Setting priorities for urban forest planning. A comprehensive response to ecological and social needs for the metropolitan area of rome (Italy)

Sustainability (Switzerland)

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 3958-3976

  Capotorti, Giulia ^a   Mollo, Barbara ^a   Zavattero, Laura ^a   Anzellotti, Ilaria ^a   Celesti Grapow, Laura ^a  

^a SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

Author keywords

Connectivity; Ecological classification of land; Ecological network; Ecosystem services; Green infrastructure; Landscape conservation status; Nature based solutions; Restoration; Sustainable urban planning

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; CONNECTIVITY; GREEN REVOLUTION; METROPOLITAN AREA; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; URBAN FORESTRY; URBAN PLANNING;

ITALY; LAZIO; ROMA [LAZIO]; ROME;

EID: 84928944133     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20711050     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/su7043958     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. De Oliveira, J.A.P.; Balaban, O.; Doll, C.N.H.; Moreno-Penaranda, R.; Gasparatos, A.; Iossifova, D.; Suwa, A. Cities and biodiversity: Perspectives and governance challenges for implementing the convention on biological diversity (CBD) at the city level. Biol. Conserv. 2011, 144, 1302-1313.
2. Säynäjoki, E.; Heinonen, J.; Junnila, S. The Power of Urban Planning on Environmental Sustainability: A Focus Group Study in Finland. Sustainability 2014, 6, 6622-6643.
3. Schewenius, M.; McPhearson, T.; Elmqvist, T. Opportunities for Increasing Resilience and Sustainability of Urban Social-Ecological Systems: Insights from the URBES and the Cities and Biodiversity Outlook Projects. Ambio 2014, 43, 434-444.
4. Crane, P.; Kinzig, A. Nature in the Metropolis. Science 2005, 308, doi: doi:10.1126/science.1114165.
5. McPherson, E.G. Urban forestry in North America. Renew. Resour. J. 2006, 24, 8-12.
6. Dearborn, D.C.; Kark, S. Motivations for Conserving Urban Biodiversity. Conserv. Biol. 2009, 24, 432-440.
7. Tzoulas, K.; Korpela, K.; Venn, S.; Yli-Pelkonen, V.; Kazmierczak, A.E.; Niemelä, J.; James, P. Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using Green Infrastructure: A literature review. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2007, 81, 167-178.
8. Lovell, S.T. Multifunctional Urban Agriculture for Sustainable Land Use Planning in the United States. Sustainability 2010, 2, 2499-2522.
9. Jongman, R.H.; Külvik, M.; Kristiansen, I. European ecological networks and greenways. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2004, 68, 305-319.
10. Opdam, P.; Steingröver, E.; van Rooij, S. Ecological networks: A spatial concept for multi-actor planning of sustainable landscapes. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2006, 75, 322-332.
11. Benedict, M.A.; McMahon, E.T. Green Infrastructure; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2006; pp. 1-299.
12. Mell, I.C. Green infrastructure: Concepts and planning. FORUM Ejournal 2008, 8, 69-80.
13. Maes, J.; Teller, A.; Erhard, M.; Liquete, C.; Braat, L.; Berry, P.; Egoh, B.; Puydarrieux, P.; Fiorina, C.; Santos, F.; et al. Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and Their Services. An Analytical Framework for Ecosystem Assessments under Action 5 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2013; pp. 1-58.
14. Schindler, S.; Sebesvari, Z.; Damm, C.; Euller, K.; Mauerhofer, V.; Hermann, A.; Biró, M.; Essl, F.; Kanka, R.; Lauwaars, S.; et al. Multifunctionality of floodplain landscapes: Relating management options to ecosystem services. Landsc. Ecol. 2014, 29, 229-244.
15. Forman, R.T.T.; Godron, M. Patches and structural components for a landscape ecology. BioScience 1981, 31, 733-740.
