From Global to Local: Implementing Nature-Based Solutions in Cultural Value Protection for Sustainable Village Development

Abstract

Nature-based Solutions (NbSs) bridge ecological conservation and human well-being. As the concept gains global traction, its potential for cultural heritage preservation is drawing increasing interest. This study explores the localized application of NbSs in Chinese villages, focusing on two core questions: its compatibility with traditional Chinese construction wisdom and its practical pathways for localization. A literature review reveals strong theoretical alignment between NbS principles and indigenous building practices. This study develops a dual quantitative framework—comprising an NbS evaluation system and a cultural value assessment system—for coupling coordination analysis. Results show a strong interdependence between the integration of NbS principles and village cultural value, with traditional villages (0.7806) achieving a better balance between ecological protection and cultural heritage than non-traditional villages (0.5953), validating the alignment of global NbS principles with local building wisdom. Based on gray relational analysis, disaster risk management and local governance are identified as key NbS dimensions shaping cultural integrity and knowledge continuity. An integrated indicator system combining ecological and cultural metrics is proposed. This study confirms the alignment between global principles and local wisdom, offering an NbS localization framework with insights for heritage conservation.

1. Introduction

With the increasing prominence of various environmental challenges, the development model that prioritizes economic growth at the expense of nature has revealed significant drawbacks. The international community has gradually recognized that “nature is the cornerstone of human survival and development” and has begun exploring sustainable development models that emphasize harmonious coexistence with nature. Against this backdrop, NbSs have emerged as a standardized approach that has been widely applied and proven effective, offering valuable insights for the field of human settlements science. However, the dissemination of cutting-edge concepts has also sparked a critical dilemma in local practice: whether to integrate external ideas or adhere strictly to indigenous knowledge. Empirical evidence suggests that neither blindly replicating global models nor rigidly clinging to local traditions is an optimal solution. Therefore, as NbSs gain global acceptance as a key strategy for advancing sustainability [1], it is essential to gain a profound understanding of their core principles and deeper wisdom, which is crucial for both theoretical comprehension and their broader application.

As living witnesses to the evolution of China’s millennia-old agrarian civilization and vital carriers of its material heritage, traditional villages embody profound architectural wisdom that has shaped their unique cultural value. This significance has been repeatedly emphasized at the national level as a key dimension of heritage conservation. However, in recent years, traditional villages have faced increasing challenges, including the deterioration of village landscapes and ecological degradation, which threaten their preservation and sustainable development. UNESCO has proposed that the concept of NbSs presents opportunities for more sustainable heritage conservation, highlighting the integration of NbS practices with heritage protection as a valuable yet largely underexplored domain [2]. Academic research on NbSs has gradually expanded beyond their initial focus on addressing ecological challenges to exploring their broader applications, such as their potential role in cultural heritage preservation [3,4,5]. Against this backdrop, this study focuses on the cultural value dimension, investigating the feasibility of applying NbS principles to traditional village conservation. By conducting a comparative analysis between NbS strategies and local indigenous practices, this study seeks to identify commonalities between contemporary global concepts and traditional wisdom. The ultimate goal is to establish an optimal integration pathway—one that mitigates the risk of cultural homogenization in a globalized context while simultaneously providing insights for the localized adaptation of NbSs in traditional village conservation.

2. The Theoretical Foundation and System Construction of the Association and Coupling Between NbSs and Cultural Value

2.1. Theoretical Foundation

Rooted in the philosophical concept of the “unity of heaven and humanity”, traditional Chinese architectural wisdom establishes a dynamic system that balances human settlements with nature. Guided by the spatial principle of “emulating the heavens and following the earth” and the ecological practice of “adapting to local conditions” [6,7,8], this wisdom is widespread in traditional villages across China. Empirical studies consistently show that traditional construction knowledge influences every stage of village site selection, layout, and material choice. While specific forms vary based on geography—southern villages emphasize water system interactions [9], whereas northern villages prioritize warmth retention and defensive structures [10]—the overall approach remains consistent nationwide, revealing clear common patterns [11]. For instance, in site selection, natural elements are carefully considered to enhance climate adaptability. In Hong Village, Anhui [12], the “back mountain, facing water” configuration, formed by Leigang Mountain and Nanhu Lake, effectively blocks cold winds and regulates humidity, improving residential comfort. In the Jiangnan water towns [13], settlements are designed to “live beside water”, integrating irrigation, transportation, and microclimate regulation. Regarding layout, traditional construction balances ecological control with symbolic cultural expression. Fujian Tulou [14], for example, employs circular layouts and a “thicker exterior, thinner interior” structure to create a thermal buffer zone, regulating indoor temperatures. The fishbone-shaped layout of Daling Village in Panyu, Guangzhou [15], aligns with water systems and airflow, reinforcing spatial expressions of clan and ritualistic order. Material selection emphasizes the use of local resources, creating low-energy, recyclable building systems. The high-platform dwellings in Kashgar, Xinjiang [16], incorporate reed-reinforced rammed earth walls for seismic resistance, while cave dwellings on the Loess Plateau [17] utilize the insulating properties of loess to achieve “warm winters and cool summers”.

