A Conceptual Framework to Untangle the Concept of Urban Ecosystem Services.

Clicks: 350
ID: 105420
2020
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #1 of 46 articles by views in landscape and urban planning

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Urban ecosystem service (UES) is becoming an influential concept to guide the planning, design, and management of urban landscapes towards urban sustainability. However, its use is hindered by definitional ambiguity, and the conceptual bases underpinning its application remain weak. This is exemplified by two different but equally valid interpretations of UES: "urban ", referring to ecosystem services from analogs of natural and semi-natural ecosystems within urban boundaries, and " services", a much broader term that includes the former group as well as urban services in a city. While we recognize that a single definition of UES is not possible nor necessary as its application is context-dependent, it is nevertheless useful to clarify the relationships between these interpretations to promote consistent use, and importantly, explore how a broader interpretation of UES might advance its applications in areas that have been neglected. We developed a conceptual framework that links UES to natural and human-derived capital to explain the relationships between the dual meanings of UES and proposed three normative propositions to guide its application: (1) integrate holistically multiple components of natural capital to provide UES, (2) reduce dependence on non-renewable abiotic resources and human-derived capital, and (3) enhance UES through technology. The framework we developed helps to resolve the current ambiguity in the meanings of UES, highlights the need to recognise neglected aspects of natural capital important for UES, and can be used to clarify relationships with related concepts conveying dependence of human well-being on nature.
Reference Key
yok-tan2020alandscape Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Yok Tan, Puay;Zhang, Jingyuan;Masoudi, Mahyar;Berhane Alemu, Jahson;Edwards, Peter J;Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne;Richards, Daniel R;Saunders, Justine;Ping Song, Xiao;Wei Wong, Lynn;
Journal landscape and urban planning
Year 2020
DOI
10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103837
URL
Keywords
Diabetes indonesia diabetes management demographic characteristics clinical and lifestyle factors diabetes knowledge extended health belief model healthy lifestyle behaviour

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.