The Function and Perception of Urban Ecosystem Services in the Society

Edlund, Fredrik

Artykuł - szczegóły

Tytuł artykułu

The Function and Perception of Urban Ecosystem Services in the Society

Autorzy

Edlund Fredrik

Treść / Zawartość

Pełne teksty:

Pobierz

Identyfikatory

Warianty tytułu

Funkcja i postrzeganie usług pełnionych przez ekosystemy miejskie w społeczeństwie

Języki publikacji

Abstrakty

The urban development that is now taking place globally has led to the most extensive permanent land use that has caused ecosystems to be destroyed and the depletion of natural resources. Today, about 50% of the world’s population lives in urbanized cities and by 2030 it is estimated to be about 70%. The fact that we gather in larger numbers in cities means that we transport large volumes of resources to these areas, which gives rise to waste and emissions, which places a burden on the neighboring environment to the it’s limits. This leads to problems for both human health and society’s economy, which is because the ecosystems that help us, collapse. To counter this, a better urban planning is required which includes the environment in society as ecosystem services. The problem with ecosystem services is that they do not have a commercial value, which makes it difficult to implement since they do not indicate any economic gain. Therefore, it is necessary to increase knowledge about how they contribute so that they can be correlated to how they contribute to society from three aspects: economic, social, environmental.

Rozprzestrzenianie się miast, który odbywa się obecnie na całym świecie, doprowadziło do największego stałego zajęcia gruntów, oznaczającego zniszczenie ekosystemów i wyczerpywania się zasobów naturalnych. Obecnie około 50% światowej populacji mieszka w miastach i szacuje się, że do 2030 r. będzie to około 70%. To, że gromadzimy się coraz liczniej w miastach, oznacza, że musimy transportować duże ilości zasobów do tych obszarów, co powoduje powstawanie odpadów i emisji zanieczyszczeń, co obciąża sąsiadujące z miastami środowisko do jego granic. Prowadzi to do powstawania problemów odnoszących się zarówno do ludzkiego zdrowia, jak i gospodarki społecznej, ponieważ ekosystemy, które mają nam pomagać, ulegają zniszczeniu. Aby temu przeciwdziałać, konieczne jest lepsze planowanie miast, które uwzględniałoby pełnione przez środowisko w społeczeństwie usługi ekosystemowe. Problemem jest to, że takie usługi nie mają one wartości handlowej, co utrudnia ich uznanie, ponieważ nie wskazują na żadne korzyści ekonomiczne. Dlatego konieczne jest pogłębienie wiedzy na temat ich znaczenia, aby można było je skorelować z tym, jak służą społeczeństwu w trzech wymiarach: ekonomicznym, społecznym i środowiskowym.

Słowa kluczowe

ecosystem services green Infrastructure urban planning urbanization

usługi ekosystemowe zielona infrastruktura planowanie miast urbanizacja

Wydawca

Lublin University of Technology

Czasopismo

Problemy Ekorozwoju

Rocznik

2020

Tom

Vol. 15, nr 1

Strony

15--23

Opis fizyczny

Bibliogr. 49 poz. fig.

