Thinking Green: A Place Lab Approach to Citizen Engagement and Indicators for Nature-Based Solutions in a Case Study from Katowice

Abstract

Urban areas are at the forefront in addressing global challenges such as climate change and biodiversity loss. Among the key responses are nature-based solutions, which are increasingly being integrated into policy frameworks but which require strong community engagement for their effective implementation. This paper presents the findings of surveys conducted within the Place Lab in Katowice, Poland, an initiative developed as part of an international project and used as a participatory tool for co-creating and implementing green infrastructure. The project applies both place-based and people-centred approaches to support European cities in their transition towards regenerative urbanism. Place Lab activities encourage collaboration between local authorities and residents, enhancing awareness and fostering participation in environmental initiatives. The survey data collected during the project allowed for the evaluation of changes in public attitudes and levels of engagement and for the identification of broader societal phenomena that may influence the implementation of nature-based solutions. The findings revealed, for instance, that more women were interested in supporting the project, that residents tended to be sceptical of governmental actions on climate change, and that views were divided on the trade-off between urban infrastructure such as parking and roads and the presence of green areas. Furthermore, questions of responsibility, awareness, and long-term commitment were frequently raised. Building on the survey results and the existing literature, the study proposes a set of indicators to assess the contribution of citizen participation to the adoption of nature-based solutions. While the effectiveness of nature-based solutions in mitigating climate change impacts can be assessed relatively directly, evaluating civic engagement is more complex. Nevertheless, when conducted transparently and interpreted by experts, indicator-based assessment can offer valuable insights. This study introduces a novel perspective by considering not only drivers of engagement but also the obstacles. The proposed indicators provide a foundation for evaluating community readiness and commitment to nature-based approaches and may be adapted for application in other urban settings and in future research on climate resilience strategies.

1. Introduction

Although global population projections vary depending on fertility assumptions, most suggest that the world population will reach between 9 and 10 billion by 2050 [1,2,3,4], a level that may be unsustainable for life on the planet [5,6]. As of 2023, approximately 4.4 billion people, about 56 per cent of the global population, reside in cities [7]. By 2050, urban areas are projected to accommodate nearly 70 per cent of humanity, reaching around 6.5 billion people, the same as the total world population in 2005 [8]. Owing to urban densification, city centres in developing countries have absorbed the bulk of this growth [9]. Urban land cover expanded from 0.21 per cent of the world’s land surface in 1975 to 0.46 per cent by 2015 [10], and by 2025, half of all cities are expected to be predominantly urban in terms of land use [11,12]. Consequently, the future of urban life will inevitably depend on sustainable development [13]. Urbanisation proceeds unevenly across countries and cities, influenced by factors such as climate [14,15,16]. Nevertheless, all cities now face the common challenge of climate change and must prepare infrastructure and populations for adverse events and their associated risks. Climate change significantly impacts daily life, demanding technological and smart solutions that are also based on green and blue infrastructure.

In Europe, urban and flash floods occur systematically, with climate change intensifying the hydrological cycle and leading to more frequent extreme events [17]. For example, between 1998 and 2004, more than 100 flood events resulted in hundreds of fatalities and economic losses totalling EUR 25 billion [18]. Similarly, Gaume et al. [19] recorded 578 flood events across seven European regions between 1953 and 2005. More recently, Papagiannaki et al. [20] compiled the Database of Flood Fatalities in the Euro-Mediterranean Region (FFEM-DB), which documents 2875 flood-related deaths across 12 territories from 1980 to 2020. The European Academies’ Science Advisory Council (EASAC) analysed trends in natural disasters from 1980 to 2016 using Munich Re NatCatService data, one of the world’s largest disaster inventories with over 40,000 entries, and found a marked rise in hydrological events compared with other geophysical, meteorological, and climatic disasters [21,22]. Concurrent analyses of precipitation frequency and intensity reveal an increasing probability of heavy rainfall [23], and Kundzewicz et al. [24] demonstrated an upward trend in major flood occurrences, albeit with substantial annual and decadal variability. Together, these findings underscore the critical need to predict, mitigate, and reduce the impacts of climate change on urban water systems.

Urban greenery, as a nature-based solution, constitutes a central element of sustainable drainage systems (SuDS), which are also referred to as low-impact development (LID) or best management practices (BMPs) in other contexts. These systems function by attenuating surface runoff and improving both surface and subsurface water retention [25,26]. Modelling studies have demonstrated that the comprehensive implementation of green infrastructure can reduce downstream flood-prone areas by as much as 91 per cent and lower peak flow intensities by an average of 83 per cent in the case of minor flood events [27]. Geographic Information System (GIS) analyses further support the idea that even relatively small increases in green-infrastructure coverage can significantly diminish runoff peaks [28]. Medium- and large-scale interventions tend to offer the most substantial benefits, particularly when designed to function in synergy with conventional grey infrastructure [29,30]. Therefore, it is essential to adopt a green mindset in urban planning, integrating nature-based solutions not only as isolated interventions akin to urban acupuncture but also as interconnected systems that collectively reduce surface runoff and mitigate the impacts of extreme rainfall.

In Europe, the urban heat island (UHI) effect is widely observed, with average temperatures in certain urban areas exceeding those in the surrounding rural landscapes. This phenomenon arises from the concentration of buildings and impervious surfaces, which absorb solar radiation by day and re-emit heat by night. Most cities must contend with UHI intensification during extreme heatwave events [31]. Heatwaves are among the most damaging and deadly climate-change-related hazards, and climate-model projections indicate that their frequency and severity will increase in the future [31,32]. Therefore, assessing the magnitude and duration of the UHI, as well as its interaction with heatwaves, is essential to identify strategies for reducing urban temperatures and for creating local cool islands to mitigate heat stress in humans and animals [33,34,35].

Although numerous studies have examined the cooling potential of blue–green infrastructure across different climates and configurations [36,37,38,39], a systematic synthesis that integrates field measurements, satellite observations, historical data, and modelling is still needed. It is well established that green infrastructure can substantially reduce urban temperatures: green roofs have been shown to lower daytime temperatures by 0.75–1.5 °C [40] or by 0.3–0.7 °C [41], increasing tree canopy cover can decrease daytime temperatures by 0.8 °C [42] and by up to 1.8 °C at 56 per cent coverage [43], and grass cover of a similar extent can reduce temperatures by approximately 0.9 °C [43].

There is little doubt that climate chaos and insecurity across the globe are driving economic losses, displacements, and serious health challenges. The effects of climate change on physical and mental well-being are profound: extreme weather events not only inflict direct physical harm but also elevate stress, perceptions of threat, and a range of psychological disorders, especially in densely populated urban areas [44,45]. Although many technical and infrastructural measures have been implemented to mitigate climate impacts on cities, support for residents’ mental health remains inadequate, leaving vulnerable communities exposed to long-term psychosocial harm [46]. Nature-based solutions and urban greenery have, however, demonstrated clear benefits for health and well-being: they foster social cohesion, strengthen place attachment, and promote collective stewardship of the environment, all of which contribute to improved mental resilience [47,48,49,50,51]. By enhancing biodiversity, beautifying urban landscapes, and creating inviting spaces for recreation and relaxation, NbSs offer an ideal, integrated strategy for addressing the twin challenges of rapid urbanisation and climate change.

