Temporal changes in ecosystem services in European cities in the continental biogeographical region in the period from 1990-2012

Sustainability (Switzerland)

Volumn 9, Issue 4, 2017, Pages

  Szumacher, Iwona ^a   Pabjanek, Piotr ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARSAW   (Poland)

Author keywords

Core city; Corine Land Cover; Ecosystem services; European cities; Large urban zone

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; BIOGEOGRAPHICAL REGION; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATOR; FOOD PRODUCTION; LAND COVER; REGIONAL POLICY; SPATIAL PLANNING; TEMPORAL VARIATION; URBAN AREA; URBAN ECOSYSTEM;

CZECH REPUBLIC; DENMARK; GERMANY; POLAND [CENTRAL EUROPE];

EID: 85018373356     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20711050     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/su9040665     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Carlo, L.; Birgit, G.; Jaume, F.; Holger, R.; Vincent, G.; Marie, B.; Anna, G.; Maria, B.; Adrian, J.; Judith, B.; et al. Ensuring Quality of Life in Europe's Cities and Towns; EEA-European Environment Agency: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2009
2. TEEB-The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity. Available online: www.teebweb.org (accessed on 27 December 2014)
3. Bolund, P.; Hunhammar, S. Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecol. Econ. 1999, 29, 293-301. [CrossRef]
4. Baró, F.; Chaparro, L.; Gómez-Baggethun, E.; Langemeyer, J.; Nowak, D.J.; Terradas, J. Contribution of ecosystem services to air quality and climate change mitigation policies: The case of urban forests in Barcelona, Spain. AMBIO 2014, 43, 466-479. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
5. Breuste, J.; Schnellinger, J.; Qureshi, S.; Faggi, A. Urban ecosystem services on the local level: Urban green spaces as providers. Ekologia (Bratisl.) 2013, 32, 290-304. [CrossRef]
6. Douglas, I. Urban ecology and urban ecosystems: Understanding the links to human health and well-being. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2012, 4, 385-392. [CrossRef]
7. MEA-Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystem and Human Well-Being: Current State and Trends; The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Series; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005; Volume 1, pp. 795-825
8. Haase, D.; Kabisch, N.; Haase, A. Endless urban growth? On the mismatch of population, household and urban land area growth and its effects on the urban debate. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e66531. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
9. Triantakonstantis, D.; Stathakis, D. Examining urban sprawl in Europe using spatial metrics. Geocarto Int. 2015, 30, 10. [CrossRef]
10. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2014). Available online: https://esa.un. org/unpd/wup/publications/files/wup2014-highlights.Pdf (accessed on 28 July 2016)
11. EEA-European Environment Agency. Urban Sprawl in Europe: Joint EEA-FOEN Report; Publications Office: Luxembourg, 2016
12. EEA-European Environment Agency. Protected Areas in Europe-An Overview. Available online: http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/protected-areas-in-europe-2012 (accessed on 26 December 2016)
13. Kabisch, N.; Haase, D. Green spaces of European cities revisited for 1990-2006. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2013, 110, 113-122. [CrossRef]
14. Schägner, J.P.; Brander, L.; Maes, J.; Hartje, V. Mapping ecosystem services' values: Current practice and future prospects. Ecosyst. Serv. 2013, 4, 33-46. [CrossRef]
15. Luederitz, C.; Brink, E.; Grall, F.; Hermelingmeier, V.; Meyer, M.; Niven, L.; Panzer, L.; Partelow, S.; Rau, A.-L.; Saski, R.; et al. A review of urban ecosystem services: Six key challenges for future research. Ecosyst. Serv. 2015, 14, 98-112. [CrossRef]
16. Elmqvist, T.; Setälä, H.; Handel, S.N.; van der Ploeg, S.; Aronson, J.; Blignaut, J.B.; Gómez-Baggethun, E.; Nowak, D.J.; Kronenberg, J.; de Groot, R. Benefits of restoring ecosystem services in urban areas. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2015, 14, 101-108. [CrossRef]
