The main aim of this study is to model the Nature-based solution of Green Roofs (GRs) in order to assess their efficiency as a mitigation strategy for UHI effects and extreme summertime temperatures over Attica in Greece. The area of study is a region that encompasses Athens, the largest Metropolitan area of Greece, and the suburbs. The analysis has been performed with the use of an advanced modeling system that consists of the mesoscale Weather Research and Forecasting model (WRF) and the advanced multilayer urban canopy scheme building energy parameter and building energy model (BEP/BEM). The two modules are fully coupled, forming WRF urban. For a better description of the urban environment and in order to use the full capabilities of the urban canopy scheme, 11 urban classes corresponding to the WUDAPT Local Climate Zones (LCZ) were used instead of the 3 traditional urban classes that the default version uses. Sensitivity tests for a major heatwave that affected the area of study have been performed in order to evaluate the impact of GRs on the UHI structure. Results indicate that the modification of the roof energy budget decreased the maximum temperature during heatwaves and altered the spatio-temporal pattern of the effect.

Nature-based solutions (NbS) can be beneficial to help human communities build resilience to climate change by managing and mitigating related hydro-meteorological hazards (HMHs). Substantial research has been carried out in the past on the detection and assessment of HMHs and their derived risks. Yet, knowledge on the performance and functioning of NbS to address these hazards is severely lacking. The latter is exacerbated by the lack of practical and viable approaches that would help identify and select NbS for specific problems. The EU-funded OPERANDUM project established seven Open-Air Laboratories (OALs) across Europe to co-develop, test, and generate an evidence base from innovative NbS deployed to address HMHs such as flooding, droughts, landslides, erosion, and eutrophication. Herein, we detail the original approaches that each OAL followed in the process of identifying and selecting NbS for specific hazards with the aim of proposing a novel, generic framework for selecting NbS. We found that the process of selecting NBS was overall complex and context-specific in all the OALs, and it comprised 26 steps distributed across three stages: (i) Problem recognition, (ii) NbS identification, and (iii) NbS selection. We also identified over 20 selection criteria which, in most cases, were shared across OALs and were chiefly related to sustainability aspects. All the identified NbS were related to the regulation of the water cycle, and they were mostly chosen according to three main factors: (i) hazard type, (ii) hazard scale, and (iii) OAL size. We noticed that OALs exposed to landslides and erosion selected NbS capable to manage water budgets within the soil compartment at the local or landscape scale, while OALs exposed to floods, droughts, and eutrophication selected approaches to managing water transport and storage at the catchment scale. We successfully portrayed a synthesis of the stages and steps followed in the OALs’ NbS selection process in a framework. The framework, which reflects the experiences of the stakeholders involved, is inclusive and integrated, and it can serve as a basis to inform NbS selection processes whilst facilitating the organisation of diverse stakeholders working towards finding solutions to natural hazards. We animate the future development of the proposed framework by integrating financial viability steps. We also encourage studies looking into the implementation of the proposed framework through quantitative approaches integrating multi-criteria analyses.