International conventions increasingly endorse participatory processes in urban and environmental governance. The Local Agenda 21 Action Plan [52], the European Landscape Convention [53], and the EU Aarhus Convention [54] all call for meaningful citizen involvement. Likewise, the United Nations New Urban Agenda [55] and Sustainable Development Goal 11 [56] emphasise inclusive urban planning. Citizen engagement (CE)—sometimes termed community engagement—can be conceptualised with Arnstein’s “ladder” of participation [57], which ranges from non-participation through consultation to full citizen power. However, definitions of participation vary widely [58]. Arnstein’s framework has been applied to environmental planning [59], green and blue–green infrastructure [60,61], nature-based solutions [62,63], and climate-adaptation policy [64]. Key dimensions of CE include who participates, to what extent, why engagement is needed, and how it is organised [65]. At the lower rungs of Arnstein’s ladder, participation takes the form of public hearings, surveys, or fora that solicit feedback [66,67]. Higher on the ladder lies collaborative decision-making, in which community members share power and responsibility for designing and managing green spaces [68,69,70,71]. Such deep engagement transfers knowledge, fosters motivation, and cultivates a strong sense of place, thereby boosting ownership and belonging [51,72]. Empirical evidence suggests that citizen engagement yields more tangible benefits at local scales where the impacts of expenditure and taxation are more immediately visible than at national levels [73]. As cities grow to house the majority of the global population, active participation in environmental initiatives not only affirms citizens’ rights but also accelerates regional economic and technological development.

The UPSURGE project supports cities in their regenerative transition by promoting the widespread adoption of nature-based solutions (NbSs). Although NbSs offer durable and effective means of both mitigating and adapting to climate change, the sheer range of options can make it difficult for municipalities to identify the most appropriate interventions. UPSURGE addresses this challenge by delivering tailored consultancy via its Urban Regenerative Lighthouse, which builds on methods and tools honed in the project’s demonstration cities. Within the UPSURGE framework, these tools and methodologies guide cities through all scales of regenerative action: from deploying a single targeted NbS to orchestrating comprehensive, city-wide networks that stimulate new business opportunities and deepen stakeholder and citizen involvement. Throughout, UPSURGE places a strong emphasis on innovation in urban regeneration, particularly through its Place Lab approach, which prioritises meaningful citizen engagement at every stage.

Place Labs within the UPSURGE project provide a framework and a working environment for cooperation among stakeholders to validate NbS interventions against selected project criteria in the demonstration cities. The Place Lab-based approach focused on the co-design and implementation of nature-based solutions across five European cities: Budapest, Belfast, Breda, Maribor, and Katowice. In each case, the co-design process, which also relies on thinking green, was led by the respective city partners. Establishing partnerships and agreements with stakeholders was essential for enabling city planners to overcome design-related barriers and to make informed decisions regarding their greening strategies.

The five UPSURGE criteria that were fulfilled within Place Labs can be briefly explained as follows:

• Eco-sensitisation, which refers to the process of raising awareness, promoting an understanding of ecological issues, and fostering environmentally responsible behaviour;
• Social benefits of NbSs, including improved health and well-being, enhanced quality of life, and increased social interaction ands community engagement;
• Gender-based NbSs: NbSs can have significant implications for gender by promoting equal access to and participation in decision-making processes related to green spaces, ensuring women’s safety in urban parks, and providing economic opportunities through green jobs;
• NbS economic opportunities, as implementing NbSs extends beyond urban greening; they also have the potential to generate economic opportunities by creating jobs and fostering economic growth;
• Enabling NbS-supporting political capital: this refers to the process of creating favourable political conditions and securing resources to promote the implementation and advancement of NbSs.

Place Labs within the UPSURGE project are designed to advance sustainable solutions by fostering ecological awareness, promoting social benefits and gender equity, identifying economic opportunities, and securing political support. Each Place Lab progresses through four stages: analysing the local social context, convening stakeholder groups, exploring and validating the impacts of nature-based solutions, and assessing the effectiveness of the participatory methods employed.

This study reports the findings of two citizen-engagement surveys carried out in the Katowice Place Lab. The surveys examine residents’ attitudes towards the “Katowice City Adaptation Plan to Climate Change by 2030” and explore their understanding of, and involvement with, nature-based solutions. They also assess levels of climate change awareness, responsibility for local green spaces, and the personal initiatives that participants have undertaken. This study adopted a city-oriented approach, consistent with the objectives of the UPSURGE project, as urban areas are where the population is concentrated, exposure to climate change impacts is most acute, and where interventions through green and blue infrastructure are most urgently needed. It should be noted, however, that Katowice serves as both the capital of a larger conurbation and an academic hub. Several major cities are situated in its immediate vicinity, and many respondents, although not residing directly in Katowice, work or study there and are familiar with the local environmental challenges.

Recent studies highlight a persistent lack of empirical and measurable evidence demonstrating that citizen participation directly contributes to climate change adaptation through nature-based solutions [64,74,75,76]. Assessing the effectiveness of NbSs is often more straightforward when simulation-based methods are employed, particularly those involving mathematical hydrological models, which can quantify reductions in surface runoff, increases in water retention, or the provision of ecosystem services [77,78,79]. In contrast, agent-based models, designed to simulate the actions and interactions of autonomous agents such as individuals, households, businesses, or municipalities, are based on behavioural assumptions and may lack the physical realism characteristic of mathematical models [80].

Moreover, challenges and barriers to successful citizen engagement persist, which may limit its overall effectiveness [81]. These observations lead to the conclusion that the capacity of communities to successfully implement effective climate change adaptation measures remains uncertain [58]. In response, the authors seek to

• Identify the reasons why people are not convinced to uptake adaptation measures and the factors that can be considered obstacles to adaptation;
• Develop indicator(s) for future studies to evaluate how citizen engagement (CE) promotes the effective uptake and integration of nature-based solutions (NbSs) within broader climate-change-mitigation strategies.
• By developing such tools, this study aims to provide a valuable framework for future assessments of the effectiveness of citizen engagement in promoting climate adaptation and NbS implementation.

Therefore, the objective of this study is twofold. First, it seeks to validate the effectiveness of the Place Lab methodology in facilitating meaningful stakeholder engagement, particularly in capturing residents’ visions, awareness, preferences, levels of commitment, and perceptions of responsibility concerning the implementation of nature-based solutions. Second, drawing on the survey results and a review of the relevant literature, the study aims to develop a set of preliminary indicators that can serve as a foundation for assessing the likelihood of adopting nature-based solutions through civic engagement. These indicators may inform future evaluation frameworks and contribute to guiding policy and practice in fostering inclusive, participatory climate adaptation strategies.

2. Materials and Methods

Katowice is the capital of the Silesian Voivodeship and of the Upper Silesian Dąbrowa Basin Metropolis (GZM). Located in southern Poland, 70 km west of Kraków (Figure 1), the city combines a rich history with dynamic modern development and serves as the seat of Poland’s first metropolitan association. As an economic, cultural, and educational hub, Katowice boasts well-developed infrastructure across its 164.64 km² territory, which is home to approximately 280,000 residents [82], the largest population of any city in the Upper Silesian conurbation. Long known as an industrial and service centre, Katowice also offers a vibrant cultural scene, with numerous museums, art galleries, theatres, cinemas, and music festivals. It is a major educational centre, hosting several universities, secondary schools, and vocational colleges. The city has grown up on rich hard-coal deposits that have been exploited for over 200 years [83]; this mining activity has profoundly altered the natural environment [84,85,86,87]. Since the 1990s, the region has been undergoing a concerted process of revitalisation and regeneration aimed at restoring degraded urban landscapes [87,88]. Today, Katowice is also recognised for its green infrastructure initiatives [89,90]. Over 42% of the metropolitan area is covered by forests and green spaces that form a protective belt around the agglomeration, yet much of this greenery lies on the city’s periphery. As a result, several highly urbanised districts remain underserved by green infrastructure and would benefit from expanded tree planting and park development.

