城市生态系统服务量化方法综述

IF 7.9 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY Landscape and Urban Planning Pub Date : 2024-09-14 DOI:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2024.105215
{"title":"城市生态系统服务量化方法综述","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.landurbplan.2024.105215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Many methods have been applied to quantify urban ecosystem services (UESs) in the past two decades. Timely reviews of UES assessment methods are necessary for tracking the methodological progress and identifying research gaps. In this study, we systematically analyzed 862 to reveal the overall trend of quantitative studies of UESs, the types of ecological structures and UESs assessed in those studies, and the main equations and parameters used. We found a rising trend of quantitative studies of UESs, accelerating after 2015. Large-size and publicly-owned ecological structures and regulating services were assessed the most frequently. We identified 1,130 equations and 1,190 parameters. Simple methods and equations were used more regularly than complex ones. Values for around 30% of parameters were taken from published papers, while the sources or the values were not specified for about 40% and 20% of all parameters, respectively. The remaining 10% were derived from field measurements and other sources. Based on our findings, we recommend building an open database of quantitative methods, testing the suitability of existing methods for urban environments, developing new methods specifically designed for urban areas, and increasing the transparency of reported methods.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54744,"journal":{"name":"Landscape and Urban Planning","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204624002147/pdfft?md5=840ddc20ec9a8b83948f49962a8aeeb9&pid=1-s2.0-S0169204624002147-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A review of methods for quantifying urban ecosystem services\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.landurbplan.2024.105215\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Many methods have been applied to quantify urban ecosystem services (UESs) in the past two decades. Timely reviews of UES assessment methods are necessary for tracking the methodological progress and identifying research gaps. In this study, we systematically analyzed 862 to reveal the overall trend of quantitative studies of UESs, the types of ecological structures and UESs assessed in those studies, and the main equations and parameters used. We found a rising trend of quantitative studies of UESs, accelerating after 2015. Large-size and publicly-owned ecological structures and regulating services were assessed the most frequently. We identified 1,130 equations and 1,190 parameters. Simple methods and equations were used more regularly than complex ones. Values for around 30% of parameters were taken from published papers, while the sources or the values were not specified for about 40% and 20% of all parameters, respectively. The remaining 10% were derived from field measurements and other sources. Based on our findings, we recommend building an open database of quantitative methods, testing the suitability of existing methods for urban environments, developing new methods specifically designed for urban areas, and increasing the transparency of reported methods.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54744,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Landscape and Urban Planning\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204624002147/pdfft?md5=840ddc20ec9a8b83948f49962a8aeeb9&pid=1-s2.0-S0169204624002147-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Landscape and Urban Planning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204624002147\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Landscape and Urban Planning","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204624002147","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

摘要

在过去二十年中,许多方法都被用于量化城市生态系统服务 (UES)。及时回顾 UES 评估方法对于跟踪方法学进展和发现研究空白非常必要。在本研究中,我们对 862 项研究进行了系统分析,以揭示 UESs 定量研究的总体趋势、这些研究中评估的生态结构和 UESs 的类型以及使用的主要方程和参数。我们发现,对生态系统服务补偿的定量研究呈上升趋势,并在 2015 年后加速。对大型和公有生态结构和调节服务的评估最为频繁。我们确定了 1130 个方程和 1190 个参数。简单方法和方程的使用频率高于复杂方法和方程。约有 30% 的参数值取自已发表的论文,约有 40% 和 20% 的参数没有说明来源或数值。其余 10%的参数来自实地测量和其他来源。根据我们的研究结果,我们建议建立一个开放的定量方法数据库,测试现有方法对城市环境的适用性,开发专门针对城市地区的新方法,并提高报告方法的透明度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A review of methods for quantifying urban ecosystem services

Many methods have been applied to quantify urban ecosystem services (UESs) in the past two decades. Timely reviews of UES assessment methods are necessary for tracking the methodological progress and identifying research gaps. In this study, we systematically analyzed 862 to reveal the overall trend of quantitative studies of UESs, the types of ecological structures and UESs assessed in those studies, and the main equations and parameters used. We found a rising trend of quantitative studies of UESs, accelerating after 2015. Large-size and publicly-owned ecological structures and regulating services were assessed the most frequently. We identified 1,130 equations and 1,190 parameters. Simple methods and equations were used more regularly than complex ones. Values for around 30% of parameters were taken from published papers, while the sources or the values were not specified for about 40% and 20% of all parameters, respectively. The remaining 10% were derived from field measurements and other sources. Based on our findings, we recommend building an open database of quantitative methods, testing the suitability of existing methods for urban environments, developing new methods specifically designed for urban areas, and increasing the transparency of reported methods.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Landscape and Urban Planning
Landscape and Urban Planning 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
15.20
自引率
6.60%
发文量
232
审稿时长
6 months
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.
期刊最新文献
A novel method of urban landscape perception based on biological vision process Neighborhood environmental conditions and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic: A network analysis in Hong Kong adults Evaluating objective and perceived ecosystem service in urban context: An indirect method based on housing market ‘It’s not necessarily a social space’ − Institutions, power and nature’s wellbeing benefits in the context of diverse inner-city neighbourhoods Air regulation service is affected by green areas cover and fragmentation: An analysis using demand, supply and flow during COVID-19 quarantine
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1