Twórcy

autor

Edlund Fredrik

fredrik.edlund@gmail.com

Enviroment and Energysystems, Karlstads University, Karlstad, Sweden

Bibliografia

1. ADEGUN O., 2017, Developing Green Infrastructure in a Johannesburg Informal Settlement: Investigating Residents’ Willingness to Pay, in: Procedia Engineering, 198, p. 176-186.
2. AGUILAR F. X., OBENG E. A., CAI Z., 2018, Water quality improvements elicit consistent willingness-to-pay for the enhancement of forested watershed ecosystem services, in: Ecosystem Services, 30, p. 158-171.
3. AMANO T., BUTT I. PEH K. S.-H., 2018, The importance of green spaces to public health: a multi-continental analysis, in: Ecological Applications, 28(6), p. 1473-1480.
4. ANDERSSON-SKÖLD Y., KLINGBERG J., GUNNARSSON B., CULLINANE K., GUSTAFSSON I., HEDBLOM M., KNEZ I., LINDBERG F., ODE S. Å., PLEIJEL, H., THORSSON P., THORSSON S., 2018, A framework for assessing urban greenery’s effects and valuing its ecosystem services, in: Journal of Environmental Management, 205, p. 274-285.
5. ARITFUL ISLAM M., AHMAD S.A., ISLAM R., 2018, Estimating Willingness to Pay for Improving River Water Quality Using Contingent Valuation Method: A Conceptual Framework, in: International Journal of Management, Accounting & Economics, 5(8), p. 643-657.
6. BENDPR T. K., SHANDAS V., MILES B., BELT K., OLANDER L., 2018, Ecosystem services and U.S. stormwater planning: An approach for improving urban stormwater decisions, in: Environmental Science and Policy, 88, p. 92-103.
7. BERLAND A., SHIFLETT S. A., SHUSTER W. D., GARMESTANI A. S., GODDARD H. C., HERRMANN D. L., HOPTON M. E., 2017, The role of trees in urban stormwater management, in: Landscape and Urban Planning, 162, p. 167-177.
8. BISSONNETTE J.-F., DUPRAS J., MESSIER C., LECHOWICZ M., DAGENAIS D., PAQUETTE A., JAEGER J. A. G., GONZALES A., 2018, Moving forward in implementing green infrastructures: Stakeholder perceptions of opportunities and obstacles in a major North American metropolitan area, in: Cities, 81, p. 61-70.
9. CHEN X., de VRIES S., ASSMUTH T., DICK J., HERMANS T., HERTEL O., JENSEN A., JONES L., KABISCH S., LANKI T., LEHMANN I., MASKELL L., NORTON L., REIS S., 2018, Research challenges for cultural ecosystem services and public health in (peri-)urban environments, in: Science of The Total Environment, 651, p. 2118-2129.
10. CHIABAI A., QUIROGA S., MARTINEZJUAREZ P., HIGGINS S., TAYLOR T., 2018, The nexus between climate change, ecosystem services and human health: Towards a conceptual framework, in: Science of The Total Environment, 635, p. 1191-1204.
11. CHIARA C., 2018, Ecosystem services in urban plans: What is there, and what is still needed for better decisions – ScienceDirect.
12. CZAJKOWSKI J., ENGEL V., MARTINEZ C., MIRCHI A., WATKINS D., SUKOP M. C., HUGHES J. D., 2018, Economic impacts of urban flooding in South Florida: Potential consequences of managing groundwater to prevent salt water intrusion, in: Science of The Total Environment, 621, p. 465-478.
13. DEMUZERE M., ORRU K., HEIDRICH O., OLAZABAL E., GENELETTI D., ORRU H., BHAVE A. G., MITTAL N., FELIU E., FAEHNLE M., 2014, Mitigating and adapting to climate change: Multi-functional and multiscale assessment of green urban infrastructure, in: Journal of Environmental Management, 146. P. 107-115.
14. DERKZEN M. L., van TEEFFELEN A. J. A., VERBUNG P. H., 2017, Green infrastructure for urban climate adaptation: How do residents’ views on climate impacts and green infrastructure shape adaptation preferences?, in: Landscape and Urban Planning, 157, p. 106-130.
15. ELMQVIST T., SETÄLÄ H., HANDEL S., van der PLOEG S., ARONSON J., BLIGNAUT J., GÓMEZ-BAGGETHUN E., NOWAK D., KRONENBERG J., de GROOT R., 2015, Benefits of restoring ecosystem services in urban areas, in: Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 14, p. 101-108.