The Place Lab concept brings together all relevant stakeholders and dimensions in accordance with the Quintuple Helix framework. Place Labs explore and validate the environmental, social, and spatial aspects of nature-based solutions (NbSs), experimenting with innovative approaches such as gender mainstreaming, community production, social factories, and zero-kilometre initiatives. In the framework of the UPSURGE project, five European cities have been chosen to host Place Labs (Figure 1). The Quintuple Helix builds on Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff’s Triple Helix model of innovation [91]. The Triple Helix model, which comprises academia, industry and government, was extended into the Quadruple Helix by adding media and culture-based public components [92], and gained a fifth strand by incorporating natural environment and ecological systems to address climate change [93]. Through socio-ecological interactions, this framework can be applied in both interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary contexts to support sustainable development.

In the pre-implementation phase of NbSs in Katowice and other demonstration cities, the co-creation and co-design phases actively involved residents. Encouraging face-to-face participation proved challenging, yet a combination of indoor workshops and outdoor site visits to prospective NbS locations ensured a consultative process that incorporated diverse stakeholder perspectives. At this early stage, a survey of participants probed their perceptions of the role and importance of NbSs. As the Place Lab activities progressed, further enquiries were conducted to monitor shifts in citizens’ eco-sensitisation and environmental awareness, including evaluations of NbS impacts and ecosystem services as measures to address local needs and challenges.

The first survey assessed the implementation of the “Katowice City Adaptation Plan to Climate Change by 2030”, residents’ knowledge and engagement in promoting nature-based solutions (NbSs), and civic awareness of climate change and environmental conservation. The first part of the survey encompassed three issues related to the implementation of the city adaptation plan, which was evaluated on a Likert scale (type: I definitely disagree; I rather disagree; I have no opinion; I rather agree; and I definitely agree). The second part of the survey included two questions evaluated on a Likert scale, similarly to the first survey, and three open-choice questions, where respondents selected three answers from available options. The third part of survey consisted of six questions, including a yes/no/I don’t know question, an open-choice question, and a question designed to assess the amount of respondents’ knowledge. It also included a question evaluating the occurrence of extreme events (one question with six options), a question measuring agreement with a statement according to a Likert scale (I definitely disagree; I rather disagree; I have no opinion; I rather agree; and I definitely agree), and an open-ended question about ecological initiatives in which respondents participate. During the survey, responses were categorized by gender (female, male), with a total of 34 participants. Additionally, extra information was gathered, like the education level of participants, age, place of living, etc.

The second survey comprised seven questions. The first question addressed the perceived amount of green space in Katowice using a five-point scale. The second question concerned the types of green areas deemed most needed in the city, allowing respondents to select up to three options. The third was a binary (yes/no) question focused on the willingness to make trade-offs between urban development and green space. The fourth question assessed the frequency of activities undertaken in green areas, using a five-point Likert scale (1—never; 2—rarely; 3—occasionally; 4—often; 5—very often). The fifth question explored whether respondents felt personally responsible for green areas, offering “yes”, “no”, and “I don’t know” as possible responses. The sixth question asked about the forms of protection or maintenance of green areas that respondents had undertaken, with multiple choices permitted. The seventh question examined respondents’ views on which stakeholders should bear responsibility for green areas, which also allowed for multiple selections. Responses were categorised by gender (female, male), with a total of 54 participants. Additional demographic data were also collected, which included education level, age, and place of residence.

In general, due to the nature of the work carried out within the Place Labs, the interviewed groups were relatively small, and the number of respondents statistically modest. Consequently, the application of classical statistical methods and associated measures may lead to biased or unrealistic outcomes. Identifying robust trends also proved challenging; nonetheless, certain patterns and socio-behavioural phenomena were discerned. Drawing upon these insights, a set of proposed indicators was developed to support the monitoring of adaptation effectiveness. The illustrative application of these indicators, together with their interpretation, is presented in the following sections.

Table 1. Drivers and obstacles that can be taken into account when creating indicators to assess the uptake of nature-based solutions by local communities.

Drivers
Parameter	Description
Awareness (A)	Number or proportion of respondents self-classified as aware of the benefits of nature-based solutions.
Willingness (W)	Number or proportion of respondents willing to make trade-offs between grey infrastructure or land use (e.g., parking).
Practical Engagement (P)	Number or proportion of respondents involved in voluntary green-space care activities (e.g., planting, cleaning).
Responsibility (R)	Number or proportion of respondents who feel personally responsible for green areas (e.g., by taking part in green projects).
Support (S)	Number or proportion supporting shared governance of green spaces (e.g., involving citizens, schools, volunteers).
Capacity Building (C)	Number of workshops or training sessions organised for citizens.
Sustainability of Engagement (E)	Number or proportion of respondents willing to remain involved in the project after its official end.
Visible Co-benefits (VC)	Number or proportion of respondents who observe improvements such as cooling, shade, biodiversity, or recreational use due to NbSs.
Place Attachment (PA)	Number or proportion of respondents who feel emotionally or historically connected to local green spaces.
Obstacles
Parameter	Description
Lack of Awareness (LA)	Number or proportion of respondents unaware of the benefits of nature-based solutions.
Lack of Funding (LF)	Number or proportion of respondents indicating withdrawal from NbS maintenance in the absence of funding
Unclear responsibility (UR)	Number or proportion of respondents who do not know who is responsible for managing green areas in the city.
Institutional/Legal Constraints (IL)	Number of legal or administrative procedures required to carry out an NbS intervention.
Aesthetic Appeal (AA)	Number or proportion of respondents expressing a negative perception of wild or unmanaged green spaces.
Lack of Trust (LT)	Number or proportion of respondents expressing low trust in local authorities or implementing institutions.
Perceived Inequity (PI)	Number or proportion of respondents who believe NbS projects benefit only certain areas or social groups.
Lack of Feedback (LFb)	Number or proportion of respondents who feel their input was ignored or not reflected in project outcomes.
Safety Concerns (SC)	Number or proportion of respondents expressing fears about unmanaged green spaces (e.g., pests, crime, flooding).

presents a selection and short description of factors and obstacles that can be integrated into indicators designed to assess both the willingness and effectiveness of citizens in the uptake of nature-based solutions, while Figure 2 presents a diagram of factors that can be adapted to calculate these indicators.

The simplest indicators that can be derived from such factors is the ratio of awareness to the lack of awareness, i.e.,

$$\mathrm{Knowledge}\text{-}\mathrm{Level} \mathrm{Index}={\displaystyle \frac{{\mathrm{w}}_1\times \mathrm{A}}{{\mathrm{w}}_2\times \mathrm{L}\mathrm{A}}},$$

(1)

where w₁ and w₂ represent the weights of the two factors, and A and LA denote awareness and lack of awareness, respectively. This simple indicator can inform about the level of awareness regarding the benefits of green areas. It is important for each indicator to maintain consistent weighting factors over time and to track changes, for example, within a focus group.

The second simple indicator, the Community Stewardship Index (CSI), integrates drivers (such as responsibility and support) and an obstacle (unclear or lack of responsibility). It can be calculated as follows:

$$\mathrm{Community} \mathrm{Stewardship} \mathrm{Index} = {\displaystyle \frac{{\mathrm{w}}_1\times \mathrm{R}+{\mathrm{w}}_2\times \mathrm{S}}{{\mathrm{w}}_3\times \mathrm{U}\mathrm{R}}},$$

(2)

where w₁, w₂, and w₃ represent the weights of factors, and R, S, and UR denote responsibility, support, and unclear responsibility, respectively. This index provides insights into the community’s collective sense of responsibility and commitment towards stewardship of green infrastructure. A high CSI indicates strong community involvement, a clear understanding of governance roles, and robust support for shared management.

