IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i12p1367-d700048.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating Quantity and Quality to Assess Urban Green Space Improvement in the Compact City

Author

Listed:
  • Shanshan Chen

    (Institute of Geography, Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Rudower Chaussee 16, 12489 Berlin, Germany)

  • Dagmar Haase

    (Institute of Geography, Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Rudower Chaussee 16, 12489 Berlin, Germany
    Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research–UFZ, Department of Computational Landscape Ecology, 04318 Leipzig, Germany)

  • Bing Xue

    (Key Lab for Environmental Computation and Sustainability of Liaoning Province, Shenyang 110016, China
    Key Lab of Pollution Ecology and Environmental Engineering, Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang 110016, China)

  • Thilo Wellmann

    (Institute of Geography, Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Rudower Chaussee 16, 12489 Berlin, Germany)

  • Salman Qureshi

    (Institute of Geography, Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Rudower Chaussee 16, 12489 Berlin, Germany)

Abstract

Urban green space (UGS) has gained much attention in terms of urban ecosystems and human health. Measures to improve green space in compact cities are important for urban sustainability. However, there is a knowledge gap between UGS improvement and planning management. Based on the integration of quantity and quality, this research aims to identify UGS changes during urban development and suggest ways to improve green space. We analyse land use changes, conduct a hotspot analysis of land surface temperature (LST) between 2005 and 2015 at the city scale, and examine the changes in small, medium and large patches at the neighbourhood scale to guide decision-makers in UGS management. The results show that (i) the redevelopment of urban brownfields is an effective method for increasing quantity, with differences depending on regional functions; (ii) small, medium and large patches of green space have significance in terms of improving the quality of temperature mitigation, with apparent coldspot clustering from 2005 to 2015; and (iii) the integration of UGS quality and quantity in planning management is beneficial to green space sustainability. Green space improvement needs to emphasize the integration of UGS quantity and quality to accommodate targeted planning for local conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Shanshan Chen & Dagmar Haase & Bing Xue & Thilo Wellmann & Salman Qureshi, 2021. "Integrating Quantity and Quality to Assess Urban Green Space Improvement in the Compact City," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-14, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:12:p:1367-:d:700048
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/12/1367/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/12/1367/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marit Rosol, 2010. "Public Participation in Post‐Fordist Urban Green Space Governance: The Case of Community Gardens in Berlin," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 548-563, September.
    2. Bertram, Christine & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2015. "The role of urban green space for human well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 139-152.
    3. Yue Lin & Wenzhan An & Muye Gan & AmirReza Shahtahmassebi & Ziran Ye & Lingyan Huang & Congmou Zhu & Lu Huang & Jing Zhang & Ke Wang, 2021. "Spatial Grain Effects of Urban Green Space Cover Maps on Assessing Habitat Fragmentation and Connectivity," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-18, October.
    4. Sun, Ranhao & Chen, Liding, 2017. "Effects of green space dynamics on urban heat islands: Mitigation and diversification," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 38-46.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xin Li & Bin Fang & Mengru Yin & Tao Jin & Xin Xu, 2022. "Multi-Dimensional Urbanization Coordinated Evolution Process and Ecological Risk Response in the Yangtze River Delta," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-25, May.
    2. Dongwoo Lee & Kyushik Oh & Jungeun Suh, 2022. "Diagnosis and Prioritization of Vulnerable Areas of Urban Ecosystem Regulation Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-22, October.
    3. Oleg Sizov & Roman Fedorov & Yulia Pechkina & Vera Kuklina & Maxim Michugin & Andrey Soromotin, 2022. "Urban Trees in the Arctic City: Case of Nadym," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, April.
    4. Min Wu & Bingxin Yan & Ying Huang & Md Nazirul Islam Sarker, 2022. "Big Data-Driven Urban Management: Potential for Urban Sustainability," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-16, May.
    5. Qian Dong & Qiuliang Zhang, 2022. "The Estimation of a Remote Sensing Model of Three-Dimensional Green Space Quantity and Research into Its Cooling Effect in Hohhot, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-21, August.

