IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v111y2021ics0264837721004592.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards a framework for driving sustainable urban regeneration with ecosystem services

Author

Listed:
  • Lak, Azadeh
  • Sharifi, Ayyoob
  • Khazaei, Mohsen
  • Aghamolaei, Reihaneh

Abstract

Rapid urbanization has caused significant challenges for environmental protection and historical conservation, leading to severe problems in sustaining healthy built and natural environments. Adopting new approaches to sustainable urban regeneration (SUR) is essential and could provide effective and efficient solutions to these problems. In this study, the critical concepts of SUR were investigated, and a conceptual framework was developed to implement SUR by leveraging different types of ecosystem services (ESs). Delphic hierarchy process was used to identify and measure the dimensions, sub-dimensions, and criteria of SUR that were identified from the literature and categorized into ES types. Next, these items were validated and assessed by 21 international scholars to be included in the proposed conceptual framework of ES types. The three main dimensions of SUR in this framework are quality of place, quality of life, and good governance. Also, the five types of ESs include regulating, provisioning, supporting, cultural, and economic services. The findings of this study can help local authorities as well as urban planners and designers to gain a better understanding of the significance of ES capabilities in the implementation of SUR in urban areas.

Suggested Citation

  • Lak, Azadeh & Sharifi, Ayyoob & Khazaei, Mohsen & Aghamolaei, Reihaneh, 2021. "Towards a framework for driving sustainable urban regeneration with ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:111:y:2021:i:c:s0264837721004592
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105736
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837721004592
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105736?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Natanya Meyer & Christelle Auriacombe, 2019. "Good Urban Governance and City Resilience: An Afrocentric Approach to Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-18, October.
    2. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    3. Esmaeilpoorarabi, Niusha & Yigitcanlar, Tan & Guaralda, Mirko & Kamruzzaman, Md., 2018. "Evaluating place quality in innovation districts: A Delphic hierarchy process approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 471-486.
    4. Soria-Lara, Julio A. & Banister, David, 2017. "Participatory visioning in transport backcasting studies: Methodological lessons from Andalusia (Spain)," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 113-126.
    5. Matthew Carmona, 2019. "Place value: place quality and its impact on health, social, economic and environmental outcomes," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 1-48, January.
    6. Matthew Carmona, 2009. "Sustainable urban design: principles to practice," International Journal of Sustainable Development, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 12(1), pages 48-77.
    7. García, Andrés M. & Santé, Inés & Loureiro, Xurxo & Miranda, David, 2020. "Green infrastructure spatial planning considering ecosystem services assessment and trade-off analysis. Application at landscape scale in Galicia region (NW Spain)," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    8. Martina Artmann & Olaf Bastian & Karsten Grunewald, 2017. "Using the Concepts of Green Infrastructure and Ecosystem Services to Specify Leitbilder for Compact and Green Cities—The Example of the Landscape Plan of Dresden (Germany)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-26, February.
    9. Thomas L. Saaty, 1994. "How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 24(6), pages 19-43, December.
    10. Hyun Woo Kim & Dakota Aaron McCarty & Jaekyung Lee, 2020. "Enhancing Sustainable Urban Regeneration through Smart Technologies: An Assessment of Local Urban Regeneration Strategic Plans in Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-23, August.
    11. Manganelli, Benedetto & Tataranna, Sabina & Pontrandolfi, Piergiuseppe, 2020. "A model to support the decision-making in urban regeneration," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    12. Didem Dizdaroglu & Tan Yigitcanlar, 2016. "Integrating urban ecosystem sustainability assessment into policy-making: insights from the Gold Coast City," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(11), pages 1982-2006, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Adu-McVie, Rosemary & Yigitcanlar, Tan & Erol, Isil & Xia, Bo, 2021. "Classifying innovation districts: Delphi validation of a multidimensional framework," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    2. Jing Jing, 2022. "Seeing Streetscapes as Social Infrastructure: A Paradigmatic Case Study of Hornsbergs Strand, Stockholm," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(4), pages 510-522.