The next indicator, the Engagement Resilience Index, combines willingness, practical engagement, and lack of funding and can be calculated from the following equation:

$$\mathrm{Engagement} \mathrm{Resilience} \mathrm{Index} = {\displaystyle \frac{{\mathrm{w}}_1\times \mathrm{W}+{\mathrm{w}}_2\times \mathrm{P}}{{\mathrm{w}}_3\times \mathrm{L}\mathrm{F}}},$$

(3)

where w₁, w₂, and w₃ represent the weights of factors, and W, P, and LF denote willingness, practical engagement, and lack of funding, respectively. The Engagement Resilience Index reflects a community’s capacity to sustain practical and committed involvement in green infrastructure, even when financial resources become limited. A high ERI signifies a resilient community characterised by strong intrinsic motivation, a willingness to adapt land-use priorities, and active engagement in voluntary stewardship activities. Conversely, a lower ERI indicates vulnerability to funding fluctuations, potentially compromising long-term sustainability and the effectiveness of green initiatives.

The Implementation Readiness Index can be assessed by combining capacity building as a driver and institutional/legal constraints as an obstacle. So, it can be calculated as follows:

$$\mathrm{Implementation} \mathrm{Readiness} \mathrm{Index} = {\displaystyle \frac{{\mathrm{w}}_1\times \mathrm{C}}{{\mathrm{w}}_2\times \mathrm{I}\mathrm{L}}},$$

(4)

where w₁ and w₂ represent the weights of factors, and C and IL denote capacity building and institutional and legal constraints, respectively. It assesses the feasibility of community-driven projects, taking into account the local regulatory contexts.

The next indicator, the Long-term Commitment Indicator, is very important in regard to the run length of the project and its maintenance of the green solutions within the community.

$$\mathrm{Long}\text{-}\mathrm{term} \mathrm{Commitment} \mathrm{Index}={\displaystyle \frac{{\mathrm{w}}_1\times \mathrm{S}+{\mathrm{w}}_2\times \mathrm{P}\mathrm{A}}{{\mathrm{w}}_3\times \mathrm{A}\mathrm{A}{+\mathrm{w}}_4\times \mathrm{S}\mathrm{C}}},$$

(5)

where w₁, w₂, w₃, and w₄ represent the weights of factors, and S, PA, AA, and SC denote sustainability, place attachment, aesthetic appeal, and safety concerns, respectively. This indicator assesses community commitment by capturing individuals’ emotional attachment to local green spaces, their willingness for sustained involvement, and their perceptions regarding safety and aesthetic preferences. Higher values suggest robust long-term commitment and positive perceptions, whereas lower values indicate that concerns about aesthetics or safety may weaken community support and ongoing participation in nature-based solutions.

The Equity and Transparency Index is an indicator that mixes visible co-benefits, perceived inequity, and lack of feedback. A simplified conceptual formula could look like

$$\mathrm{Equity} \mathrm{and} \mathrm{Transparency} \mathrm{Index}={\displaystyle \frac{{\mathrm{w}}_1\times \mathrm{V}\mathrm{C}}{{\mathrm{w}}_3\times \mathrm{P}\mathrm{I}{+\mathrm{w}}_4\times \mathrm{L}\mathrm{F}\mathrm{b}}},$$

(6)

where w₁, w₂, and w₃ represent the weights of factors, and VC, PI, and LFb denote visible co-benefits, perceived inequity, and lack of feedback, respectively. A high ETI score indicates effective communication, equitable distribution of NbS benefits, and high transparency, suggesting strong public support, trust, and a willingness to engage. A low ETI score implies community perception of unfairness or poor communication, potentially diminishing the project legitimacy, community acceptance, and long-term engagement.

The final indicator is the Communication Effectiveness Index (CEI), which combines awareness, sustainability, and lack of feedback. A simplified conceptual formula for this indicator is

$$\mathrm{Communication} \mathrm{Effectiveness} \mathrm{Index}={\displaystyle \frac{{\mathrm{w}}_1\times \mathrm{A}+{\mathrm{w}}_2\times \mathrm{S}}{{\mathrm{w}}_3\times \mathrm{L}\mathrm{F}\mathrm{b}}}$$

(7)

where w₁, w₂, and w₃ represent the weights of factors, and A, S, and LFb denote awareness, sustainability, and lack of feedback, respectively. This indicator explicitly measures the effectiveness of communication by local government or stakeholders. A higher CEI indicates clear effective communication, good public awareness, and sustainable engagement practices, while a lower CEI suggests inadequate feedback mechanisms, reduced transparency, and potential barriers to maintaining long-term community involvement.

3. Results

3.1. General Information About Participants

Thirty-four respondents took part in the survey prior to implementation of NbSs in Katowice. Of these, 20 were women and 14 were men. The sample was heavily concentrated in the 36 to 50 age range, with almost half of all respondents falling in those two brackets (four women and three men aged 36–40, and five women and five men aged 41–50) (Figure 3). Most held a higher-education qualification (Figure 4). The second part of the survey referred to the knowledge and involvement of residents in the dissemination of nature-based solutions (NbSs).

In the case of the second survey, this was completed by 54 respondents participating in the Katowice Place Lab activities. There were 44 women and 10 men. The age profile was heavily skewed towards older adults, with over half of all respondents aged 56 and above (9 women/3 men aged 56–65, 12 women aged 66–75, and 2 women/1 man aged 76+) (Figure 5). The respondents declared different levels of education, with the majority having completed higher education (Figure 6). The majority of respondents (26 women and 6 men) resided in Katowice, so they could refer to the subject of the survey locally.

3.2. The Results of the First Survey

3.2.1. Opinions on the Implementation of the City Adaptation Plan

The first question addressed agreement with the statement that the local government of Katowice has prepared the city very well for the negative effects of increasing weather phenomena and the impacts of the urban heat island (Figure 7). In general, half of the female respondents did not agree that the city is well prepared for five climate-related issues: the decline in biodiversity, high surface runoff, overflow of combined sewer systems, urban flooding, and the urban heat island. Additionally, about one-quarter of female respondents had no opinion on the city’s readiness to address these climate-related challenges. However, about half of them generally acknowledged that the city has implemented solutions to improve air quality. Male respondents were also sceptical about the effectiveness of actions taken to mitigate the negative effects of climate change, with nearly half having no opinion on five of the eight issues. Moreover, most disagreed that the city is adequately prepared to mitigate the urban heat island effect, and half did not believe that the city is capable of addressing high urban runoff. Nevertheless, their opinions were fairly varied overall.

The second question investigated whether the Katowice local authority is effectively fulfilling its city adaptation tasks (Figure 8). According to approximately half of the female respondents, the city is performing these tasks well. However, in three specific areas (educating residents, engaging residents, and implementing adaptation measures in cooperation with residents), one-quarter of the female respondents had no opinion. Furthermore, a comparable proportion of female participants did not agree that the city is performing well in terms of consulting residents on proposed adaptation measures, educating them, engaging them, and implementing adaptation measures. In general, male respondents were more sceptical regarding the realisation of tasks related to climate change adaptation. For instance, only one respondent indicated “definitely agree” concerning the fulfilment of these tasks. Approximately half of the male respondents agreed that the city effectively fulfils tasks associated with implementing adaptation measures, securing financial resources for those measures, and informing residents about them. However, half of them also had no opinion on the city’s efforts to engage residents in these adaptation activities.

The last question elicited respondents’ opinions on whether planning and implementing adaptation measures would bring specific benefits to the residents of Katowice (Figure 9). The distribution of answers was similar for both genders, with both female and male respondents generally believing that adaptation measures can yield substantial benefits. However, there were a few individuals who disagreed that adaptation actions could deliver benefits in the areas of warning systems, improved cooperation between the city and rescue institutions, reduced damages and costs, or the expansion of green areas. In addition, respondents of both genders expressed no opinion regarding whether adaptation could be beneficial for the development of warning systems, the enhancement of cooperation with NGOs, or cost reduction.

