IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v7y2015i4p3958-3976d47770.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Setting Priorities for Urban Forest Planning. A Comprehensive Response to Ecological and Social Needs for the Metropolitan Area of Rome (Italy)

Author

Listed:
  • Giulia Capotorti

    (Department of Environmental Biology, Sapienza University of Rome, P.le Aldo Moro 5, Rome 00185, Italy)

  • Barbara Mollo

    (Department of Environmental Biology, Sapienza University of Rome, P.le Aldo Moro 5, Rome 00185, Italy)

  • Laura Zavattero

    (Department of Environmental Biology, Sapienza University of Rome, P.le Aldo Moro 5, Rome 00185, Italy)

  • Ilaria Anzellotti

    (Department of Environmental Biology, Sapienza University of Rome, P.le Aldo Moro 5, Rome 00185, Italy)

  • Laura Celesti-Grapow

    (Department of Environmental Biology, Sapienza University of Rome, P.le Aldo Moro 5, Rome 00185, Italy)

Abstract

Urban forests represent key elements of green infrastructure and provide essential ecosystem services in both the ecological and social spheres. Therefore, forestation planning plays a decisive role in the sustainable development strategies of metropolitan areas and addresses the challenge of maintaining biodiversity while improving human health and well-being. The aim of this work is to present a methodological approach that can be used to identify priorities in urban forest planning and can provide comprehensive responses to ecological and social needs in any metropolitan context. The approach, which is based on interdisciplinary principles of landscape ecology, ecosystem geography and dynamic plant sociology, has been adopted in the Municipality of Rome (Italy). The first step entails defining an ecological framework for forestation plans by means of the ecological land classification and assessment of landscape conservation status. The second step entails setting forestation priorities according to both ecological and social criteria. The application of the method proved to effectively select limited areas requiring intervention within an extensive metropolitan area. Furthermore, it provided responses to sustainability issues such as long-term maintenance of restored habitats, landscape perspective of planning, greening of urban agriculture, improvement in urban resilience, and cost-effective improvement in ecosystem services provision.

Suggested Citation

  • Giulia Capotorti & Barbara Mollo & Laura Zavattero & Ilaria Anzellotti & Laura Celesti-Grapow, 2015. "Setting Priorities for Urban Forest Planning. A Comprehensive Response to Ecological and Social Needs for the Metropolitan Area of Rome (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-19, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:4:p:3958-3976:d:47770
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/4/3958/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/4/3958/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eeva-Sofia Säynäjoki & Jukka Heinonen & Seppo Junnila, 2014. "The Power of Urban Planning on Environmental Sustainability: A Focus Group Study in Finland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(10), pages 1-22, September.
    2. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Barton, David N., 2013. "Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 235-245.
    3. Sarah Taylor Lovell, 2010. "Multifunctional Urban Agriculture for Sustainable Land Use Planning in the United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(8), pages 1-24, August.
    4. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    5. Camilo Ordóñez & Peter N. Duinker, 2010. "Interpreting Sustainability for Urban Forests," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(6), pages 1-13, June.
    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. Steffen Lehmann, 2015. "A New Urban Agenda: Introduction to the Special Issue on “Sustainable Urban Development”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-7, July.
    2. Giulia Capotorti & Vera De Lazzari & Marta Alós Ortí, 2019. "Local Scale Prioritisation of Green Infrastructure for Enhancing Biodiversity in Peri-Urban Agroecosystems: A Multi-Step Process Applied in the Metropolitan City of Rome (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-20, June.
    3. 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.
    4. Kunyuan Wanghe & Xinle Guo & Xiaofeng Luan & Kai Li, 2019. "Assessment of Urban Green Space Based on Bio-Energy Landscape Connectivity: A Case Study on Tongzhou District in Beijing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-15, September.
    5. Simone Valeri & Giulia Capotorti, 2023. "Linking Green Infrastructure Deployment Needs and Agroecosystem Conditions for the Improvement of the Natura2000 Network: Preliminary Investigations in W Mediterranean Europe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-33, June.
    6. Rita Mendonça & Peter Roebeling & Teresa Fidélis & Miguel Saraiva, 2021. "Policy Instruments to Encourage the Adoption of Nature-Based Solutions in Urban Landscapes," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-16, 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. Rebecka Milestad & Annika Carlsson-Kanyama & Christina Schaffer, 2020. "The Högdalen urban farm: a real case assessment of sustainability attributes," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(6), pages 1461-1475, December.
    2. 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).
    3. Massoni, Emma Soy & Barton, David N. & Rusch, Graciela M. & Gundersen, Vegard, 2018. "Bigger, more diverse and better? Mapping structural diversity and its recreational value in urban green spaces," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 502-516.
    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. Donatella Valente & María Victoria Marinelli & Erica Maria Lovello & Cosimo Gaspare Giannuzzi & Irene Petrosillo, 2022. "Fostering the Resiliency of Urban Landscape through the Sustainable Spatial Planning of Green Spaces," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-13, March.
    6. Vahid Amini Parsa & Esmail Salehi & Ahmad Reza Yavari & Peter M van Bodegom, 2019. "An improved method for assessing mismatches between supply and demand in urban regulating ecosystem services: A case study in Tabriz, Iran," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-22, August.
    7. Brown, Melanie G. & Quinn, John E., 2018. "Zoning does not improve the availability of ecosystem services in urban watersheds. A case study from Upstate South Carolina, USA," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 254-265.
    8. Berglihn, Elisabeth Cornelia & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik, 2021. "Ecosystem services from urban forests: The case of Oslomarka, Norway," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    9. 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).
    10. Jonas Smit Andersen & Sara Maria Lerer & Antje Backhaus & Marina Bergen Jensen & Hjalte Jomo Danielsen Sørup, 2017. "Characteristic Rain Events: A Methodology for Improving the Amenity Value of Stormwater Control Measures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-18, October.
    11. Jeroen Degerickx & Martin Hermy & Ben Somers, 2020. "Mapping Functional Urban Green Types Using High Resolution Remote Sensing Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-35, March.
    12. Heather L Reynolds & Leslie Brandt & Burnell C Fischer & Brady S Hardiman & Donovan J Moxley & Eric Sandweiss & James H Speer & Songlin Fei, 2020. "Implications of climate change for managing urban green infrastructure: an Indiana, US case study," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(4), pages 1967-1984, December.
    13. Holt, Alison R. & Mears, Meghann & Maltby, Lorraine & Warren, Philip, 2015. "Understanding spatial patterns in the production of multiple urban ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 33-46.
    14. Karen T. Lourdes & Chris N. Gibbins & Perrine Hamel & Ruzana Sanusi & Badrul Azhar & Alex M. Lechner, 2021. "A Review of Urban Ecosystem Services Research in Southeast Asia," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, January.
    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. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Johan Colding & Karl Samuelsson & Lars Marcus & Åsa Gren & Ann Legeby & Meta Berghauser Pont & Stephan Barthel, 2022. "Frontiers in Social–Ecological Urbanism," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, June.
    19. Claron, Charles & Mikou, Mehdi & Levrel, Harold & Tardieu, Léa, 2022. "Mapping urban ecosystem services to design cost-effective purchase of development rights programs: The case of the Greater Paris metropolis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    20. Renato Monteiro & José C. Ferreira & Paula Antunes, 2020. "Green Infrastructure Planning Principles: An Integrated Literature Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, December.

    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:7:y:2015:i:4:p:3958-3976:d:47770. 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.