Linking demand and supply factors in identifying cultural ecosystem services of urban green infrastructures: A review of European studies

Abstract

Urban green infrastructure provides a number of cultural ecosystem services that are greatly appreciated by the public. In order to benefit from these services, actual contact with the respective ecosystem is often required. Furthermore, the type of services offered depend on the physical characteristics of the ecosystem. We conducted a review of publications dealing with demand or social factors such as user needs, preferences and values as well as spatially explicit supply or physical factors such as amount of green space, (bio)diversity, recreational infrastructure, etc. and linking demand and supply factors together. The aim was to provide an overview of this highly interdisciplinary research, to describe how these linkages are being made and to identify which factors significantly influence dependent variables such as levels of use, activities or health and well-being benefits. Commonly used methods were the combination of questionnaires with either on-site visual recording of elements or GIS data. Links between social and physical data were usually established either by using statistical tools or by overlaying different thematic maps. Compared to the large number of variables assessed in most studies, the significant effects in the end were relatively few, not consistent across the studies and largely dependent on the context they were seen in. Studies focused on aesthetic and recreational services, while spiritual, educational and inspirational services were not considered when creating links to spatially explicit ecological structures. We conclude that an improvement and harmonization of methodologies, cross-country studies and an expansion of this line of research to a wider range of services and more user groups could help clarify relationships and thereby increase applicability for urban management and planning.

Mapping and assessing ecosystem services to support urban planning: A case study on brownfield regeneration in Trento, Italy

“…While most urban ES studies have focused on a single ES , the integration of multiple value dimensions and related indicators, especially across different ES categories, is still a challenge (Jacobs et al 2016). In this context, multi-criteria analysis was demonstrated as a useful tool for planners (Adem Esmail andGeneletti 2018, Saarikoski et al 2016).…”

“…As shown by the assessment of the cooling effect, simple beneficiary-based indicators can be obtained through the combination of biophysical modelling with information commonly available to planners, such as the distribution and generalised level of demand of the actual and potential beneficiaries. What is needed, though still challenging, is to follow the whole 'production chain' of ES, from urban ecological structures and functions to ES benefits (Luederitz et al 2015, Olander et al 2018, which requires synthesising multiple inputs into a true trans-disciplinary assessment (Jacobs et al 2016). …”

“…Then, the results are combined through multi-criteria analysis (Geneletti and Ferretti 2015), which allows the best alternative to be selected according to different planning objectives and priorities. By presenting a real-life application, the paper contributes to the efforts towards mainstreaming ES mapping and assessment in policy-making, specifically addressing the challenge of integrating multiple ES values in decision-relevant and usable assessments (Jacobs et al 2016.…”

Research on Ecological Infrastructure from 1990 to 2018: A Bibliometric Analysis

“…The construction of EI needs to adapt to changing urban environments and stakeholders' needs. Therefore, in the next few years, research should focus on how to solve the problems of imperfect ecological function and the imbalance of the geographical distribution of EI [135].…”

Seeing the Forest for the Trees: A Review-Based Framework for Better Harmonization of Timber Production, Biodiversity, and Recreation in Boreal Urban Forests

“…Despite the fast growing body of research literature within market and non-market ecosystem services, trade-offs between services are still poorly understood [2]. Outdoor recreation is important on all forest land and is one of the most highly valued non-market services for all urban ecosystems [2][3][4][5][6][7]. The links between biodiversity, timber production, and recreation are well-studied [8][9][10][11][12][13], but studies rarely result in practical recommendations for how managers could integrate these values into the management of urban forest landscapes [14].…”