Urban ecosystems are increasingly shaped by multiple environmental stressors, which may threaten both biodiversity and human well-being. We summarised the current knowledge on the ecological and social consequences of seven major urban pressures: air pollution, freshwater degradation, biological invasions, noise pollution, habitat fragmentation, soil pollution and climate crisis. Air and soil pollution, largely driven by traffic and industrial activities, compromises vegetation functions, reduces ecosystem services, and affects human health. Urban freshwater systems face contamination from stormwater runoff, wastewater, and microplastics, leading to biodiversity loss, altered ecosystem processes, and reduced water availability. Biological invasions, facilitated by human activities and habitat disturbances, reshape ecological communities, outcompete native species, and impose socio-economic costs, while management requires integrated monitoring and citizen engagement. Noise pollution disrupts animal communication, alters species distributions, and poses significant risks to human physical and mental health. Simultaneously, habitat fragmentation and loss reduce ecological connectivity, impair pollination and dispersal processes, and heighten extinction risks for both plants and animals. Collectively, these stressors interact synergistically, amplifying ecological degradation and exacerbating health and social inequalities in urban populations. The cumulative impacts highlight the need for systemic and adaptive approaches to urban planning that integrate biodiversity conservation, public health, and social equity. Nature-based solutions, ecological restoration, technological innovation, and participatory governance emerge as promising strategies to enhance urban resilience. Furthermore, fostering citizen science initiatives can strengthen monitoring capacity and create community ownership of sustainable urban environments. Addressing the combined pressures of urban environmental stressors is thus pivotal for building cities that are ecologically robust, socially inclusive, and capable of coping with the challenges of the climate crisis and global urbanization.

In this study, conventional and organic olive tree nurseries were compared through a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) analysis to identify processes that have a greater environmental impact and which of the two systems leads to lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Carbon sequestration in the woody biomass of the plants grown with both management systems was also considered. The research was carried out on six olive tree nurseries, four conventional and two managed also with an organic system, located in the nursery district of Pescia (Tuscany, Italy). The functional unit considered was two-year-old pot-grown plants (pot 15 cm Ø) and the results were expressed in terms of kg of CO₂ equivalent (CO₂eq). In all the nurseries analyzed, LCA showed that pots were the highest CO₂eq emission source (45–63%), followed by potting mix (22.6–32.1%). This was due to the use of plastic in pots and peat for the growing media. Organic management was found to have a definite positive influence on the decrease of GHG, reducing the emissions up to 13% compared with conventional nurseries. Considering carbon stocked in the woody tissues of seedlings, the reduction of emissions attained 15.7% though a slightly lower (−6.7%) amount of CO₂ incorporated into biomass was detected in the olive plants grown in organic nurseries. In light of our results, conversion of the nursery industry from conventional to organic management has the potential to reduce its carbon footprint.