Differential community and the perception of urban green spaces and their contents in the megacity of Karachi, Pakistan

Urban Ecosystems

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 853-870

  Qureshi, Salman ^a,b   Breuste, Jürgen H ^c   Jim, C Y ^d  

^a HUMBOLDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b BIRMINGHAM CITY UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SALZBURG   (Austria)

^d UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Environmental perception; Green infrastructure; Megacities; Nature perception; Quality of life; Socio economic disparity; Urban ecology; Urban forestry; Urban gradient

Indexed keywords

EID: 84888377690     PISSN: 10838155     EISSN: 15731642     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11252-012-0285-9     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Akhtar MR (1996) Towards an Islamic approach form environmental balance. Islam Econ Stud 3(2): 57-76.
2. Bell S, Montarzino A, Travlou P (2006) Mapping research priorities for green and public urban space in the U. K. Urban For Urban Green 6(2): 103-115.
3. Bennet G (2009) Green infrastructure in Europe-past lessons/future challenges. In: Sundseth K, Sylwester A (eds) Towards green infrastructure for Europe: Integrating Natura 2000 sites into the wider countryside. Proceedings of EC Workshop, 25-26 March 2009, Brussels, Belgium. Ecosystems Ltd. Brussels.
4. Bentsen P, Lindholst AC, Konijnendijk CC (2010) Reviewing 8 years of Urban Forestry & Urban Greening: taking stock, looking ahead. Urban For Urban Green 9(4): 273-280.
5. Bolund P, Hunhammar S (1999) Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecol Econ 29: 293-301.
6. Bonaiuto M, Aiello A, Perugini M, Bonnes M, Ercolani AP (1999) Multidimensional perception of residential environment quality and neighbourhood attachment in the urban environment. J Environ Psychol 19(4): 331-352.
7. Borgström ST, Elmqvist T, Angelstam P, Alfsen-Norodom C (2006) Scale mismatches in management of urban landscapes. Ecol Soc 11(2): 16. [online] URL: http://www. ecologyandsociety. org/vol11/iss2/art16/.
8. Breuste J (2004) Decision making, planning and design for the preservation of indigenous vegetation within urban development. Landsc Urban Plan 68(4): 439-452.
9. Brush R, Chenoweth RE, Barman T (2000) Group differences in the enjoyability of driving through rural landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 47: 39-45.
10. Buijs AE, Elands BHM, Langers F (2009) No wilderness for immigrants: cultural differences in images of nature and landscape preferences. Landsc Urban Plan 91(3): 113-123.
11. Carp FM, Carp A (1982) Perceived environmental quality of neighborhoods: development of assessment scales and their relation to age and gender. J Environ Psychol 2: 245-312.
12. CDGK-MPGO (2007) Karachi strategic development plan 2020. City District Government Karachi, Pakistan.
13. Chiesura A (2004) The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landsc Urban Plan 68: 129-138.
14. Crow T, Brown T, DeYoung R (2006) The Riverside and Berwyn experience: contrasts in landscape structure, perceptions of the urban landscape, and their effects on people. Landsc Urban Plan 75: 282-299.
15. Cumming GS, Cumming DHM, Redman CL (2006) Scale mismatches in social-ecological systems: causes, consequences, and solutions. Ecol Soc 11(1): 14. [online] URL: http://www. ecologyandsociety. org/vol11/iss1/art14/.
16. Daniel TC (1990) Measuring the quality of the natural environment: a psychophysical approach. Am Psychol 45: 633-637.
17. Daniel TC, Boster RC (1976) Measuring landscape aesthetics: the scenic beauty estimation method. (Research Paper RM-167). USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins.
18. de Groot WT, van dan Born RJG (2003) Visions of nature and landscape type preferences: an exploration in The Netherlands. Landsc Urban Plan 63: 127-138.
19. Deuraseh N (2009) Maintaining a healthy environment: an Islamic ethical approach. Eur J Soc Sci 8(4): 524-531.
20. Dökmeci V, Berköz L (2000) Residential-location preferences according to demographic characteristics in Istanbul. Landsc Urban Plan 48: 45-55.
21. Dow K (2002) Social dimensions of gradients in urban ecosystems. Urban Ecosyst 4: 255-275.
22. Flores A, Pickett STA, Zipperer WC, Pouyat RV, Pirani R (1998) Adopting a modern ecological view of the metropolitan landscape: the case of a greenspace system for the New York City region. Landsc Urban Plan 39: 295-308.
23. Government of Pakistan (GOP) (2000) District Census Report of Karachi South, Pakistan. Demographic Survey 1998, Federal Bureau of Statistics, Statistics Division, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad.
24. Gundersen VS, Frivold LH (2008) Public preferences for forest structures: a review of quantitative surveys from Finland, Norway and Sweden. Urban For Urban Green 7(4): 241-258.
