Promoting Urban Ecosystems by Integrating Urban Ecosystem Disservices in Inclusive Spatial Planning Solutions

Ecosystem disservices (EDS)—ecosystem properties and functions that cause discomfort or harm—often shape public attitudes to urban biodiversity more strongly than ecosystem services, yet they remain weakly integrated into inclusive spatial planning. This study develops and tests an EDS classification and a decision-making tree intended to help planners recognise disservices, assess ES–EDS trade-offs, and select proportionate responses without defaulting to ecological simplification. The framework was derived from literature, survey evidence, and expert–stakeholder input from Eastern European cities, and then examined through five contrasting urban action situations in Estonia and Belarus. The cases show that a shared decision logic for EDS is transferable across settings, but that its practical uptake depends on governance conditions. Where communication was proactive and explanatory, participation was meaningful, and long-term management was institutionally secured, disservices were reframed or mitigated while ecological objectives were maintained. Where disservices were framed late, trust was low, or political intervention truncated deliberation, even modest nature-based interventions were stalled or redirected toward grey alternatives. These findings justify treating EDS as a routine planning concern and demonstrate how an EDS-aware approach can strengthen inclusive planning by making both benefits and burdens of urban nature explicit.