Dear Colleagues,

Recently, enlightened businesses have been making commitments to become “nature positive”, “biodiversity positive”, or even “net positive”. However, these terms are used loosely, such as “value add nature” or “restore biodiversity to 2020 levels”. Progressive green building proponents have called for “regenerating” the environment for decades, but this usually meant only “more good and less bad” compared to contemporary buildings, practices or site conditions. In both sectors, definitions and standards are rubbery and often lack serious consideration of the “embodied nature” that accumulates across supply chains and lifecycles. Without whole-system gains in nature, its accelerating losses cannot be reversed.

Net-positive design and development was originally defined as that which increases (a) the “ecological base”, or natural life-support systems, and (b) the “public estate” or social life-support systems. Hence, a net-positive building or business would increase nature beyond pre-urban conditions, and improve environmental and social justice in the wider area. Criteria are assessed against earth-based, fixed baselines and benchmarks, instead of current norms or conditions (see netpositivedesign.org). With increasing usage, however, the “net-positive” concept is being weakened to mean, at most, “regenerating leftover spaces”, “making nature more resilient”, or “protecting existing reserves”. A critical examination of strategies and standards for increasing nature is therefore necessary.

Any proposed topics relevant to “nature-positive” or “net-positive” projects or products are welcome. The following are suggestions:

• Concepts and definitions: How have, or could, differing definitions of nature positive, net positive, biodiversity positive, and similar terms using “positive”, shape specific frameworks and standards that would lead to better ecological performance?
• Incentives and standards: How could certification schemes or other mechanisms be altered to incentivize socio-ecologically positive outcomes rather than, for instance, merely adding biophilic amenities or offsetting “more” adverse impacts?
• Products and materials: Are there examples of products or production systems that go beyond closed-loop recycling? For example, can algae-based fabrics or mycelium-based materials (which need little land, energy, water or structures) be net positive?
• Exemplars and assessment: Are there already buildings, infrastructures or products that meet the formal criteria for (net) nature-positive development? What issues arise in assessing the strengths and weaknesses of these projects?
• Environmental-social justice: Most assessment tools only consider the wellbeing of project stakeholders and not social impacts on the region, such as segregation by class or wealth. Are there developments that achieve measurable gains in regional equity?
• Dissemination strategies: What changes to professional education or design processes, methods, or tools (beyond rating, assessment or award schemes) could accelerate the awareness and adoption of net-positive sustainability goals and outcomes?
• Whole-system accounting: There are arguably products already in the market that offset their own ecological footprint and replace harmful products. Yet, if displaced products end up as waste, a net public gain is unlikely. Can this “designed waste” be prevented?
• Regulatory incentives: Since the majority of businesses have not responded to the nature-positive challenge, regulations or other policy levers are still necessary. What frameworks of governance or administration might be effective in bringing real change?

Prof. Dr. Janis Birkeland
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Urban Science is an international peer-reviewed open access quarterly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

• Green building rating tools
• Sustainable design tools
• Sustainable development strategies
• Net-positive design
• Nature-positive development
• Urban design
• Social inclusion
• Building assessment
• Design review processes
• Regenerative design