17. Haase, D.; Larondelle, N.; Andersson, E.; Artmann, M.; Borgström, S.; Breuste, J.; Gomez-Baggethun, E.; Gren, Å.; Hamstead, Z.; Hansen, R.; et al. A quantitative review of Urban ecosystem service assessments: Concepts, models, and implementation. AMBIO 2014, 43, 413-433. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
18. Kuttler, W.; Strassburger, A. Air quality measurements in urban green areas-A case study. Atmos. Environ. 1999, 33, 4101-4108. [CrossRef]
19. Nowak, D.J.; Civerolo, K.L.; Trivikrama Rao, S.; Sistla, G.; Luley, C.L.; Crane, D.E. A modeling study of the impact of urban trees on ozone. Atmos. Environ. 2000, 34, 1601-1613. [CrossRef]
20. Nowak, D.J.; Crane, D.E.; Stevens, J.C. Air pollution removal by urban trees and shrubs in the United States. Urban For. Urban Green. 2006, 4, 115-123. [CrossRef]
21. Nowak, D.J. Institutionalizing urban forestry as a "biotechnology" to improve environmental quality. Urban For. Urban Green. 2006, 5, 93-100. [CrossRef]
22. Georgi, J.N.; Dimitriou, D. The contribution of urban green spaces to the improvement of environment in cities: Case study of Chania, Greece. Build. Environ. 2010, 45, 1401-1414. [CrossRef]
23. Peters, E.B.; McFadden, J.P. Influence of seasonality and vegetation type on suburban microclimates. Urban Ecosyst. 2010, 13, 443-460. [CrossRef]
24. Monteiroa, M.V.; Doicka, K.J.; Handleya, P.; Peace, A. The impact of green space size on the extent of local nocturnal air temperature cooling in London. Urban For. Urban Green. 2016, 16, 160-169. [CrossRef]
25. Manes, F.; Incerti, G.; Salvatori, E.; Vitale,M.; Riccota, C.; Costanza, R. Urban ecosystemservices: Tree diversity and stability of tropospheric ozone removal. Ecol. Appl. 2012, 22, 349-360. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
26. Hall, J.M.; Handley, J.F.; Ennos, A.R. The potential of tree planting to climate-proof high density residential areas in Manchester, UK. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2012, 104, 410-417. [CrossRef]
27. Tratalos, J.; Fuller, R.A.; Warren, P.H.; Davies, R.G.; Gaston, K.J. Urban form, biodiversity potential and ecosystem services. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2007, 83, 308-317. [CrossRef]
28. Strohbach, M.W.; Haase, D. Above-ground carbon storage by urban trees in Leipzig, Germany: Analysis of patterns in a European city. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2012, 104, 95-104. [CrossRef]
29. Davies, Z.G.; Edmondson, J.L.; Heinemeyer, A.; Leake, J.R.; Gaston, K.J. Mapping an urban ecosystem service: Quantifying above-ground carbon storage at a city-wide scale. J. Appl. Ecol. 2011, 48, 1125-1134. [CrossRef]
30. McPherson, E.G.; Xiao, Q.; Aguaron, E. A new approach to quantify and map carbon stored, sequestered and emissions avoided by urban forests. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2013, 120, 70-84. [CrossRef]
31. Kuittinen, M.; Moinel, C.; Adalgeirsdottir, K. Carbon sequestration through urban ecosystem services. A case study from Finland. Sci. Total. Environ. 2016, 563, 623-632. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
32. Tyrväinen, L. Economic valuation of urban forest benefits in Finland. J. Environ. Manag. 2001, 62, 75-92. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
33. Seeland, K.; Moser, K.; Scheuthle, H.; Kaiser, F.G. Public acceptance of restrictions imposed on recreational activities in the peri-urban Nature Reserve Sihlwald, Switzerland. Urban For. Urban Green. 2002, 1, 49-57. [CrossRef]
34. Vejre, H.; Jensen, F.S.; Thorsen, B.J. Demonstrating the importance of intangible ecosystem services from peri-urban landscapes. Ecol. Complex. 2010, 7, 338-348. [CrossRef]
35. Cohen, D.A.; Golinelli, D.; Wiliamson, S.; Sehgal, A.; Marsh, T.; McKenzi, T.L. Effects of Park Improvements on Park Use and Physical Activity. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2009, 37, 475-480. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
36. Bjerke, T.; Østdahl, T.; Thrane, C.; Strumse, E. Vegetation density of urban parks and perceived appropriateness for recreation. Urban For. Urban Green. 2006, 5, 35-44. [CrossRef]