16. Bennett, G.; Jo Mulongoy, K. Review of Experience with Ecological Networks, Corridors and Buffer Zones; Technical Series No. 23; Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity: Montreal, QC, Canada, 2006.
17. Weber, T.; Allen, W.L. Beyond on-site mitigation: An integrated, multi-scale approach to environmental mitigation and stewardship for transportation projects. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2010, 96, 240-256.
18. Pataki, D.E.; Carreiro, M.M.; Cherrier, J.; Grulke, N.E.; Jennings, V.; Pincetl, S.; Pouyat, R.V.; Whitlow, T.H.; Zipperer, W.C. Coupling biogeochemical cycles in urban environments: Ecosystem services, green solutions, and misconceptions. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2011, 9, 27-36.
19. Lafortezza, R.; Davies, C.; Sanesi, G.; Konijnendijk, C.C. Green Infrastructure as a tool to support spatial planning in European urban regions. iForest Biogeosci. For. 2013, 6, 102-108.
20. Wolf, K.L.; Kruger, L.E. Urban Forestry Research Needs: A Participatory Assessment Process. J. For. 2010, 108, 39-44.
21. Ordonez, C.; Duinker, P.N. Interpreting Sustainability for Urban Forests. Sustainability 2010, 2, 1510-1522.
22. Bolund, P.; Hunhammar, S. Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecol. Econ. 1999, 29, 293-301.
23. Kenney, W.A.; van Wassenaer, P.J.E.; Satel, A.L. Criteria and Indicators for Strategic Urban Forest Planning and Management. Arboric. Urban For. 2011, 37, 108-117.
24. Thompson, B.A. Planning for Implementation: Landscape-Level Restoration Planning in an agricultural Setting. Restor. Ecol. 2011, 19, 5-13.
25. Konijnendijk, C.C.; Ricard, R.M.; Kenney, A.; Randrup, T.B. Defining urban forestry-A comparative perspective of North America and Europe. Urban For. Urban Green. 2006, 4, 152-161.
26. Standish, R.J.; Hobbs, R.J.; Miller, J.R. Improving city life: Options for ecological restoration in urban landscapes and how these might influence interactions between people and nature. Landsc. Ecol. 2013, 28, 1213-1221.
27. Bailey, R.G. Ecoregions: The Ecosystem Geography of the Oceans and Continents; Springer-Verlag: New York, NY, USA, 1998.
28. Blasi, C.; Capotorti, G.; Frondoni, R. Defining and mapping typological models at the landscape scale. Plant Biosyst. 2005, 139, 155-163.
29. Blasi, C.; Capotorti, G.; Copiz, R.; Guida, D.; Mollo, B.; Smiraglia, D.; Zavattero, L. Classification and mapping of the ecoregions of Italy. Plant Biosyst. 2014, 148, 1255-1345.
30. Capotorti, G.; Zavattero, L.; Anzellotti, I.; Burrascano, S.; Frondoni, R.; Marchetti, M.; Marignani, M.; Smiraglia, D.; Blasi, C. Do National Parks play an active role in conserving the natural capital of Italy? Plant Biosyst. 2012, 146, 258-265.
31. Blasi, C.; Capotorti, G.; Marchese, M.; Marta, M.; Bologna, M.A.; Bombi, P.; Bonaiuto, M.; Bonnes, M.; Carrus, G.; Cifelli, F.; et al. Interdisciplinary research for the proposal of the Urban Biosphere Reserve of Rome Municipality. Plant Biosyst. 2008, 142, 305-312.
32. Celesti-Grapow, L.; Capotorti, G.; Del Vico, E.; Lattanzi, E.; Tilia, A.; Blasi, C. The vascular flora of Rome. Plant Biosyst. 2013, 147, 1059-1087.
33. Frondoni, R.; Mollo, B.; Capotorti, G. A landscape analysis of land cover change in the Municipality of Rome (Italy): Spatio-temporal characteristics and ecological implications of land cover transitions from 1954 to 2001. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2011, 100, 117-128.
34. Manes, F.; Incerti, G.; Salvatori, E.; Vitale, M.; Ricotta, C.; Costanza, R. Urban ecosystem services: Tree diversity and stability of tropospheric ozone removal. Ecol. Appl. 2012, 22, 349-360.
35. Bonacquisti, V.; Casale, G.R.; Palmieri, S.; Siani, A.M. A canopy layer model and its application to Rome. Sci. Total Environ. 2006, 364, 1-13.
