Assessing the capacity of different urban forms to preserve the connectivity of ecological habitats

Landscape and Urban Planning

Volumn 105, Issue 1-2, 2012, Pages 128-139

  Tannier, Cécile ^a   Foltête, Jean Christophe ^a   Girardet, Xavier ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE FRANCHE COMTÉ   (France)

Author keywords

Compact city; Fractal city; Landscape connectivity; Residential development; Spatial indexes; Spatial simulation

Indexed keywords

ANIMALS; FORESTRY; FRACTALS; GRAPHIC METHODS; HOUSING;

COMPACT CITY; FRACTAL CITIES; LANDSCAPE CONNECTIVITIES; RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT; SPATIAL INDEXES; SPATIAL SIMULATION;

ECOSYSTEMS;

ANTHROPOGENIC EFFECT; ASSESSMENT METHOD; CONNECTIVITY; DISPERSAL; FRACTAL ANALYSIS; HABITAT FRAGMENTATION; HABITAT TYPE; LANDSCAPE PLANNING; RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; URBAN PLANNING;

ANIMALS; ECOSYSTEMS; FORESTRY; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS;

BESANCON; DOUBS; FRANCE; FRANCHE COMTE;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 84857396954     PISSN: 01692046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.12.008     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Aguilera F., Valenzuela L., Botequilha-Leitão A. Landscape metrics in the analysis of urban land use patterns: A case study in a Spanish metropolitan area. Landscape and Urban Planning 2011, 99:226-238.
2. Alberti M. The effects of urban patterns on ecosystem function. International Regional Science Review 2005, 28:168-192.
3. Barnsley M. Fractals everywhere 1988, Academic Press, New York.
4. Batty M., Xie Y. Preliminary evidence for a theory of the fractal city. Environment and Planning A 1996, 28:1745-1762.
5. Belisle M. Measuring landscape connectivity: The challenge of behavioral landscape ecology. Ecology 2005, 86:1988-1995.
6. Benguigui L., Czamanski D., Marinov M., Portugali Y. When and where is a city fractal. Environment and Planning B 2000, 27:507-519.
7. Breheny M.J. Contradictions of the compact city: A review. Sustainable Development and Urban Form 1992, 138-159. M.J. Breheny (Ed.).
8. Bierwagen B. Predicting ecological connectivity in urbanizing landscapes. Environment and Planning B 2005, 32:763-776.
9. Bierwagen B. Connectivity in urbanizing landscapes: The importance of habitat configuration, urban area size, and dispersal. Urban Ecosystems 2007, 10:29-42.
10. Burton E. The compact city: Just or just compact?. Urban Studies 2000, 37:1969-2001.
11. Calabrese J., Fagan W. A comparison-shopper's guide to connectivity metrics. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2004, 2:529-536.
12. Camagni R., Gibelli M., Rigamonti P. Urban mobility and urban form: The social and environmental costs of different patterns of urban expansion. Ecological Economics 2002, 40:199-216.
13. Caruso G., Peeters D., Cavailhès J., Rounsevell M. Spatial configurations in a periurban city. A cellular automata-based microeconomic model. Regional Science and Urban Economics 2007, 37:542-567.
14. Cavailhès J., Frankhauser P., Peeters D., Thomas I. Where Alonso meets Sierpinski: An urban economic model of fractal metropolitan area. Environment and Planning A 2004, 36:1471-1498.
15. Coffin A. From roadkill to road ecology: A review of the ecological effects of roads. Journal of Transport Geography 2007, 15:396-406.
16. Davoudi S. Polycentricity in european spatial planning: From an analytical tool to a normative agenda. European Planning Studies 2003, 11:979-999.
17. De Keersmaecker M., Frankhauser P., Thomas I. Using fractal dimensions for characterizing intra-urban diversity. The example of Brussels. Geographical Analysis 2003, 35:310-328.
18. Fall A., Fortin M., Manseau M., O'Brien D. Spatial graphs: Principles and applications for habitat connectivity. Ecosystems 2007, 10:448-461.
19. Forman R. Land mosaics, the ecology of landscapes and regions 1995, Cambridge University Press.
20. Frankhauser P. Comparing the morphology of urban patterns in Europe: A fractal approach. European cities - Insights on outskirts 2004, 79-105. Brussels. A. Borsdorf, P. Zembri (Eds.).
21. Galpern P., Manseau M., Fall A. Patch-based graphs of landscape connectivity: A guide to construction, analysis and application for conservation. Biological Conservation 2011, 144:44-55.
22. Gardner R. Rule: Map generation and spatial analysis program. Landscape ecological analysis: issues and applications 1999, 280-303. Springer-Verlag, New York. J. Klopatek, R. Gardner (Eds.).
23. Gardner R., Milne B., Turner M., O'Neill R. Neutral models for the analysis of broad-scale landscape pattern. Landscape Ecology 1987, 1:19-28.
24. Gardner R., Urban D. Neutral models for testing landscape hypotheses. Landscape Ecology 2007, 22:15-29.
25. Geurs K.T., van Wee B. Ex-post evaluation of thirty years of compact urban development in the Netherlands. Urban Studies 2006, 43:139-160.
26. Hagen-Zanker A., Lajoie G. Neutral models of landscape change as benchmarks in the assessment of model performance. Landscape and Urban Planning 2008, 86:284-296.
27. Hale M.L., Lurz P.W.W., Shirley M.D.F., Rushton S., Fuller R.M., Wolff K. Impact of landscape management on the genetic structure of red squirrel populations. Science 2001, 293:2246-2248.
