Exploring social and cultural norms to promote ecologically sensitive residential garden design

Uren, Hannah V.; Dzidic, Peta; Bishop, Brian

doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.12.008

Cited by 66 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our WTP analysis confirms this latter point. Acceptability can also increase when GI designs are promoted on neighbourhood level to influence neighbourhood norms so that residents do not feel an outsider when they install a rain garden or green roof (Uren, Dzidic, & Bishop, 2015;Visscher et al, 2014).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Green infrastructure for urban climate adaptation: How do residents’ views on climate impacts and green infrastructure shape adaptation preferences?

Derkzen

Teeffelen

Verburg

2017

Landscape and Urban Planning

257

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

h i g h l i g h t s• Novel socio-cultural valuation framework for green infrastructure and climate impacts.• People are more aware of present-day heat waves but more alarmed by future flooding.• People tend to prefer diverse, familiar and visually attractive adaptation measures.• Environmental education can increase support for effective adaptation measures.• Results help planners prioritize effective and desired green infrastructure designs. a r t i c l e i n f o b s t r a c tCities are particularly prone to the effects of climate change. One way for cities to adapt is by enhancing their green infrastructure (GI) to mitigate the impacts of heat waves and flooding. While alternative GI design options exist, there are many unknowns regarding public support for the various options. This study aims to fill this gap by performing a socio-cultural valuation of urban GI for climate adaptation that encompasses multiple dimensions: people's notion of and concerns about climate impacts, the degree to which people acknowledge the benefits of GI to alleviate such impacts, and people's preferences for different GI measures, including their willingness to pay (WTP). Data were collected through photo-assisted face-to-face surveys (n = 200) with residents in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, and linked to GI GIS data. Respondents had a notion of and concerns about climate impacts, but did not necessarily acknowledge that GI may help tackle these issues. Yet, when residents were informed about the adaptation capacity of different GI measures, their preferences shifted towards the most effective options. There was no information effect, however, on people's WTP for GI, which was mostly related to income and ethnicity. Our study shows that economic valuation alone would miss nuances that socio-cultural valuation as applied in this paper can reveal. The method revealed preferences for particular adaptation designs, and assists in detecting why policy for climate adaptation may be hampered. Understanding people's views on climate impacts and adaptation options is crucial for prioritizing effective policy responses in the face of climate change.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Green infrastructure for urban climate adaptation: How do residents’ views on climate impacts and green infrastructure shape adaptation preferences?

Derkzen

Teeffelen

Verburg

2017

Landscape and Urban Planning

257

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With this framework we intend to contribute to a young field of study that aims to bridge ecological and socio-cultural disciplines (Chowdhury et al 2011;Cook et al 2012;Uren et al 2015). There is still a gap with regards to an integrated understanding of domestic urban space and how it is constituted through an interaction of natural and human factors (Larson et al 2010;Lubbe et al 2010;Chowdhury et al 2011;Cook et al 2012;Beumer and Martens 2015;Uren et al 2015). On a societal level, the framework aims to foster a transformational dialogue (Lang et al 2012;Wiek et al 2012) on the question: how can we reconcile living comfort, aesthetics and ease at the one hand and the protection of biodiversity, ecosystem services and a sustainable living environment at the other hand, in the way we design our residential areas (Rosenzweig 2003)?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cornelis and Hermy 2004;Gaston et al 2005;Hope et al 2006;Baker and Harris 2007;Burghardt et al 2008;Loram et al 2008;Martin 2008;Kendal et al 2012), or on factors that influence human choices and preferences for certain types of yards (Nassauer 1995;Larsen and Harlan 2006;Larsen and Swanbrow 2006;Lyytimäki et al 2008;Larson et al 2009;St. Hilaire et al 2010;Zheng et al 2011;Heezik, et al 2012;Kurz and Baudains 2012;Uren, et al 2015). Although urban residential landscapes and domestic gardening preferences, values and drivers are increasingly studied in the context of sustainable development and biodiversity conservation (Miller and Hobbs 2002;Gaston, et al 2005;Larsen and Harlan 2006;Mathieu et al 2007;Loram et al 2008;Galluzzi et al 2010;Goddard et al 2010;Larson et al 2010;St.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…design style, maintenance need, artefacts) influence habitat value, biodiversity, ecosystem services, and sustainability in and beyond human settlement areas (Dunn et al 2006;Galluzzi et al 2010;Larson et al 2010;Chowdhury et al 2011;Cook et al 2012;Heezik et al 2012). Integrative approaches that combine ecological and cultural factors in domestic landscaping practices and design are available but scarce (Larson et al 2010;Lubbe et al 2010;Cook et al 2012;Uren et al 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