36. Celesti-Grapow, L.; Di Marzio, P.; Blasi, C. The importance of alien and native species in the urban flora of Rome (Italy). In Plant Invasions: Species Ecology and Ecosystem Management; Brundu, G., Brock, J., Camarda, I., Child, L., Wade, M., Eds.; Blackhuys Publisher.: Leiden, The Netherlands, 2001; pp. 209-220.
37. Capotorti, G.; Del Vico, E.; Lattanzi, E.; Tilia, A.; Celesti-Grapow, L. Exploring biodiversity in a metropolitan area in the Mediterranean region: The urban and suburban flora of Rome (Italy). Plant Biosyst. 2013, 147, 174-185.
38. Blasi, C.; Capotorti, G. Carta delle serie di vegetazione del territorio del Comune di Roma (1:50.000). 2005. Available online: http://www.urbanistica.comune.roma.it (accessed on 10 November 2014).
39. Biondi, E.; Blasi, C.; Allegrezza, M.; Anzellotti, I.; Azzella, M.M.; Carli, E.; Casavecchia, S.; Copiz, R.; Del Vico, E.; Facioni, L.; et al. Plant communities of Italy: The Vegetation Prodrome. Plant Biosyst. 2014, 148, 728-814.
40. Pizzolotto, R.; Brandmayr, P. An index to evaluate landscape conservation state based on land-use pattern analysis and Geographic Information System techniques. Coenoses 1996, 11, 37-44.
41. Zonneveld, I. The land unit-A fundamental concept in landscape ecology, and its applications. Landscape Ecol. 1989, 3, 67-86.
42. Bailey, R.G. Ecosystem Geography: From Ecoregions to Sites, 2nd ed.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2009; p. 251.
43. Rivas-Martinez, S. Notions on dynamic-catenal phytosociology as a basis of landscape science. Plant Biosyst. 2005, 139, 135-144.
44. Corona, P.; Fattorini, L.; Chirici, G.; Valentini, R.; Marchetti, M. Estimating forest area at the year 1990 by two-phase sampling on historical remotely sensed imagery in Italy. J. For. Res. 2007, 12, 8-13.
45. Science Communication Unit, the University of the West of England (UWE). The Multifunctionality of Green Infrastructure. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/ecosystems/docs/Green_Infrastructure.pdf (accessed on 25 March 2015).
46. Gómez-Baggethun, E.; Barton, D.N. Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. Ecol. Econ. 2013, 86, 235-245.
47. Termorshuizen, J.W.; Opdam, P.; van den Brink, A. Incorporating ecological sustainability into landscape planning. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2007, 79, 374-384.
48. Blasi, C.; Zavattero, L.; Marignani, M.; Smiraglia, D.; Copiz, R.; Rosati, L.; del Vico, E. The concept of land ecological network and its design using a land unit approach. Plant Biosyst. 2008, 142, 540-549.
49. Allen, W.L. Advancing Green Infrastructure at All Scales: From Landscape to Site. Environ. Pract. 2012, 14, 17-25.
50. Burkhard, B.; Kroll, F.; Nedkov, S.; Müller, F. Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecol. Indic. 2012, 21, 17-29.
51. Kühn, I.; Brandl, R.; Klotz, S. The flora of German cities is naturally species rich. Evol. Ecol. Res. 2004, 6, 749-764.
52. Ricotta, C.; Di Nepi, M.; Guglietta, D.; Celesti-Grapow, L. Exploring taxonomic filtering in urban environments. J. Veg. Sci. 2008, 19, 229-238.
53. Blasi, C.; Capotorti, G.; Marta, M.; Marchese, M. An integrated approach to better define the concept and functions of Urban Biosphere Reserves. Plant Biosyst. 2008, 142, 324-330.
54. Capotorti, G.; Frondoni, R.; Mollo, B.; Tilia, A.; Blasi, C. The contribution of plant sociology to the ecosystem service approach in urban and peri-urban areas: Evidences from a Mediterranean metropolis case study (Rome, Italy). Fitosociologia 2011, 48, 127-135.
55. Blasi, C.; Capotorti, G.; Frondoni, R.; Guida, D.; Mollo, B.; Smiraglia, D.; Zavattero, L. Vegetation science and the ecoregional approach: A proposal for the ecological land classification of Italy. Fitosociologia 2011, 48, 67-80.
56. Rosati, L.; Marignani, M.; Blasi, C. A gap analysis comparing Natura2000 vs. National Protected Area network with potential natural vegetation. Community Ecol. 2008, 9, 147-154.