IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i3p645-d200917.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cultural Ecosystem Services Provided by Urban Green Change along an Urban-Periurban Gradient

Author

Listed:
  • Maraja Riechers

    (Faculty of Sustainability, Leuphana University Lüneburg, Universitätsallee 1, 21335 Lüneburg, Germany
    Agrarecology, Department of Crop Sciences, Georg-August-University Göttingen, 37077 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Micha Strack

    (Georg-Elias-Müller-Institute of Psychology, University of Göttingen, 37077 Göttingen, Germany)

  • Jan Barkmann

    (Hochschule Darmstadt—University of Applied Sciences, Fachbereich Gesellschaftswissenschaften, 64295 Darmstadt, Germany)

  • Teja Tscharntke

    (Agrarecology, Department of Crop Sciences, Georg-August-University Göttingen, 37077 Göttingen, Germany)

Abstract

Urbanization by densification is globally increasing and endangers maintenance of urban green and associated social-ecological systems. Cultural ecosystem services play a crucial role in human well-being, especially in urban areas. We analyzed perceived importance of cultural ecosystem services provided by green space in Berlin along an urban-periurban gradient. Based on extensive pretests, we designed a standardized questionnaire and conducted 558 face-to-face interviews. B using multiple regressions and principal component analysis, we show that perceived importance of cultural ecosystem services and patterns of urban green use are affected by an urbanization gradient and associated changes in population density. Important cultural ecosystem services decreases in urban core areas with higher population density, whereas people in periurban areas with more available green spaces exhibit a greater valuation of nature. In contrast, social relations and cultural diversity had the highest importance in the urban core, while cultural heritage, education, natural awareness, recreation, and aesthetical appreciation were higher valued in the less populated periurban areas, suggesting two bundles of cultural ecosystem services.

Suggested Citation

  • Maraja Riechers & Micha Strack & Jan Barkmann & Teja Tscharntke, 2019. "Cultural Ecosystem Services Provided by Urban Green Change along an Urban-Periurban Gradient," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-10, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:3:p:645-:d:200917
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/645/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/645/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhongwei Guo & Lin Zhang & Yiming Li, 2010. "Increased Dependence of Humans on Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(10), pages 1-8, October.
    2. Calvet-Mir, Laura & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Reyes-García, Victoria, 2012. "Beyond food production: Ecosystem services provided by home gardens. A case study in Vall Fosca, Catalan Pyrenees, Northeastern Spain," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 153-160.
    3. Tarja Söderman & Leena Kopperoinen & Petri Shemeikka & Vesa Yli-Pelkonen, 2012. "Ecosystem Services Criteria For Sustainable Development In Urban Regions," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(02), pages 1-48.
    4. Ernstson, Henrik & Sörlin, Sverker, 2013. "Ecosystem services as technology of globalization: On articulating values in urban nature," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 274-284.
    5. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    6. Riechers, Maraja & Barkmann, Jan & Tscharntke, Teja, 2016. "Perceptions of cultural ecosystem services from urban green," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 33-39.
    7. Chan, Kai M.A. & Satterfield, Terre & Goldstein, Joshua, 2012. "Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 8-18.
    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. Claudio Fagarazzi & Carlotta Sergiacomi & Federico M. Stefanini & Enrico Marone, 2021. "A Model for the Economic Evaluation of Cultural Ecosystem Services: The Recreational Hunting Function in the Agroforestry Territories of Tuscany (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-15, October.
    2. Rafał Blazy & Hanna Hrehorowicz-Gaber & Alicja Hrehorowicz-Nowak & Arkadiusz Płachta, 2021. "The Synergy of Ecosystems of Blue and Green Infrastructure and Its Services in the Metropolitan Area—Chances and Dangers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-14, February.
    3. Kimberly J. Coleman & Elizabeth E. Perry & Dominik Thom & Tatiana M. Gladkikh & William S. Keeton & Peter W. Clark & Ralph E. Tursini & Kimberly F. Wallin, 2020. "The Woods around the Ivory Tower: A Systematic Review Examining the Value and Relevance of School Forests in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, January.
    4. Siân de Bell & Hilary Graham & Piran C. L. White, 2020. "Evaluating Dual Ecological and Well-Being Benefits from an Urban Restoration Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-28, January.
    5. Qindong Fan & Xiaoyu Yang & Chenming Zhang, 2022. "A Review of Ecosystem Services Research Focusing on China against the Background of Urbanization," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-17, July.
    6. Grzyb, Tomasz, 2024. "Mapping cultural ecosystem services of the urban riverscapes: the case of the Vistula River in Warsaw, Poland," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    7. Dehghani Pour, Milad & Barati, Ali Akbar & Azadi, Hossein & Scheffran, Jürgen & Shirkhani, Mehdi, 2023. "Analyzing forest residents' perception and knowledge of forest ecosystem services to guide forest management and biodiversity conservation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    8. Rachel Dolan & James M. Bullock & Julia P. G. Jones & Ioannis N. Athanasiadis & Javier Martinez-Lopez & Simon Willcock, 2021. "The Flows of Nature to People, and of People to Nature: Applying Movement Concepts to Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-18, May.
    9. Barbara Sowińska-Świerkosz & Malwina Michalik-Śnieżek & Dawid Soszyński & Agnieszka Kułak, 2020. "In the Search of an Assessment Method for Urban Landscape Objects (ULOs): Tangible and Intangible Values, Public Participation Geographic Information Systems (PPGIS), and Ranking Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-23, December.
    10. Grzyb, Tomasz & Kulczyk, Sylwia & Derek, Marta & Woźniak, Edyta, 2021. "Using social media to assess recreation across urban green spaces in times of abrupt change," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    11. Ewa Zaraś-Januszkiewicz & Jakub Botwina & Barbara Żarska & Tatiana Swoczyna & Tomasz Krupa, 2020. "Fortresses as Specific Areas of Urban Greenery Defining the Uniqueness of the Urban Cultural Landscape: Warsaw Fortress—A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-30, February.

    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. 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.
    2. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    3. Wubante Fetene Admasu & Annelies Boerema & Jan Nyssen & Amare Sewnet Minale & Enyew Adgo Tsegaye & Steven Van Passel, 2020. "Uncovering Ecosystem Services of Expropriated Land: The Case of Urban Expansion in Bahir Dar, Northwest Ethiopia," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-20, October.
    4. Washbourne, Carla-Leanne & Goddard, Mark A. & Le Provost, Gaëtane & Manning, David A.C. & Manning, Peter, 2020. "Trade-offs and synergies in the ecosystem service demand of urban brownfield stakeholders," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    5. Langemeyer, Johannes & Baró, Francesc & Roebeling, Peter & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik, 2015. "Contrasting values of cultural ecosystem services in urban areas: The case of park Montjuïc in Barcelona," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 178-186.
    6. Gugulica, Madalina & Burghardt, Dirk, 2023. "Mapping indicators of cultural ecosystem services use in urban green spaces based on text classification of geosocial media data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    7. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Barton, David N., 2013. "Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 235-245.
    8. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    9. Riechers, Maraja & Barkmann, Jan & Tscharntke, Teja, 2016. "Perceptions of cultural ecosystem services from urban green," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 33-39.
    10. Kaiser, Nina N. & Ghermandi, Andrea & Feld, Christian K. & Hershkovitz, Yaron & Palt, Martin & Stoll, Stefan, 2021. "Societal benefits of river restoration – Implications from social media analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    11. Schmidt, Katja & Walz, Ariane & Martín-López, Berta & Sachse, René, 2017. "Testing socio-cultural valuation methods of ecosystem services to explain land use preferences," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 270-288.
    12. Florian V Eppink & Matthew Winden & Will C C Wright & Suzie Greenhalgh, 2016. "Non-Market Values in a Cost-Benefit World: Evidence from a Choice Experiment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-12, October.
    13. Peck, Megan & Khirfan, Luna, 2021. "Improving the validity and credibility of the sociocultural valuation of ecosystem services in Amman, Jordan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    14. Shuping Zhang & Xuehui Sun & Kun Zhang & Xiaozheng Zhang & Renqing Wang & Jian Liu & Shuping Zhang, 2021. "An Attempt To Identify Cultural Ecosystem Services And Related Land Use Types In Rural Areas Under Urbanization," Environment & Ecosystem Science (EES), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 5(2), pages 121-128, September.
    15. Brzoska, P. & Grunewald, K. & Bastian, O., 2021. "A multi-criteria analytical method to assess ecosystem services at urban site level, exemplified by two German city districts," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    16. Katayama, Naoki & Baba, Yuki G., 2020. "Measuring artistic inspiration drawn from ecosystems and biodiversity: A case study of old children’s songs in Japan," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    17. De Valck, Jeremy & Beames, Alistair & Liekens, Inge & Bettens, Maarten & Seuntjens, Piet & Broekx, Steven, 2019. "Valuing urban ecosystem services in sustainable brownfield redevelopment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 139-149.
    18. Luederitz, Christopher & Brink, Ebba & Gralla, Fabienne & Hermelingmeier, Verena & Meyer, Moritz & Niven, Lisa & Panzer, Lars & Partelow, Stefan & Rau, Anna-Lena & Sasaki, Ryuei & Abson, David J. & La, 2015. "A review of urban ecosystem services: six key challenges for future research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 98-112.
    19. Riechers, Maraja & Barkmann, Jan & Tscharntke, Teja, 2015. "Bewertung kultureller Ökosystemleistungen von Berliner Stadtgrün entlang eines urbanen-periurbanen Gradienten," DARE Discussion Papers 1507, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    20. Ramos, Alya & Jujnovsky, Julieta & Almeida-Leñero, Lucía, 2018. "The relevance of stakeholders’ perceptions of ecosystem services in a rural-urban watershed in Mexico City," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 85-95.

    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:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:3:p:645-:d:200917. 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.