Historically, traditional construction practices demonstrate villages’ deep adaptation to natural laws within their systems of production, life, and rituals, with cultural meanings embodied in spatial forms. In contemporary practice, as traditional construction wisdom is increasingly validated through academic quantification, its scientific value is recognized [6,8,18,19], evolving from mere “cultural heritage” into a forward-looking solution. However, its preservation and development require not only exploration of core principles but also integration with modern contexts and international theories, enriching and optimizing the system for greater adaptability and sustainability.

Since its initial introduction in 2002, the influence and application scope of NbSs have continuously expanded. Initially centered on biodiversity conservation, the concept gradually extended into the agricultural sector [20]. In 2008, NbSs underwent a milestone development, driven by international organizations, and were officially recognized as an effective strategy for addressing climate change in policy documents [21]. Subsequently, NbSs transcended sectoral boundaries, paving the way for multidisciplinary explorations of environmentally friendly development models. Between 2009 and 2012, practical applications of NbSs flourished [22,23,24], ranging from wetland restoration to mitigate flood risks and leveraging forest carbon sequestration to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the construction of ecological infrastructure to enhance urban resilience. Through these applications, NbSs have established themselves as a critical bridge between environmental conservation and human well-being. Today, NbSs have become an integral component of global policies, national strategies, and scientific research, attracting widespread international attention. In China, the implementation of NbSs has been predominantly concentrated in urban areas [25,26], yielding significant achievements in ecological restoration, biodiversity conservation, green infrastructure development, and climate adaptation. However, their application in rural regions remains limited. Existing studies on NbSs in rural contexts primarily focus on [1,27,28,29,30,31] climate change adaptation, water resource management, coastal landscape restoration, grassland management, disaster risk reduction, and rural landscape conservation. Notably, research exploring NbSs in the context of cultural value preservation remains largely absent, highlighting a critical gap in the current discourse.

The literature review reveals that, unlike traditional approaches that focus solely on direct environmental protection, NbSs emphasize emulating natural ecosystem processes to derive support and inspiration from nature [18]. They advocate for the sustainable management of ecosystems while simultaneously addressing socio-economic challenges. By providing multiple ecosystem services, NbSs facilitate the achievement of both environmental conservation and human well-being, reinforcing their role as an integrative and multifunctional strategy for sustainable development [32,33,34].

The fundamental principles of China’s traditional construction philosophy can be summarized as follows: “Settlement wisdom aligned with topographical advantages”, “Spatial wisdom adapted to ecological conditions”, and “Construction wisdom integrated with the natural environment”. These principles reflect a deep understanding of and adaptation to the natural landscape, emphasizing harmony between human habitation and ecological systems [35]. A comparison between the two reveals that the NbS principles advocating for “moving beyond mechanical methods, promoting low-interference and low-impact development” closely align with traditional Chinese concepts emphasizing “harmony between heaven and humanity, returning to nature, minimal human intervention, and following the natural forces to transform harms into benefits” [36]. A deeper analysis shows that the NbS principles of “protecting ecosystem integrity” and “considering external environmental adaptability” are highly aligned with traditional Chinese construction concepts, which emphasize a profound understanding of the natural environment, geographical features, and ecological balance when selecting sites. This is evident in principles such as “backing onto a mountain and facing water”, “embracing the shadow and welcoming the sun”, “mountains encircling water”, and “sheltering from the wind and gathering qi”. Furthermore, due to the geospatial characteristics of traditional Chinese villages, where settlements are often organized by kinship groups [37], the design and implementation are typically based on collective opinions from villagers, achieved through thorough discussions to reach consensus. This ensures a balance of interests and opinions, which resonates with the co-creation and co-governance principles emphasized by NbSs.

We can reasonably speculate that, despite the formal introduction of NbSs in the 21st century, both concepts reflect the same fundamental ideas within different cultural and geographical contexts in the East and the West [26]. Current academic research on NbSs predominantly focuses on their ecological dimension, emphasizing their ecological performance in biodiversity conservation, carbon sequestration, and risk mitigation, thus constructing a globally applicable technological framework. However, there is limited exploration of the cultural underpinnings behind NbSs. In fact, the ecological philosophy promoted by NbSs is highly culturally compatible worldwide. Its core principles resonate across different human civilizations, from the Daoist cosmology of “the Dao follows nature” to the Hindu concept of “the unity of Brahman and Atman” and the Christian ecological ethics of “stewardship”. While these civilizations express the idea differently, they all point to the ultimate theme of “ harmonious coexistence between humans and nature”. This cross-cultural value consensus allows NbSs to function not only as an ecological restoration approach but also as a cultural translator that activates traditional wisdom in local contexts. From this perspective, the localization of NbSs in China is not just a response to ecological challenges but a transformation into a vehicle for carrying civilizational values. Therefore, promoting NbSs in Chinese villages can not only reconstruct human–environment relationships through the global discourse of NbSs but also strengthen the intrinsic connection between ecology and culture. This contributes to the symbiotic evolution of “global methodologies” and “local wisdom” in a globalized context, providing conceptual support for building sustainable human habitats with both scientific and cultural depth.

