IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2023i1p23-d1305831.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Urban Green Infrastructure: Does Species’ Origin Impair Ecosystem Services Provision?

Author

Listed:
  • Mónica Andrade

    (Centre of Studies in Geography and Spatial Planning, Department of Geography and Tourism, University of Coimbra, 3004-530 Coimbra, Portugal)

  • Cláudia Fernandes

    (Departamento de Geociências, Ambiente e Ordenamento de Território, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade do Porto, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal)

  • António Coutinho

    (Centre for Functional Ecology, Department of Life Sciences, University of Coimbra, 3000-456 Coimbra, Portugal)

  • Albano Figueiredo

    (Centre of Studies in Geography and Spatial Planning, Department of Geography and Tourism, University of Coimbra, 3004-530 Coimbra, Portugal)

Abstract

The adverse effects of urbanized areas’ growth might be mitigated by the multiple ecosystem services that urban green infrastructure provides. However, the design and composition of such infrastructure is still a hotly debated issue, mainly considering the challenges associated with the use of exotic plant species. To assess if there is a clear association between the species’ origin and ecosystem services or ecosystem disservices, an in-depth systematic literature review was carried out based on a bibliometric approach to assess the panorama of the scientific perspective. Based on the results, a detailed analysis was performed for the urban green infrastructure of five European Mediterranean cities, where management and expansion of the urban green infrastructure might act as tools to mitigate climate change and biodiversity loss. Urban green infrastructure benefits to urban areas and its composition must consider the balance between services and disservices provided by plant species. Data analysis shows that disservices are not exclusively related to exotic species, revealing that plant species selection based on their origin represents a biased approach, as it often disregards the higher capacity of some exotic species to thrive under continuous pressure and disturbance, along with relevant and highly valued cultural services provided. Since exotic species are commonly used, ecosystems formed can be seen as experiments to support decisions, allowing new approaches to planning, designing, and maintaining urban green infrastructure.

