Search results

Nature-based solutions (NBS) generate different impacts at the urban scale, such as the ability to regulate water or store carbon, comparable to traditional, gray infrastructures in a more cost-efficient way. On the other hand, by their intrinsic nature, NBS do deliver a series of other services that are commonly defined as social, economic, and environmental cobenefits. These benefits are not always valued in a consistent and complete way, so there is the need to compile a more comprehensive evidence base on the social, economic, and environmental effectiveness of NBS. The chapter attempts to identify a categorization of the existing NBS and define the ecosystem services (ES) provided by them. Furthermore, starting from the results achieved through the definition of the existing NBS frameworks assessment, the chapter will identify a set of key performance indicators KPIs, based on the ES produced by NBS, to measure the economic, social, and environmental benefits generated in by NBS at the urban level taking into account their multifunctional character. In total, 66 key performance indicators have been individuated: 3 for provisioning services, 38 for regulating services, 17 for cultural services, and 8 for supporting services. Each indicator has been associated to a category of ES in order to measure and evaluate the performances of NBS implemented in cities.

Although the literature on corporate governance and firm innovation finds that board independence is important, this paper proposes that the presence of independent directors alone is not enough to explain their impact on firm innovation. This study analyses if diversity among independent directors may affect the relationship between board independence and firm innovation.

A panel data on a sample of 124 Spanish listed companies for the period 2008–2019 used to test the hypotheses.

Results suggest that independent directors have a negative effect on firm innovation, measured as number of patents, but when there are high levels of gender and nationality diversity among such directors, this negative effect may be mitigated.

Considering that firm innovation is a complex process associated with decision-making and that board independence itself may be not enough, this study goes a step further and delves deeper into the characteristics of independent directors. As far as is known, this paper is the first theoretical and empirical study that considers that independent director diversity as a moderating variable between board independence and firm innovation. Besides, this research contributes to the debate on the role of independent directors in firm innovation and the results may also serve as a guideline for policy makers and firms for structuring boards that are pro-innovation.