2.2. System Construction

To further explore the intrinsic logical relationship between the NbS approach and local construction wisdom, this paper constructs an NbS evaluation system based on the principles of data availability, comparability, and utility. Additionally, this paper incorporates China’s mainstream village cultural value evaluation system, providing foundational support for subsequent coupled analysis.

Given the relative scarcity of research on the NbS concept at the village level in China, and the absence of a standardized indicator system, this study adopts the eight fundamental NbS criteria proposed by the IUCN [38,39]. These are (1) addressing societal challenges based on ecosystems; (2) multi-scale planning and risk management; (3) enhancing ecosystem integrity and biodiversity; (4) achieving equitable trade-offs between multiple benefits; (5) ensuring economic feasibility; (6) promoting inclusive, equitable, and transparent governance mechanisms; (7) evidence-based adaptive management; (8) ensuring sustainability and facilitating mainstreaming. Based on these, this study proposes an indicator strategy for translating the international NbS criteria into the context of Chinese villages (see Supplementary S1 for detail). By considering both the unique characteristics of villages and the core elements of the NbS approach, a quantifiable evaluation system is developed that integrates both international perspectives and local contexts. The specific translation approach is outlined as follows:

“Addressing Societal Challenges” Criterion: This study selects key indicators such as average annual rainfall, average annual temperature, frequency of natural disasters, and access to safe drinking water to assess the multiple natural and anthropogenic challenges faced by villages during development, including water security, food security, climate change, and natural disasters.

“Scale Adaptability” Criterion: The impact of the external environment on villages is incorporated into the evaluation considering spatial geographic factors such as elevation, slope, orientation, village alignment, and proximity to water sources and towns, reflecting the village’s response and adaptation to natural and social environments.

“Ecosystem Structure and Function Integrity” Principle: This study uses landscape indices, including patchiness, the Shannon diversity index, and landscape fragmentation, to measure the village’s adaptive response to ecosystem structure and functional integrity.

“Multiple Benefit Trade-offs” and “Economic Feasibility” Criteria: Evaluation indicators are set across three dimensions: ecology, economy, and society. Ecological indicators include wastewater treatment rate, waste management rate, and green cover; economic indicators include per capita income and collective economic income; social indicators include disaster prevention, wastewater management, sanitation investment, number of health technicians per 1000 people, and per capita housing area, providing a systemic analysis of the village’s collaborative performance across ecological, economic, and social goals.

“Governance Inclusivity”, “Implementation Adaptability”, and “Sustainability and Mainstreaming” Criteria: A governance capacity indicator system is developed based on three dimensions: village autonomy, policy regulation, and science education. This evaluates the level of public participation and institutional support in the NbS implementation process.

Regarding the cultural value evaluation system, since China’s relevant policies and regulations have clearly defined the evaluation of traditional village cultural values and assigned them significant importance, this study adopts the “Traditional Village Evaluation and Recognition Indicator System (Trial)” [40] rather than constructing a new system. This system uses the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to ensure broad coverage of evaluation factors through a multi-level structure and scoring criteria while combining both qualitative and quantitative as well as subjective and objective assessment methods to enhance its scientific rigor. Specifically, the evaluation system is divided into three sub-indicator systems: the traditional architecture domain (eight criteria layers and nine evaluation factors), the layout and site selection domain (five criteria layers and five evaluation factors), and the intangible cultural heritage domain (seven criteria layers and seven evaluation factors), as detailed in Supplementary S2.

2.3. Argumentation Approach

Given the theoretical commonalities between the two frameworks, this study constructs both an NbS evaluation system and a cultural value evaluation system using a coupling coordination analysis to verify their correlation. The NbS system quantifies the effectiveness of various measures implemented since the establishment of villages from a modern perspective [41], while the cultural value evaluation system quantifies village cultural characteristics to infer the integration of historical construction philosophies in the development process, thereby representing the long-standing governance wisdom embedded in traditional practices. If the two frameworks are theoretically compatible, the study should reveal that villages with higher cultural value scores also achieve higher NbS scores, indicating a strong coupling between the two systems. This would, in turn, validate the alignment between the NbS approach and traditional construction wisdom as well as its applicability in rural development. Building on this foundation, the study employs grey relational analysis (GRA) to refine the cultural value evaluation framework by incorporating the comprehensive indicators from the NbS system. This integrated approach provides an innovative conceptual perspective and reference for advancing village conservation strategies.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Study Area

Fujian Province, abbreviated as “Min”, is historically known as “Eight Min” due to its vast territory and long history. The western Fujian (Minxi) region is renowned for its distinctive Hakka culture, abundant natural resources, and historical heritage. This study focuses on the Minxi region, selecting Changting County, Shanghang County, Yongding District, and Liancheng County in Longyan City as the study area (Figure 1). For village selection within the study area, the research refers to the national list of traditional villages while also considering the availability of existing data and the accessibility of future data. Ultimately, ten villages—five traditional villages and five non-traditional villages—were chosen as the research subjects.

3.2. Data Sources

The data required for this study encompass three main categories: natural geographic data, historical and cultural data, and socio-economic data.