25. Haq SN (2001) Islam and ecology: toward retrieval and reconstruction. Daedalus J Am Acad Arts Sci 130(4): 141-177.
26. Hartig T (1993) Nature experience in transactional perspective. Landsc Urban Plan 25: 17-36.
27. Hough M (1989) City form and natural process. Routledge, London.
28. Jim CY, Chen WY (2006) Recreation-amenity use and contingent valuation of urban greenspaces in Guangzhou, China. Landsc Urban Plan 65: 95-116.
29. Johnson C, Zipperer WC (2007) Culture, place, and urban growth in the U. S. South. Urban Ecosyst 10: 459-474.
30. Kamran M (2006) Rawalpindi Food Street attracts visitors. Daily Times, Islamabad. Retrieved January 26, 2010 from .
31. Kamran M (2007) Food parks gain popularity in Pindi, Islamabad. Daily Times, Islamabad. Retrieved January 26, 2010 from .
32. Kaplan R, Kaplan S (1989a) The experience of nature: a psychological perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
33. Kaplan S, Kaplan R (1989b) The experience of nature: a psychological perspective. Cambridge University Press, New York.
34. Kaplan R, Talbot JF (1988) Ethnicity and preference for natural settings: a review and recent findings. Landsc Urban Plan 15: 107-117.
35. Konijnendijk C, Randrup TB, Nilsson K (2000) Urban forestry research in Europe: an overview. J Arboric 26: 152-161.
36. Konijnendijk CC, Bentsen P, Lindholst AC (2011) Editorial. Urban For Urban Green 10(1): 1-2. doi: 10. 1016/j. ufug. 2010. 11. 005.
37. Levin S (2000) Multiple scales and the maintenance of biodiversity. Ecosystems 3: 498-506.
38. Lindsey G (1999) Use of urban greenways: insights from Indianapolis. Landsc Urban Plan 45: 145-157.
39. Lohr VI, Pearson-Mims CH, Tarnai J, Dillman DA (2004) How urban residents rate and rank the benefits and problems associated with trees in cities. J Arboric 30: 28-35.
40. Lovell ST, Johnston DM (2009) Creating multifunctional landscapes-how can the field of ecology inform the design of the landscape? Front Ecol Environ 7(4): 212-220.
41. Mander Ü, Helming K, Wiggering H (eds) (2007) Multifunctional land use: meeting future demands for landscape goods and services. Springer, Berlin, p 422.
42. Matsuoka RH, Kaplan R (2008) People needs in the urban landscape: analysis of landscape and urban planning contributions. Landsc Urban Plan 84: 7-19.
43. Mayer FS, McPherson-Frantz I (2004) The connectedness to nature scale: a measure of individuals' feeling in community with nature. J Environ Psychol 24: 503-515.
44. McDonnell MJ, Hahs AK (2008) The use of gradient analysis studies in advancing our understanding of the ecology of urbanizing landscapes: current status and future directions. Landsc Ecol 23: 1143-1155.
45. McDonnell MJ, Pickett STA (1990) Ecosystem structure and function along urban-rural gradients: an unexploited opportunity for ecology. Ecology 71: 1232-1237.
46. Mell IC (2007) Green infrastructure planning: what are the costs for health and well-being? J Environ Cult Econ Soc Sustain 3(5): 117-124.
47. Pickett STA, Cadenasso ML, Grove JM, Nilon CH, Pouyat RV, Zipperer WC, Costanza R (2001) Urban ecological systems: linking terrestrial ecological, physical, and socioeconomic components of metropolitan areas. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 32: 127-157.
48. Priego C, Breuste JH, Rojas J (2008) Perception and value of nature in urban landscapes: a comparative analysis of cities in Germany, Chile and Spain. Landsc Online 7: 1-22.
49. Qureshi S (2010) The fast growing megacity Karachi as a frontier of environmental challenges: urbanization and contemporary urbanism issues. J Geogr Reg Plan 3: 306-321.
50. Qureshi S, Breuste JH (2010) Prospects of biodiversity in the mega city Karachi, Pakistan: potentials, constraints and implications. In: Müller N, Werner P, Kelcey J (eds) Urban biodiversity and design-implementing the convention on biological diversity in towns and cities. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, pp 497-517.
51. Qureshi S, Arsalan MH, Coles R (2007) Simulating the sociometric analysis of landscape changes in GIS framework: an example of the selected town of Karachi metropolis. In: Bunce RGH, Jongman RHG, Hojas L, Weel S (eds) 25 years of landscape ecology: scientific principles in practice. Proceedings of the 7th IALE world congress, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 8-12 July 2007. IALE Publication series 4, pp 799-800.
52. Qureshi S, Breuste JH, Lindley SJ (2010a) Green space functionality along an urban gradient in Karachi, Pakistan: a socio-ecological study. Hum Ecol 38(2): 283-294.
53. Qureshi S, Kazmi SJH, Breuste JH (2010b) Ecological disturbances due to high cutback in the green infrastructure of Karachi: analyses of public perception about associated health problems. Urban For Urban Green 9(3): 187-198.
