IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ssb/dispap/941.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Urban Green. Integrating ecosystem extent and condition as a basis for ecosystem accounts. Examples from the Oslo region

Author

Listed:

Abstract

The article enhances the knowledge base for assessment of urban ecosystem services, within UN System of Environmental-Economic Accounting Experimental Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EEA), which is based on spatial extent accounts (area of ecosystems) and biophysical condition accounts (ecological state of ecosystems). Case studies from the Oslo region are explored, combining land use/land cover maps from Statistics Norway with satellite data. The approach suggests that especially in an urban context, extent and condition accounts are not separate approaches as suggested by SEEA EEA but should be integrated for ecosystem accounting. Moreover, the basic spatial unit should not be fixed, as suggested by SEEA EEA, but should reflect that modelling of different ecosystem services, as basis for trade-offs in urban planning, requires different spatial units to capture urban green elements.

Suggested Citation

  • Per Arild Garnåsjordet & Margrete Steinnes & Zofie Cimburova & Megan Nowell & David N. Barton & Iulie Aslaksen, 2020. "Urban Green. Integrating ecosystem extent and condition as a basis for ecosystem accounts. Examples from the Oslo region," Discussion Papers 941, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:ssb:dispap:941
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ssb.no/en/forskning/discussion-papers/_attachment/436198
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Remme, Roy P. & Schröter, Matthias & Hein, Lars, 2014. "Developing spatial biophysical accounting for multiple ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 6-18.
    2. Nicola Clerici & Cesar Augusto Valbuena Calderón & Juan Manuel Posada, 2017. "Fusion of Sentinel-1A and Sentinel-2A data for land cover mapping: a case study in the lower Magdalena region, Colombia," Journal of Maps, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 718-726, November.
    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. Warnell, Katherine J.D. & Russell, Marc & Rhodes, Charles & Bagstad, Kenneth J. & Olander, Lydia P. & Nowak, David J. & Poudel, Rajendra & Glynn, Pierre D. & Hass, Julie L. & Hirabayashi, Satoshi & In, 2020. "Testing ecosystem accounting in the United States: A case study for the Southeast," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    2. Carl Obst & Lars Hein & Bram Edens, 2016. "National Accounting and the Valuation of Ecosystem Assets and Their Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(1), pages 1-23, May.
    3. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo & Paletto, Alessandro & Fath, Brian D., 2015. "Assessing, valuing, and mapping ecosystem services in Alpine forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 12-23.
    4. Cavalletti, B. & Di Fabio, C. & Lagomarsino, E. & Ramassa, P., 2020. "Ecosystem accounting for marine protected areas: A proposed framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    5. Burke, Thomas & Whyatt, J. Duncan & Rowland, Clare & Blackburn, G. Alan & Abbatt, Jon, 2020. "The influence of land cover data on farm-scale valuations of natural capital," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    6. Xiao, Lan & Haiping, Tang & Haoguang, Liang, 2017. "A theoretical framework for researching cultural ecosystem service flows in urban agglomerations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 95-104.
    7. Schröter, Matthias & Stumpf, Klara H. & Loos, Jacqueline & van Oudenhoven, Alexander P.E. & Böhnke-Henrichs, Anne & Abson, David J., 2017. "Refocusing ecosystem services towards sustainability," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 35-43.
    8. Hein, Lars & Remme, Roy P. & Schenau, Sjoerd & Bogaart, Patrick W. & Lof, Marjolein E. & Horlings, Edwin, 2020. "Ecosystem accounting in the Netherlands," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    9. Havinga, Ilan & Bogaart, Patrick W. & Hein, Lars & Tuia, Devis, 2020. "Defining and spatially modelling cultural ecosystem services using crowdsourced data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    10. Richter, Franziska & Jan, Pierrick & El Benni, Nadja & Lüscher, Andreas & Buchmann, Nina & Klaus, Valentin H., 2021. "A guide to assess and value ecosystem services of grasslands," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    11. Song Liu & Peiyu Shen & Yishan Huang & Li Jiang & Yongjiu Feng, 2022. "Spatial Distribution Changes in Nature-Based Recreation Service Supply from 2008 to 2018 in Shanghai, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-17, October.
    12. Wei Jiang & Rainer Marggraf, 2021. "Ecosystems in Books: Evaluating the Inspirational Service of the Weser River in Germany," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, June.
    13. Lai, Tin-Yu & Salminen, Jani & Jäppinen, Jukka-Pekka & Koljonen, Saija & Mononen, Laura & Nieminen, Emmi & Vihervaara, Petteri & Oinonen, Soile, 2018. "Bridging the gap between ecosystem service indicators and ecosystem accounting in Finland," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 377(C), pages 51-65.
    14. Paolo De Fioravante & Tania Luti & Alice Cavalli & Chiara Giuliani & Pasquale Dichicco & Marco Marchetti & Gherardo Chirici & Luca Congedo & Michele Munafò, 2021. "Multispectral Sentinel-2 and SAR Sentinel-1 Integration for Automatic Land Cover Classification," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-35, June.
    15. Vallecillo, Sara & La Notte, Alessandra & Zulian, Grazia & Ferrini, Silvia & Maes, Joachim, 2019. "Ecosystem services accounts: Valuing the actual flow of nature-based recreation from ecosystems to people," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 392(C), pages 196-211.
    16. Schröter, Matthias & Remme, Roy P. & Sumarga, Elham & Barton, David N. & Hein, Lars, 2015. "Lessons learned for spatial modelling of ecosystem services in support of ecosystem accounting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 64-69.
    17. Clément Feger & Laurent Mermet, 2017. "A blueprint towards accounting for the management of ecosystems," Post-Print hal-01930913, HAL.
    18. Nikodinoska, Natasha & Paletto, Alessandro & Pastorella, Fabio & Granvik, Madeleine & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2018. "Assessing, valuing and mapping ecosystem services at city level: The case of Uppsala (Sweden)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 368(C), pages 411-424.
    19. Elena A. Mikhailova & Christopher J. Post & Mark A. Schlautman & Garth R. Groshans & Michael P. Cope & Lisha Zhang, 2019. "A Systems-Based Approach to Ecosystem Services Valuation of Various Atmospheric Calcium Deposition Flows," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-14, April.
    20. Boudewijn van Leeuwen & Zalán Tobak & Ferenc Kovács, 2020. "Sentinel-1 and -2 Based near Real Time Inland Excess Water Mapping for Optimized Water Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Experimental ecosystem accounting; ecosystem services; urban ecosystems; spatial analysis; land use maps; land cover maps;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q34 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Natural Resources and Domestic and International Conflicts
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ssb:dispap:941. 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: L Maasø (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ssbgvno.html .

    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.