsiii 469
solutions and
land-sparing
interventions Grey infrastructure 10,548
94.8%
Total 11,131

Notes: i. Calculated using nature-based solution spending data from the State of Finance for Nature, and total infrastructure spending in cities for 2021.
ii. “Nature-based solutions” for infrastructure is an umbrella term referring to actions to protect, sustainably manage, and restore natural or modified ecosystems
that provide the same infrastructure services as human-engineered grey infrastructure. Examples include reforestation of urban watersheds for natural water supply
and wastewater and pollution cycling.
iii. “Land-sparing interventions” is an umbrella term referring to those opportunities that release land to nature by reducing the footprint of the built environment,
while also generating new economic value. Examples include repurposing land from unproductive existing uses (e.g. parking).

Source: UNEP; World Economic Forum; ELD; Vivid Economics (2021); State of Finance for Nature; IHS Markit (2021); Alphabeta

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature 17

 FIGURE 6 11 investment opportunities could create over $1.5 trillion in annual business
value by 2030

Annualized capital expenditure, 2021-30 Annual business value generated in 2030

Investment opportunity US$ billions, 2019 values (expected) US$ billions, 2019 values

Sustainable transport infrastructure* 293

293
Waste management solutions 81 305

Nature-based systems for water supply 45 139

Repurposed parking lots 42 312

Wastewater treatment solutions 16 51

Residential sharing 15 213

Urban green roofs 11 13

Flexible offices 10 138

Infrastructure for resilience to climate shocks 4 22

Coastal wetlands restoration 1 5

Other nature-based solutions 64 64

Total 113 469 583 231 1,325

1,555

Nature-based solutions Land-sparing intervention2

Source: Literature review; expert interviews; Alphabeta

CASE STUDY 3 Sizing the investment opportunity

It is important to note that the $583 billion estimate

for NbS for infrastructure and land-sparing
interventions in cities is related to the investment
opportunity (the capital expenditure required) and not the
business opportunity. The latter constitutes returns for
investors which evidence shows could be significantly higher
- at least $1.5 trillion in annual business value - by 2030
(Figure 6). It should be noted that these opportunities are
based on existing commercialized business models or those
with significant potential for commercialization, and greater
research and development along with supportive public policy
is required to unlock their full potential (Section 3 provides
further details on key levers and actions that can do so).

Additionally, these are examples of potential business models,

rather than being an exhaustive analysis of all available
opportunities. In other words, the overall potential value
created by NbS and land-sparing interventions within the
infrastructure sector could be significantly higher, particularly
given the likelihood of nascent technologies and new players
emerging as markets develop. As a result, the analysis
presented in this section should not be considered as a
“substitution” analysis for NbS and land-sparing interventions
vis-à-vis the use of all grey infrastructure in cities, but a
relatively small investment opportunity that could have a
transformative impact on cities’ relationship with nature.

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature 18

 Sustainable transport infrastructure

ROI in Between 2015 and 2030, it is estimated there citizens’ wellbeing during the planning stage. A
sustainable will be a $730 billion annual infrastructure particularly useful framework is the “mitigation
infrastructure for investment gap in the transport sector.64 $293 hierarchy”, which sequentially recommends
the private sector billion of this gap can be addressed by private projects to avoid, minimize, rehabilitate, offset
could be 2.5 to and institutional investors alone by ramping up and compensate for impacts on biodiversity in all
sustainable transport infrastructure,65 which infrastructure activities, to successfully balance
3.5 times the
includes building more public transport, improving conservation needs with development priorities.66
size of the initial
facilities for biking and walking and ensuring Returns on investment (ROI) in sustainable
investment. road, rail and port networks are constructed in a infrastructure for the private sector – even with
nature-compatible manner. This is a critical land- additional compliance and procurement costs –
sparing opportunity that can both reduce the could be 2.5 to 3.5 times greater than the initial
impact of connecting infrastructure and increase investment.67 The COVID-19 pandemic has paved
density in cities. Transport infrastructure currently the way for urban reorganization and there is now a
uses large amounts of land, alters ecosystems window of opportunity to make permanent changes
during construction and requires vast quantities of to the urban transport landscape, accounting for
construction materials, including steel and concrete social distancing and open public spaces. Common
– both of which negatively impact biodiversity reorganization during the pandemic has included
through their production and supply chains. the widening of sidewalks and the introduction of
pedestrian-friendly roads and pop-up cycling lanes.
A mindset shift is required for transport These have proven to be powerful tools, pushing
infrastructure to utilize less land and better back against the dominance of cars and roads,68
integrate nature. Rather than purely optimizing for and sparking the potential for lasting behaviour
the built environment to improve journey times and changes by fostering more sustainable modes
distances, decision-makers must integrate positive of transport and integrating people- and nature-
biodiversity and climate outcomes and consider friendly spaces.

CASE STUDY 4 Integrating nature with roads in Singapore

Singapore’s land scarcity and high population density

necessitates innovative land-sharing solutions to incorporate
nature in infrastructure and service the city’s needs.
Reducing the environmental impact of roads has proven particularly
challenging, as they fragment habitats and require engineered
materials (e.g. concrete) to provide safe passage for vehicles.
Although the land used for roads can be minimized, important road
networks face challenges in integrating nature within their design.

In response, Singapore has developed a system of roads called “Nature

Ways” that feature native trees and shrubs. Singapore’s National Parks
Board has drawn key lessons from native tropical forests to successfully
incorporate a diverse range of species alongside verges. By emulating the
multiple layers of the forest ecosystem in multi-tiered tree planting systems,
the Nature Ways mimic the structure of the rainforest. They create
vibrant, natural niches for small mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians and
insects, providing ecological connectivity between green spaces across
the city. A denser tree canopy helps to reduce ambient temperatures
and curtail the urban heat island effect, as well as absorbing carbon
and air pollution, retaining soil moisture and intercepting heavy rainfall,
thereby lowering flood risk. The Nature Ways also improve the travel
experience across the island for commuters, pedestrians and cyclists.