Suggested Citation

  • Mónica Andrade & Cláudia Fernandes & António Coutinho & Albano Figueiredo, 2023. "Urban Green Infrastructure: Does Species’ Origin Impair Ecosystem Services Provision?," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2023:i:1:p:23-:d:1305831
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/1/23/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/1/23/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giulia Capotorti & Eva Del Vico & Ilaria Anzellotti & Laura Celesti-Grapow, 2016. "Combining the Conservation of Biodiversity with the Provision of Ecosystem Services in Urban Green Infrastructure Planning: Critical Features Arising from a Case Study in the Metropolitan Area of Rome," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Guangxi Shen & Zipeng Song & Jiacong Xu & Lishuang Zou & Lijin Huang & Yingnan Li, 2023. "Are Ecosystem Services Provided by Street Trees at Parcel Level Worthy of Attention? A Case Study of a Campus in Zhenjiang, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-16, January.
    3. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    4. Boyd, James & Banzhaf, Spencer, 2007. "What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 616-626, August.
    5. Gevorg Tepanosyan & Chiara Baldacchini & Lilit Sahakyan, 2021. "Revealing Soil and Tree Leaves Deposited Particulate Matter PTE Relationship and Potential Sources in Urban Environment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-12, October.
    6. Joseph Bigirimana & Charles De Cannière & Jan Bogaert & Marie Josée Bigendako & Ingrid Parmentier, 2012. "Domestic garden plant diversity in Bujumbura, Burundi: Role of the socio-economical status of the neighborhood and alien species invasion risk," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/184419, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    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. Ahmet Tolunay & Çağlar Başsüllü, 2015. "Willingness to Pay for Carbon Sequestration and Co-Benefits of Forests in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, March.
    2. Bo Yang & Ming-Han Li & Shujuan Li, 2013. "Design-with-Nature for Multifunctional Landscapes: Environmental Benefits and Social Barriers in Community Development," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-26, October.
    3. Aevermann Tim & Schmude Jürgen, 2015. "Quantification and monetary valuation of urban ecosystem services in Munich, Germany," ZFW – Advances in Economic Geography, De Gruyter, vol. 59(3), pages 188-200, December.
    4. Stoll, Stefan & Frenzel, Mark & Burkhard, Benjamin & Adamescu, Mihai & Augustaitis, Algirdas & Baeßler, Cornelia & Bonet, Francisco J. & Carranza, Maria Laura & Cazacu, Constantin & Cosor, Georgia L. , 2015. "Assessment of ecosystem integrity and service gradients across Europe using the LTER Europe network," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 295(C), pages 75-87.
    5. McInnes, R.J. & Everard, M., 2017. "Rapid Assessment of Wetland Ecosystem Services (RAWES): An example from Colombo, Sri Lanka," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 89-105.
    6. Yang, Wu & Chang, Jie & Xu, Bin & Peng, Changhui & Ge, Ying, 2008. "Ecosystem service value assessment for constructed wetlands: A case study in Hangzhou, China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 116-125, December.
    7. Dickinson, Dawn C. & Hobbs, Richard J., 2017. "Cultural ecosystem services: Characteristics, challenges and lessons for urban green space research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 179-194.
    8. Yamaguchi, Rintaro & Shah, Payal, 2020. "Spatial discounting of ecosystem services," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    9. Sha Chen & Guan Li & Zhongguo Xu & Yuefei Zhuo & Cifang Wu & Yanmei Ye, 2019. "Combined Impact of Socioeconomic Forces and Policy Implications: Spatial-Temporal Dynamics of the Ecosystem Services Value in Yangtze River Delta, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-22, May.
    10. Haozhe Zhang & Qingyuan Yang & Zhongxun Zhang & Dan Lu & Huiming Zhang, 2021. "Spatiotemporal Changes of Ecosystem Service Value Determined by National Land Space Pattern Change: A Case Study of Fengdu County in The Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-24, May.
    11. Danley, Brian & Widmark, Camilla, 2016. "Evaluating conceptual definitions of ecosystem services and their implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 132-138.
    12. Renata Giedych & Gabriela Maksymiuk, 2017. "Specific Features of Parks and Their Impact on Regulation and Cultural Ecosystem Services Provision in Warsaw, Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-18, May.
    13. Foudi, Sébastien & Spadaro, Joseph V. & Chiabai, Aline & Polanco-Martínez, Josué M. & Neumann, Marc B., 2017. "The climatic dependencies of urban ecosystem services from green roofs: Threshold effects and non-linearity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 223-233.
    14. Zhichao Li & Tianqu Shao, 2019. "An Improved Ecological Services Valuation Model in Land Use Project," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-17, April.
    15. Depietri, Yaella & Kallis, Giorgos & Baró, Francesc & Cattaneo, Claudio, 2016. "The urban political ecology of ecosystem services: The case of Barcelona," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 83-100.
    16. Larondelle, Neele & Lauf, Steffen, 2016. "Balancing demand and supply of multiple urban ecosystem services on different spatial scales," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 18-31.
    17. Goran Krsnik & Sonia Reyes-Paecke & Keith M. Reynolds & Jordi Garcia-Gonzalo & José Ramón González Olabarria, 2023. "Assessing Relativeness in the Provision of Urban Ecosystem Services: Better Comparison Methods for Improved Well-Being," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    18. Gaodi Xie & Wenhui Chen & Shuyan Cao & Chunxia Lu & Yu Xiao & Changshun Zhang & Na Li & Shuo Wang, 2014. "The Outward Extension of an Ecological Footprint in City Expansion: The Case of Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-16, December.
    19. 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.
    20. P. Hlaváčková & D. Šafařík, 2016. "Quantification of the utility value of the recreational function of forests from the aspect of valuation practice," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(8), pages 345-356.

    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:13:y:2023:i:1:p:23-:d:1305831. 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.