(1)

Natural-geographic data: Land use, elevation, and NDVI data were obtained from the Resource and Environmental Science Data Center of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (www.resdc.cn, accessed on 20 October 2023), with a spatial resolution of 30 m. Based on these datasets, land use types were classified and area statistics were calculated to support the evaluation of NbS indicators such as “distance to rivers”, “distance to township centers”, and “per capita residential area”. NDVI and topographic data were used to quantify landscape patterns, ecological benefits, and terrain-related indicators, including average elevation, slope, and aspect. Annual precipitation and temperature data were sourced from the National Earth System Science Data Center (www.geodata.cn, accessed on 20 October 2023) and village planning documents and were used to quantify the indicators of “annual average temperature” and “annual average precipitation” at the village level.

(2)

Historical-cultural data: Information on traditional architecture, spatial layout, and intangible cultural heritage was collected from traditional village application dossiers, conservation plans, local gazetteers, genealogies, and field surveys. Missing data were supplemented through interviews with village committees. These datasets support the cultural value assessment based on the official Cultural Value Evaluation Index System.

(3)

Socio-economic data: Data on governance investment, education, technology, and collective income were obtained from township master plans, village planning documents, and interviews with local officials. The interview outline is provided in Supplementary S3. These data inform the evaluation of indicators related to economic benefits, social development, self-governance, and policy support in the NbS framework.

3.3. Research Methods

(1)

Comprehensive System Evaluation

Before conducting the coupled coordination analysis, a comprehensive score for both the NbS and cultural value systems of each village needs to be calculated. The NbS evaluation system has already been constructed based on eight criteria, and the next step involves determining indicator weights, which includes three steps: determining indicator attributes, data standardization, and weight calculation. Specifically, the process is as follows: first, before data standardization, the attribute type of each indicator must be identified, which determines whether the value increase indicates improved village development (positive indicator) or the opposite (negative indicator). Subsequently, to ensure comparability across subsystems, the raw data are standardized using the following formula [42]:

$$Positive Indicator\text{:} T_{ij}={\displaystyle \frac{t_{ij}-min\left(t_i\right)}{max\left(t_i\right)-min\left(t_i\right)}}$$

$$Negative Indicator\text{:} T_{ij}={\displaystyle \frac{t_{ij}-min\left(t_i\right)}{max\left(t_i\right)-min\left(t_i\right)}}$$

In the formula, i represents the evaluation indicator, and j represents the sample. $T_{ij}$ denotes the standardized result, while $t_{ij}$ refers to the original value of each indicator. $max\left(t_i\right)$ and $min\left(t_i\right)$ represent the maximum and minimum values of the indicator, respectively.

Based on standardization, this study uses the entropy weight method to determine the weights of each indicator. The entropy weight method is an objective weighting approach based on information entropy theory. Its main advantage lies in autonomously assigning weights by quantifying the degree of data dispersion, effectively avoiding the influence of expert subjective preferences on weight distribution in traditional methods. The scientific validity and reliability of this method in system evaluation have been validated in multiple fields of research. Referencing relevant studies [43], the formula used in this paper is as follows:

$$h_i=-k{\displaystyle \sum }_{j=1}^n\left(f_{ij}\mathit{ln}{f}_{ij}\right)$$

$$\omega =\left(1-h_i\right)/\left(n-{{\displaystyle \sum }}_{i=1}^n{h}_i\right)\left(0\le {\omega }_i\le 1\right)$$

In the formula, ${\omega }_i$ represents the entropy weight, $h_i$ represents the entropy, and $n$ denotes the number of samples. Additionally, $f_{ij}=x_{ij}{{\displaystyle \sum }}_{i=1}^n{x}_{ij}$, $k$ = 1/$\mathit{ln}n$ (when $f_{ij}$ = 0, let $h_i$ = 0).

After determining the weights of each indicator (specific results can be found in Supplementary S4), a comprehensive calculation of the overall system performance is required based on the scores of each indicator. The specific method is as follows: multiply the standardized value of each indicator by its corresponding weight to obtain the weighted score for that indicator. Then, sum the weighted scores of all indicators to obtain the overall system score. A higher score indicates that the village better reflects the NbS concept in its natural context and development practices. The calculation formula is as follows:

$$F={\displaystyle \sum }_{i=1}^n{S}_i{W}_i$$

In the formula, $F$ represents the overall NbS system score, $S_i$ refers to the score of the i-th evaluation indicator, $W_i$ denotes the weight of the i-th evaluation indicator, and n is the total number of evaluation indicators.

For the cultural value evaluation system, this study adopts the widely applicable and scientifically grounded “Traditional Village Evaluation and Recognition Indicator System (Trial)” (refer to Supplementary S2 for the scoring details). Quantitative indicators follow the existing standards. For example, the indicator X5, “The proportion of traditional historical buildings’ land area to the total village construction land area”, is scored as follows: 12–15 points for over 60%, 8–11 points for 40–60%, 4–7 points for 20–40%, and 0–3 points for less than 20%. For qualitative indicators, on-site surveys are conducted, and multiple experts assess the historical buildings, layout patterns, and intangible cultural heritage of each village. These are then documented with photographs, and each village is rated according to the criteria in Supplementary S5. To minimize subjective bias, each option is rated on a scale of I, II, III, IV, or V, with higher scores corresponding to higher ratings. Finally, the ratings of all scholars are compiled, and the average score of each indicator is used as the final score for that indicator. The scores for all indicators are then summed to form the overall cultural value evaluation result for each village. Based on this, the scores for each village are standardized to facilitate subsequent coupled coordination analysis of the two systems.

