ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025
Indigenous critiques and recommendations for reclaiming nature-based solutions.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- From Community Benefits to Vulnerabilities: Reverse-Logic Analysis of Nature-Based Solution Treescapes Across Europe.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Nature-based solutions for urban sustainability.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Indigenous peoples have long histories and diverse contemporary practices of caring for and enhancing biodiversity at different scales, in rural and urban contexts. As has been researched and documented by the Convention on Biological Diversity and others, Indigenous peoples globally only constitute 5% of the world's population and control and care for just 20% of the Earth's surface yet protect nearly 80% of the world's remaining biodiversity. Indigenous peoples have forms of biodiversity conservation that could be characterized as "nature-based solutions" (NbS), or would they be culture-based solutions? Given the extraordinary diversity of Indigenous peoples globally, there will never be a "one size fits all" solution. Yet there are general principles that have been articulated in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that articulate global concepts of Indigenous Knowledge Systems (IKS) and Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK). IKS, TEK, and Native ways of knowing and caring for biodiversity can find both resonance and conflict with what is currently being called NbS. This article articulates Indigenous concerns and critiques of the conceptual and ontological framework of NbS, demonstrating that Indigenous Peoples' knowledge systems include a similar framework but extend it to include a distinctly
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.