3.2.2. Knowledge and Engagement of Residents in the Dissemination of Nature-Based Solutions (NbSs)

The first question in the second part of the survey aimed to assess the extent of agreement with the statement that the development of nature-based solutions can reduce the negative impacts of climate change and phenomena associated with urbanisation, such as poor air quality (Figure 10). In general, approximately half of the women agreed that, to a large or very large extent, adaptation measures can mitigate the effects of climate change, such as droughts, urban heat islands (UHI), and local flooding, as well as the impacts of urbanisation, including a decrease in biodiversity and poor air quality. Male respondents generally also agreed that adaptation solutions can address some environmental issues related to climate change, with the exception of droughts and the diminishing of potable water sources. In this case, one-third of male participants indicated that these measures could only help to a small extent in conserving water resources.

The second question related to the statement on why citizens of Katowice accept the need for nature-based solutions (Figure 11). In general, most responses fell into the “Rather Agree” or “Definitely Agree” categories. This suggests a generally positive perception of these climate-related issues and solutions. There were very few responses of “Definitely Disagree” across all issues, indicating that outright rejection of these statements was rare. Moreover, female respondents tended to give higher agreement ratings (with more 4 s and 5 s), whereas male respondents’ ratings were more distributed across all categories, with a slightly higher presence in the “No opinion” category and some disagreement. Both genders largely agreed on the positive role of TV and social media in promoting adaptation measures. More importantly, a significant number of respondents—especially women—actively participated in implementing such measures themselves.

The third question concerned the importance of nature-based solutions in comparison with other investments aimed at improving the city’s infrastructure (Figure 12). In general, “Equally Important” was the most frequent response, with the highest counts in this category appearing for district revitalisations (9F, 9M), strengthening the city’s road and transport infrastructure (8F, 9M), and strengthening social infrastructure (8F, 7M). Additionally, nature-based solutions (rainwater drainage system) were perceived relatively positively, with a significant number of respondents considering them either “Rather More Important” or “Equally Important.”

The next question concerned which adaptation solutions should be implemented in Katowice. Respondents were asked to select from among three options (Figure 13). Regardless of gender, the most important adaptation measure was pervious pavement (10F, 9M). An equal number of female respondents also highlighted the need for the revitalisation of watercourses and retention ponds. Male respondents, on the other hand, showed a preference for pocket parks and flowery meadows, indicating a general preference for more green infrastructure.

The fifth question addressed the obstacles that prevent the widespread implementation of NbSs (Figure 14). Respondents were allowed to select up to five options from a given list. The top three choices for female respondents were financial resources, public awareness (widely recognized), and engagement of citizens. For male respondents, the most important obstacles were also financial resources and public awareness. The third place was shared equally by engagement of citizens, access to knowledge, and access to data.

3.2.3. Civic Awareness of Climate Change and Environmental Conservation

Based on the results presented, residents of Katowice demonstrate strong awareness and acceptance that climate change poses a real threat to human lives (Figure 15). A significant majority, comprising 19 females and 13 males, clearly recognized the seriousness of this issue. When assessing their knowledge about climate change, female respondents tend to rate their understanding slightly higher, with more women than men describing their knowledge as “good,” though males predominantly rated theirs as “average.” Only a small group from both genders described their knowledge as “very good,” suggesting a moderate overall level of understanding among respondents. In terms of anticipated impacts, most respondents foresee serious water availability problems in Poland within the next five years, largely attributing this risk to climate change. Females expressed somewhat higher concern, although both genders showed substantial apprehension about future water-related issues.

The most frequently selected threats for both genders are water crisis or droughts and global warming (Figure 16). These two issues stand out as the most serious concerns, with female respondents showing slightly higher concern, especially in the case of global warming. Women show consistently higher response rates in most categories. They are particularly more likely than men to view air pollution, pollution from waste, and species extinctions as serious threats. Even for less commonly selected issues such as the disappearance of traditional seasons or pollution of seas and oceans, female respondents outnumber male respondents. Men are less likely to identify these issues as threats, with one exception: they slightly outnumber women in identifying the degradation of the natural environment by humans as a threat. Maybe they are using it as a kind of umbrella term that captures the essence of many of the more specific threats listed separately.

The next question addressed the agreement to several statements referring to the positive behaviour, habits, or benefits of NbSs (Figure 17). Overall, the data reveal strong support for climate-related action and NbSs, especially among women. Female respondents most often selected the highest level of agreement (“Definitely yes”), while male respondents more frequently selected middle-range options such as “No opinion” or “Rather yes.” For example, many women strongly agreed that residents value green space, with 14 selecting “Definitely yes” for that statement. A similar number strongly agreed that NbSs are an opportunity to develop unused areas in Katowice and that they are essential for retaining water at the point of precipitation. In these areas, women showed clear and consistent support. Men also expressed support, particularly for increasing greenery in the city and valuing green space, but their responses were more varied. Fewer men selected the highest agreement level, and more chose neutral or moderate options, which may indicate lower certainty or less enthusiasm. One area where both groups showed more mixed responses was the statement that “Nature-based solutions will only bear fruit in a few years or so”.

Statistically, women were involved in a wider range of community and hands-on environmental campaigns, while men were more likely to participate in planning-oriented or individual planting initiatives (Figure 18). Women participated more often in activities like tree planting, meadows, and rainwater collection. For example, seven women took part in the “Dig a tree” campaign compared with four men. Similarly, three women participated in the “Sow the Meadows” initiative, while only one man did. Women also appeared more in small-scale actions like “Catch rain” and “Perfect Courtyard.” In contrast, men were more active in the official consultation of the Municipal Climate Adaptation Plan, with five men involved compared with just two women. They also participated more in activities such as community gardens, adopting pots, and creating small garden patches—actions that were almost exclusively male in this sample. Additionally, more men (seven) than women (four) reported not taking part in any initiative, suggesting that men were slightly more disengaged overall.

3.3. The Results of the Second Survey

Attitude and Responsibility Towards Green Spaces

Regarding attitudes to the amount of green space in the city, only two people said that there was enough. Generally, citizens would like to enlarge the number of green spaces in the city. Twenty-eight respondents said that they would like to have many more green spaces, 14 said that there were too few of them and 8 said that there were far too few of them. Overall, women expressed stronger concerns about the lack of green spaces across all levels of dissatisfaction. This gender difference highlights the importance of considering women’s perspectives in urban green-space planning. The responses could also be used as an indicator for monitoring the social perception of green infrastructure over time (Figure 19).

When we asked for details, we obtained the following answers as to which green areas are most needed in the city (Figure 20): neighbourhood greens, squares (45), and greenery along streets and squares (37). Very important for residents are green areas in the city centre (29), “pocket parks” (27), flowery meadows (26), ponds (26), small green areas at bus stops (25), and large parks (25). Less important are grasslands, open spaces (20), green areas next to public facilities (18), allotment gardens, gardens and community orchards (17), wetlands (16), and urban and communal forests (16). Least important are trees and shrubs in containers and pots (13).

Citizens will agree to increasing the amount of green space in their immediate area at the expense of reducing the number of service points (31), the width of streets (29), and the number of parking spaces (29). They would be less likely to agree to reduce the size of playgrounds (Figure 21).

Green spaces have different functions. The respondents very often use them as a place of meeting with friends (24 answers), learning about nature, photography (18), sport, recreation (16), or activities with children (16). They often or moderately use them for passive recreation. Surprisingly, green spaces are not seen as a place to walk with animals (Figure 22).

The survey showed that the sense of responsibility for green spaces is rather high. A total of 31 women and 9 men admitted that they felt responsible for the green areas in their neighbourhood. Six women stated that they did not feel responsible for the green areas in their neighbourhood. Five respondents were unable to define their position (Figure 23).

