Matthew G. Kirby, Alister J. Scott, Claire L. Walsh
{"title":"Translating policy to place: exploring cultural ecosystem services in areas of Green Belt through participatory mapping","authors":"Matthew G. Kirby, Alister J. Scott, Claire L. Walsh","doi":"10.1080/26395916.2023.2276752","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Green Belts are longstanding planning designations, which primarily seek to prevent urban sprawl. Importantly, they form the open spaces close to where most people live, but we lack clarity over how Green Belts are used and valued by publics, and the cultural ecosystem services they provide. To address this policy and research gap, a public participatory mapping survey was conducted on the North-East England Green Belt, with 779 respondents plotting 2388 points. The results show for the first time that in addition to being a planning policy zone, Green Belts are important, and widely used open spaces for ‘everyday nature’, providing several cultural ecosystem services including recreation, connection with nature, sense of place and aesthetic value. Several factors were found to influence the supply of cultural ecosystem services in Green Belts, including proximity to urban areas, woodland land cover and access designations. Whereas most demand pressures on Green Belts were on public rights-of-way, nature designations and deciduous woodlands. Pervasive barriers inhibiting Green Belt’s full potential were identified including management issues, concerns over personal safety and lack of access. We argue that opportunities to further enhance the cultural ecosystem services provided Green Belts and peri-urban landscapes more broadly, not only come from planning policies themselves, but from the design and delivery of approaches integrating urban, rural and land-use policy silos. The findings have wider implications for policy including potential conflict with future development, and opportunities for greater access to greenspace.","PeriodicalId":37104,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystems and People","volume":"47 24","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecosystems and People","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/26395916.2023.2276752","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Green Belts are longstanding planning designations, which primarily seek to prevent urban sprawl. Importantly, they form the open spaces close to where most people live, but we lack clarity over how Green Belts are used and valued by publics, and the cultural ecosystem services they provide. To address this policy and research gap, a public participatory mapping survey was conducted on the North-East England Green Belt, with 779 respondents plotting 2388 points. The results show for the first time that in addition to being a planning policy zone, Green Belts are important, and widely used open spaces for ‘everyday nature’, providing several cultural ecosystem services including recreation, connection with nature, sense of place and aesthetic value. Several factors were found to influence the supply of cultural ecosystem services in Green Belts, including proximity to urban areas, woodland land cover and access designations. Whereas most demand pressures on Green Belts were on public rights-of-way, nature designations and deciduous woodlands. Pervasive barriers inhibiting Green Belt’s full potential were identified including management issues, concerns over personal safety and lack of access. We argue that opportunities to further enhance the cultural ecosystem services provided Green Belts and peri-urban landscapes more broadly, not only come from planning policies themselves, but from the design and delivery of approaches integrating urban, rural and land-use policy silos. The findings have wider implications for policy including potential conflict with future development, and opportunities for greater access to greenspace.
Ecosystems and PeopleAgricultural and Biological Sciences-Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
11.30%
发文量
40
审稿时长
42 weeks
期刊介绍:
Ecosystems and People is an interdisciplinary journal that addresses how biodiversity and ecosystems underpin human quality of life, and how societal activities and preferences drive changes in ecosystems. Research published in Ecosystems and People addresses human-nature relationships and social-ecological systems in a broad sense. This embraces research on biodiversity, ecosystem services, their contributions to quality of life, implications for equity and justice, and the diverse and rich ways in which people relate to nature.