16. FELTYNOWSKI M., KRONENBERG J., BERGIER T., KABISCH N., ŁASZKIEWICZ E., STROHBACH M. W., 2018, Challenges of urban green space management in the face of using inadequate data, in: Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 31, p. 56-66.
17. GROSHANS G. R., MIKHAILOVA E. A., POST C. J., SCHLAUTMAN M. A., ZURQANI H. A., ZHANG L., 2018, Assessing the Value of Soil Inorganic Carbon for Ecosystem Services in the Contiguous United States Based on Liming Replacement Costs, in: Land, 7(4), p. 149.
18. GUSTAFSSON S., HERMELIN B., SMAS L., 2018, Integrating environmental sustainability into strategic spatial planning: the importance of management, in: Journal of Environmental Planning and Management.
19. HEGETSCHWEILER K. T., de VRIES S., ARNBERGER A., BELL S., BRENNAN M., SITER N., OLAFSSON A. S., VOIGHT, A., HUNZIKER M., 2017, Linking demand and supply factors in identifying cultural ecosystem services of urban green infrastructures: A review of European studies, in: Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 21, p. 48-59.
20. HUANG L., CAO W., XU X., FAN J., WANG J., 2018, Research article: Linking the benefits of ecosystem services to sustainable spatial planning of ecological conservation strategies, in: Journal of Environmental Management, 222, p. 385-395.
21. JIANG W., 2017, Ecosystem services research in China: A critical review, in: Ecosystem Services, 26, p. 10-16.
22. KIM D., JIN J., 2018, Does happiness data say urban parks are worth it?, in: Landscape and Urban Planning, 178, p. 1-11.
23. LI F., LIU X., ZHANG X., ZHAO D., LIU H., ZHOU C. , WANG R., 2017, Urban ecological infrastructure: an integrated network for ecosystem services and sustainable urban systems, in: Journal of Cleaner Production, 163, p. S12-S18.
24. LIMA L. S. de KRUEGER T., GARCIA-MARQUEZ, J., 2017, Uncertainties in demonstrating environmental benefits of payments for ecosystem services, in: Ecosystem Services, 27, p. 139- 149.
25. MABON L., SHIH W.-Y., 2018, What might ‘just green enough’ urban development mean in the context of climate change adaptation? The case of urban greenspace planning in Taipei Metropolis, Taiwan, in: World Development, 107, p. 224-238.
26. di MARINO M., LAPINTIE K., 2018, Exploring the concept of green infrastructure in urban landscape. Experiences from Italy, Canada and Finland, in: Landscape Research, 43(1), p. 139- 149.
27. MEEROW S., NEWELL J. P., 2017, Spatial planning for multifunctional green infrastructure: Growing resilience in Detroit, in: Landscape and Urban Planning, 159, p. 62-75.
28. MEXIA T., VIEIRA J., PRÍNCIPE A., ANJOS A., SILVA P., LOPES N., FREITAS C., SANTOS-REIS M., CORREIA O., BRANQUINHO C., PINHO P., 2018, Ecosystem services: Urban parks under a magnifying glass, in: Environmental Research, 160, p. 469-478.
29. NATURVÅRDSVERKET, 2015, Guide för värdering av ekosystemtjänster, Naturvårdsverket, Stockholm.
30. NATURVÅRDSVERKET, 2019, Vad är ekosystemtjänster?,https://www.naturvardsverket.se/Miljoarbete-i-samhallet/Miljoarbete-iSverige/Uppdelat-efter-omrade/Ekosystemtjanster/Vad-ar-ekosystemtjanster/ (16.01.2019).
31. NIELSEN-PINCUS M., SUSSMAN P., BENNETT D. E., GOSNELL, H., PARKER R., 2017, The Influence of Place on the Willingness to Pay for Ecosystem Services, in: Society & Natural Resources, 30(12), p. 1423-1441.
32. NIKODINOSKA N., PALETTO A., PASTORELLA F., GRANVIK M., FRANZESE P. P., 2018, Assessing, valuing and mapping ecosystem services at city level: The case of Uppsala (Sweden), in: Ecological Modelling, 368, p. 411-424.
33. REGERINGSKANSLIET R., 2015, Ekosystem och biologisk mångfald, https://www.regerin gen.se/regeringens-politik/globala-malen-ochagenda-2030/ekosystem-och-biologisk-mangfald/ (16.01.2019).