    3. Merica Slišković & Katja Božić & Jelena Žanić Mikuličić & Ines Kolanović, 2024. "Addressing the Significance of the Union List with a Focus on Marine Invasive Alien Species Impacts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-25, October.
    4. Yanzi Wang & Chunming Wu & Yongfeng Gong & Zhen Zhu, 2021. "Can Adaptive Governance Promote Coupling Social-Ecological Systems? Evidence from the Vulnerable Ecological Region of Northwestern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.
    5. Comino, E. & Ferretti, V., 2016. "Indicators-based spatial SWOT analysis: supporting the strategic planning and management of complex territorial systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64142, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Samira F. Oliveira & Rachel B. Prado & Elaine C. C. Fidalgo & Ana P. D. Turetta & Joyce M. G. Monteiro & Bernadete da C. C. G. Pedreira & Gerson J. Y. Antonio & Renato L. de Assis & Sandro R. A. Oitav, 2024. "Climate Change and Ecosystem Services: A Participatory Approach in a Brazilian Mountainous Region," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 17(5), pages 1-1, September.
    7. Jansson, Åsa, 2013. "Reaching for a sustainable, resilient urban future using the lens of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 285-291.
    8. Bordt, Michael, 2018. "Discourses in Ecosystem Accounting: A Survey of the Expert Community," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 82-99.
    9. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    10. Meixler, Marcia S., 2017. "Assessment of Hurricane Sandy damage and resulting loss in ecosystem services in a coastal-urban setting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 28-46.
    11. Juliana Hurtado Rassi, 2020. "Gestión conjunta de ecosistemas transfronterizos: la importancia del trabajo articulado entre los Estados para la conservación de los recursos naturales. Análisis del caso particular de la “Reserva de," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 1241.
    12. Alessio D’Auria & Pasquale De Toro & Nicola Fierro & Elisa Montone, 2018. "Integration between GIS and Multi-Criteria Analysis for Ecosystem Services Assessment: A Methodological Proposal for the National Park of Cilento, Vallo di Diano and Alburni (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-25, September.
    13. Agnieszka Jaszczak & Ewelina Pochodyła & Katarina Kristianova & Natalia Małkowska & Jan K. Kazak, 2021. "Redefinition of Park Design Criteria as a Result of Analysis of Well-Being and Soundscape: The Case Study of the Kortowo Park (Poland)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-22, March.
    14. Johann Audrain & Mateo Cordier & Sylvie Faucheux & Martin O’Connor, 2013. "Écologie territoriale et indicateurs pour un développement durable de la métropole parisienne," Revue d'économie régionale et urbaine, Armand Colin, vol. 0(3), pages 523-559.
    15. Andrés M. García & Inés Santé & Xurxo Loureiro & David Miranda, 2020. "Spatial Planning of Green Infrastructure for Mitigation and Adaptation to Climate Change at a Regional Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-22, December.
    16. Stenger, Anne & Harou, Patrice & Navrud, Ståle, 2009. "Valuing environmental goods and services derived from the forests," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 1-14, January.
    17. Benjamin Leard, 2011. "Joan Martinez-Alier and Ingo Ropke (eds.): Recent developments in ecological economics (2 vols.)," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 161-178, July.
    18. Luyanda Mafumbu & Leocadia Zhou & Ahmed Mukalazi Kalumba, 2022. "Assessing Public Perceptions on Coastal Access -Community Profile: A Case Study of Ngqushwa Local Municipality, South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-20, October.
    19. Vincenzo Formisano & Bernardino Quattrociocchi & Maria Fedele & Mario Calabrese, 2018. "From Viability to Sustainability: The Contribution of the Viable Systems Approach (VSA)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-17, March.
    20. Bhatta, Arun & Bigsby, Hugh R. & Cullen, Ross, 2011. "Alternative to Comprehensive Ecosystem Services Markets: The Contribution of Forest-Related Programs in New Zealand," 2011 Conference, August 25-26, 2011, Nelson, New Zealand 115350, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:111:y:2021:i:c:s0264837721004592. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.