IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i8p844-d612798.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Novel Urban Ecosystems: Opportunities from and to Landscape Architecture

Author

Listed:
  • Catarina Patoilo Teixeira

    (InBIO-Rede de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Biologia Evolutiva, CIBIO, Campus Agrário de Vairao, Universidade do Porto, 4485-661 Vairao, Portugal
    Departamento de Geociências, Ambiente e Ordenamento do Território, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade do Porto, rua do Campo Alegre 687, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal)

  • Cláudia Oliveira Fernandes

    (InBIO-Rede de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Biologia Evolutiva, CIBIO, Campus Agrário de Vairao, Universidade do Porto, 4485-661 Vairao, Portugal
    Departamento de Geociências, Ambiente e Ordenamento do Território, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade do Porto, rua do Campo Alegre 687, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal)

  • Jack Ahern

    (Department of Landscape Architecture and Regional Planning, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003-2901, USA)

Abstract

Novel assemblages of biotic, abiotic, and social components resulting from human-induced actions (e.g., climate change, land-use change, species movement) have been labeled as “Novel Ecosystems”, or “Novel Urban Ecosystems” when emerging in urban contexts. This concept has been shifting perspectives among some scientists and making them question traditional values about human-nature interactions in a rapidly changing era dominated by anthropogenic actions (Anthropocene). Controversial dimensions surrounding the Novel Ecosystems and Novel Urban Ecosystems terms may be preventing the evolution and further research of these concepts. The environmental problems that our society will soon face support a search for innovative solutions and transdisciplinary efforts. For that reason, this discussion should not cease, rather should expand to other fields of knowledge that can contribute with pertinent insights and collaborations. This way, this short communication aims to reflect on the opportunities from Landscape Architecture to the discussion, research, and application of the novel ecosystems concepts in the real world, particularly in the urban landscape, and also reflect on the opportunities of this debate to the Landscape Architecture field. Ultimately, Landscape Architecture can contribute with innovative and creative perspectives, acceding valuable and advanced tools, facilitating dialogues between fields of knowledge, and bridging gaps between science, people, and nature.

Suggested Citation

  • Catarina Patoilo Teixeira & Cláudia Oliveira Fernandes & Jack Ahern, 2021. "Novel Urban Ecosystems: Opportunities from and to Landscape Architecture," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-12, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:8:p:844-:d:612798
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/8/844/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/8/844/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Collier, Marcus J., 2014. "Novel ecosystems and the emergence of cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 166-169.
    2. Rupprecht, Christoph, 2017. "Informal urban green space: Residents’ perception, use, and management preferences across four major Japanese shrinking cities," SocArXiv ug86b, Center for Open Science.
    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. Maria Ignatieva & Diana Dushkova & Daniel Jan Martin & Fahimeh Mofrad & Katherine Stewart & Michael Hughes, 2023. "From One to Many Natures: Integrating Divergent Urban Nature Visions to Support Nature-Based Solutions in Australia and Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-29, March.
    2. Kinga Kimic & Albert Fekete, 2022. "The Ratio of Biologically Vital Areas as a Measure of the Sustainability of Urban Parks Using the Example of Budapest, Hungary," Resources, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-16, May.
    3. Luka Bajić & Nevena Vasiljević & Dragana Čavlović & Boris Radić & Suzana Gavrilović, 2022. "A Green Infrastructure Planning Approach: Improving Territorial Cohesion through Urban-Rural Landscape in Vojvodina, Serbia," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-21, September.

    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. Veerkamp, Clara J. & Schipper, Aafke M. & Hedlund, Katarina & Lazarova, Tanya & Nordin, Amanda & Hanson, Helena I., 2021. "A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    2. Angelica Melone & Leah L. Bremer & Susan E. Crow & Zoe Hastings & Kawika B. Winter & Tamara Ticktin & Yoshimi M. Rii & Maile Wong & Kānekoa Kukea-Shultz & Sheree J. Watson & Clay Trauernicht, 2021. "Assessing Baseline Carbon Stocks for Forest Transitions: A Case Study of Agroforestry Restoration from Hawaiʻi," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-17, February.
    3. Qiang Sheng & Dongyang Wan & Boya Yu, 2021. "Effect of Space Configurational Attributes on Social Interactions in Urban Parks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-15, July.
    4. Haixia Zhao & Binjie Gu & Jinding Fan & Junqi Wang & Liancong Luo, 2023. "Socioeconomic Factors Influence the Spatial and Temporal Distribution of Blue–Green Infrastructure Demand: A Case of Nanjing City," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-20, February.
    5. Minseo Kim & Christoph D. D. Rupprecht & Katsunori Furuya, 2018. "Residents’ Perception of Informal Green Space—A Case Study of Ichikawa City, Japan," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-20, September.
    6. Agnieszka Stacherzak & Maria Hełdak, 2019. "Borough Development Dependent on Agricultural, Tourism, and Economy Levels," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, January.
    7. Monika Kopecká & Harini Nagendra & Andrew Millington, 2018. "Urban Land Systems: An Ecosystems Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-4, January.
    8. Jackie Parker & Greg D. Simpson, 2018. "Public Green Infrastructure Contributes to City Livability: A Systematic Quantitative Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-26, December.
    9. Daer Su & Jie Chen & Hongyu Li & Shixian Luo & Jing Xie & Huixin Wang & Fuhao Sun & Wanyue Ren & Takeshi Kinoshita, 2024. "Quantifying the Wild: Public Acceptance and Challenges of Urban Wildscapes in Chiba, Japan," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-21, July.
    10. Jiayi Jiang & Hong Xu & Ruochen Ma & Shi Chen & Huixin Wang & Ziang Zheng, 2024. "What Is the Perceived Environmental Restorative Potential of Informal Green Spaces? An Empirical Study Based on Visitor-Employed Photography," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, October.
    11. Kimisato Oda & Christoph D. D. Rupprecht & Kazuaki Tsuchiya & Steven R. McGreevy, 2018. "Urban Agriculture as a Sustainability Transition Strategy for Shrinking Cities? Land Use Change Trajectory as an Obstacle in Kyoto City, Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-15, April.
    12. Biernacka, Magdalena & Kronenberg, Jakub & Łaszkiewicz, Edyta & Czembrowski, Piotr & Amini Parsa, Vahid & Sikorska, Daria, 2023. "Beyond urban parks: Mapping informal green spaces in an urban–peri-urban gradient," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    13. Duy Thong Ta & Katsunori Furuya, 2022. "Google Street View and Machine Learning—Useful Tools for a Street-Level Remote Survey: A Case Study in Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam and Ichikawa, Japan," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-18, December.
    14. Toma, Tiago Shizen Pacheco & Buisson, Elise, 2022. "Taking cultural landscapes into account: Implications for scaling up ecological restoration," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    15. Christopher B. Riley & Kayla I. Perry & Kerry Ard & Mary M. Gardiner, 2018. "Asset or Liability? Ecological and Sociological Tradeoffs of Urban Spontaneous Vegetation on Vacant Land in Shrinking Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-19, June.
    16. Christoph D. D. Rupprecht & Lihua Cui, 2020. "Understanding Threats to Young Children’s Green Space Access in Unlicensed Daycare Centers in Japan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-23, March.
    17. Jackie Parker & Greg D. Simpson, 2018. "Visitor Satisfaction with a Public Green Infrastructure and Urban Nature Space in Perth, Western Australia," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-17, December.
    18. Liqin Zhang & Huhua Cao & Ruibo Han, 2021. "Residents’ Preferences and Perceptions toward Green Open Spaces in an Urban Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-23, February.

    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:8:p:844-:d:612798. 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.