{"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}
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.
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.