Despite being one of the world’s most densely populated cities,

thanks to its Nature Ways, Singapore is now the second-ranked city
on Treepedia’s global Green View Index – a tool developed by MIT’s
Senseable City Lab that measures tree canopy cover in cities.69

Image below: The Lornie Nature Corridor in Singapore,

featuring the “Nature Ways” road design.

Picture credit: National Parks Board, Singapore

Authored by the National Parks Board, Singapore

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature 19

 Nature-based systems for water supply

The costs of NbS for water supply could save $140 billion urban and peri-urban watersheds remains a
building nature- annually and provide clean and safe drinking key solution. The opportunity lies not only in
based solutions for water for 1.4 billion people by 2030. The restoring degraded landscapes and improving
water supply can associated annual investment opportunity over water security, but also in conserving the natural
be as low as $2 per 2021-30 is $45 billion – although costs can be habitats of thousands of species, including several
as low as $2 or less per person, per year based at risk of extinction. Additionally, significant
person, per year.
on a variety of regional factors.70 Water access carbon benefits could be felt by avoiding up
and security are some of today’s main urban to 603 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide
development priorities. Water depletion across equivalent (MTCO2e) emissions per year from
urban watersheds is high around the world deforestation and sequestering up to 2,168
due to pressures from agriculture, mining and MTCO2e per year in preserved soils and forests.
urbanization – in some regions, up to 60% of Cities could even see positive returns on their
the area encompassed by source watersheds total project investment from savings generated
is at risk.71 Reforestation and protection of through reduced annual water treatment costs.

CASE STUDY 5 Upper Tana-Nairobi Water Fund - The business case for natural water supply72

Since the 1970s, Kenyan forests on steep hillsides

and in wetlands have been converted for agriculture,
removing natural areas for storing run-off and
accelerating the sedimentation of rivers. The Tana River
watershed, which supplies 95% of the water for Nairobi’s
four million residents and another five million people living
in the river’s catchment, has been subject to this type
of land-use change. Due to changes in the hydrological
cycle brought about by conversion, 60% of Nairobi’s
residents now lack access to a reliable water supply.

In response, the Upper Tana-Nairobi Water Fund was

created in 2015 to provide a secure source of water and
conserve the watershed. A public-private steering committee
was established, bringing together diverse stakeholders,
including major utility companies, the Water Resources
Management Authority and the Tana and Athi Rivers
Development Authority, as well as prominent corporations.
Contributors to the Fund include downstream users and
upstream stewards, such as agricultural landholders and
development organizations. Finances are used to promote
sustainable land management practices, including strategic
tree planting and land terracing to filter and regulate water
supply to the river’s watershed. Funds are also used to
distribute water-saving technologies for agricultural use,
boosting productivity and generating cost savings.

The Fund’s activities now provide “several million more” litres

of water to Nairobi each day. Furthermore, project monitoring
revealed a 15% decrease in sedimentation, with Nairobi’s
water supply achieving World Health Organization turbidity
standards for the first time in 2016. It has been estimated
that an investment of $10 million in the Water Fund will
return $21.5 million in economic benefits over 30 years.

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature 20

 1 Preserving existing natural habitats

Protecting cities’ remaining intact natural habitat required for action.122 Actions to protect existing
involves actions both within urban areas and the habitats in cities - for instance, designating certain
connected ecosystems that feed into a city’s areas as “protected” land (Case study 8), as well as
ecological cycles. This is an essential step in the providing proper governance and local stewardship
(re)integration of nature as, in some circumstances, - are critical to increase resilience to climate shocks
intact habitats safeguard more biodiversity and and support key ecosystem services such as water
generate greater ecosystem services than restored regulation and supply.
habitats, at lower costs and without the time delay

CASE STUDY 8 Conserving remaining natural habitats in Curridabat - Costa Rica’s “Sweet City”123

60% of Costa Rica’s population lives in the Greater

Metropolitan Area (GAM), which constitutes just
4% of the national territory. Curridabat, one of the
GAM’s main urban centres, stands out for its multidimensional
government plan - developed in 2015 under the name
“Ciudad Dulce” (Sweet City) - and for being one of the first
cities to create a series of Urban Natural Parks (PANU), a new
protected area category issued in February 2021. Despite
having significant environment protection afforded for nine
other protected area categories, urban forests have not
historically been protected by the country’s National System
of Conservation Areas (SINAC).

Driven by Curridabat’s municipality, Ciudad Dulce’s

development model is based on five dimensions: biodiversity,
habitat, infrastructure, coexistence and productivity. Curridabat
treats green spaces as places within its urban infrastructure
where all forms of life can coexist and productivity is constantly
ensured. Pollinators, diverse plant species and people thrive
in urban gardens and parks, producing fruits and vegetables,
and promoting soil regeneration, leisure, tourism and cleaner
air. New green areas are also being created to meet the
needs of vulnerable plant and animal species through improved
connectivity and habitat restoration.

City officials claim that the greatest achievements of Ciudad

Dulce can be found in neighbourhood wellbeing. Air quality
and the diversity of species and green spaces aren’t the only
improved aspects; peoples’ spirits have also lifted thanks to
increased participation, intergenerational and multistakeholder
collaboration, and community activities. This biophilic
approach has earned the city several awards, including
“Best City Plan” from the Congress of New Urbanism (CNU),
the “Wellbeing Cities Award” from New Cities, and the
“Guangzhou International Award for Urban Innovation”.

BiodiverCities by 2030: Transforming Cities’ Relationship with Nature 31