The improved understanding of the environmental dimensions of armed conflict and their link with peace and security raises the question of how to address such impacts. In response to the growing awareness that environmental, climatic and societal challenges require integrated approaches, the recent introduction of the Nature-based Solutions (NbS) framework has gained momentum. Though environmental degradation from military activities and environmentally harmful coping mechanisms of local and displaced communities can be broad and complex, the use of NbS and broader nature-positive approaches, bring the potential to minimise and mitigate direct impacts and can be an instrument for conflict prevention through shared natural resource management.

However, while the NbS framework has been advocated by many, others have pointed to important flaws, shortcomings and risks associated with it. These include, but are not limited to, the risk of avoiding carbon reduction through carbon offsetting, land grabbing and insufficient consent from local communities, greenwashing, human rights abuses, militarised conservation, insufficient focus on justice, negative impacts on the environment, and ambiguity and debate about definitions and criteria.

Next to listing existing guidance notes on NbS in conflict contexts, this paper outlines key lessons to successfully implement NbS in conflict-affected areas towards co-benefits for nature and peace. Each key lesson is grounded within a peacebuilding project that PAX was/is involved in and describes additional good practices. First, with the right standards and safeguards, NbS have the potential to contribute to security with positive impacts on nature and peace. Second, NbS must be based within and grown from local initiatives. Third, it is critical to disseminate information from diverse and independent sources in the project planning phase. Last, accountability must be ensured of all actors, in particular those with a disproportionate amount of power, such as governments, multinational corporations, and international donors.

PAX urges UNEP, UNEA members, and other international organisations championing NbS:
• To discuss and address criticism and recommendations regarding NbS in conflict-affected settings at UNEA 6, as listed, among others, throughout this paper;
• To recognize the importance of the environmental dimensions of armed conflicts and address them within multilateral environmental fora;
• To develop and formalise NbS standards and guidelines, with specific attention to conflict-sensitive implementation in conflict-affected regions and their potential for contributing to peace and security, ensuring that NbS protect and support the most vulnerable communities worldwide, i.e. those affected by violent conflict; and
• To build on an inventory of realized NbS in conflict-affected areas contributing to peace and security, their best practices and lessons learned, and thereby systematically explore the opportunities NbS offer to address conflict-linked environmental degradation and sustainable resource management throughout the conflict cycle, i.e. for conflict-prevention, response, peacemaking (mediation and negotiations), peacekeeping, remediation, restoration and peacebuilding.