Site selection of urban wildlife sanctuaries for safeguarding indigenous biodiversity against increased predator pressures

Rastandeh, Amin; Brown, Daniel K.; Zari, Maibritt Pedersen

doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2018.03.019

Cited by 16 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On average, central Wellington has approximately 20 m 2 of urban green space per person [56]. This is partly due to the constraints of topography on development and the preservation of the Town Belt (a series of interconnected green spaces) and key Indigenous habitat reserves, such as the large urban fenced predator-free habitat named Zealandia [57]. However, Wellington is facing challenges similar to many cities worldwide, namely increasing densification, population growth, and climate change, which will increase the demand and pressure on the city's existing green spaces [58].…”

Section: Case Study Location Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, in the context of this research, existing and future green space planting strategies will need to include more Indigenous species in addition to achieving the other performance targets listed in Table 1 [55,66]. The location of habitat patches must also be carefully considered to counteract some of the adverse outcomes of isolated patches, increase Indigenous avifauna and seed dispersal across the urban landscape, and contribute to the regeneration of Indigenous habitat [57]. While there are several articles discussing habitat connectivity in Aotearoa New Zealand urban environments, many of them rely on green spaces and green strips associated with roadways to increase habitat connectivity [56,70]; therefore, their applications to an urban habitat provision strategy that uses buildings are limited.…”

Section: Targetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Architecture as Habitat: Enhancing Urban Ecosystem Services Using Building Envelopes

MacKinnon¹,

Zari²,

Brown³

2021

AEER

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The practice of reconciliation ecology in urban environments relies heavily on urban green space as the primary source of vegetated habitat in cities. However, most cities lack the quantity, connectivity, and accessibility of green space needed to provide essential ecosystem services for the health, well-being, and resilience of human and non-human species. In reaction to urban densification and the increasing frequency and severity of climate change impacts, this study argues that architecture could strategically provide vegetated habitats to supplement existing urban green space and provide refuges for non-human species during extreme disturbances. A spatial analysis was conducted to test the performance of the existing green space network against targets for human well-being and Indigenous avifauna habitat needs in a 1.93 km2 neighborhood in Wellington, Aotearoa New Zealand, during normal conditions and flooding. The results showed an insufficient quantity and connectivity of green space during both normal conditions and flooding to meet the habitat needs of Indigenous avifauna. Though the per capita green space and accessibility targets for human well-being are met under normal conditions, there is insufficient green space to meet those targets during flooding. During normal conditions, 9% of the roofs in the neighborhood need to be converted to green roofs to achieve the targets for both human well-being and Indigenous avifauna. The amount increases to 17% if the targets are to be maintained during flooding. At least 3% of the roofs need to function as small and medium-sized habitat patches in key locations to increase the existing green space network's connectivity. The study concludes that though ground-level green space is limited, with regenerative architecture strategies and supporting governance policy, the surplus of existing roofs could be used to increase urban habitat provision, thereby enhancing the health and resilience of humans and Indigenous avifauna in cities.

show abstract

Section: Case Study Location Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Targetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Architecture as Habitat: Enhancing Urban Ecosystem Services Using Building Envelopes

MacKinnon¹,

Zari²,

Brown³

2021

AEER

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Large areas of what was once native forest in the mostly uninhabited western part of Wellington are now "scrub", which is a mixture of native and non-native (mostly invasive) species on land regenerating from once pastoral or cleared land. Currently, only 0.6% to 2% of Wellington's original forest remains [38], most of which is contained in remote areas or within several important urban biodiversity sanctuary areas. Although an extensive outer green belt now surrounds the city, including a mixture of public and private lands, a high level of fragmentation exists in the remaining forested areas [36].…”

Section: Wellingtonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This implies that 10% indigenous land cover may be an appropriate initial target to begin the process of restoration of the ecosystem service of habitat provision. Other research suggests that 20% forest cover may be a more effective urban habitat provision target in an Oceanic context [38]; therefore, for the purposes of this research, the smaller percentage is used as a preliminary target, and 20% as the second.…”

Section: Wellington Habitat Provision Targetsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Devising Urban Biodiversity Habitat Provision Goals: Ecosystem Services Analysis

