CHARACTERIZING URBAN GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE THROUGH BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICE DIMENSIONS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53555/env.v1i2.2580Keywords:
Urban green infrastructure, Biodiversity, Ecosystem services, Classification, Sustainable urban planningAbstract
Urban green infrastructure (UGI) is increasingly recognised as a crucial element in sustainable urban development, delivering a range of ecosystem services that enhance environmental quality and human health and wellbeing. Although its significance is increasing, categorizations and terminology have not been uniformly consistent and research results are not easily comparable, which has hindered the establishment of standardized assessment approaches. The aim of this study was to characterize the UGI by combining the dimensions of biodiversity and ecosystem services into one analytical framework. Descriptive and comparative statistical analyses were used to investigate the spatial distribution of classes of urban green infrastructure, terminology used for the classification of urban green infrastructure and the research objectives. The results indicated that more biodiversity-related studies were conducted than ecosystem service oriented studies: biodiversity research was mainly based on the study of plants and birds; the studies on urban heat island mitigation, air quality improvement and water related services were the major ecosystem service themes. The study demonstrates that biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service provision can go together and underlines the value of having a common classification system for the consistent assessment of UGI. The results of these analyses are useful for an informed approach to urban planning, biodiversity protection and environmental sustainability.
References
Behm, J. E., Bélouard, N., Gleditsch, J. M., Phillips, P. M., & Swartz, T. M. (2022). Trait-based approaches for understanding how biodiversity generates sustainable benefits in urban vegetated green infrastructure. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 57, 101204.
Bowler, D. E., Callaghan, C. T., Felappi, J. F., Mason, B. M., Hutchinson, R., Kumar, P., & Jones, L. (2025). Evidence-base for urban green-blue infrastructure to support insect diversity. Urban Ecosystems, 28(1), 54.
Cheng, X., Van Damme, S., & Uyttenhove, P. (2021). A review of empirical studies of cultural ecosystem services in urban green infrastructure. Journal of Environmental Management, 293, 112895.
de Manuel, B. F., Méndez-Fernández, L., Peña, L., & Ametzaga-Arregi, I. (2021). A new indicator of the effectiveness of urban green infrastructure based on ecosystem services assessment. Basic and Applied Ecology, 53, 12-25.
Evans, D. L., Falagán, N., Hardman, C. A., Kourmpetli, S., Liu, L., Mead, B. R., & Davies, J. A. C. (2022). Ecosystem service delivery by urban agriculture and green infrastructure–a systematic review. Ecosystem services, 54, 101405.
Fan, K., Chu, H., Eldridge, D. J., Gaitan, J. J., Liu, Y. R., Sokoya, B., ... & Delgado-Baquerizo, M. (2023). Soil biodiversity supports the delivery of multiple ecosystem functions in urban greenspaces. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 7(1), 113-126.
Felappi, J. F., Sommer, J. H., Falkenberg, T., Terlau, W., & Kötter, T. (2024). Urban park qualities driving visitors mental well-being and wildlife conservation in a Neotropical megacity. Scientific reports, 14(1), 4856.
Grilo, F., McPhearson, T., Santos-Reis, M., & Branquinho, C. (2022). A trait-based conceptual framework to examine urban biodiversity, socio-ecological filters, and ecosystem services linkages. Npj Urban Sustainability, 2(1), 32.
Guillen-Cruz, G., Rodríguez-Sánchez, A. L., Fernández-Luqueño, F., & Flores-Rentería, D. (2021). Influence of vegetation type on the ecosystem services provided by urban green areas in an arid zone of northern Mexico. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 62, 127135.
Hagemann, F. A., Randrup, T. B., & Sang, Å. O. (2020). Challenges to implementing the urban ecosystem service concept in green infrastructure planning: a view from practitioners in Swedish municipalities. Socio-Ecological Practice Research, 2(3), 283-296.
Hanna, E., Bruno, D., & Comín, F. A. (2024). The ecosystem services supplied by urban green infrastructure depend on their naturalness, functionality and imperviousness. Urban Ecosystems, 27(1), 187-202.
Hansen, R., Mattes, A., Meier, M., & Kurths, A. (2023). Reorienting urban green infrastructure planning towards biodiversity–Perspectives and ongoing debates from Germany. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 90, 128155.
Herath, P., & Bai, X. (2024). Benefits and co-benefits of urban green infrastructure for sustainable cities: six current and emerging themes. Sustainability Science, 19(3), 1039-1063.
Jato-Espino, D., Capra-Ribeiro, F., Moscardó, V., del Pino, L. E. B., Mayor-Vitoria, F., Gallardo, L. O., ... & Dietrich, K. (2023). A systematic review on the ecosystem services provided by green infrastructure. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 86, 127998.
Jones, L., Anderson, S., Læssøe, J., Banzhaf, E., Jensen, A., Bird, D. N., ... & Zandersen, M. (2022). A typology for urban Green Infrastructure to guide multifunctional planning of nature-based solutions. Nature-Based Solutions, 2, 100041.
Julia, P., Banzhaf, E., & Priess, J. A. (2020). How do the green components of urban green infrastructure influence the use of ecosystem services? Examples from Leipzig, Germany. Landscape Ecology, 35(5), 1127-1142.
Korkou, M., Tarigan, A. K., & Hanslin, H. M. (2023). The multifunctionality concept in urban green infrastructure planning: A systematic literature review. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 85, 127975.
Kowarik, I., Fischer, L. K., Haase, D., Kabisch, N., Kleinschroth, F., Konijnendijk, C., ... & von Haaren, C. (2025). Promoting urban biodiversity for the benefit of people and nature. Nature Reviews Biodiversity, 1(4), 214-232.
Liu, X., Zhao, Y., Zeng, D., Yang, Y., Li, W., Kang, Y., ... & Si, X. (2023). Characterizing bird species for achieving the win-wins of conserving biodiversity and enhancing regulating ecosystem services in urban green spaces. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 87, 128064.
Morpurgo, J., Remme, R., & van Bodegom, P. (2023). Dataset: CUGIC: The consolidated urban green infrastructure classification for assessing ecosystem services and biodiversity (Version 1) [Data set]. Leiden University. https://doi.org/10.17632/cmzkcxvykt.1
Prodanovic, V., Bach, P. M., & Stojkovic, M. (2024). Urban nature-based solutions planning for biodiversity outcomes: human, ecological, and artificial intelligence perspectives. Urban Ecosystems, 27(5), 1795-1806.
Sharmin, M., Tjoelker, M. G., Esperon-Rodriguez, M., Katlav, A., Gilpin, A. M., Rymer, P. D., & Power, S. A. (2024). Urban greening with shrubs can supercharge invertebrate abundance and diversity. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 8735.
Strashok, O., Bidolakh, D., & Ziemiańska, M. (2025). Ecosystem benefits of urban woody plants for sustainable green space planning: a case study from Wroclaw. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 10999.
Veerkamp, C. J., Schipper, A. M., Hedlund, K., Lazarova, T., Nordin, A., & Hanson, H. I. (2021). A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure. Ecosystem Services, 52, 101367.
Wang, D., Xu, P. Y., An, B. W., & Guo, Q. P. (2024). Urban green infrastructure: Bridging biodiversity conservation and sustainable urban development through adaptive management approach. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 12, 1440477.