37. Bertram, C.; Rehdanz, K. Preferences for cultural urban ecosystem services: Comparing attitudes, perception, and use. Ecosyst. Serv. 2015, 2, 187-199. [CrossRef]
38. Zerbe, S.; Maurer, U.; Schmitz, S.; Sukopp, H. Biodiversity in Berlin and its potential for nature conservation. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2003, 62, 139-148. [CrossRef]
39. Strohbach, M.W.; Lerman, S.B.; Warren, P.S. Are small greening areas enhancing bird diversity? Insights from community-driven greening projects in Boston. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2013, 114, 69-79. [CrossRef]
40. Morimoto, Y. Biodiversity and ecosystem services in urban areas for smart adaptation to climate change: "Do you Kyoto"? Landsc. Ecol. Eng. 2011, 7, 9-16. [CrossRef]
41. Dallimer, M.; Skinner, A.M.J.; Rouquette, J.R.; Maltby, L.L.; Warren, P.H.; Gaston, K.J.; Irvine, K.N.; Davies, Z.G.; Armsworth, P.R. Biodiversity and the feel-good factor: Understanding associations between self-reported human well-being and species richness. BioScience 2012, 62, 47-55. [CrossRef]
42. Barrico, L.; Azul, A.M.; Morais, M.C.; Coutinho, A.P.; Freitas, H.; Castro, P. Biodiversity in urban ecosystems: Plants and macromycetes as indicators for conservation planning in the city of Coimbra (Portugal). Landsc. Urban Plan. 2012, 106, 88-102. [CrossRef]
43. Cohen, M.; Baudoin, R.; Palibrk, M.; Persyn, N.; Rheine, C. Urban biodiversity and social inequalities in built-up cities: New evidences, next questions. The example of Paris, France. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2012, 106, 277-287. [CrossRef]
44. Kowarika, I.; Buchholza, S.; von der Lippea, M.; Seitz, B. Biodiversity functions of urban cemeteries: Evidence from one of the largest Jewish cemeteries in Europe. Urban For. Urban Green. 2016, 19, 68-78. [CrossRef]
45. Maes, J.; Fabrega, N.; Zulian, G.; Lopes, L.; Vizcaino, M.; Ivits, E.; Polce, C.; Vandecasteele, I.; Mari, I.; Bastos, C.; et al.Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services: Trends in Ecosystems and Ecosystem Services in the European Union between 2000 and 2010; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2015
46. Song, X.; Chang, K.-T.; Yang, L.; Scheffran, J. Change in Environmental Benefits of Urban Land Use and Its Drivers in Chinese Cities. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13, 1-21. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
47. Feranec, J.; Soukup, T.; Hazeu, G.; Jaffrain, G. European Landscape Dynamics: CORINE Land Cover Data; CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, USA; London, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2016
48. Estoque, R.C.; Murayama, Y. Examining the potential impact of land use/cover changes on the ecosystem servces of Baguio city, the Philippines: A scenario-based analysis. Appl. Geogr. 2012, 35, 316-326. [CrossRef]
49. Zhan, J. Impact of Land-Use Changes on Ecosystem Services; Springer: Heidelberg, Germany, 2015
50. EEA-European Environment Agency. Biogeographical Regions; European Environmental Agency: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2016. Available online: http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/ biogeographical-regions-europe-3 (accessed on 21 April 2017)
51. Sundseth, K. Natura 2000 in the Continental Region; European Commission: Luxemburg, 2005
52. Ogrin, D. Long-term air temperature changes in Ljubljana (Slovenia) in comparison Trieste (Italy) and Zagreb (Croatia). Morav. Geogr. Rep. 2015, 23, 17-26. [CrossRef]
53. Martinelli, L.; Matzarakis, A. Influence of height/width proportions on the thermal comfort of courtyard typology for Italian climate zones. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2017, 29, 97-106. [CrossRef]
54. EC-European Commission. Urban Audit-Methodological Handbook; Office for Official Publications of the European Communities: Luxembourg, 2004
55. EEA-European Environment Agency. Urban Atlas Outline; European Environmental Agency: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2010. Available online: http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/urban-atlas/urbanatlas-outline/urban-atlas-outline (accessed on 21 April 2017)