(2)

Coupling Coordination Degree Model

The coupling coordination degree model is a commonly used method for analyzing the interaction between different systems [44,45]. It effectively reflects the degree of interaction and the trend of coordinated development among multiple systems. This study applies the coupling coordination degree model to explore the relationship between the NbS evaluation system and the village cultural value system. The formulas used are as follows:

$$C={\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{f\left(x\right)·g\left(x\right)}{{\left[\frac{f\left(x\right)+g\left(x\right)}{2}\right]}^2}}\right\}}^k$$

$$T=\alpha f\left(x\right)+\beta ·g\left(y\right)$$

$$D=\sqrt{C·T}$$

In the formula, C represents the coupling degree between the village cultural value and the NbS system, and the value range of C is [0, 1]. $f\left(x\right)$ represents the cultural value evaluation index, and $g\left(x\right)$ represents the NbS system evaluation index. This study takes k = 2 for calculation. T is the comprehensive coordination index of cultural value and NbSs. $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are undetermined coefficients, and $\alpha$+ $\beta$ = 1. This study believes that the two systems are equally important, that is, $\alpha$=$\beta$ = 0.5.

D is the coupling coordination degree of the two systems, which is used to measure the degree of coupling coordination between systems or system elements, and the value range is [0, 1]. This study draws on relevant research results to divide the coupling degree and coupling coordination degree of cultural value and NbSs. The division results are shown in

Table 1. Coupling degree (C) classification standard.

Level	Interval	Coupling Phase
1	[0, 0.3]	Low-level coupling stage
2	(0.3, 0.5]	Antagonistic stage
3	(0.5, 0.8]	Running-in phase
4	(0.8, 1]	High-level coupling stage

and

Table 2. Coupling coordination degree (D) classification standard.

Level	Interval	Coupling Coordination Degree
1	(0.0, 0.1)	Extreme imbalance
2	[0.1, 0.2)	Severe imbalance
3	[0.2, 0.3)	Moderate imbalance
4	[0.3, 0.4)	Mild imbalance
5	[0.4, 0.5)	On the verge of imbalance
6	[0.5, 0.6)	Barely coordinated
7	[0.6, 0.7)	Primary coordination
8	[0.7, 0.8)	Intermediate coordination
9	[0.8, 0.9)	Good coordination
10	[0.9, 1.0)	High-quality coordination

.

(3)

Grey Relational Analysis

Grey relational analysis, also known as “grey relational degree”, is a method used to assess the degree of association between data sequences, particularly in situations where data are limited or information is incomplete. It evaluates the level of association between internal system elements or across different systems by comparing the trends and patterns of the data sequences. Building on the preliminary verification of the coupling relationship between the two systems, this study further uses grey relational analysis to explore the associations between the NbS system and cultural value system indicators. It aims to identify the key factors influencing the interaction between these systems, providing insights for developing strategic recommendations for village conservation and development from the NbS perspective.

4. Results

4.1. Comprehensive Evaluation of the NbS Evaluation System

This study employs the entropy weight method to determine the weights of each indicator. After standardizing the raw data, a weighted sum is calculated, and a comprehensive evaluation of the 10 villages is conducted. The results, as shown in Figure 2, indicate an overall average score of 0.391 for the ten villages. The average score for traditional villages (0.4768) is significantly higher than that of non-traditional villages (0.3053). This indicates that the construction process of traditional villages has historically integrated the core principles of the NbS approach, resulting in higher evaluation scores compared to non-traditional villages.

4.2. Comprehensive Evaluation of Village Cultural Value

This study uses the “Recognition Index System” to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the cultural value of the villages, quantifying their current protection and development status. It reflects the degree to which wisdom and thoughtful planning have been integrated into the entire process, from the initial site selection and layout during village construction to the later stages of governance and development. Based on the final scores (see Figure 2), traditional villages generally score higher than non-traditional villages, which aligns with our initial hypothesis. Among traditional villages, Chuxi Village scores the highest in cultural value, while Yuantian Village scores the lowest. Among non-traditional villages, Getian Village achieves the highest score and Chongsha Village the lowest. The scores for traditional historical buildings and site selection patterns in traditional villages are significantly higher than those in non-traditional villages, while the difference in intangible cultural heritage scores between the two types of villages is relatively small. This indicates that the cultural value of villages is largely influenced by tangible cultural heritage, particularly village architecture and site selection.

4.3. System Coupling Coordination Degree Evaluation

This study conducts a comprehensive evaluation of the villages based on the NbS evaluation system and the cultural value evaluation system and analyzes the results using the coupling coordination degree model. The coupling degree represents the correlation between the two systems, while the coupling coordination degree reflects the level of coordination between the integration of NbS principles and the cultural value presentation in the village, quantifying the balance between environmental protection and utilization, as well as cultural heritage preservation and development, during the village construction process. The results (see

Table 3. The coupling degree and coupling coordination degree of the two types of villages and each village.

