Ecosystem service delivery by urban agriculture and green infrastructure – a systematic review

Evans, Daniel; Falagán, Natalia; Hardman, Charlotte A.; Kourmpetli, Sofia; Liu, L.; Mead, Bethan R.; Davies, Jessica

doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2022.101405

Cited by 102 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We searched for research publications published in peer-reviewed journals in English from 1990 to 2021, available from the ISI Web of Science databases using the following search keywords [39][40][41]: term1: urban heat island (UHI) OR urban thermal environment (UTE) OR land surface temperature (LST) AND term2(1-6): term21-green infrastructure (GI) OR term22-urban parks (UPS) OR term23-urban forests (UFS) OR term24-green streets OR street trees (UTS) OR term25-green roofs OR eco-roof OR living roof OR vegetate roof OR roof garden OR roof greening (GR) OR term26-green wall OR vertical greenery system OR green facades (GW) AND term3: ecosystem services(ESS) OR benefits OR values. We searched term1 and term2(1-6) and term3 six times separately, and downloaded the six different databases from WOS for the historical review analysis of GI types.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comprehensive Review of Different Types of Green Infrastructure to Mitigate Urban Heat Islands: Progress, Functions, and Benefits

Shao

Kim

2022

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change and rapid urbanization increase/amplify urban heat islands (UHIs). Green infrastructure (GI) is an effective and popularly strategy used to moderate UHIs. This paper aims to better understand the progress of different GI types (urban parks, urban forests, street trees, green roofs, green walls) in mitigating UHIs, and what benefits they provide. Firstly, this paper used CiteSpace to analyze 1243 publications on the Web of Science from 1990 to 2021, then analyzed the function/regulation of ecosystem services/benefits and values of GI types in reducing UHIs. The historical review results show that research on all GI types showed rapid growth since 2013, and their GR increased rapidly. The highest-ranking keywords were urban heat island/heat island, climate/climate change/microclimate, and temperature/land surface temperature/air temperature. “Design,” “vegetation,” “quality,” and “reduction” are the top four strongest keyword bursts. The most published countries are the People’s Republic of China, USA, Australia, Germany, and Italy, and the top three institutions are the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Arizona State University, and the National University of Singapore. Landscape and Urban Planning, Building and Environment, Energy and Building, and Urban Forestry and Urban Greening are the most published journals. In urban areas, different GI types as a form of ecosystem hardware provide multiple functions (reduced land surface temperatures, lower building energy usage, improved thermal comfort and enhanced human health, reduced morbidity and mortality, etc.). GI thus provides a regulated ecosystem service to ameliorate UHIs primarily through temperature regulation and shade. At the same time, GI provides benefits and values (ecological, economic, social, and cultural) to humans and urban sustainable development. GI types determine the functions they provide, afford corresponding regulated ecosystem services, and provide benefits and values in a logical/recycle system. Overall, this review highlights the development and importance of GI, as well as the relationship of GI types and functions of regulating the ecosystem service benefits and values to mitigate UHI, and advances the study of climate change adaptation in cities.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comprehensive Review of Different Types of Green Infrastructure to Mitigate Urban Heat Islands: Progress, Functions, and Benefits

Shao

Kim

2022

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…“Green Infrastructure (GI)” is a general term used to refer to the provision and maintenance of natural and semi-natural green spaces within the built “gray” infrastructure [ 84 ]. This term emerged in the USA in the 1990s and it seems to have origins in both landscape architecture, where it has been promoted as a network of green spaces, and in landscape ecology [ 35 ].…”

Section: Urban Practices To Mitigate Soil Sealing: Typologies Charact...mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Discussion on the Application of Terminology for Urban Soil Sealing Mitigation Practices