BIMBY’s first steps: a pilot study on the contribution of residential front-yards in Phoenix and Maastricht to biodiversity, ecosystem services and urban sustainability

Beumer

Martens

2015

Urban Ecosyst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large parts of urban space around the world exist of small-scale plots such as domestic gardens. These small-scale urban spaces carry potential for enhancing biodiversity, sustainability and ecosystem services in and beyond cities. However, domestic gardening and residential garden designs are often guided by aesthetics and ease more than by the aim to create habitat and biological diversity. Yard-management decisions impact socio-ecological systems in various ways, for example through irrigation patterns, fertilization or the use of pesticides or through the choice for exotic species that may become invasive over time. Yardmanagement decisions can also positively influence the presence of pollinators, improve soil quality or even foster small scale 'Wildlife Habitats' that can function as ecological stepping stones to the wider environment. In this paper a pilot assessment is presented of the contribution of residential front-yards in Phoenix (Arizona) and Maastricht (The Netherlands) to biodiversity, ecosystem services and sustainability by applying the BIMBY (Biodiversity in My (Back) Yard) framework.

show abstract

Boom–bust economics and vegetation dynamics in a desert city: How strong is the link?

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In cities, human activities such as supplemental watering and plantings of ornamental species are thought to decouple vegetation diversity from biophysical processes. Consequently, socioeconomics may arguably be one of the most important factors influencing the pattern and dynamics of vegetation in urban ecosystems. Socioeconomic disturbances, like The Great Recession of 2007 to post-2010, disrupt normal social and economic activity causing changes to the ecology of cities that have yet to be examined. Using the rapidly growing metropolitan area of Phoenix, Arizona, USA, as a case study, we explored the dynamics of residential vegetation diversity from before to after The Great Recession. Our findings linked changing plant community composition and increasing richness with socioeconomics of the housing boom, (from 2000 to 2006) followed by the Great Recession (from 2007 to post-2010). Specifically, we found that the housing market boom-bust episode acted as a socioeconomic driver of overall plant community composition. However, plant species with annual reproduction strategies were instead linked to the previous winter's precipitation and did not respond to socioeconomic disturbance, a behavior expected in native desert plant communities, but not from constructed and managed urban plant communities. This study demonstrates how disturbances to socioeconomic components of ecosystems can result in changes to plant community diversity and dynamics; though, biophysical drivers remain important to short-lived annual species regardless. Undertakings that aim to maintain or increase urban biodiversity for ecosystem services and human well-being need to systematically approach the effects of socioeconomic fluctuations on urban flora. Cross-site comparisons will be key to developing a broader understanding of these coupled dynamics across older and newer, mesic and arid, and growing and shrinking cities.

show abstract

Exploring social and cultural norms to promote ecologically sensitive residential garden design

Cited by 66 publications

References 34 publications

Green infrastructure for urban climate adaptation: How do residents’ views on climate impacts and green infrastructure shape adaptation preferences?

Green infrastructure for urban climate adaptation: How do residents’ views on climate impacts and green infrastructure shape adaptation preferences?

BIMBY’s first steps: a pilot study on the contribution of residential front-yards in Phoenix and Maastricht to biodiversity, ecosystem services and urban sustainability

Boom–bust economics and vegetation dynamics in a desert city: How strong is the link?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About