BRIDGING INCLUSION: BARRIERS AND ENABLERS OF GENDER AND DISABILITY RESPONSIVE COMMUNITY-BASED NATURE-BASED SOLUTIONS

Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.

🔬研究者:Offers a systematic framework to study inclusion in NbS, useful for socio-ecological research.

🏢実務担当者:Provides actionable enablers for designing inclusive NbS projects, e.g., involving women and disabled groups early.

🏛政策担当者:Highlights policy levers such as gender-disaggregated data and accessibility standards for NbS programs.

<ns3:p>社区本位的自然解决方案（Cb-NbS）在气候变化适应与减缓中日益重要，然而其实施并未实现公平参与或公正的利益共享，尤其是对女性和残障人士而言。本研究考察了Cb-NbS中性别与残障包容的障碍和驱动因素，及其对治理和社会-生态结果的影响。本研究通过遵循PRISMA指南和PICO框架的系统文献综述进行，基于从Scopus、Web of Science和Google Scholar中选出的文章，并辅以相关文献。研究结果表明，排斥主要由土地或资源获取方面的不平等、缺乏性别和残障敏感性的技术上“中立”政策以及精英俘获做法所驱动。在社会层面，父权规范和家务劳动负担限制了女性的时间和合法性，往往将其参与局限于没有决策影响力的正式参与。关于残障，主要障碍包括无障碍性（空间和沟通）、缺乏合理便利以及薄弱的分项数据。有利因素始终通过加强妇女组织和领导力、透明的问责和利益共享机制，以及从设计阶段就吸纳残障人士组织参与而显现。建议的政策含义强调性别变革性方法：确保女性获得获取权或保有权先决条件及利益控制权，设计对护理负担安全且兼容的决策论坛（灵活时间安排、儿童照护支持），将无障碍标准设定为项目要求，并强制要求按性别和残障分项的数据以监测利益公平性。</ns3:p>

AI 翻訳（deepseek-v4-flash）。 正確を期す場合は下の原文を参照してください。

<ns3:p>Community-based Nature-based Solutions (Cb-NbS) are increasingly important in climate change adaptation and mitigation, yet their implementation has not provided equitable participation or fair benefit-sharing, particularly for women and persons with disabilities. This study examines the barriers and drivers of gender-disability inclusion in Cb-NbS and their implications for governance and socio-ecological outcomes. The study was conducted through a Systematic Literature Review following the PRISMA guidelines and PICO framework, based on selected articles from Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, supplemented by relevant literature. Findings indicate that exclusion is primarily driven by inequalities in land or resource access, technically “neutral” policies that lack gender and disability sensitivity, and elite capture practices. At the social level, patriarchal norms and domestic workloads limit women’s time and legitimacy, often restricting their involvement to formal participation without decision-making influence. Regarding disability, dominant barriers include accessibility (spatial and communication), lack of reasonable accommodation, and weak disaggregated data. Enabling factors consistently emerge through the strengthening of women’s organizations and leadership, transparent accountability and benefit-sharing mechanisms, and the involvement of organizations of persons with disabilities from the design stage. Suggested policy implications emphasize a gender-transformative approach: ensuring access or tenure prerequisites and benefit control for women, designing decision-making forums to be safe and compatible with care burdens (flexible schedules, childcare support), establishing accessibility standards as program requirements, and mandating gender and disability-disaggregated data for monitoring benefit equity.</ns3:p>

• openalex https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.179292.1first seen 2026-06-17 05:26:50 · last seen 2026-06-17 07:13:41