sustainability Article Ecosystem-Based Adaptation Practices as a Nature-Based Solution to Promote Water-Energy-Food Nexus Balance Kennedy Muthee * , Lalisa Duguma , Judith Nzyoka and Peter Minang   Citation: Muthee, K.; Duguma, L.; Nzyoka, J.; Minang, P. Ecosystem-Based Adaptation Practices as a Nature-Based Solution to Promote Water-Energy-Food Nexus Balance. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1142. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su13031142 Academic Editor: Nathanial Matthews Received: 4 January 2021 Accepted: 19 January 2021 Published: 22 January 2021 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affil- iations. Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). World Agroforestry (ICRAF), UN Avenue, Gigiri, P.O. Box 30677, Nairobi 00100, Kenya; l.a.duguma@cgiar.org (L.D.); j.nzyoka@cgiar.org (J.N.); a.minang@cgiar.org (P.M.) * Correspondence: k.muthee@cgiar.org Abstract: The objective of this study is to evaluate the contributions of ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) practices to the water–energy–food (WEF) nexus balance, design practical pathways, and analyze barriers towards achievement of EbA-WEF balance. An area case study and descriptive methods were used to analyze data collected from 50 community forests (CFs) spread across three regions in The Gambia. Extensive information from relevant literature sources was also referred to in this study. Fourteen priority EbA practices were established and categorized into four major groups based on their application similarities. Among the anticipated ecosystem services were enhanced water resource conservation, food and feed production, enhanced energy supply, and improved community livelihoods to enhance their resilience. Pathways on how each practice under the broad category contributes to water, energy, and food were developed to demonstrate how they individually and collectively contribute towards the nexus balance. Key enablers identified included a conducive policy framework, institutional support, diverse incentives, information, knowledge, and technology transfer, and climate and non-climate barriers were cited as impediments. The paper concludes by outlining recommendations to overcome the established barriers. Keywords: ecosystem-based adaptation; ecosystem services; livelihood; resilience; restoration; The Gambia; water-energy-food nexus 1. Introduction 1.1. Study Background Ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) is among the fastest-growing adaptation concepts around the world [1], based on its cost-effectiveness, multiple benefits, and a wide range of applications in different landscapes [2]. The EbA approach entails incorporating biodi- versity and ecosystem services into the broader adaptation strategy [3]. Further, Duguma et al. [4] presented evidence that EbA is a system-wide process that considers the interplay between people, policies, institutions, and broader ecosystems with the potential to pro- mote landscape restoration and livelihoods if well harnessed. It has the immense potential to contribute to the developmental and environmental goals at local, national, and global levels, as noted by [5,6]. Over the years, different communities have established various EbA practices depending on their socioeconomic needs, ecological conditions, and desired adaptation outcomes. According to Hoff [7], EbA practices aim to achieve balanced and secure systems that maximize potential synergies and reduce potential conflicts. Reinhard et al. [8] and Rasul and Sharma [9] noted that the security of these practices is defined in terms of their safety, reliability, accessibility, and affordability, at the same time taking into consideration environmental concerns. These options have worked better and are more sustainable compared to other options, such as engineering-based options. This is due to their ease of application in different levels and scales, cost-effectiveness, inclusivity of local and scientific and indigenous knowledge, and reduced social and environmental externali- ties, among other factors, as Phoju et al. [10] established. However, different practices to Sustainability 2021, 13, 1142. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031142 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability