Le Parc Méric à Montpellier : représentations sociales d’un parc public entre campagne, jardin et nature sauvage

Aggeri, Gaëlle

doi:10.4000/developpementdurable.11191

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In practice, to reconcile ecological and social issues, the designer must find a subtle combination between wild areas and some occasional interventions such as a few planted spaces, built elements or urban facilities to welcome users and guide perceptions. For example, in a wild park, the designer could choose to use wooden fences and benches, and plant a small orchard so that the site evokes both nature and the countryside (Aggeri, 2016). To limit insecurity and the perception of abandonment, and to facilitate movement and certain uses such as sport or picnics on the grass, paths can be laid out in the meadows, small areas can be maintained as lawns, and shrubs can be pruned occasionally (Noe & Stolte, 2023; Unt & Bell, 2014).…”

Section: Urban Wilding In the Fabric Of Just Citiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wilding cities for biodiversity and people: a transdisciplinary framework

Bonthoux,

Chollet

2024

Biological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accelerating urbanisation and associated lifestyle changes result in loss of biodiversity and diminished wellbeing of people through fewer direct interactions and experiences with nature. In this review, we propose the notion of urban wilding (the promotion of autonomous ecological processes that are independent of historical land‐use conditions, with minimal direct human maintenance and planting interventions) and investigate its propensity to improve biodiversity and people–nature connections in cities. Through a large interdisciplinary synthesis, we explore the ecological mechanisms through which urban wilding can promote biodiversity in cities, investigate the attitudes and relations of city dwellers towards urban wild spaces, and discuss the integration of urban wilding into the fabric of cities and its governance. We show that favouring assembly spontaneity by reducing planting interventions, and functional spontaneity by limiting maintenance practices, can promote plant diversity and provide ecological resources for numerous organisms at habitat and city scales. These processes could reverse biotic homogenisation, but further studies are needed to understand the effects of wilding on invasive species and their consequences. From a socio‐ecological perspective, the attitudes of city dwellers towards spontaneous vegetation are modulated by successional stages, with grassland and woodland stages preferred, but dense shrubby vegetation stages disliked. Wild spaces can diversify physical interactions with nature, and enrich multi‐sensory, affective and cognitive experiences of nature in cities. However, some aspects of wild spaces can cause anxiety, feeling unsafe, and the perception of abandonment. These negative attitudes could be mitigated by subtle design and maintenance interventions. While nature has long been thought of as ornamental and instrumental in cities, urban wilding could help to develop relational and intrinsic values of nature in the fabric of cities. Wildness and its singular aesthetics should be combined with cultural norms, resident uses and urban functions to plan and design urban spatial configurations promoting human–non‐human cohabitation. For urban wilding to be socially just and adapted to the needs of residents, its implementation should be backed by inclusive governance opening up discussion forums to residents and urban workers. Scientists can support these changes by collaborating with urban actors to design and experiment with new wild spaces promoting biodiversity and wellbeing of people in cities.

show abstract

Section: Urban Wilding In the Fabric Of Just Citiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wilding cities for biodiversity and people: a transdisciplinary framework

Bonthoux,

Chollet

2024

Biological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Outre des raisons de sécurité urbaine ou de calme, cet entretien est nécessaire pour favoriser une meilleure appropriation par les habitants (Tchékémian, 2007) : la nature sauvage n'offrant pas, pour ces habitants, les conditions idéales pour profiter d'un espace de verdure récréatif. Paradoxalement, les habitants sont même parfois à la recherche de « touches de sauvage dans la ville » (Aggéri, 2016) : par exemple, une forêt entretenue où l'on peut se perdre, des chemins cachés, ou des coins artificiellement sauvages. Ainsi, pour le milieu urbain, il paraît difficile de parler de services écosystémiques consommés de manière directe.…”

unclassified