Rodríguez-Rojas

Grindlay

2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soil sealing is one of the most serious environmental problems today regarding its impact on cities. This article presents an analysis of the different urban practices currently used to mitigate the effects of soil sealing in urban areas. The main typologies, characteristics, differences, similarities and objectives have been considered. The practices analyzed were SuDS (Sustainable Drainage Systems), LIDs (Low Impact Developments), BMPs (Best Management Practices), WSUD (Water Sensitive Urban Design), GI (Green Infrastructure), and NbS (Nature-based Solutions). To understand the impact of these terms, an analysis of their presence in the scientific literature over the last 10 years is carried out. The results indicate that the trend in the use of these terms is increasing, with the number of articles having doubled in the last 10 years. This indicates the importance that the problem of soil sealing has acquired in the world, and the relevant environmental benefits of addressing it.

show abstract

“…Urban agriculture can also contribute to mitigating the negative effects of future food system disruptions. In terms of environmental sustainability, urban food growing delivers a wide range of ecosystem services, including regulating (e.g., carbon sequestration, reducing air pollution), provisioning (e.g., food production, medicinal resources), supporting (e.g., biodiversity, soil formation) and cultural (e.g., well‐being, better diet quality) services (Clinton et al., 2018; Evans et al., 2022; Mead et al., 2021; Russo et al., 2017; Small et al., 2019). Urban agriculture may also contribute to global efforts in mitigating climate change, though there is still uncertainty as to whether the carbon footprint of urban agriculture is indeed lower than that of conventional agriculture for provisioning urban areas.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, the focus in the literature on urban agriculture has been put on green spaces (e.g., private gardens, allotments, parks) and relatively little attention has been paid to gray spaces (i.e., spaces that have been artificialized and replaced by impermeable materials known as “gray infrastructure”) because these spaces are at the edge of our food growing frontier (Evans et al., 2022; Walsh et al., 2022). Though interest is rising, the examination of the productive potential of these spaces, their agronomic suitability, and how their food production could fit within the wider food system remains relatively under‐studied.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Much Food Can We Grow in Urban Areas? Food Production and Crop Yields of Urban Agriculture: A Meta‐Analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban agriculture can contribute to food security, food system resilience and sustainability at the city level. While studies have examined urban agricultural productivity, we lack systemic knowledge of how agricultural productivity of urban systems compares to conventional agriculture and how productivity varies for different urban spaces (e.g., allotments vs. rooftops vs. indoor farming) and growing systems (e.g., hydroponics vs. soil‐based agriculture). Here, we present a global meta‐analysis that seeks to quantify crop yields of urban agriculture for a broad range of crops and explore differences in yields for distinct urban spaces and growing systems. We found 200 studies reporting urban crop yields, from which 2,062 observations were extracted. Lettuces and chicories were the most studied urban grown crops. We observed high agronomic suitability of urban areas, with urban agricultural yields on par with or greater than global average conventional agricultural yields. “Cucumbers and gherkins” was the category of crops for which differences in yields between urban and conventional agriculture were the greatest (17 kg m−2 cycle−1 vs. 3.8 kg m−2 cycle−1). Some urban spaces and growing systems also had a significant effect on specific crop yields (e.g., tomato yields in hydroponic systems were significantly greater than tomato yields in soil‐based systems). This analysis provides a more robust, globally relevant evidence base on the productivity of urban agriculture that can be used in future research and practice relating to urban agriculture, especially in scaling‐up studies aiming to estimate the self‐sufficiency of cities and towns and their potential to meet local food demand.

show abstract

Ecosystem service delivery by urban agriculture and green infrastructure – a systematic review

Cited by 102 publications

References 61 publications

A Comprehensive Review of Different Types of Green Infrastructure to Mitigate Urban Heat Islands: Progress, Functions, and Benefits

A Comprehensive Review of Different Types of Green Infrastructure to Mitigate Urban Heat Islands: Progress, Functions, and Benefits

A Discussion on the Application of Terminology for Urban Soil Sealing Mitigation Practices

How Much Food Can We Grow in Urban Areas? Food Production and Crop Yields of Urban Agriculture: A Meta‐Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About