In this report, we summarise the outcomes of a governance analysis conducted for the INTERLACE cities: CBIMA (Costa Rica), Chemnitz (Germany), Envigado (Colombia), Granollers (Spain), Metropolia Krakowska (Poland) and Portoviejo (Ecuador). The aim of the governance analysis is to gain insights in each city’s current governance practices for policymaking and policy implementation of Nature-based Solutions (NBS), encountered challenges, factors supporting governance and needs for tools and knowledge to improve NBS-governance. The outcomes inform the baseline for INTERLACE’s objective to increase the capacity of local governments to implement integrated and ecologically coherent urban planning and governance approaches for NBS. Governance is the means to an end. Locally adapted NBS - which aim to tackle the recovery of degraded, damaged, or destroyed ecosystems, utilise nature to address societal challenges, build resilience and provide environmental, social and economic benefits - can be considered the objective. A (governance) process should be established which reflects these ambitions. Various types of viewpoints, knowledge and expertise are needed in such a process. In other words, multi-sector, multistakeholder and multi-scale processes are key to meet its end. This consideration underlies the governance analysis. Interviews and focus groups were conducted within each INTERLACE city. We found that each city engages itself in various forms of engagement with academic, civil and/or business stakeholders for NBS policymaking and policy implementation. Nevertheless, all INTERLACE cities experienced challenges regarding collaborating with stakeholders, both internally within city departments as well as with external stakeholders. Either it was difficult to engage a diverse group of stakeholders, or to develop a shared vision or effective collaboration within the process. In addition, many cities find it challenging to develop, plan, design or adopt strategies for multifunctional green spaces because they lack appropriate scientific and technical knowledge. Tools that provide evidence of multiple benefits can support cities in making scientific arguments in favour of NBS. Moreover, funding hampers the planning and implementation of NBS in all INTERLACE cities. In search for alternative pathways to achieve and maintain NBS, different forms of governance with multi-actor and multi-sector constellations can be a driving force to find agreements on design, benefits, costs, funding, responsibilities, etc. The findings of this report is meant to inform multiple INTERLACE products to increase their relevance and applicability for the INTERLACE cities. The overarching themes of challenges, the factors that support the NBS governance and the specific city needs can act as a starting point for other INTERLACE tasks. More specifically, results will inform the identification and co-production of local governance solutions in each INTERLACE city (task 2.3), the development of city impulse papers (task 2.4), and the definition of relevant standards and tools (WP3). Furthermore, Annex B with the city results can be consulted to gain a more detailed understanding of the cities’ context, practices, challenges and needs.