Recreational ecosystem services in European cities: Sociocultural and geographical contexts matter for park use

Ecosystem Services - Tập 31 - Trang 455-467 - 2018
L.K. Fischer1,2, J. Honold1,3, A. Botzat1,4, D. Brinkmeyer1, R. Cvejić5, T. Delshammar6, B. Elands7, D. Haase8,9, N. Kabisch8,9, S.J. Karle1, R. Lafortezza10,11, M. Nastran5, A.B. Nielsen12,13, A.P. van der Jagt14, K. Vierikko15, I. Kowarik1,2
1Department of Ecology, Ecosystem Science/Plant Ecology, Technische Universität Berlin, Rothenburgstr. 12, D-12165 Berlin, Germany
2Berlin-Brandenburg Institute of Advanced Biodiversity Research (BBIB), D-14195 Berlin, Germany
3German Institute of Urban Affairs (Difu), Team Economics and Innovation, Zimmerstr. 13-15, D-10969 Berlin, Germany
4Institute of Vocational Education and Work Studies, Education for Sustainable Nutrition and Food Science, Technische Universität Berlin, Marchstr. 23, D-10587 Berlin, Germany
5Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Jamnikarjeva 101, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
6Street and Parks Department, City of Malmö, 205 80 Malmö, Sweden
7Forest and Nature Conservation Policy Group, Wageningen University & Research, P.O. Box 47, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands
8Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Department of Geography, Rudower Chaussee 16, 12489 Berlin, Germany
9Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Department of Urban and Environment Sociology, Permoser Straße 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany
10Department of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, University of Bari “A. Moro”, Via Amendola 165/A, 70126 Bari, Italy
11Center for Global Change and Earth Observations (CGCEO), Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48823 USA
12Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhagen, Rolighedsvej 23, 1958 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
13Department of Landscape Architecture, Planning and Management, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Slottsvägen 5, 23053 Alnarp, Sweden
14Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 2, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands
15Strategic Projects Unit, Research Services, P.O. Box 53 (Fabianinkatu 32), 00014 University of Helsinki, Finland

Tài liệu tham khảo

Arnberger, 2017, Elderly resident’s uses of and preferences for urban green spaces during heat periods, Urban For. Urban Green., 21, 102, 10.1016/j.ufug.2016.11.012 Bertram, 2017, Differences in the recreational value of urban parks between weekdays and weekends: A discrete choice analysis, Landscape Urban Plann., 159, 5, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.10.006 Bertram, 2015, Preferences for cultural urban ecosystem services: Comparing attitudes, perception, and use, Ecosyst. Serv., 12, 187, 10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.12.011 Bjerke, 2006, Vegetation density of urban parks and perceived appropriateness for recreation, Urban For. Urban Green., 5, 35, 10.1016/j.ufug.2006.01.006 Bolund, 1999, Ecosystem services in urban areas, Ecol Econ, 29, 293, 10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00013-0 Botzat, 2016, Unexploited opportunities in understanding liveable and biodiverse cities. A review on urban biodiversity perception and valuation, Global Environ. Change, 39, 220, 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.04.008 Brownson, 2001, Environmental and policy determinants of physical activity in the United States, Am. J. Public Health, 91, 1995, 10.2105/AJPH.91.12.1995 Buijs, 2009, No wilderness for immigrants: cultural differences in images of nature and landscape preferences, Landscape Urban Plann., 91, 113, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.12.003 Buizer, 2016, Governing cities reflexively—The biocultural diversity concept as an alternative to ecosystem services, Environ. Sci. Policy, 62, 7, 10.1016/j.envsci.2016.03.003 Carrus, 2015, Go greener, feel better? The positive effects of biodiversity on the well-being of individuals visiting urban and peri-urban green areas, Landscape Urban Plann., 134, 221, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.10.022 Cvejic, 2015, Urban agriculture as a tool for facilitated urban greening of sites in transition: a case study, Urbani izziv, 26, 84 Dallimer, 2012, Biodiversity and the feel-good factor: understanding associations between self-reported human well-being and species richness, Bioscience, 62, 47, 10.1525/bio.2012.62.1.9 Elands, 2015, Policy interpretations and manifestation of biocultural diversity in urbanized Europe: conservation of lived biodiversity, Biodivers. Conserv., 24, 3347, 10.1007/s10531-015-0985-6 Elmendorf, 2005, Urban park and forest participation and