Elena Oertel , Caroline E. Vickery , John E. Quinn
{"title":"Linked spatial and temporal success of urban growth boundaries to preserve ecosystem services","authors":"Elena Oertel , Caroline E. Vickery , John E. Quinn","doi":"10.1016/j.landurbplan.2024.105134","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Urban expansion and sprawl lead to loss of green space. This has the potential to degrade natural capital and associated ecosystem services. Urban growth boundaries (UGBs) are a planning tool to delineate where growth may or may not occur as a strategy to protect green and open space.<!--> <!-->However, how these policies impact ecosystem services is unknown, particularly across multiple years. Here we compare pairs of cities: one of which has a UGB and one that does not.<!--> <!-->Specifically, we analyzed the following city pairs: (1) Lexington, KY: Huntsville, AL and (2) Portland, OR: Denver, CO. We modeled the ecosystem services provided to each city, quantifying carbon storage, pollinator abundance, urban flood risk, and urban cooling. Our results show that UGBs succeed in preserving the ecosystem services, over time, at a higher and more predictable rate than cities that do not have a UGB. Change over time highlights the effectiveness of UGBs in preserving ecosystem services overall and concentrating loss of ecosystem service delivery within highly urbanized areas. We discuss how the data necessitates analyzing spatial and temporal trends together to incorporate starting values of ecosystem service function for comparison between case studies. Natural capital and its associated ecosystem services should be key criteria for assessing policies for urban planning and used to further implement laws and policies to enhance environmental and human health within urban areas.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54744,"journal":{"name":"Landscape and Urban Planning","volume":"250 ","pages":"Article 105134"},"PeriodicalIF":7.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Landscape and Urban Planning","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204624001336","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Urban expansion and sprawl lead to loss of green space. This has the potential to degrade natural capital and associated ecosystem services. Urban growth boundaries (UGBs) are a planning tool to delineate where growth may or may not occur as a strategy to protect green and open space. However, how these policies impact ecosystem services is unknown, particularly across multiple years. Here we compare pairs of cities: one of which has a UGB and one that does not. Specifically, we analyzed the following city pairs: (1) Lexington, KY: Huntsville, AL and (2) Portland, OR: Denver, CO. We modeled the ecosystem services provided to each city, quantifying carbon storage, pollinator abundance, urban flood risk, and urban cooling. Our results show that UGBs succeed in preserving the ecosystem services, over time, at a higher and more predictable rate than cities that do not have a UGB. Change over time highlights the effectiveness of UGBs in preserving ecosystem services overall and concentrating loss of ecosystem service delivery within highly urbanized areas. We discuss how the data necessitates analyzing spatial and temporal trends together to incorporate starting values of ecosystem service function for comparison between case studies. Natural capital and its associated ecosystem services should be key criteria for assessing policies for urban planning and used to further implement laws and policies to enhance environmental and human health within urban areas.
期刊介绍:
Landscape and Urban Planning is an international journal that aims to enhance our understanding of landscapes and promote sustainable solutions for landscape change. The journal focuses on landscapes as complex social-ecological systems that encompass various spatial and temporal dimensions. These landscapes possess aesthetic, natural, and cultural qualities that are valued by individuals in different ways, leading to actions that alter the landscape. With increasing urbanization and the need for ecological and cultural sensitivity at various scales, a multidisciplinary approach is necessary to comprehend and align social and ecological values for landscape sustainability. The journal believes that combining landscape science with planning and design can yield positive outcomes for both people and nature.