From the listed forms of green space protection in residents’ neighbourhoods, people most frequently indicated that they picked up trash from green areas (32) and that they drew attention to the person destroying a green area (31). Relatively often, citizens are planting plants (24). Rarely did they intervene in the matter of green areas (12). Only a few people (8) responded that they cleaned the green area (e.g., raked) or secured the green area (6) (Figure 24).

The respondents were also asked about their opinions on who should be in charge of working on green areas in the city. Here, the difference between greenery cleanup, planting, and care of greenery was noticed. Referring to greenery cleanup, the largest number of residents indicated that this work can be performed by schoolchildren as part of their educational lessons (42). Slightly fewer people pointed that greenery cleanup can be carried out by the residents of the district, spontaneously (38), by volunteers under the supervision of specialized services (37), or by prisoners under the supervision of specialized services (37). In people’s opinion, planting should be handled by specialized services only (34) or, eventually, by volunteers under the supervision of specialized services (28). The fewest number of people thought that residents should do it spontaneously (17). The answers in the area of care of greenery did not differ much from each other, so it confirms that all the groups mentioned in this question could be responsible for the condition and appearance of greenery (Figure 25).

3.4. The Illustrative Application of Indicators

It must be emphasised that the following indicators were developed post hoc, based on interpretations of survey responses and a review of relevant literature. They serve as an exploratory framework for quantifying social factors that may influence the effectiveness of climate adaptation measures, rather than as precise metrics. Additionally, because each index is calculated from different survey questions and scales, their absolute values are not directly comparable; each indicator is intended to be tracked within its own context rather than compared across domains. The calculations presented here are approximate and intended to illustrate potential drivers and obstacles. Further studies, especially those involving qualitative methods such as focus groups, could help refine these indicators. Future efforts might also employ more targeted survey designs (e.g., improved question wording and larger sample sizes) to increase the precision and transparency of such assessments.

The first indicator is the Knowledge-Level Index, which reflects the public’s self-assessed and actual awareness of climate issues. For example, in the initial survey (Figure 15b), 65% of respondents described themselves as well informed about climate change, whereas 35% reported only moderate awareness. However, when asked if climate change poses a threat to humans, some respondents answered “no” or “I don’t know.” This discrepancy suggests that respondents may overestimate their knowledge. By taking the ratio of the “well-informed” to “moderately aware” groups, we obtain a Knowledge-Level Index of approximately 1.8. This indicator can be monitored over time to track changes in knowledge levels. In a related measure of knowledge, the survey asked whether citizens of Katowice are aware of the benefits provided by nature-based solutions (NbSs). As illustrated in Figure 16, 41% of respondents agreed that the public is aware, while 29 per cent believed that citizens do not understand how NbSs function. The ratio of these responses yields a Knowledge-Level Index of about 1.4 for public awareness of NbSs.

The second indicator is the Community Stewardship Index (CSI), which integrates key drivers of engagement (such as a sense of responsibility and active support) and an opposing factor (lack of responsibility as an obstacle). The second survey asked participants to self-assess their sense of responsibility for urban green spaces: 74% of respondents felt a personal sense of responsibility, while 11% did not. In terms of supportive actions, 44% of respondents (from the second survey) reported that they find time to engage in planting or gardening activities, and nearly 46% (from the first survey) had participated in other green initiatives (e.g., the civic green budget or sowing flower meadows). Based on these figures, the Community Stewardship Index was estimated to be approximately 10.7. This relatively high value reflects a strong net presence of stewardship drivers (responsibility and participation) relative to the hindering factor (lack of responsibility) in the community.

A third indicator, the Engagement Resilience Index, combines measures of public willingness to support green-space expansion, actual participation in green-space maintenance, and the perceived barrier of insufficient funding. In the second survey, 57% of respondents expressed a willingness to sacrifice some urban space for additional greenery (indicating willingness), and 59% reported that they had actively participated in the protection or maintenance of green areas (indicating practical engagement). From the first survey, however, approximately 82% of respondents identified a lack of funding as a major barrier to implementing nature-based solutions. By comparing the supportive factors (willingness and participation) against this financial obstacle, we estimate an Engagement Resilience Index of roughly 1.4. This value suggests that the community’s combined willingness and engagement slightly outweigh the perceived funding constraints.

A fourth indicator is the Implementation Readiness Index, which gauges the community’s capacity to initiate adaptation measures relative to institutional or legal barriers. One component of this index is capacity building, which we proxy by the share of citizens who recognise a strong need for more green areas in the city. According to the second survey, 51% of respondents felt that there is a strong need for additional green spaces, reflecting a base level of public support for greening efforts. Another component is the perceived role of local leadership: 70% of respondents agreed that implementing nature-based solutions depends on local initiative by community leaders who can educate others and demonstrate the benefits of such projects. The main opposing factor for implementation readiness is the presence of institutional or legal constraints. In the first survey, 38% of respondents pointed to a lack of regulations as a barrier to fully implementing nature-based solutions. Combining these factors (public capacity/initiative and institutional obstacles) would yield an approximate Implementation Readiness Index of around 3.2. This indicates thatk in the Place Lab context, pro-implementation sentiment and capacity moderately exceed the reported institutional barriers.

The fifth indicator is the Communication Effectiveness Index (CEI), which is conceptualised by combining public awareness, project sustainability commitment, and the degree of feedback or cooperation shortfalls. As with the Knowledge-Level Index, “awareness” can be measured either through self-evaluations or through opinions on the public’s understanding of NbSs. Sustainability, in this context, refers to an awareness of the need for long-term commitment to green initiatives. In the Place Lab’s first survey, 68% of respondents acknowledged that long-term commitment is necessary for the success of the project. Meanwhile, a lack of feedback or poor stakeholder coordination is treated as the counteracting obstacle: 25 per cent of respondents in the first survey cited insufficient cooperation between stakeholders as a barrier (which can be interpreted as a lack of adequate feedback mechanisms or communication among parties). By integrating these components—awareness, sustainability commitment, and feedback gaps, the CEI provides an indication of how effectively information and long-term vision are being communicated and maintained in the community. It should be noted that, given the exploratory nature of this framework, no single quantitative value for the CEI is provided here.

Finally, two proposed indicators could not be quantified with the available data: the Long-Term Commitment Indicator and the Equity and Transparency Indices. These concepts were identified in the literature as important for adaptation success, encompassing factors such as residents’ attachment to place, the aesthetic appeal of interventions, and the perceived fairness or equity in how benefits are distributed. However, the surveys did not explicitly capture these parameters. As a result, no direct index values could be derived for long-term commitment, equity, or transparency in this study. Future research would need to include targeted questions or qualitative assessments to evaluate these aspects and to incorporate them into the indicator framework.

4. Discussion

In general, the Place Lab approach provides localised insights into stakeholders’ levels of awareness, knowledge, and opinion. It functions as a platform for dialogue among diverse actors; however, it typically depends on small, intimate meetings. Consequently, the dataset collected is relatively modest. Nevertheless, it has enabled the identification of critical social phenomena that may influence the uptake of nature-based solutions—either by facilitating their initiation or by hindering their implementation. Despite the limited number of survey participants, the composition of the groups—though imbalanced—reflects broader societal trends. For example, a higher proportion of women participated in the project, a pattern observed in other environmental initiatives [94,95,96]. Additionally, many respondents were retired individuals, who generally have more time to engage in participatory activities and to contribute to the maintenance of green spaces [97,98]. The majority of respondents were also well educated, which aligns with national trends: in 2022, 50.1% of women and 31.2% of men in Poland held a higher-education degree [99]. Moreover, Katowice, the location of the Place Lab, is an academic centre, home to 17 institutions of higher education.