34. RIECHERS M., BARKMANN J., TSCHARNTKE T., 2018, Diverging perceptions by social groups on cultural ecosystem services provided by urban green, in: Landscape and Urban Planning, 175, p. 161-168.
35. RODRÍGUEZ-LOINAZ G., PEÑA L., PALACIOS-AGUNDEZ I., AMETZAGA I., ONAINDIA M., 2018, Identifying Green Infrastructure as a Basis for an Incentive Mechanism at the Municipality Level in Biscay (Basque Country), in: Forests, 9(1), p. 22.
36. ROEBELING P., SARAIVA M., PALLA A., GNECCO I., TEOTÓNIO C., FIDELIS T., MARTINS F., ALVES H., ROCHA J., 2017, Assessing the socio-economic impacts of green/blue space, urban residential and road infrastructure projects in the Confluence (Lyon): a hedonic pricing simulation approach, in: Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 60(3), p. 482-499.
37. SHACKLETON R. T., ANGELSTAM P., van der WAAL B., ELBAKIDZE M., 2017, Progress made in managing and valuing ecosystem services: a horizon scan of gaps in research, management and governance, in: Ecosystem Services, 27, p. 232-241.
38. SILVENNOINEN S., TAKA M., YLI-PELKONEN V., KOIVUSALO H., OLLIKAINEN M., SETÄLÄ H., 2017, Monetary value of urban green space as an ecosystem service provider: A case study of urban runoff management in Finland, in: Ecosystem Services, 28, p. 17-27.
39. SIRAKAYA A., CLIQUET A., HARRIS J., 2018, Ecosystem services in cities: Towards the international legal protection of ecosystem services in urban environments, in: Ecosystem Services, 29, p. 205-212.
40. VALLECILLO S., LA NOTTE A., ZULIAN G., FERRINI S., MAES J., 2019, Ecosystem services accounts: Valuing the actual flow of nature-based recreation from ecosystems to people, in: Ecological Modelling, 392, p. 196-211.
41. VALLECILLO S., POLCE C., BARBOSA A., PERPIÑA CASTILLO C., VANDECASTEELE I., RUSCH G. M., MAES J., 2018, Spatial alternatives for Green Infrastructure planning across the EU: An ecosystem service perspective, in: Landscape and Urban Planning, 174, p. 41-54.
42. VARIS O., KESKINEN M., KUMMU M., 2017, Four dimensions of water security with a case of the indirect role of water in global food security, in: Water Security, 1, p. 36-45.
43. WANG J., BANZHAF E., 2018, Towards a better understanding of Green Infrastructure: A critical review, in: Ecological Indicators, 85, p. 758-772.
44. WANG Y., LI X., SUN M., YU H., 2018, Managing urban ecological land as properties: Conceptual model, public perceptions, and willingness to pay, in: Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 133, p. 21-29.
45. WANG Y.-C., SHEN J.-K., XIANG W.-N., 2018, Ecosystem service of green infrastructure for adaptation to urban growth: function and configuration, in: Ecosystem Health and Sustainability, 4(5), p. 132-143.
46. Wei, J., Qian, J., Tao, Y., Hu, F. & Ou, W. (2018). Evaluating Spatial Priority of Urban Green Infrastructure for Urban Sustainability in Areas of Rapid Urbanization: A Case Study of Pukou in China. Sustainability, 10(2), 327.
47. WILKERSON M. L., MITCHELL M. G. E., SHANAHAN D., WILSON K. A., IVES C. D., LOVELOCK C. E., RHODES J. R., 2018, The role of socio-economic factors in planning and managing urban ecosystem services, in: Ecosystem Services, 31(Part A), p. 102-110.
48. XIAO Y., LU Y., GUO Y., YUAN Y., 2017, Estimating the willingness to pay for green space services in Shanghai: Implications for social equity in urban China, in: Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 26, p. 95-103.
49. ZINIA N. J., MCSHANE P., 2018, Ecosystem services management: An evaluation of green adaptations for urban development in Dhaka, Bangladesh, in: Landscape and Urban Planning, 173, p. 23-32.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa Nr 461252 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2020).

Typ dokumentu

Bibliografia

Identyfikator YADDA

bwmeta1.element.baztech-71e0f20d-2fff-4b62-930e-9517d846c6b3