A review of urban ecosystem services: six key challenges for future research

Abstract

a b s t r a c tGlobal urbanization creates opportunities and challenges for human well-being and transition towards sustainability. Urban areas are human-environment systems that depend fundamentally on ecosystems, and thus require an understanding of the management of urban ecosystem services to ensure sustainable urban planning. The purpose of this study is to provide a systematic review of urban ecosystems services research, which addresses the combined domain of ecosystem services and urban development. We examined emerging trends and gaps in how urban ecosystem services are conceptualized in peer-reviewed case study literature, including the geographical distribution of research, the development and use of the urban ecosystem services concept, and the involvement of stakeholders. We highlight six challenges aimed at strengthening the concept's potential to facilitate meaningful inter-and transdisciplinary work for ecosystem services research and planning. Achieving a cohesive conceptual approach in the research field will address (i) the need for more extensive spatial and contextual coverage, (ii) continual clarification of definitions, (iii) recognition of limited data transferability, (iv) more comprehensive stakeholder involvement, (v) more integrated research efforts, and (vi) translation of scientific findings into actionable knowledge, feeding information back into planning and management. We conclude with recommendations for conducting further research while incorporating these challenges.

Does the Ecosystem Service Concept Reach its Limits in Urban Environments?

“…The possibility to point out management options to maintain ecosystem services or the connection of ecosystems despite construction gives an argument to include all classes of urban structures into the assessment of ecosystem service potentials. In any case, the approach should be transparent, but often case studies do not provide sufficient information on how urban structures are defined (Luederitz et al, 2015). Here, the proposed classification natural, managed, constructed and overbuilt ecosystems in relation to differing ecosystem definition might serve as an orientation towards a more transparent reporting, which is generally of importance as the challenge of framing "nature" applies in other contexts as well (e.g.…”

Mapping and assessing ecosystem services to support urban planning: A case study on brownfield regeneration in Trento, Italy

“…As shown by the assessment of the cooling effect, simple beneficiary-based indicators can be obtained through the combination of biophysical modelling with information commonly available to planners, such as the distribution and generalised level of demand of the actual and potential beneficiaries. What is needed, though still challenging, is to follow the whole 'production chain' of ES, from urban ecological structures and functions to ES benefits (Luederitz et al 2015, Olander et al 2018, which requires synthesising multiple inputs into a true trans-disciplinary assessment (Jacobs et al 2016). …”

“…In fact, most urban ES mapping and assessment studies lack the identification of specific policy questions and stakeholders to which they might be relevant . As a consequence, they usually produce generic and abstract recommendations , failing to close the feedback loop between ES and the planning and management of green infrastructure (Luederitz et al 2015). The use of ES knowledge to assess alternative scenarios poses specific requirements to ES assessments.…”

Valoración económica de los servicios ecosistémicos de una Laguna del sudeste bonaerense (Argentina)

“…Desde MEA se han propuesto diversidad de tipologías sobre SE (Haines-Young & Potschin, 2010;Daniel et al 2012;Luederitz et al 2015;Hermelingmeir & Nicholas, 2017). Es probable que las tipologías continúen evolucionando, porque como señala Costanza (2008) es posible considerar otras formas de categorización más allá del listado que sugiere MEA o Wallace (2007).…”