Challenges and Adaptive Solutions for the Adoption and Scaling of Nature‑based Solutions in three Central and Eastern European regions: A Comparative Regional Analysiс

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorPopov, Vladislav
dc.contributor.authorGrozdanova, Dafinka
dc.contributor.authorBileva, Tatyana
dc.contributor.authorValcheva, Ekaterina
dc.contributor.authorIvanova, Dafinka
dc.contributor.authorPetrova, Slaveya
dc.contributor.authorTarau, Gabriela
dc.contributor.authorNenad, Mirjana
dc.date.accessioned2026-10-16T09:15:13Z
dc.date.available2026-10-16T09:15:13Z
dc.date.issued2026-10-12
dc.description.abstractNature‑based solutions (NbS) are increasingly promoted as a multi‑benefit pathway for climate adaptation, disaster risk reduction, biodiversity recovery, and sustainable regional development. Yet, mainstreaming NbS into sub‑national planning and investment pipelines remains uneven across Europe. This paper addresses the research question: What are the challenges and suitable adaptive solutions for the adoption of NbS in the Plovdiv, Centru, and Podravje regions, situated in Bulgaria, Romania, and Slovenia, respectively? Drawing on several EU research project ARCADIA documents, e.g., the regions’ self‑assessment, the comparative analysis of the fellow regions, and review materials, the study team conducted a structured comparative policy and governance analysis using the ARCADIA common assessment pillars (governance, climate risk assessment, and adaptation planning). Results show that (i) Plovdiv region (Bulgaria) combines strong EU policy alignment with fragmented regional execution and NGO‑dependent coordination; (ii) Centru region (Romania) exhibits a comprehensive multi‑tier governance and strategic planning orientation but is slowed by inter‑agency complexity and data and monitoring gaps; and (iii) Podravje region (Slovenia) presents a coherent, performance‑driven model with stronger NbS integration and monitoring, but faces constraints related to municipal‑level funding boundaries, social acceptance, and local decision‑maker knowledge. Across all regions, the most limiting factors include weak vertical coordination, inconsistent monitoring frameworks, and insufficiently institutionalized stakeholder platforms. The study proposes a portfolio of adaptive NbS governance and policy solutions and instruments such as clarifying mandates and establishing regional coordination hubs; adopting KPI‑based and learning‑oriented monitoring; developing co‑innovation labs and twinning pathways for capacity building; and introducing results‑based financing and blended funding structures. The paper concludes with region‑specific and cross‑regional recommendations to accelerate NbS mainstreaming while respecting diverse administrative architectures.
dc.identifier.issn1313-9940
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.uni-plovdiv.bg/handle/store/1125
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherPlovdiv University Press "Paisii Hilendarski"
dc.subjectNature‑based solutions
dc.subjectclimate adaptation
dc.subjectgovernance
dc.subjectpolicy coherence
dc.subjectmonitoring and evaluation
dc.subjectregional development
dc.subjectARCADIA
dc.titleChallenges and Adaptive Solutions for the Adoption and Scaling of Nature‑based Solutions in three Central and Eastern European regions: A Comparative Regional Analysiс
dc.typeArticle
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
eb20262062.pdf
Size:
334.09 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
73 B
Format:
Item-specific license agreed to upon submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Ecologia Balkanica