28. Herold M., Couclelis H., Clarke K.C. The role of spatial metrics in the analysis and modeling of urban land use change. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 2005, 29:369-399.
29. Kramer-Schadt S., Revilla E., Wiegand T., Breitenmoser U. Fragmented landscapes, road mortality and patch connectivity: Modelling influences on the dispersal of Eurasian lynx. Journal of Applied Ecology 2004, 41:711-723.
30. Magle S., Theobald D., Crooks K. A comparison of metrics predicting landscape connectivity for a highly interactive species along an urban gradient in Colorado, USA. Landscape Ecology 2009, 24:267-280.
31. Mandelbrot B. The fractal geometry of nature 1982, Freeman, San Francisco.
32. Milne B. The utility of fractal geometry in landscape design. Landscape and Urban Planning 1991, 21:81-90.
33. Minor E., Lookingbill T. A multiscale network analysis of protected-area connectivity for mammals in the United States. Conservation Biology 2010, 24:1549-1558.
34. Minor E., Urban D. Graph theory as a proxy for spatially explicit population models in conservation planning. Ecological Applications 2007, 17:1771-1782.
35. Mitsova D., Shuster W., Wang X. A cellular automata model of land cover change to integrate urban growth with open space conservation. Landscape and Urban Planning 2011, 99:141-153.
36. Ostapowicz K., Vogt P., Riiters K., Kozak J., Estreguil C. Impact of scale on morphological spatial pattern of forest. Landscape Ecology 2008, 23:1107-1117.
37. Rayfield B., Fortin M.-J., Fall A. The sensitivity of least-cost habitat graphs to relative cost surface values. Landscape Ecology 2010, 25:519-532.
38. Rayfield B., Fortin M.F., Fall A. Connectivity for conservation: A framework to classify network measures. Ecology 2011, 94:847-858.
39. Riitters K., Vogt P., Soille P., Estreguil C. Landscape patterns from mathematical morphology on maps with contagion. Landscape Ecology 2009, 24:699-709.
40. Riitters K., Vogt P., Soille P., Kozak J., Estreguil C. Neutral model analysis of landscape patterns from mathematical morphology. Landscape Ecology 2007, 22:1033-1043.
41. Saupe D. Algorithms for random fractals. The science of fractal images 1988, 71-113. Springer-Verlag, New York. H. Petigen, D. Saupe (Eds.).
42. Saura S., Pascual-Hortal L. A new habitat availability index to integrate connectivity in landscape conservation planning: Comparison with existing indices and application to a case study. Landscape and Urban Planning 2007, 83:91-103.
43. Saura S., Rubio L. A common currency for the different ways in which patches and links can contribute to habitat availability and connectivity in the landscape. Ecography 2010, 33:523-537.
44. Sierro A., Arlettaz R. Barbastelle bats (Barbastella spp.) specialize in the predation of moths: Implications for foraging tactics and conservation. Acta Œcologica 1997, 18:91-106.
45. Spear S., Balkenhol N., Fortin M., McRae B., Scribner K. Use of resistance surfaces for landscape genetic studies: Considerations for parameterization and analysis. Molecular Ecology 2010, 19:3576-3591.
46. Syphard A., Clarke K., Franklin J. Using a cellular automaton model to forecast the effects of urban growth on habitat pattern in southern California. Ecological Complexity 2005, 2:185-203.
47. Tannier, C., Vuidel, G., Houot, H., & Frankhauser, P. Spatial accessibility to amenities in fractal and non fractal urban patterns. Environment and Planning B, submitted for publication. doi:10.1068/b37132.
48. Taylor P.D., Fahrig L., With K.A. Landscape connectivity: A return to basics. Connectivity conservation 2006, 29-43. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. K.R. Crooks, M. Sanjayan (Eds.).
49. Termorshuizen J., Opdam P., van den Brink A. Incorporating ecological sustainability into landscape planning. Landscape and Urban Planning 2007, 79:374-384.
50. Thomas I., Frankhauser P., Biernacki C. The morphology of built-up landscapes in Wallonia (Belgium): A classification using fractal indices. Landscape and Urban Planning 2008, 84:99-115.
51. Tischendorf L., Fahrig L. How should we measure landscape connectivity. Landscape Ecology 2000, 15:633-641.
52. Tratalos J., Fuller R., Warren P., Davies R., Gaston K. Urban form, biodiversity potential and ecosystem services. Landscape and Urban Planning 2007, 83:308-317.
53. Urban D., Keitt T. Landscape connectivity: A graph-theoretic perspective. Ecology 2001, 82:1205-1218.
54. Vasas V., Magura T., Jordán F., Tóthmérész B. Graph theory in action: Evaluating planned highway tracks based on connectivity measures. Landscape Ecology 2009, 24:581-586.
55. Vogt P., Ferrari J., Lookingbill T., Gardner R., Riitters K., Ostapowicz K. Mapping functional connectivity. Ecological Indicators 2009, 9:64-71.
56. Vogt P., Riitters K., Iwanowski M., Estreguil C., Kozak J., Soille P. Mapping landscape corridors. Ecological Indicators 2007, 7:481-488.
57. With K., Crist T. Critical thresholds in species' responses to landscape structure. Ecology 1995, 76:2446-2459.
58. Zetterberg A., Mortberg U.M., Balfors B. Making graph theory operational for landscape ecological assessments, planning, and design. Landscape and Urban Planning 2010, 95:181-191.
59. Zuberogoitia I., Zabala J., Garin I., Aihartza J. Home range size and habitat use of male common genets in the Urdaibai biosphere reserve, Northern Spain. Zeitschrift Fur Jagdwissenschaft 2002, 48:107-113.