Village Types	NbS Score	Cultural Value Score	Village Name	NbS Score	Cultural Value Score	C	T	D	Degree of Coupling	Degree of Coordination
Traditional Villages	0.4768	0.7787	Chuxi	0.3907	0.8833	0.9222	0.6370	0.7665	High-level coupling	Intermediate Coordination
			Peitian	0.4235	0.8367	0.9447	0.6301	0.7715	High-level coupling	Intermediate Coordination
			Hongkeng	0.7880	0.7833	0.9999	0.7857	0.8864	High-level coupling	Good coordination
			Sanzhou	0.4097	0.7467	0.9566	0.5782	0.7437	High-level coupling	Intermediate Coordination
			Yuantian	0.3721	0.6433	0.9637	0.5077	0.6995	High-level coupling	Primary Coordination
Non-traditional villages	0.3053	0.4113	Getian	0.3388	0.5700	0.9671	0.4544	0.6629	High-level coupling	Primary Coordination
			Shengxing	0.2080	0.4867	0.9160	0.3473	0.5640	High-level coupling	Barely coordinated
			Gechuan	0.3899	0.3833	0.9999	0.3866	0.6218	High-level coupling	Primary Coordination
			Caixia	0.3463	0.3200	0.9992	0.3331	0.5769	High-level coupling	Barely coordinated
			Chongsha	0.2438	0.2967	0.9952	0.2702	0.5186	High-level coupling	Barely coordinated

) show that the coupling degree for both traditional and non-traditional villages is above 0.8, indicating a high level of coupling. Upon further analysis of the coupling coordination degree between the two systems, it is found that the coupling coordination degree between the cultural value and NbS systems in traditional villages is 0.7806, indicating a moderate coordination state, while the coupling coordination degree between the cultural value and NbS systems in non-traditional villages is 0.5953, reflecting a barely coordinated state.

4.4. Grey Relational Analysis

Further, grey relational analysis is conducted to explore the indicator factors that show a high degree of correlation between the two systems (see

Table 4. Grey correlation ranking table of coupling between NbSs and cultural value.

Serial Number	Main NbS Influencing Factors	Gray Correlation Degree	Main Influencing Factors of Cultural Value	Gray Correlation Degree
1	Existence of village regulations and conventions	0.7079	Scale of inheritance activities	0.6250
2	Rate of centralized treatment of household waste	0.6994	Types of existing historical environmental elements	0.6249
3	Existence of a villagers’ committee	0.6932	Grade of cultural heritage protection units	0.6245
4	Natural disasters	0.6757	Degree of preservation of traditional village layout	0.6226
5	Rate of sewage treatment	0.6680	Types of intangible cultural heritage	0.6212
6	Distance of the village from the river	0.6533	Period of construction of traditional historical buildings (groups)	0.6211
7	Status of protective policy formulation	0.6533	Preservation status of traditional historical buildings and surrounding environment	0.6209
8	Rate of access to safe drinking water	0.6401	Inheritance status	0.6201
9	Landscape fragmentation	0.6295	Aesthetic value of traditional historical buildings (groups)	0.6189
10	Village orientation	0.6173	Construction period of the oldest existing building	0.6182
11	Elevation	0.6145	Coordination between the village and surrounding environment	0.6178
12	Green coverage rate	0.6104	Level of intangible cultural heritage	0.6163
13	Slope	0.6102	Proportion of traditional building land area to total construction land area	0.6158
14	Average education level of residents	0.6084	Types of building functions	0.6081
15	Diversity index of inheritance activities scale	0.6070	Period of the formation of the village’s current site selection	0.6081

). The results indicate that the indicator factors strongly associated with cultural value evaluation can be broadly categorized into two groups: governance/regulation and natural disasters. In the governance and regulation category, indicators such as the presence of village regulations, the establishment of a village council, the rate of centralized household waste treatment, and the formulation of protection policies all demonstrate a grey relational degree greater than 0.65, indicating a strong correlation with the cultural value system. In terms of natural disasters, the frequency of natural disasters in the NbS system and the proximity of the village to rivers are two indicators that show a high degree of association with the cultural value system.

5. Discussion

5.1. Theoretical Foundation for the Integration of NbS Principles and Local Construction Wisdom

Through the coupling coordination model, this study demonstrates a high degree of coupling between the NbS evaluation system and the cultural value assessment system, indicating a strong interdependence between the integration of NbS principles and the ultimate presentation of village cultural value. As cultural value represents the external manifestation of long-term embedded construction wisdom, their strong correlation validates the theoretical hypothesis proposed earlier: the NbS concept shares fundamental commonalities with traditional construction wisdom. The NbS evaluation system can be regarded as an approximate equivalent of the traditional construction wisdom assessment system and is closely related to the level of village cultural value. This finding confirms that NbS principles and indigenous village ideologies are not in conflict but rather highly compatible, forming a universally applicable framework for exploring harmonious human–nature coexistence [26]. This conclusion aligns with the findings of Chinese scholar Zhao Hongyu [28] and provides theoretical support for the localized application of NbSs in China.

