4.6 Article

Identifying linkages between urban green infrastructure and ecosystem services using an expert opinion methodology

期刊

AMBIO
卷 49, 期 2, 页码 569-583

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s13280-019-01223-9

关键词

Co-benefits; Ecosystem services; Expert opinion; Green infrastructure; Holistic planning; Matrix model

资金

  1. National Science Foundation (NSF) Integrative Graduate Education and Research Training (IGERT) Fellowship [DGE-0903597]
  2. NSF Coastal SEES Award [1325676]
  3. NSF Sustainability Research Networks Award [1444745]
  4. Earth Institute's Postdoctoral Fellowship Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Stormwater green infrastructure (GI) has the potential to provide ecosystem services (ES) that are currently lacking in many urban environments. Nevertheless, while stormwater GI presents a major opportunity for cities to enhance urban ES, there is insufficient evidence to link the complex social and ecological benefits of ES to different GI types for holistic urban planning. This study used an expert opinion methodology to identify linkages between 22 ES and 14 GI types within a New York City context. An analysis of results from five interdisciplinary workshops engaging 46 academic experts reveals that expert judgement of ES benefits is highest for larger green spaces, which are not universally considered for stormwater management, and lowest for vacant land and non-vegetated GI types. Overall, cultural services were identified as those most universally provided by GI. The results of this study highlight potential significant variations in ES benefits between different GI types, and indicate the importance of considering cultural services in future GI research and planning efforts. In the current absence of robust quantitive measurements linking ES and stormwater GI, increased qualitative insight could be obtained by expanding the methodology used in this work to include non-academic experts and other urban stakeholders. We therefore offer recommendations and learnings based on our experience with the approach.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据