Urban vegetation is important in providing ecosystem services to people. Different urban vegetation types provide contrasting suites of ecosystem services and disservices. Understanding public perceptions of the ecosystem services and disservices can therefore play an important role in shaping the planning and management of urban areas. We conducted an online survey (n = 1000) to understand how residents in the tropical city of Singapore perceived urban vegetation and the associated ecosystem services and disservices. The questionnaire was designed to explore whether different urban vegetation types (grass, shrubs, trees, trees over shrubs, and secondary forest) were perceived as equal in providing benefits. Respondents considered ecosystem services provided by urban vegetation to be more important than disservices. Among ecosystem services, regulating services were most highly rated, with more than 80% of the respondents appreciating urban vegetation for providing shade and improving air quality. Respondents recognized that different vegetation types provided different ecosystem services. For example, secondary forest was most commonly associated with education and wildlife, while trees were strongly associated with cooling and air quality. We conclude that in developing plans and designs for urban vegetation and ecosystem services, it is important to understand the perceptions, priorities, and concerns of residents.

The climate mitigation potential of urban nature-based solutions (NBSs) is often perceived as insignificant and thus overlooked, as cities primarily pursue NBSs for local ecosystem services. Given the rising interest and capacities in cities for such projects, the potential of urban forests for climate mitigation needs to be better understood. We modelled the global potential and limits of urban reforestation worldwide, and find that 10.9 ± 2.8 Mha of land (17.6% of all city areas) are suitable for reforestation, which would offset 82.4 ± 25.7 MtCO₂e yr⁻¹ of carbon emissions. Among the cities analysed, 1189 are potentially able to offset >25% of their city carbon emissions through reforestation. Urban natural climate solutions should find a place on global and local agendas.

Nature-based solutions (NbS) are increasingly recognized as viable tools for sustainable urban water management. This article explores the implementation of NbS in two distinct cities, Singapore and Lisbon, to demonstrate that NbS can work in very different contexts and spark new thoughts on the urban–nature relationship and to identify commonalities that drive and enable the implementation of NbS in different context. Literature review-based research was conducted to examine the types of NbS implemented, the common drivers, the governance model, and the plural functionalities of the solutions. The research shows that, despite the differences, the two cities shared common drivers (including water supply, flood control, and resident demand for green space) and goals, such as improving water quality and overall quality of life, through the deployment of NbS. With rapid urban expansion, water use increase, and the impacts of climate change, NbS can be effective tools to deliver integrated benefits and improve the liveability of cities.

Urban residents can benefit from spending time in outdoor spaces and engaging with nature-related activities. Such engagement can improve health and well-being, support community cohesion, and improve environmentally-friendly behaviours. However, engagement with nature may not be equal amongst different members of society. We investigated individual variation in engagement with nature in Singapore, a high-density city in tropical Southeast Asia. Through a survey of 1000 residents, we analysed relationships between demographic factors such as age, income, and sex, and the frequency of visitation to different ecosystem types, and the frequency of engagement with different nature-related activities. Parks and neighbourhood open spaces were among the most commonly-visited outdoor spaces, with nature reserves and other natural areas being visited less frequently. Common activities included sitting outdoors, art and photography, and running, while hiking and nature recreation were less frequent. In contrast with previous studies, we found relatively small differences among different groups of the population in their preferred types of outdoor activities. Older people, those with lower incomes, and without degrees were less likely to visit most types of outdoor space and engage with most types of nature-related activities. In the case of nature reserves, the distance from the visitor’s home had a significantly negative influence on the frequency of visitation. These findings demonstrate that the benefits of engagement with nature are not equally enjoyed by all demographic groups, and that some groups lack engagement across the board. Strategies to increase nature engagement in tropical cities could include increasing the local availability and accessibility of different types of outdoor space, and education and public outreach programmes to encourage participation.