Ecological engineering or nature-based solutions: does the term matter?

Attempting to find the most advantageous approach to address environmentally, economically, and politically acceptable environmental challenges has led many organizations to incorporate new terms such as nature-based and ecological. The difference in orientation and terms of reference creates a gap to cross in the search for mutual understanding since the inconsistent use of terminology makes it challenging to find a specific solution. This research aims to better understand the impact of using different terms and evaluate the connections and differences among them through a bibliometric analysis. A bibliometric analysis was performed using the bibliometrix package in RStudio on environmental engineering, ecological engineering, nature-based solutions, engineering with nature, constructed wetlands, green engineering, and ecological systems. A thorough database search of Web of Science and Scopus was conducted to retrieve all published articles containing these terms from 1945 to 2021. The results showed that these terms developed over different periods, with a recent increase in the scientific literature. The growth of ecological engineering is stagnant, while green engineering and nature-based solutions are becoming more popular, with the highest average number of citations per year. The term “constructed wetlands” was chosen as part of the Ecological engineering field; however, the strongest connection is with environmental engineering. Considering the latest publications, environmental engineering remains the predominant area, with nature-based solutions gaining popularity in lieu of ecological engineering. Bridging the conceptual gap between these terms is crucial for fostering a more cohesive understanding and application of environmentally friendly solutions.