Reimagining Nature-Based Solutions in Johannesburg: Lessons from a Grassland City
- Kerry-Anne Grey

- Nov 7
- 2 min read
Johannesburg is often described as an urban forest, but this leafy identity masks a deeper ecological and social history. Before development, the city sat within a highveld grassland biome—an ecosystem now largely displaced by exotic trees and urban infrastructure. In a recent study, Camilla Hyslop and colleagues explored what this transformation means for climate resilience, biodiversity, and social equity in post-Apartheid Johannesburg.
Using MODIS land surface temperature data, the Biodiversity Intactness Index, and a suite of socio-economic indicators, the study examined how different types of vegetation—native grasslands versus novel tree-dominated ecosystems—perform as nature-based solutions (NbS). In addition, they wanted to know, when there are benefits coming from either the native or novel ecosystems, who is benefitting?
Both native and novel NbS offered benefits over the urban core, but native grasslands consistently outperformed novel ecosystems in terms of cooling and biodiversity. Native and novel ecosystems are therefore both useful and benefit people. Importantly, these benefits are not evenly distributed. The authors found that lower income limits access to novel ecosystems and climate benefits - but not biodiversity and livestock production. Tree-rich areas tend to cluster in wealthier, predominantly white northern suburbs of Johannesburg, while lower-income communities on the city’s periphery—often in historically marginalised areas—have less access to these climate and aesthetic benefits of novel ecosystems.
Yet, the study also found that race alone is not a reliable predictor of who benefits from NbS. Instead, income and land use play a more decisive role. The key takeaway: effective and equitable NbS in Johannesburg must be grounded in local ecological knowledge and historical context. Reintroducing native grasslands may not only restore biodiversity but also help rebalance the uneven distribution of environmental benefits in the city.

This paper is currently under review and will be shared here when available online.




Comments