Both female and male respondents expressed significant scepticism regarding the city’s preparedness for climate-related challenges. Specifically, half of the female respondents disagreed that Katowice is adequately prepared for issues such as biodiversity decline, high surface runoff, sewer overflow, urban flooding, and urban heat islands. Many respondents (particularly men) indicated uncertainty, frequently selecting “No opinion,” suggesting either a lack of information or insufficient communication from the local government. Most male respondents explicitly disagreed that the city is prepared to manage the urban heat island effect, highlighting it as a major concern. The primary reason for scepticism or for withholding any opinion is the widespread belief that climate change does not exist or is not severe, despite numerous global studies and communications [100]. As the population is heterogeneous, climate scepticism can also be categorised into groups such as the “cautious” or the “disengaged”, which is useful for tailoring adaptation measures and enhancing direct citizen engagement [67]. Secondly, although many people acknowledge that climate change is occurring [101] and recognise the threats it poses to human life such as water crises, global warming, and extreme weather events (Figure 15a,b), they doubt that municipal authorities and cities are adequately preparing for these changes or their impacts. For example, a recent survey in New York City found that only 6 per cent of respondents believe the city is prepared for severe climate phenomena, whereas 80 per cent consider it unprepared [102]. Moreover, the Gensler report [103] found that only 18 per cent of over 1800 US adults surveyed agreed that their community is built to withstand climate change. A key source of scepticism may therefore lie in perceptions of responsibility for managing climate crises; most citizens regard this as the duty of public or private institutions, primarily central government [104]. While it is generally true that governments are responsible for public safety [105], local regional parties are also more or less involved in this task [106], and this does not absolve citizens from preparing for adaptation or for potential catastrophic impacts. Indeed, climate scepticism may, in part, arise from a general lack of trust in public authorities. For example, in our first survey, nearly half the female respondents were unsure or had no opinion on whether their city was effectively involving citizens in adaptation-related tasks. Male respondents exhibited even greater scepticism, with fewer indicating strong agreement that their city was undertaking adaptation measures. Nevertheless, most residents of Katowice believe that adaptation actions, particularly those enhancing green spaces, reducing potential damages, improving early-warning systems, and fostering cooperation with emergency services, would confer significant benefits. In summary, residents’ trust in local government appears to depend both on the transparency and effectiveness of adaptation measures and on clear communication. A survey of Lithuanian residents found that only 9 per cent of respondents, or someone in their household, had ever communicated with municipal or other public authorities about issues related to extreme weather [107].

Nature-based solutions (NbSs) are widely recognised by experts as fundamental to urban resilience, supporting biodiversity and addressing contemporary climatic and societal challenges [108,109,110,111,112,113,114]. However, their adoption and the sustained environmental engagement they require depends on public perception, genuine co-creation processes, and the long-term sustainable use of these interventions, all of which underpin citizen acceptance [115]. As residents begin to experience the benefits of NbS, enhanced safety and risk reduction during extreme events such as flooding become their foremost concerns [116]. Yet uncertainty about the effectiveness of NbSs and the scarcity of empirical evidence demonstrating their risk-mitigation performance compared with conventional grey infrastructure can inhibit their uptake [81,117,118,119]. Recent studies suggest this perception is changing, particularly among younger generations, who are increasingly attuned to the environmental imperatives driven by climate change [120,121]. Nevertheless, citizens’ resistance to implementing NbSs remains a significant barrier to their widespread adoption [108,122]. This scepticism is reflected in Katowice respondents, who support NbSs but not at the expense of “hard” infrastructure they deem essential. Because transport and social infrastructure ranked at or above NbSs in importance, urban strategies should maintain basic infrastructure while also allocating resources for NbS. In practice, planners should pursue hybrid investments; for example, combining rainwater drainage upgrades with bioswales or rain gardens and integrating new parks into district revitalization projects on brownfield sites. Notably, modest gender differences suggest that adaptation planning can be gender-responsive (Figure 12). In other countries, surveys have found that women place a higher value on the co-benefits of green infrastructure and are more willing to engage in local green projects [123,124], whereas male respondents often express lower support for nature-based options (e.g., carbon-storing parks) and greater trust in conventional engineering solutions [124].

Most respondents believe their fellow Katowice citizens are becoming more active in adapting to climate change, but many remain uncertain about how widespread that activity truly is (Figure 17). Women are slightly more confident that community engagement is growing, whereas men more often say they “have no opinion.” This difference likely stems from the fact that women tend to be more involved in or observant of environmental projects (Figure 18). Many residents taking part in the first survey are unsure whether citizens of Katowice understand the specific advantages of nature-based solutions, suggesting a widespread information gap across the city. Most respondents agree that citizens will see the benefits of NbSs in a few years, since it takes time for trees and plants to grow, as noted by [125,126].

Most respondents in the first survey identified pervious pavement as the most effective nature-based solution (Figure 13), likely because they regularly observe it in the city and appreciate its dual function of serving as a roadway while permitting infiltration. Moreover, they see that it functions immediately. People gravitate towards solutions they know and trust [116]; if an NbS resembles something they have already seen or used, they feel more comfortable adopting it. For instance, in recent years, permeable pavements in Poland (paving stones with sand joints) have become increasingly popular: the Center for Industry Analysis [127] estimated that Poland produced 74 million m² of paving stones in 2023. Foreign trade in this sector is negligible; only 0.7 million m² was exported that year (0.9% of production). Female participants also prioritised retention ponds and the revitalisation of watercourses, whereas male participants tended to favour flowery meadows. These choices likely reflect personal aesthetic preferences and current needs [128]; in general, people tend to favour tidy, clean, and lower-cost solutions [116,129,130,131]. Finally, one reason why women tend to choose blue features is that these spaces contribute to a sense of place and identity. Water bodies often become symbolic landmarks, and people report strong emotional bonds to local rivers, lakes or seashores—even granting them legal or cultural personhood [132,133,134]. Moreover, some studies suggest that women often identify their favourite places as nearby blue areas, such as local waterways or coastal spots [135]. In the second survey, the open-choice options focused on the types of green solutions needed in Katowice (Figure 20). Both genders saw the need for green areas in neighbourhoods, the city centre, and along streets, while men also showed interest in urban and communal forests. Women tend to favour nearby, well-equipped urban greens that feel safe and social. For example, compared with men, women visit local parks more often and prefer green areas with family-oriented features [136]. In many studies, women rate park lighting, cleanliness, safety, playgrounds, drinking fountains, and off-leash dog areas more highly than men do [137,138,139,140]. Men often gravitate towards larger or more natural green areas, even if they are further from home [136].

Regarding sacrificing public space for green areas, a higher percentage of women than men are prepared to trade off existing urban amenities such as service points, playground size, street width, and parking spaces to gain more green infrastructure. Men are consistently more likely to oppose reductions in these amenities, and they show the least willingness to reduce parking and playground sizes (Figure 21). Although public acceptance of greening schemes has been widely studied, the specific issue of trading off landscape elements (for example converting parking into parkland) has received relatively little attention. However, a survey of New York City voters found that over 80% supported more greenery in the city [141]. Similarly, Parisians voted 66% in favour of creating 500 additional car-free streets and removing 10% of the city’s parking spaces to reallocate them to pedestrians, cyclists, and green space [142]. Phillips et al. [143] conducted an online survey and focus groups in which respondents, including car owners, were more supportive of green changes than expected and were willing to exchange parking spaces for greener solutions.