Further analysis reveals that the coupling coordination degree between NbSs and cultural value systems is significantly higher in traditional villages (0.7806) than in non-traditional ones (0.5953). This discrepancy can be explained by several factors. Traditional villages, shaped by historical evolution, embody an ecological wisdom that integrates nature, humanity, and the cosmos. Their construction practices follow holistic principles—for instance, site selection adheres to the logic of “mountain–water configuration and favorable solar orientation”, while spatial layouts aim to maintain dynamic equilibrium between building density and ecological patches. Moreover, traditional practices emphasize the integration of aesthetics, functionality, and environmental harmony [46], achieving a more balanced response to both ecological and cultural needs. In contrast, the lower coordination observed in non-traditional villages stems from a stronger emphasis on economic efficiency and cost control. Cultural continuity and environmental protection are often overlooked, with planning and construction processes driven by modern, efficiency-oriented models that prioritize short-term gains and functional maximization, often at the expense of deeper ecological and cultural integration. These findings underscore the contemporary relevance of traditional construction wisdom, which enhances village resilience and sustainability through the synergistic integration of cultural and ecological elements. They also highlight the potential for aligning traditional knowledge with modern NbS principles to support sustainable rural development.

Building on this foundation, this study further applies a grey relational analysis to examine the interconnections between the two systems. The results indicate that the key factors highly correlated with cultural value evaluation can be broadly categorized into two groups: governance and disaster-related factors. In terms of governance, indicators such as the presence of village regulations, the establishment of village councils, and the implementation of protective policies show a strong correlation with cultural value. Similarly, within the disaster-related category, the frequency of natural disasters and the proximity of villages to rivers are also highly correlated with cultural value. This highlights that both the NbS concept and local construction wisdom emphasize participatory governance and risk adaptation, further underscoring the central role of villagers’ self-governance and risk response capabilities in ecological protection and cultural heritage preservation. These findings align with previous literature. For instance, Hao, Diandian [47] highlighted the critical role of village committees in encouraging farmer participation in governance and fostering village value development. Yuanyuan Peng [48] emphasized the positive influence of rural leadership quality on environmental governance and sustainable rural development. Lin B. and Wang Y. [49] demonstrated that frequent natural disasters negatively impact agricultural production and the preservation of village cultural value. Additionally, Chowdhury JR [50] pointed out that a village’s proximity to a river affects its vulnerability to flood disasters, which, in turn, can have devastating consequences for village conservation and development. By examining these findings through the lens of NbS integration, this study identifies key areas of focus for enhancing village cultural value. These insights provide a valuable reference for the future development of an NbS-based village cultural value evaluation framework.

5.2. Construction of the Village Cultural Value Evaluation System Based on NbSs

This study selected factors from the NbS evaluation system with a correlation coefficient greater than 0.6 and refined the indicator framework based on the Recognition Index System and relevant literature. This process resulted in the development of an NbS-based village cultural value evaluation framework (Figure 3), with specific indicators detailed in Supplementary S6. Building on this framework, this study applied a combination of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the entropy weight method to determine the weight of each indicator. To enhance the robustness of the weighting process, 10 questionnaires were distributed to experts in related fields. These experts rated each evaluation factor, and the average scores were taken as the subjective weights. The objective weights were then calculated using the entropy weight method. The final weight values were derived through a combination weighting approach (Supplementary S7). This comprehensive evaluation framework serves as a reference for promoting the conservation and transmission of traditional village culture, guiding local NbS practices, and fostering the integration of global concepts with indigenous wisdom for innovative development.

Building on this foundation, this study re-evaluated the ten villages using the newly developed framework. Additionally, a comparative analysis between the original village cultural value evaluation system and the NbS-based evaluation system (see Figure 4) revealed a high degree of consistency in their results. This indicates that the new system maintains the logical framework and core value judgments of the original while expanding the dimensions of cultural value assessment through the NbS perspective. By integrating NbS principles, the framework enhances the evaluation process by incorporating factors such as ecological adaptability, resource utilization, and sustainability. This optimization does not overturn the original system but rather builds upon the inherent compatibility between NbSs and indigenous construction wisdom, ensuring an organic fusion of their shared principles. As a result, the new framework preserves local cultural characteristics while introducing a broader international perspective, enriching the indicator system and reinforcing the applicability and scientific rigor of NbSs in the context of village cultural value assessment.

5.3. Sustainable Development Suggestions for Traditional Villages Based on NbSs

As living heritage, the preservation of traditional villages should go beyond the maintenance of architectural structures and built environments to encompass the continuity of social networks and the villages’ adaptive transformation in contemporary society [51]. This study reveals a significant correlation between village cultural value and two key NbS indicators—community self-governance and policy regulation. Therefore, in integrating NbS principles with traditional village cultural value preservation, it is crucial to fully consider and respect the interests of stakeholders [52]. A deep engagement with local communities is essential to understanding villagers’ needs and recognizing them as the internal driving force behind village revitalization. Establishing self-organized conservation groups can enhance residents’ ability to safeguard their interests and strengthen their cultural identity. At the same time, the government should provide financial support, develop regulatory policies, and establish a diversified conservation framework along with feedback and appeal mechanisms. Continuous optimization of these strategies will ensure the effective transmission and sustainable preservation of village cultural value.