Zari¹

2019

Forests

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper employs a unique ecosystem services analysis methodology to evaluate how cities could support or generate ecosystem services. Ecosystem services analysis can provide quantifiable goals for urban ecological regeneration that are determined by the site-specific ecology and climate of an urban area. In this research, the ecosystem service of habitat provision is the key focus. The role of urban green space and urban forests is crucial within this. Setting ambitious targets for urban ecological performance and ecosystem services provision is of great importance due to the large negative environmental impact that cities currently have on ecosystems and, therefore, ecosystem service provision, and because healthier ecosystems enable humans to better adapt to climate change through creating potentials for increased resilience. A comparative case study analysing the ecosystem service of habitat provision in two existing urban environments with similar climates (Cfb according to the Köppen Climate Classification System) but in different parts of the world, namely Wellington, New Zealand and Curitiba, Brazil, was conducted to examine how the ecosystem services analysis concept can used to devise urban habitat provision goals. The paper concludes that, although achieving habitat provision goals derived from ecosystem services analysis in urban areas is likely to be difficult, determining quantitative site- and climate-specific staged goals could enable urban design professionals to increase the effectiveness of conservation and regeneration efforts in terms of ecosystem service provision from urban green and blue spaces.

show abstract

“…The presented research is aimed at the assessment of the Kyiv city habitats suitability for typical avifauna. The researches work within this field of study in three major directions: study of the diversity and condition of the urban fauna (Warren, 2019) evaluation of the risks for certain group of organisms within a specific urban area (Leal, 2019) and the perspectives for conservation of the urban fauna representatives within a city (Flores-Meza, 2013;Rastandeh et al, 2018). None of such research works are available for Kyiv in detailed form, so there is a need to elaborate the approaches and perspectives of the urban animal world support in Ukraine.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The assessment of the Kyiv urban ecotopes comfort as a birds' habitat

Radomska

Horobtsov

2019

SBUNFU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The city is one of the most specific ecosystems of the modern biosphere. The combination of natural and artificial components and elements of the city have made it a complex system of ecotopes with various levels of anthropogenic transformation. Still the structure of urban ecosystems includes some patches of undisturbed or minimally disturbed landscapes, which may be considered the home for the most abundant part of urban biocenosis -the urban avifauna. Therefore, in this research the concept and features of urban zoocenosis in specific application to avifauna of the Kyiv urban system have been considered. A modern city if found to offer a range of benefits for birds, including food, shelter, and higher temperatures over the year and lower predator pressure and competition. However, the level of food quality as well as the condition of environment components are low and impose real health threats. Physical pollution, in particular noise and electro-magnetic impacts are also serious disturbing factors. Considering these factors, the ecotopes most suitable for birds have been defined among the parks, forests, lakes and cemeteries of the city -total 59 objects. In order to assess their comfort for birds, the specific ranking scale has been developed. The parameters taken into consideration in the course of assessment are as follows: general spatial characteristics (size and fragmentation of the territory), vegetation quality (covered territory, height and age of trees), forage availability and diversity, hydrographic situation (access to water bodies), environment quality (level of water and air pollution, noise pollution, non-organic wastes directly at the site), human pressure (density of people moving, area with artificial covers, level of anthropization), bird supporting elements and activity, and also predation pressure. According to the obtained result the forests around and its residuals inside Kyiv are the least transformed and consequently the most comfortable for the support of birds diversity. They are followed by cultivated semi-natural areas, which comfort declines as the levels of recreational pressure, human presence and proximity to the city center increases. Finally, the last in the list are small parks or cemeteries, cut off from water bodies or water bodies lacking dense vegetation. An important issue, showed by personal visual observations, is that the activity of humans aimed at support of birds communities within area of any status is proved to be more important as compared to obvious disadvantages seen at certain areas.

show abstract

Site selection of urban wildlife sanctuaries for safeguarding indigenous biodiversity against increased predator pressures

Cited by 16 publications

References 54 publications

Architecture as Habitat: Enhancing Urban Ecosystem Services Using Building Envelopes

Architecture as Habitat: Enhancing Urban Ecosystem Services Using Building Envelopes

Devising Urban Biodiversity Habitat Provision Goals: Ecosystem Services Analysis

The assessment of the Kyiv urban ecotopes comfort as a birds' habitat

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About