54. Ramankutty N, Graumlich L, Achard F, Alves D, Chhabra A, DeFries R, Foley JA, Geist HJ, Houghton R, Klein Goldewijk K, Lambin E, Millington A, Rasmussen K, Reid R, Turner BL II (2006) Global land cover change: recent progress, remaining challenges. In: Lambin EF, Geist HJ (eds) Land-use and land-cover change. Springer, Berlin, New York, pp 9-39.
55. Rohde CLE, Kendle AD (1994) Human well being, natural landscapes and wildlife in urban areas. English Nature Science No: 22. English Nature, Peterborough.
56. Sanesi G, Chiarello F (2006) Residents and urban green spaces. The case of Bari. Urban For Urban Green 4: 125-134.
57. Sanesi G, Lafortezzaa R, Bonnes M, Carrus G (2006) Comparison of two different approaches for assessing the psychological and social dimensions of green spaces. Urban For Urban Green 5: 121-129.
58. Schetke S, Haase D (2008) Multi-criteria assessment of socio-environmental aspects in shrinking cities. Experiences from Eastern Germany. Environ Impact Assess Rev 28: 483-503.
59. Schetke S, Haase D, Breuste J (2010) Green space functionality under conditions of uneven urban land use development. Land Use Sci 5: 143-158.
60. Schroeder H, Flannigan J, Coles R (2006) Residents' attitudes toward street trees in the UK and US Communities. Arboricult Urban For 32: 236-246.
61. Shafer CS, Lee BK, Turner S (2000) A tale of three greenway trails: user perceptions related to quality of life. Landscape and Urban Planning 49: 163-178.
62. Sherman SA, Varni JW, Ulrich RS, Malcarne VL (2005) Post-occupancy evaluation of healing gardens in a pediatric cancer center. Landsc Urban Plan 73: 167-183.
63. Smardon RC (1988) Perception and aesthetics of the urban environment: review of the role of vegetation. Landsc Urban Plan 15: 85-106.
64. Stoffberg GH, van Rooyen MW, van der Linde MJ, Groeneveld HT (2010) Carbon sequestration estimates of indigenous street trees in the City of Tshwane, South Africa. Urban For Urban Green 9(1): 9-14.
65. Sudha P, Ravindranath NH (2000) A study of Bangalore urban forest. Landsc Urban Plan 47(1-2): 47-63.
66. Tress B, Tress G (2001) Capitalising on multiplicity: a transdisciplinary systems approach to landscape research. Landsc Urban Plan 57: 143-157.
67. Tyrväinen L (2001) Economic valuation of urban forest benefits in Finland. J Environ Manage 62: 75-92.
68. Tyrväinen L, Silvennoinen H, Kolehmainen O (2003) Ecological and aesthetic values in urban forest management. Urban For Urban Green 1: 135-149.
69. Tzoulas K, Korpela K, Venn S, Yli-Pelkonen V, Kazmierczak A, Niemelä J, James P (2007) Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using green infrastructure: a literature review. Landsc Urban Plan 81: 167-178.
70. Ulrich RS (1983) Aesthetic and affective response to natural environment. In: Altman I, Wohlwill JF (eds) Behavior and the natural environment, human behavior and environment. Plenum Press, New York, pp 85-125.
71. Ulrich RS (1984) View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science 224: 420-421.
72. Ulrich SR (1986) Human responses to vegetation and landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan 13: 29-44.
73. Ulrich RS (1993) Biophilia, biophobia and natural landscapes. In: Kellert SR, Wilson EO (eds) The biophilia hypothesis. Island Press, Washington.
74. van den Berg AE (1999) Individual differences in the aesthetic evaluation of natural landscapes. Ph. D. dissertation, Groningen University, Groningen. Retrieved September 10, 2009, from http://irs. ub. rug. nl/ppn/183366409.
75. van den Berg AE, Vleck CAJ, Coeterier JF (1998) Group differences in the aesthetic evaluation of nature development plans: a multilevel approach. J Environ Psychol 18: 141-157.
76. van den Berg AE, Hartig T, Staats H (2007) Preference for nature in urbanized societies: stress, restoration, and the pursuit of sustainability. J Soc Issues 63: 79-96.
77. van den Born RJG, Lenders RHJ, de Groot WT, Huijsman E (2001) The New Biophilia: an exploration of visions of nature in Western countries. Environ Conserv 28(1): 65-75.
78. Webb R (1999) Learning from urban forestry programmes in South East Asia. Arboricult J 23(1): 39-56.
79. WHO (1948) Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health Organization as adopted by the International Health Conference, New York, 19-22 June, 1946; signed on 22 July 1946 by the representatives of 61 States (Official Records of the World Health Organization, no. 2, p 100) and entered into force on 7 April 1948.
80. Wilson R (1997) Environmental education: a sense of place. Early Childhood Educ J 24: 191-194.
81. Yokohari M, Amati M (2005) Nature in the city, city in the nature: case studies of the restoration of urban nature in Tokyo, Japan and Toronto, Canada. Landsc Ecol Eng 1: 53-59.
82. Zérah M-H (2007) Conflict between green space preservation and housing needs: the case of the Sanjay Gandhi National Park in Mumbai. Cities 24(2): 122-132.
83. Zipperer WC, Wu J, Pouyat RV, Pickett STA (2000) The application of ecological principles to urban and urbanizing landscapes. Ecol Appl 10: 685-688.