    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. Matthew Dennis & David Barlow & Gina Cavan & Penny A. Cook & Anna Gilchrist & John Handley & Philip James & Jessica Thompson & Konstantinos Tzoulas & C. Philip Wheater & Sarah Lindley, 2018. "Mapping Urban Green Infrastructure: A Novel Landscape-Based Approach to Incorporating Land Use and Land Cover in the Mapping of Human-Dominated Systems," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-25, January.
    2. Hui, Ling Chui & Jim, C.Y., 2022. "Urban-greenery demands are affected by perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices, and socio-demographic and environmental-cultural factors," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    3. Thomas Krikser & Ingo Zasada & Annette Piorr, 2019. "Socio-Economic Viability of Urban Agriculture—A Comparative Analysis of Success Factors in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-12, April.
    4. Dennis, Matthew & James, Philip, 2017. "Ecosystem services of collectively managed urban gardens: Exploring factors affecting synergies and trade-offs at the site level," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 17-26.
    5. Amit Kumar & Vivek Agarwal & Lalit Pal & Surendra Kumar Chandniha & Vishal Mishra, 2021. "Effect of Land Surface Temperature on Urban Heat Island in Varanasi City, India," J, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-10, August.
    6. Jaloliddin Rustamov & Zahiriddin Rustamov & Nazar Zaki, 2023. "Green Space Quality Analysis Using Machine Learning Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-25, May.
    7. Zixuan Lian & Xianhui Feng, 2022. "Urban Green Space Pattern in Core Cities of the Greater Bay Area Based on Morphological Spatial Pattern Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-15, September.
    8. Jake M. Robinson & Martin F. Breed, 2019. "Green Prescriptions and Their Co-Benefits: Integrative Strategies for Public and Environmental Health," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-14, January.
    9. Siqi Lai & Brian Deal, 2022. "Parks, Green Space, and Happiness: A Spatially Specific Sentiment Analysis Using Microblogs in Shanghai, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, December.
    10. Zhen Yang & Weijun Gao, 2022. "Evaluating the Coordinated Development between Urban Greening and Economic Growth in Chinese Cities during 2005 to 2019," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-25, August.
    11. White, James T. & Bunn, Christopher, 2017. "Growing in Glasgow: Innovative practices and emerging policy pathways for urban agriculture," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 334-344.
    12. Tamar Arieli & Gad Schaffer, 2023. "Ideology, environment, and open space in conflict arenas: The discrepancies and harmonizing strategies of West Bank Israeli settlers," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 41(7), pages 1441-1458, November.
    13. Bayarmaa Enkhbold & Kenichi Matsui, 2021. "Community Perceptions about Participating in Urban Park Establishment in Ulaanbaatar City, Mongolia," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, November.
    14. Berglihn, Elisabeth Cornelia & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik, 2021. "Ecosystem services from urban forests: The case of Oslomarka, Norway," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    15. Chia-Tsung Yeh & Ya-Yun Cheng & Tsai-Yun Liu, 2020. "Spatial Characteristics of Urban Green Spaces and Human Health: An Exploratory Analysis of Canonical Correlation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-14, May.
    16. Marit Rosol & Vincent Béal & Samuel Mössner, 2017. "Greenest cities? The (post-)politics of new urban environmental regimes," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(8), pages 1710-1718, August.
    17. SangHyeok Lee & Donghyun Kim, 2022. "Multidisciplinary Understanding of the Urban Heating Problem and Mitigation: A Conceptual Framework for Urban Planning," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-15, August.
    18. Sandra Rousseau & Nick Deschacht, 2020. "Public Awareness of Nature and the Environment During the COVID-19 Crisis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(4), pages 1149-1159, August.
    19. Oona Morrow, 2019. "Community Self-Organizing and the Urban Food Commons in Berlin and New York," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-17, July.
    20. Tong Zhang & Sophia Shuang Chen & Guangyu Li, 2020. "Exploring the relationships between urban form metrics and the vegetation biomass loss under urban expansion in China," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(3), pages 363-380, March.

    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:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:12:p:1367-:d:700048. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.