4.7 Article

Assessing and mapping ecosystem services to support urban green infrastructure: The case of Barcelona, Spain

Journal

CITIES
Volume 92, Issue -, Pages 59-70

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2019.03.016

Keywords

Ecosystem services; Ecosystem service assessment matrix; Ecosystem services mapping; Land cover types; Green infrastructure

Categories

Funding

  1. China Scholarship Council [201506910063]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The ecosystem services approach provides an efficient way to support urban green infrastructure planning. Such an assessment, together with mapping, can effectively produce spatial analyses on a specific scale, helping to maintain multi-functional landscapes and plan urban green infrastructure. In turn, green infrastructure can offer a wide variety of ecosystem services, promoting landscape sustainability. This study develops a methodology for the planning of urban green infrastructure based on an ecosystem services approach that assesses the supply capacity of ecosystem services, and identifies possible spatial characteristic areas for interlinking urban green infrastructure within the study area. More specifically, from a landscape perspective, we use 32 ecosystem services (as X-axis) and different land use types (as Y-axis) to build an ecosystem service assessment matrix. We then take the municipality of Barcelona as an example, using the latter to assess and map ecosystem services within the city through ArcGIS, which shows the spatial distribution characteristics of ecosystem services provision. We identify possible spatial areas - which include ecosystem services provision, barren, and obstructed areas - by overlapping the ecosystem services assessment maps. Ultimately, the results provide a reference for urban green infrastructure planning by recognizing priority protected areas, new construction areas, potential areas, and renewal areas.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available