Influences of Environmental and Social Factors on Perceived Bio-Cultural Services and Disservices

Abstract

Although the value of urban ecological infrastructure (UEI) is widely recognized, insufficient research has investigated how people perceive the wide variety of UEI. To address this gap, we investigated residents' perceptions of the coupled value of aesthetic and biological qualities as related to diverse UEI and other environmental and social factors (including personal beliefs and demographics), collectively referred to as bio-cultural services and disservices. We evaluated whether people positively view their neighborhood environments as natural-looking while providing diverse plants and wildlife habitat (services), in contrast to negatively perceived disservices that we evaluated as messy-looking with weeds and pests (disservices). We analyzed survey data from residents (n = 495) in metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona, United States, coupled with environmental variables (UEI and vegetative cover) compiled from diverse sources. We ran three regression models to compare the relative influence of social and environmental factors independently and combined on the perception of biocultural services and disservices. Our results demonstrate the influence of social factors, particularly place identity, neighborhood cohesion, and income, on both biocultural services and disservices. Additionally, environmental factors such as vegetation cover increased perceptions of bio-cultural services while decreasing perceived disservices. The effects of proximity to UEI were more varied. While proximity to cropland increased perceived bio-cultural disservices, proximity to desert parks reduced disservices. Although UEI can promote biodiversity and human well-being, all UEI are not perceived the same. Our results underscore the added value of considering both the form of UEI and perceptions among people who live nearby when designing and implementing infrastructure to promote bio-cultural services that are both ecologically and socially valued.

Thermal Comfort and Perceptions of the Ecosystem Services and Disservices of Urban Trees in Florence

“…ES and EDS are generally provided by the same urban greenspace but often EDS are over-reported. That seems at least partially influenced by societal mainstream appreciation while the basic or deep knowledge on bio-cultural services and disservices shown by the respondents apparently does not influence perception and reporting on the positive value of ES [47].…”

Perceptions of Public Officers Towards the Effects of Climate Change on Ecosystem Services: A Case-Study From Northern Portugal

“…Also, caution must be granted to the implications of our results, since a common awareness and perception of the impacts of climate change on ES does not necessarily translate into effective governmental engagement in the prioritization of this matter in action-oriented decision-making (Hummel et al, 2017;Luís et al, 2018). In addition, diversified engagement from citizens and other relevant private and public entities should also be accounted (Runting et al, 2017;Brown et al, 2020). Subsequent research should explore to what extent the awareness of climate change impacts in ES is effectively incorporated into regional planning and management, given their influence in decision-making processes shaping large portions of the landscape.…”

Social-ecological drivers of metropolitan residents’ comfort living with wildlife

“…Specifically, the sprawling outward growth of cities has surrounded and isolated remnants of desert within a matrix of human development and agriculture, putting certain residents in closer proximity to the desert parks and preserves (Andrade et al, 2019). For instance, previous research in the region has shown that how close residents live to these desert parks tend to be wealthier, have more positive attitudes toward the desert, and experience higher wildlife diversity and greater ecosystem services (Andrade et al, 2019;Warren et al, 2019;Brown, 2020).…”