3 The Nexus Approach
for Managing Resources
in Multifunctional Land-Use
Systems and Resilient Cities
Aiming at concrete cases of nexus implementation, while considering the conceptual outlines
explored in Hülsmann and Ardakanian (2018a),
in this volume we specifically look at examples
for multifunctional land -use systems and
resources management in resilient cities. This
focus should allow demonstrating the close link
between the Nexus Approach to the sustainable
management of environmental resources and the
related SDGs, evident in particular along the
urban–peri-urban–rural landscape continuum
(see Fig. 2).
With multifunctional land-use systems, we
refer mainly to resources management in rural
areas and respective ecosystem services,
acknowledging that multifunctionality can also
be found and achieved in urban and particularly
in peri-urban systems. In fact, peri-urban areas
provide one of the best examples of multifunctional land-use systems, combining various uses
and sectors such as housing, agriculture, forestry
(Rodenburg and Nijkamp 2004). While putting
emphasis on functions and services related to the
mentioned SDGs (mainly provisioning services
for food, feed, energy, water), the full range of
ecosystem services, including also regulatory and
maintenance as well as cultural services (classification of ecosystem services according to
CICES (nd)) should be considered when discussing multifunctional land use systems (Zhang
and Schwärzel 2017). It is increasingly recognized that a nexus approach neglecting ecosystem services would be incomplete and
misleading (Hülsmann et al. 2019). Adopting a
nexus approach will lead to sustainable resource
use and preserving the natural (rural) environment (Fig. 2).
When dealing with resources management in
resilient cities, more emphasis should be placed
on the provision, recovery and reuse of resources
and the respective infrastructures. Cities are the
main consumers of many primary resources, to a
large extent stemming from rural areas. However,
at the same time they are primary producers of
many secondary resources, which are often considered as ‘waste’ and dissipated into the environment as urban dwellers and local decision
makers are unable to recognize the value in it
and/or lack the capacity to treat them appropriately (Agudelo-Vera et al. 2012). With the
increasing globalization, urban pressures and
limited resources availability, cities need to consider sustainable recovery and reuse options of
the resources generated from human and industrial activities. For any city to become resilient, it
needs to take care of its environmental resources
in the urban and peri-urban landscapes in an
efficient manner. Cities often neglect their periurban landscapes, which are multifunctional in
nature and supply multiple resources to the city.
The adoption of a nexus approach in cities will
increase their resilience and support sustainable
development by enhancing opportunities for
human well-being, livelihoods, etc. (Fig. 2).
In general, it seems clear that a focus on
resources and the respective SDGs is a strong
integrator along the rural–urban conundrum.
Discussing ways how the application of a
Nexus Approach may help to achieve these
SDGs implies focusing on monitoring and
implementation strategies as outlined above.
Specific nexus strategies have to be defined for
resource problems such as inefficiency in
wastewater treatment, air pollution, unstructured
urban infrastructure, etc. in the urban centers to
increase resilience. In rural and peri-urban areas,
multifunctional land use systems are good
examples for implementing integrated resources
management (Zhang and Schwärzel 2017).
Local planners and decision makers working
towards integrated resources management in
cities and multifunctional land use systems will
ultimately contribute to environmental prosperity and economic growth. Moreover, developing
governance frameworks for integrated resources
management in cities and multifunctional land
use systems can create incentives for resource
recovery and efficiency. This requires considering the economic and social dimensions for the
4
S. Hülsmann and M. Jampani
for Managing Resources
in Multifunctional Land-Use
Systems and Resilient Cities
Aiming at concrete cases of nexus implementation, while considering the conceptual outlines
explored in Hülsmann and Ardakanian (2018a),
in this volume we specifically look at examples
for multifunctional land -use systems and
resources management in resilient cities. This
focus should allow demonstrating the close link
between the Nexus Approach to the sustainable
management of environmental resources and the
related SDGs, evident in particular along the
urban–peri-urban–rural landscape continuum
(see Fig. 2).
With multifunctional land-use systems, we
refer mainly to resources management in rural
areas and respective ecosystem services,
acknowledging that multifunctionality can also
be found and achieved in urban and particularly
in peri-urban systems. In fact, peri-urban areas
provide one of the best examples of multifunctional land-use systems, combining various uses
and sectors such as housing, agriculture, forestry
(Rodenburg and Nijkamp 2004). While putting
emphasis on functions and services related to the
mentioned SDGs (mainly provisioning services
for food, feed, energy, water), the full range of
ecosystem services, including also regulatory and
maintenance as well as cultural services (classification of ecosystem services according to
CICES (nd)) should be considered when discussing multifunctional land use systems (Zhang
and Schwärzel 2017). It is increasingly recognized that a nexus approach neglecting ecosystem services would be incomplete and
misleading (Hülsmann et al. 2019). Adopting a
nexus approach will lead to sustainable resource
use and preserving the natural (rural) environment (Fig. 2).
When dealing with resources management in
resilient cities, more emphasis should be placed
on the provision, recovery and reuse of resources
and the respective infrastructures. Cities are the
main consumers of many primary resources, to a
large extent stemming from rural areas. However,
at the same time they are primary producers of
many secondary resources, which are often considered as ‘waste’ and dissipated into the environment as urban dwellers and local decision
makers are unable to recognize the value in it
and/or lack the capacity to treat them appropriately (Agudelo-Vera et al. 2012). With the
increasing globalization, urban pressures and
limited resources availability, cities need to consider sustainable recovery and reuse options of
the resources generated from human and industrial activities. For any city to become resilient, it
needs to take care of its environmental resources
in the urban and peri-urban landscapes in an
efficient manner. Cities often neglect their periurban landscapes, which are multifunctional in
nature and supply multiple resources to the city.
The adoption of a nexus approach in cities will
increase their resilience and support sustainable
development by enhancing opportunities for
human well-being, livelihoods, etc. (Fig. 2).
In general, it seems clear that a focus on
resources and the respective SDGs is a strong
integrator along the rural–urban conundrum.
Discussing ways how the application of a
Nexus Approach may help to achieve these
SDGs implies focusing on monitoring and
implementation strategies as outlined above.
Specific nexus strategies have to be defined for
resource problems such as inefficiency in
wastewater treatment, air pollution, unstructured
urban infrastructure, etc. in the urban centers to
increase resilience. In rural and peri-urban areas,
multifunctional land use systems are good
examples for implementing integrated resources
management (Zhang and Schwärzel 2017).
Local planners and decision makers working
towards integrated resources management in
cities and multifunctional land use systems will
ultimately contribute to environmental prosperity and economic growth. Moreover, developing
governance frameworks for integrated resources
management in cities and multifunctional land
use systems can create incentives for resource
recovery and efficiency. This requires considering the economic and social dimensions for the
4
S. Hülsmann and M. Jampani