landscape preference: a comparison between blacks and whites in Philadelphia and Atlanta, US, J. Arboric., 31, 318 Fischer, 2018, Beyond green: broad support for biodiversity in multicultural European cities, Global Environ. Change, 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.02.001 Fischer, L.K., Kowarik, I., Botzat, A., Honold, J., Haase, D., Kabisch, N., 2015. Interaction of biological and cultural diversity of urban green spaces. EU Publication Deliverable D2.2 within the Green Surge project. Available from: http://greensurge.eu/products/case-studies/ Fischer, 2016, Drivers of biodiversity patterns in parks of a growing South American megacity, Urban Ecosyst., 19, 1231, 10.1007/s11252-016-0537-1 Florgård, 2006, Residents’ use of remnant natural vegetation in the residential area of Järvafältet, Stockholm, Urban For. Urban Green., 5, 83, 10.1016/j.ufug.2006.06.002 Friendly, M., 2016. Working with categorical data with R and the vcd and vcdExtra packages. Fuller, 2007, Psychological benefits of greenspace increase with biodiversity, Biol. Lett., 3, 390, 10.1098/rsbl.2007.0149 Gobster, 2002, Managing urban parks for a racially and ethnically diverse clientele, Leisure Sci., 24, 143, 10.1080/01490400252900121 Haase, 2014, Conceptualizing the nexus between urban shrinkage and ecosystem services, Landscape Urban Plann., 132, 159, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.09.003 Haase, 2014, A quantitative review of urban ecosystem service assessments: concepts, models, and implementation, Ambio, 43, 413, 10.1007/s13280-014-0504-0 Haines-Young, R., 2016. Report of results of a survey to assess the use of CICES, 2016. Support to EEA tasks under the EU MAES Process. Negotiated procedure No EEA/NSS/16/002. Haines-Young, R., Potschin, M. 2013. Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES): Consultation on Version 4, August-December 2012. EEA Framework Contract No EEA/IEA/09/003. Hanibuchi, 2011, Neighborhood built environment and physical activity of Japanese older adults: results from the Aichi Gerontological Evaluation Study (AGES), BMC Public Health, 11, 657, 10.1186/1471-2458-11-657 Hansen, R., Buizer, M., Rall, E., DeBellis, Y., Davies, C., Elands, B., Wiersum, F., Pauleit, S., 2015. Report of case study portraits - Appendix – Green Surge study on urban green infrastructure planning and governance in 20 European case studies. Available from: http://greensurge.eu/products/case-studies/ Hartig, 2016, Living in cities, naturally, Science, 352, 938, 10.1126/science.aaf3759 Hegetschweiler, 2017, Linking demand and supply factors in identifying cultural ecosystem services of urban green infrastructures: A review of European studies, Urban For. Urban Green., 21, 48, 10.1016/j.ufug.2016.11.002 International Labour Organization, ILO, 2010 International Test Commission, ITC, 2005. ITC guidelines for translating and adapting tests. Available from https://www.intestcom.org/files/guideline_test_adaptation.pdf. Kabisch, 2014, Green justice or just green? Provision of urban green spaces in Berlin, Germany, Landscape Urban Plann., 122, 129, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.11.016 Kloek, 2013, Crossing borders: review of concepts and approaches in research on greenspace, immigration and society in northwest European Countries, Landscape Res., 38, 117, 10.1080/01426397.2012.690861 Lachmund, 2013 Lafortezza, 2009, Benefits and well-being perceived by people visiting green spaces in periods of heat stress, Urban For. Urban Green., 8, 97, 10.1016/j.ufug.2009.02.003 Lin, 2014, Opportunity or orientation? Who uses urban parks and why, Plos One, 9 Mariani, 2016, Climatological analysis of the mitigating effect of vegetation on the urban heat island of Milan, Italy, Sci. Total Environ., 569–570, 762, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.06.111 Meyer, D., Zeileis, A., Hornik, K., 2015. vcd: Visualizing Categorical Data. R package version 1.4-1. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, MA, 2005 Nielsen, 2014, Species richness in urban parks and its drivers: a review of empirical evidence, Urban Ecosyst., 17, 305, 10.1007/s11252-013-0316-1 Palliwoda, 2017, Human-biodiversity interactions in urban parks: The species level matters, Landscape Urban Plann., 157, 394, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.09.003 Penedo, 2005, Exercise and well-being: a review of mental and physical health benefits associated with physical activity, Curr. Opin. Psychiatry, 18, 189, 10.1097/00001504-200503000-00013 Peters, 2010, Social interactions in urban parks: Stimulating social cohesion?, Urban For. Urban Green., 9, 93, 10.1016/j.ufug.2009.11.003 Pett, 2016, Unpacking the people-biodiversity paradox: a conceptual framework, Bioscience, 66, 576, 10.1093/biosci/biw036 Qureshi, 2013, Differential