56. CORINE Land Cover. 2016. Available online: http://land.copernicus.eu/pan-european/corine-land-cover (accessed on 12 July 2016)
57. EEA-European Environment Agency. CLC2006 Technical Guidelines; Publications Office: Luxembourg, 2007
58. Larondelle, N.; Haase, D. Urban ecosystemservices assessment along a rural-urban gradient: A cross-analysis of European cities. Ecol. Indic. 2013, 29, 179-190. [CrossRef]
59. Larondelle, N.; Haase, D.; Kabisch, N. Mapping the diversity of regulating ecosystem services in European cities. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2014, 26, 119-129. [CrossRef]
60. Su, S.; Xiao, R.; Jiang, Z.; Zhang, Y. Characterizing landscape pattern and ecosystem services value changes for urbanization at an eco-regional scale. Appl. Geogr. 2012, 34, 295-305. [CrossRef]
61. Haase, D.; Schwarz, N.; Strohbach, M.; Kroll, F.; Seppelt, R. Synergies, trade-offs, and losses of ecosystem services in urban regions: An integrated multiscale framework applied to the Leipzig-Halle Region, Germany. Ecol. Soc. 2012, 17, 22. [CrossRef]
62. Rocha, S.M.; Zulian, G.; Maes, J.; Thijssen, M. Mapping and Assessment of Urban Ecosystems and Their Services; EUR 27706 EN; European Union: Brussels, Belgium, 2015. [CrossRef]
63. Schwarz, N.; Bauer, A.; Haase, D. Assessing climate impacts of planning policies-An estimation for the urban region of Leipzig (Germany). Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2011, 31, 97-111. [CrossRef]
64. Schwarz, N. Urban form revisited-Selecting indicators for characterising European cities. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2010, 96, 29-47. [CrossRef]
65. Gibbs, H.K. Major World Ecosystem Complexes Ranked by Carbon in Live Vegetation: An Updated Database Using the GLC2000 Land Cover Product (NDP-017b); University ofWisconsin:: Madison, MI, USA, 2006
66. Barbosa, O.; Tratalos, J.A.; Armsworth, P.R.; Davies, R.G.; Fuller, R.A.; Johnson, P.; Gaston, K.J. Who benefits from access to green space? A case study from Sheffield, UK. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2007, 83, 187-195. [CrossRef]
67. Burkhard, B.; Kroll, F.; Müller, F.;Windhorst,W. Landscapes' capacities to provide ecosystem services-A concept for land-cover based assessments. Landsc. Online 2009, 15, 1-22. [CrossRef]
68. Haase, D.; Nuissl, H. The urban-to-rural gradient of land use change and impervious cover: A long-term trajectory for the city of Leipzig. J. Land Use Sci. 2010, 5, 123-141. [CrossRef]
69. Santana-Cordero, A.M.; Ariza, E.; Romagosa, F. Studying the historical evolution of ecosystem services to inform management policies for developed shorelines. Environ. Sci. Policy 2016, 64, 18-29. [CrossRef]
70. Artmann, M. Driving forecast of urban soil sealing and constraints of its management-The cases of Leipzig and Munich (Germany). J. Settlements Spat. Plan. 2013, 4, 143-152
71. MEA-Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystem and Human Well-Being: A Framework for Assessment; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA; Covelo, CA, USA; London, UK, 2003
72. Gómez-Baggethun, E.; Barton, D.N. Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. Ecol. Econ. 2013, 86, 235-245. [CrossRef]
73. Niemelä, J.; Saarela, S.-R.; Söderman, T.; Kopperoinen, L.; Yli-Pelkonen, V.; Vare, S.; Kotze, J. Using the ecosystems services approach for better planning and conservation of urban green spaces: A Finland case study. Biodivers. Conserv. 2010, 19, 3225-3243. [CrossRef]
74. Wilkinson, C.; Saarne, G.; Peterson, D.; Colding, J. Strategic spatial planning and the ecosystem services concept-An historical exploration. Ecol. Soc. 2013, 18. [CrossRef]
75. Szumacher, I.; Pabjanek, P. The use of land cover data in ecosystem services assessment. Ekonomia i Srodowisko 2014, 51, 172-177
76. Kandzior, M.; Burkhard, B.; Müller, F. Mapping provisioning ecosystem services at the local scale using data of varying spatial and temporal resolution. Ecosyst. Serv. 2013, 4, 47-59. [CrossRef]