3. Methodology

In this chapter, we outline the approach taken for the study of the nature-based solutions (NBS) projects, including data collection and analysis. In the S-UMMATION project we followed eight pilot projects funded by the NCM (these are described in detail in Chapter 4).

With the eight Nordic NBS projects in different Nordic countries forming the core of this study, we adopted a case study methodology to investigate the practical aspects of the NBS projects and their implementation. In a case study approach, researchers collect detailed information using a variety of methods over a sustained period of time. We followed the eight projects from March 2022 to mid-November 2023.

The main contact and informant for each case study has primarily been the project leader of the pilot project. The project leaders had the opportunity to bring other partners along in workshops or interviews. This study is therefore limited to mainly the perspective of the project leader and implementor(s). The relevant persons are mentioned in the acknowledgement section of this report.

It is important to note that S-UMMATION is not about evaluating the pilot projects per se, but rather to capture experience-based knowledge relevant for planning, implementing, and running NBS projects while they are happening. This means that any knowledge and experience coming from the pilots, regardless of whether it was according to plan or not, has been considered relevant and valuable. It also means that choosing open-ended questions and letting the pilots tell their stories has been an important part of the approach, rather than conducting a formal assessment. We designed our study to allow for additional themes and non-predefined aspects to emerge.

The study of the cases has involved capturing the experiences of the eight NBS projects and exploring enabling and constraining factors for practical and policy application. Beyond context-specific and place-sensitive findings, the study aimed to arrive at general recommendations applicable to NBS projects in the Nordic region. Based on the key factors in the literature for successful implementation, upscaling and mainstreaming the use of NBS and considering ICUN’s global standard for NBS (IUCN, 2020), we studied the eight NBS projects with a particular focus on the topics listed below.  

Topics addressed in our study:

The project leaders/​representatives were specifically asked what they consider key learning points or key reflections from the work several times throughout the project (both in individual interviews and workshops).

Early in the study process of following the pilots, we asked to which extent the NBS pilots have used tools and guidelines in their planning, such as the IUCN Global Standard for Nature-based Solutions (IUCN, 2020). When we found that the framework was not actively used by the pilot projects themselves, we did not instigate any sessions where we actively worked with this but rather used it as a backdrop in our own study, as our role was more to follow rather than to guide the projects. Within the scope of this study, we were unable to follow up on facilitating an assessment following the IUCN framework, because the pilot projects are not yet completed.

Studying the projects as they unfolded, our research approach combined retrospective and real-time analysis elements. Through periodic interviews with project leaders, we aimed to capture reflections on recent and past events, decisions, and future plans. This method aligns with accompanying or parallel research, encompassing past experiences, present conditions and developments, adaptations, and future expectations. The approach has been proven beneficial for understanding complex and dynamic projects, where comprehending the process is as vital as assessing the outcomes (e.g. Christensen et al., 2016).

As researchers we maintained a non-interventionist stance, focusing on observing and documenting rather than actively participating in the pilot project processes and without direct interference. While recognizing the value of engaging with the project’s wider stakeholders, we refrained from external intervention, as most of the pilot projects were in their early phases during the study period. The work has still also been rooted in participatory methodologies and collaboration between practitioners and academic researchers, inspired by e.g. Bergold and Thomas (2012). While we did not directly intervene in the pilot projects, we engaged in interactions with project leaders/contacts, providing insights and observations along the way, such as in our workshop discussions and as well as in meetings within the NCM’s program on NBS, which includes all projects, including S-UMMATION.

Data collection in this study was primarily conducted through online methods, including interviews, a questionnaire, and workshops, complemented by attending project status meetings and analysing written materials from the pilot projects and public sources. The study did not include field visits to the project’s locations.

Related to the physical workshop in Denmark, June 2023 one of the eight pilot project sites was visited, but this has not been possible to do for the rest of the pilot sites in the various Nordic countries.

While it would also be relevant to involve the wider set of actors in each case, such as the stakeholders, the projects themselves carried out this contact, so it was not within the scope of the study. More details on the methodology can be found in Appendix 2.

It has been important to strike a balance between minimizing disturbance to the pilot project leaders and ensuring sufficient insights are captured. The following data collection activities were conducted (see Figure 4):

Figure 4 Timeline for key interactions with the pilot projects.

All interviews took place online using Microsoft Teams and were audio-recorded with the interviewees’ consent. Two persons from the S-UMMATION team were present. The first set of interviews lasted for about 1.5 hour, while the second set of interviews lasted about 1 hour. The workshops lasted 2 hours. Not all pilots were represented at the second and third workshop, as it was hard to find a time suitable for all. The workshop material was shared with all the pilots. In addition to the activities arranged by this study, we also participated in status meetings within the NCM NBS program. Here each of the pilot projects (as well as the S-UMMATION project) gave 5–10-minute progress reports.

Recognising that the NBS projects are different, our analysis seeks to uncover both general trends and specific, context-sensitive findings. A qualitative data analysis software, NVivo, was used to analyse interview transcripts and documents to identify key themes and aspects. We coded and examined the data to find commonalities and unique insights across the pilot projects. The insights presented here are derived from observations across all the pilot projects. In formulating the insights, we based our findings on verified experiences or observations from at least one pilot project, usually several. We acknowledge that there is no one-size-fits-all and not all experiences from these projects are universally applicable or equally relevant for all. The diversity of the pilot projects, in terms of NBS types, societal challenges, and environmental contexts, adds to the robustness of the derived insights.

No identifiable project-specific information is published without prior consent and verification from the informant. To maintain the integrity of the information, the pilot projects had the opportunity to review their individual descriptions and the broader findings. However, the responsibility for the accuracy of interpretations and derived insights lies with the authors of this report, and any misinterpretations are our responsibility.