Current village conservation efforts predominantly adopt a static, specimen-like approach, overlooking the dynamic nature of villages. Additionally, research on risk analysis, response mechanisms, and strategic planning for balancing conservation and development remains insufficient. In response to these challenges, NbS offers a novel perspective for village conservation and development—one that emphasizes an integrated approach to addressing multiple societal challenges, focusing on diverse needs, and formulating precise strategies. At the risk response level, a goal-oriented disaster management mechanism should be established to enable scientific assessment, effective prevention, and timely management of potential hazards. Simultaneously, an adaptive management framework should be implemented, incorporating long-term monitoring and periodic evaluations of village development. This approach ensures the flexibility and continuous optimization of management strategies, enhancing the resilience and sustainability of village conservation efforts.

As a globally leading conservation concept, NbSs offer a standardized framework, well-defined quantitative indicators, and clear implementation strategies. At the same time, ancient construction wisdom, refined through centuries of practice, embodies profound theoretical insights and practical experience. Given the dynamic and living nature of traditional villages, their conservation cannot simply follow rigid, one-size-fits-all models. Therefore, a constructive dialogue should be established between global concepts and local traditional wisdom, fostering mutual enrichment and adaptation. From the perspective of global frameworks, it is essential to assess their alignment with local realities, identify commonalities, and tailor their application to regional characteristics, thereby formulating context-specific conservation and development strategies. Meanwhile, local wisdom—an invaluable historical legacy and a manifestation of cultural diversity—should be reinterpreted and refined through a modern lens. By elevating its valuable elements into contemporary standards, we can achieve a meaningful synthesis of “local wisdom and global principles”. This integration not only enriches global theoretical frameworks but also provides strategic guidance for the sustainable development of traditional villages.

6. Conclusions

This study focuses on the protection of village values by examining how global concepts can be translated into context-specific strategies at the local level. It centers around two key questions: first, whether Nature-based Solutions (NbSs) and traditional Chinese construction wisdom share a foundation for integration, and second, how the localization of the NbS concept can be achieved within the Chinese village context.

To address the first question, this study begins with a literature review that reveals a high degree of consistency between the core values of NbSs and traditional Chinese construction practices. An empirical analysis is then conducted, through which a dual-system quantitative framework is developed, consisting of an NbS evaluation system and a cultural value assessment system. The former measures ecological performance from a modern perspective, while the latter quantifies the extent to which indigenous construction wisdom is embedded in village development. Based on this framework, a coupling coordination analysis is performed. The results indicate strong interactions between the two systems in both traditional and non-traditional villages, suggesting that NbSs and cultural value systems are not only compatible but also mutually reinforcing. Together, they offer a globally applicable approach to achieving harmony between humans and nature. Further analysis shows that traditional villages exhibit significantly higher coupling coordination degrees than non-traditional ones, suggesting a more effective balance between ecological protection and cultural heritage preservation. This finding reflects the deep-rooted presence of traditional wisdom in these villages and affirms its contemporary relevance and potential for integration with modern NbS approaches.

Building on this foundation, the study proposes a localized adaptation of the NbS concept in Chinese villages, focusing on value enhancement. Gray relational analysis identifies key NbS factors impacting cultural value, leading to the development of a new indicator system that integrates NbS dimensions into the existing cultural value framework. This system preserves the original cultural value evaluation logic while incorporating ecological adaptability, resource utilization, and sustainability, constructing a new path for the synergistic evaluation of culture and ecology, promoting the organic integration of both concepts. It is worth emphasizing that local characteristics are crucial in model development. While the indicator design reflects regional cultural traits, we recognize that certain key cultural dimensions, such as local legends and clan memories, are highly contextual and subjective, making them difficult to quantify. The absence of these non-quantifiable elements may lead to the underrepresentation of some cultural features. Therefore, the proposed system is not a standardized tool but an exploratory approach aimed at providing a scalable, adaptable evaluation framework to support future village conservation and help integrate local cultural values into ecological planning and governance.

It is worth noting that the localization path of NbS in villages, as discussed in this study, is based on a core understanding: the cultural value of traditional settlements is primarily shaped by their natural environmental context and corresponding production practices. The relationship between humans and the environment forms the basic logic and developmental trajectory of their historical evolution. These cultural features are essentially an “ecologically embedded” manifestation of civilization, reflecting a symbiotic pattern formed through long-term interactions between the natural environment and human activities. However, the process of cultural value generation is highly complex, with cultural evolution sometimes driven by incidental events. This study acknowledges such occurrences but does not incorporate them into the analysis, as the NbS localization evaluation system developed here aims to extract universally applicable patterns rather than account for all the unique mechanisms of specific cases. Therefore, the selected variables focus on presenting the correlations between cultural value and the natural environment, emphasizing the “commonalities” under the general trend rather than the “specifics” of individual cases. Future research could further explore cultural formation mechanisms driven by non-ecological factors in order to more comprehensively clarify the diverse origins of traditional settlement culture and inform its conservation and development pathways.