A key finding from the second survey is respondents’ sense of responsibility for green areas in Katowice and their efforts to protect and maintain them. In philosophical and legal debates, responsibility is closely tied to capacity; that is, having sufficient knowledge, awareness, resources, and behavioural control [144]. Education, clear communication, and provision of resources such as land, funding, and equipment therefore strengthen residents’ sense of responsibility for green spaces and their ability to adapt to climate change. Co-creation and co-design processes for nature-based solutions (NbSs) generate strong local support, and active participation further increases ownership of, and responsibility for, green interventions. Effective NbSs hinge on both personal responsibility citizens stewarding and maintaining green infrastructure when equipped with the necessary knowledge and resources and civic responsibility, in which stakeholders co-create and co-manage projects with authorities [145,146,147,148,149]. When stewardship roles are unclear, projects can deteriorate [150]. Conversely, co-creation workshops and co-management agreements build trust and secure local buy-in [147,151]. Face-to-face communication and trust are among the strongest predictors of successful cooperation [152,153,154]. For these reasons, the Place Lab model offers an effective way to implement NbSs. It is straightforward to establish in urban settings, creates a positive atmosphere, and facilitates genuine co-creation. Residents can speak directly with designers, decision-makers, and councillors and engage with representatives of diverse stakeholder groups, thereby embedding shared responsibility in the development and long-term success of green solutions.

To recap, several obstacles must be noted when implementing nature-based solutions, and some of these were also identified in Katowice:

• Limited public knowledge and scepticism: While many respondents recognise climate change and the need for adaptation measures, they doubt whether the wider public in Katowice has the same level of understanding. This perceived knowledge gap breeds scepticism, makes it harder for planners to secure community buy-in, and can stall participation in co-creation workshops [155,156,157];
• Low trust in authorities: When residents lack confidence in local government or planners, they are less inclined to engage. Without trust, invitations to co-design or steward green infrastructure are often ignored or resisted [158,159];
• Competing priorities and time constraints limit participation: Younger residents, particularly those who juggle multiple jobs and family duties, often lack the time or energy to attend engagement events. To widen involvement, planners could design some activities for retirees, who usually have more flexible schedules, or organise family friendly events that allow parents to participate without sacrificing time with their children [160,161,162];
• Perceived inequity or exclusion: NbS projects can be seen as benefiting only certain neighbourhoods or demographic groups. If residents believe that new green spaces will not address their needs, whether because they live in a less affluent district or speak a different language, they may opt out of participating altogether [162,163,164];
• Conflicting stakeholder interests: In any city, there are always competing demands. When stakeholders’ priorities diverge, social engagement can turn adversarial rather than collaborative [165,166];
• Unclear roles and responsibilities: Successful nature-based solutions (NbSs) require ongoing maintenance. If it is not clearly defined who will be responsible for these tasks (e.g., city agencies, community volunteers, or a hybrid arrangement), residents may hesitate to invest their time in the planning process. They may fear that the initiative will eventually be neglected or become overgrown. A clean and aesthetically pleasing project is crucial for community acceptance and uptake [167,168];
• Insufficient resources for engagement: Effective social engagement requires adequate funding for facilitators, translators, materials, and, in some cases, modest stipends to compensate participants for lost wages. Moreover, nature-based solutions also demand resources such as land, vegetation, and the involvement of experts who are willing to share their knowledge with participants [110,169,170];
• Cultural and behavioural resistance: In places where “green interventions” are unfamiliar or where manicured lawns and paved streets are considered more “modern,” residents can resist NbSs on aesthetic grounds [171,172];
• Inadequate feedback and follow-through: When authorities hold a few workshops but then fail to show how community input influenced the final designs, citizens become sceptical. The perception that “engagement is a checkbox” undermines participation in future projects and erodes social capital [173,174];
• Legal and institutional constraints: Sometimes regulations make it difficult to transfer responsibility for green-space stewardship to community groups (e.g., liability concerns, permitting hurdles). If co-management agreements are legally cumbersome, agencies may avoid offering genuine co-creation or co-management roles, which limits social engagement [175,176].

Given the numerous barriers, it is difficult to assess whether nature-based solutions have been successfully adopted by citizens, particularly considering that this is a long-term process. That is why some studies and projects have adopted an indicator-based approach, albeit often at a general level. For instance, elements of such frameworks can be found in the work of Sowińska-Świerkosz and García [177], Dubovik et al. [178], Michalina et al. [179], and van Lierop et al. [180]. In some cases, the proposed indicators may be difficult to measure, such as the level of accessibility to green areas for different social groups, the amount of energy produced, or the extent of wind-speed reduction, particularly when attempting to link these parameters directly to local nature-based solutions. In certain instances, there are proposals to assess over 40 indicators for a single intervention, which can be a burdensome and complex task. None of the existing studies take into account that the uptake of nature-based solutions involves not only benefits but also the presence of obstacles. In this study, we propose a set of simple indicators based on civic engagement and aim to assess their effectiveness by considering both local participation and encountered barriers, which provide a more reliable and context-sensitive evaluation. Moreover, we propose incorporating weighted calculations informed by expert knowledge, as this can enhance accuracy by reflecting the relative importance of specific parameters under local conditions.

5. Conclusions

The research presented herein highlights the critical importance of involving citizens in the co-creation, co-design, and co-implementation of initiatives undertaken by local authorities to expand urban green spaces and to enhance public awareness of the role and benefits of nature-based solutions as pursued within the UPSURGE project [181]. Furthermore, the findings suggest that novel approaches, such as the Place Lab model, may serve as effective tools for structuring collaborative processes with residents; for instance, through the use of surveys.

There are no universally ideal methods for engaging citizens, particularly when such approaches are new to a city and the local community displays scepticism towards unfamiliar solutions and environmental initiatives. Effective engagement generally requires a sustained process of cooperation among diverse stakeholders within their neighbourhoods and local contexts, a process that must be carefully supported and facilitated by the authorities.

As demonstrated in our study, identifying citizens’ perceptions through social surveys can provide a valuable starting point for subsequent action. Collecting a range of opinions on key topics, even from relatively small samples, can offer meaningful insights to guide the planning of adaptation measures and, in the longer term, contribute to informed policy development.

Our study confirms that in Katowice:

• Residents are generally aware of the negative effects of climate change; however, they remain sceptical about the city’s and authorities’ preparedness to address these impacts. Notably, opinions vary according to gender and more detailed responses, suggesting that scepticism and lack of trust constitute key obstacles;
• The majority of respondents acknowledge the positive role of urban greenery and nature-based solutions and express a sense of responsibility for green spaces. Nevertheless, they demonstrate limited willingness to take the initiative or express uncertainty regarding what actions they could personally undertake. This may reflect concerns about the long-term maintenance of such interventions;
• Citizens express a strong desire for more green spaces, particularly in the city centre, and many are even willing to accept trade-offs, such as converting parking areas into green infrastructure;
• While residents of Katowice are increasingly concerned with expanding greenery in urban areas and value green spaces in their immediate surroundings, their perception of other citizens’ knowledge and awareness of the benefits of nature-based solutions appears less certain and requires further improvement.

Based on the survey, a set of drivers and obstacles was identified. These factors are, in themselves, informative; for instance, the number of sceptical versus aware respondents. However, by combining drivers and obstacles, it is possible to derive more insightful indicators of the likelihood that nature-based solutions (NbSs) will be adopted within communities. Such composite indicators reflect the coexistence of both supportive and hesitant individuals within a population. Furthermore, individual factors may be weighted according to expert judgement, particularly in contexts where specific elements carry greater importance. For example, cultural resistance to certain nature-inspired installations may necessitate assigning greater weight to aesthetic preferences.

By systematically monitoring these indicators over time, they can serve as a practical means of assessing the extent to which nature-based solutions are being adopted by local communities. They will also give an opportunity to observe changes in perception of all the factors connected with climate change adaptation and of NbSs’ role and significance in increasing urban climate neutrality.