community and the perception of urban green spaces and their contents in the megacity of Karachi, Pakistan, Urban Ecosyst., 16, 853, 10.1007/s11252-012-0285-9 R Core Team, 2016. R: A language and environment for statistical computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. Available from: https://www.R-project.org/ [date of access: 26/01/2017]). Rall, 2017, Exploring city-wide patterns of cultural ecosystem service perceptions and use, Ecol. Ind., 77, 80, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.02.001 Sandifer, 2015, Exploring connections among nature, biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human health and well-being: Opportunities to enhance health and biodiversity conservation, Ecosyst. Serv., 12, 1, 10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.12.007 Sang, 2016, The effects of naturalness, gender, and age on how urban green space is perceived and used, Urban For. Urban Green., 18, 268, 10.1016/j.ufug.2016.06.008 Schetke, 2016, What determines the use of urban green spaces in highly urbanized areas? – Examples from two fast growing Asian cities, Urban For. Urban Green., 16, 150, 10.1016/j.ufug.2016.02.009 Schmidt, 2016, The sociocultural value of upland regions in the vicinity of cities in comparison with urban green spaces, Mt. Res. Dev., 36, 465, 10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-16-00044.1 Scopelliti, 2016, Staying in touch with nature and well-being in different socio-economic classes: the experience of Bogotá, Landscape Urban Plann., 148, 139, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.11.002 Seeland, 2009, Making friends in Zurich's urban forests and parks: the role of public green space for social inclusion of youths from different cultures, Forest Policy Econ., 11, 10, 10.1016/j.forpol.2008.07.005 Shan, 2014, Socio-demographic variation in motives for visiting urban green spaces in a large Chinese city, Habitat Int., 41, 114, 10.1016/j.habitatint.2013.07.012 Shanahan, 2014, Socio-economic inequalities in access to nature on public and private lands: a case study from Brisbane, Australia, Landscape Urban Plann., 130, 14, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.06.005 Shanahan, 2015, What is the role of trees and remnant vegetation in attracting people to urban parks?, Landscape Ecol., 30, 153, 10.1007/s10980-014-0113-0 Soga, 2016, Extinction of experience: the loss of human–nature interactions, Front. Ecol. Environ., 14, 94, 10.1002/fee.1225 Sreetheran, 2017, Exploring the urban park use, preference and behaviours among the residents of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, Urban Forest. Urban Green., 25, 85, 10.1016/j.ufug.2017.05.003 Sreetheran, 2014, A socio-ecological exploration of fear of crime in urban green spaces - A systematic review, Urban For. Urban Green., 13, 1, 10.1016/j.ufug.2013.11.006 Tzoulas, 2010, Peoples’ use of, and concerns about, green space networks: a case study of Birchwood, Warrington New Town, UK, Urban For. Urban Green., 9, 121, 10.1016/j.ufug.2009.12.001 United Nations, UN, 2014a. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2014 Revision, Highlights. United Nations, UN, 2014b. Composition of macro-geographical (continental) regions, geographical sub-regions, and selected economic and other groupings. Available from https://unstats.un.org/unsd/methodology/m49/ United Nations, UN, 2015. World Population Ageing 2015. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, Publication ST/ESA/SER.A/390. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, UNESCO, 2016. Culture: Urban future. Global report on Culture for sustainable urban development. UNESCO, Paris. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, UNHCR, 2016. Global trends: Forced displacement in 2015. Publication 576408cd7. Vierikko, 2016, Considering the ways biocultural diversity helps enforce the urban green infrastructure in times of urban transformation, Curr. Opin. Environ. Sust., 22, 7, 10.1016/j.cosust.2017.02.006 Voigt, 2014, Structural diversity: a multi-dimensional approach to assess recreational services in urban parks, Ambio, 43, 480, 10.1007/s13280-014-0508-9 Voigt, 2015, Does diversity matter? The experience of urban nature’s diversity: Case study and cultural concept, Ecosyst. Serv., 12, 200, 10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.12.005 Wolff, 2017, The impact of urban regrowth on the built environment, Urban Studies, 54, 2683, 10.1177/0042098016658231 Zeileis, 2007, Residual-based shadings for visualizing (conditional) independence, J. Comput. Graph. Stat., 16, 507, 10.1198/106186007X237856 Zhang, 2015, Factors affecting the use of urban green spaces for physical activities: Views of young urban residents in Beijing, Urban For. Urban Green., 14, 851, 10.1016/j.ufug.2015.08.006