K. Fausey , M.A. Rippy , G. Pierce , D. Feldman , B. Winfrey , A.S. Mehring , L.A. Levin , P.A. Holden , P.A. Bowler , R. Ambrose
{"title":"生态系统服务价值支持保护和可持续土地开发:加州大学四个校区的观点","authors":"K. Fausey , M.A. Rippy , G. Pierce , D. Feldman , B. Winfrey , A.S. Mehring , L.A. Levin , P.A. Holden , P.A. Bowler , R. Ambrose","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoleng.2024.107379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Urban landscapes homogenize our world at global scales, contributing to “extinction of experience”, a progressive decline in human interactions with native greenspace that can disconnect people from the services it provides. College age adults report feeling disconnected from nature more than other demographics, making universities a logical place to explore interventions intended to restore a connection with nature. This study surveyed 1088 students and staff across four university campus communities in Southern California, USA and used multicriteria decision analysis to explore their landscape preferences and the implications of those preferences for combatting extinction of experience. Our results suggest that perspectives of, and preferences for, different greenspace forms vary significantly (i.e., they are not perceived as substitutable). Support for native ecosystems, particularly coastal sage scrub (top ranked landscape) was generally high, suggesting that disaffection with wild nature is not particularly widespread. Programs for replacing turf grass lawns (lowest ranked landscape) with native plants were also well supported, but support for stormwater bioswales was more moderate (and variable). This may reflect their relative newness, both on university campuses and in urban spaces more generally. Not all members of campus communities preferred the same landscapes; preferences differed with degree of pro-environmentalism and university status (undergraduate student, graduate student, staff). Even so, all respondents exhibited landscape preferences consistent with at least one approach for combatting extinction of experience, suggesting that ecologists, engineers and urban planners have a viable set of generalizable tools for reconnecting people with nature.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":11490,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Engineering","volume":"208 ","pages":"Article 107379"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925857424002040/pdfft?md5=c12d6b715e7a3bd9321b981deac83a59&pid=1-s2.0-S0925857424002040-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ecosystem service values support conservation and sustainable land development: Perspectives from four University of California campuses\",\"authors\":\"K. Fausey , M.A. Rippy , G. Pierce , D. Feldman , B. Winfrey , A.S. Mehring , L.A. Levin , P.A. Holden , P.A. Bowler , R. Ambrose\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ecoleng.2024.107379\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Urban landscapes homogenize our world at global scales, contributing to “extinction of experience”, a progressive decline in human interactions with native greenspace that can disconnect people from the services it provides. College age adults report feeling disconnected from nature more than other demographics, making universities a logical place to explore interventions intended to restore a connection with nature. This study surveyed 1088 students and staff across four university campus communities in Southern California, USA and used multicriteria decision analysis to explore their landscape preferences and the implications of those preferences for combatting extinction of experience. Our results suggest that perspectives of, and preferences for, different greenspace forms vary significantly (i.e., they are not perceived as substitutable). Support for native ecosystems, particularly coastal sage scrub (top ranked landscape) was generally high, suggesting that disaffection with wild nature is not particularly widespread. Programs for replacing turf grass lawns (lowest ranked landscape) with native plants were also well supported, but support for stormwater bioswales was more moderate (and variable). This may reflect their relative newness, both on university campuses and in urban spaces more generally. Not all members of campus communities preferred the same landscapes; preferences differed with degree of pro-environmentalism and university status (undergraduate student, graduate student, staff). Even so, all respondents exhibited landscape preferences consistent with at least one approach for combatting extinction of experience, suggesting that ecologists, engineers and urban planners have a viable set of generalizable tools for reconnecting people with nature.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11490,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecological Engineering\",\"volume\":\"208 \",\"pages\":\"Article 107379\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925857424002040/pdfft?md5=c12d6b715e7a3bd9321b981deac83a59&pid=1-s2.0-S0925857424002040-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecological Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925857424002040\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925857424002040","RegionNum":2,"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}
Ecosystem service values support conservation and sustainable land development: Perspectives from four University of California campuses
Urban landscapes homogenize our world at global scales, contributing to “extinction of experience”, a progressive decline in human interactions with native greenspace that can disconnect people from the services it provides. College age adults report feeling disconnected from nature more than other demographics, making universities a logical place to explore interventions intended to restore a connection with nature. This study surveyed 1088 students and staff across four university campus communities in Southern California, USA and used multicriteria decision analysis to explore their landscape preferences and the implications of those preferences for combatting extinction of experience. Our results suggest that perspectives of, and preferences for, different greenspace forms vary significantly (i.e., they are not perceived as substitutable). Support for native ecosystems, particularly coastal sage scrub (top ranked landscape) was generally high, suggesting that disaffection with wild nature is not particularly widespread. Programs for replacing turf grass lawns (lowest ranked landscape) with native plants were also well supported, but support for stormwater bioswales was more moderate (and variable). This may reflect their relative newness, both on university campuses and in urban spaces more generally. Not all members of campus communities preferred the same landscapes; preferences differed with degree of pro-environmentalism and university status (undergraduate student, graduate student, staff). Even so, all respondents exhibited landscape preferences consistent with at least one approach for combatting extinction of experience, suggesting that ecologists, engineers and urban planners have a viable set of generalizable tools for reconnecting people with nature.
期刊介绍:
Ecological engineering has been defined as the design of ecosystems for the mutual benefit of humans and nature. The journal is meant for ecologists who, because of their research interests or occupation, are involved in designing, monitoring, or restoring ecosystems, and can serve as a bridge between ecologists and engineers.
Specific topics covered in the journal include: habitat reconstruction; ecotechnology; synthetic ecology; bioengineering; restoration ecology; ecology conservation; ecosystem rehabilitation; stream and river restoration; reclamation ecology; non-renewable resource conservation. Descriptions of specific applications of ecological engineering are acceptable only when situated within context of adding novelty to current research and emphasizing ecosystem restoration. We do not accept purely descriptive reports on ecosystem structures (such as vegetation surveys), purely physical assessment of materials that can be used for ecological restoration, small-model studies carried out in the laboratory or greenhouse with artificial (waste)water or crop studies, or case studies on conventional wastewater treatment and eutrophication that do not offer an ecosystem restoration approach within the paper.