NbS Triple Win Toolkit: Biodiversity Indicators in Context 42 Urban green & blue spaces and green infrastructure NbS implemented in urban environments may not have an effect size great enough to be picked up by the headline indicator recommendations included here. Many of them are small scale,and although can make local improvements, would not be changing the land cover designation or quality of land enough to count towards ‘hectares under ecological restoration’, and not down-scaling any threats on a large enough scale (compared to the threat of the urban area overall) to make an impact on the ‘status of threatened species’ indicator. Although the creation and/or improvement of green spaces (such as parkland) or blue spaces (such as rivers and lakes) could potentially contribute towards ‘hectares under ecological restoration’, given the likely desire for it also to be an area of recreation for the surrounding neighbourhood, it is probable that in most cases the area would not meet the requirements due to the management of the land for recreational benefit with high levels of human disturbance (for full details see methods guidance). While it is difficult to make generic indicators that capture the range of urban interventions in a way to capture the benefits at the scale of a portfolio of investments, thereis plenty of potential for biodiversity benefits within urban settings and at local scales, particularly where widely implemented. The emphasis once again is on considering project-level indicators appropriate tothe biodiversity objectives of the project itself. Good examples ofthese are demonstrated by EKLIPSE42 and Singapore Index onCities’ Biodiversity43. Genetic diversity Currently, although genetic diversity is internationally recognised as an important component of biodiversity, the conceptual and practical difficulties of monitoring genetic diversity mean that it is poorly represented in biodiversity frameworks beyond domesticated species29. Recent progress means that there have been recommendations made for three potential genetic diversity indicators in the CBD post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework44, however an in-depth review of this and wider genetic diversity considerations has not been included inthe scope of these recommendations. This would be an important area to consider in future – e.g. when CBD goals and national targets are more established – and should be informed by projects that attemptto increase and monitor genetic diversity in wild populations.