Ecosystem service delivery by urban agriculture and green infrastructure – a systematic review

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorEvans, Daniel L.
dc.contributor.authorFalagán Sama, Natalia
dc.contributor.authorHardman, C. A.
dc.contributor.authorKourmpetli, Sofia
dc.contributor.authorLiu, L.
dc.contributor.authorMead, B. R.
dc.contributor.authorDavies, J. A. C.
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-18T10:26:49Z
dc.date.available2022-02-18T10:26:49Z
dc.date.issued2022-02-11
dc.date.updated2022-02-15T10:42:27Z
dc.description.abstractThe ability for urban ecosystems to deliver provisioning, regulating, cultural, and supporting services is vital for the health, sustainability, and resilience of urban environments. The increasing pressures being placed on urban environments by global climate change and the need to create sustainable food systems contributes to rising interest in green infrastructure and urban agriculture solutions. Yet, few studies have systematically assessed the ecosystem service provision of urban agriculture and green infrastructure in parallel. In this systematic review of 157 peer-reviewed journal articles, we synthesize the benefits and disbenefits of implementing various forms of urban agriculture and green infrastructure for the delivery of ecosystem services in urban areas. While both provide a diverse variety of ecosystem services, our review suggests that some services are provided more prevalently when green infrastructure is solely adopted (e.g., Local Climate and Air Quality Regulation), while other services are best delivered when green infrastructure is combined with urban agriculture (e.g., Biological Control and Maintenance of Genetic Diversity). Our data also show that ecosystem service delivery is partly modulated by the spaces in which urban growing takes place. Community Gardens, Green Spaces, Allotments, and Parks are found to be most conducive for diverse service provision, although it is also clear that some growing spaces have not been studied as frequently in urban ecosystem service research. We conclude by highlighting some key research gaps and priorities for urban ecosystem service research, including a stronger focus on under-represented services and growing spaces, the need for more systematic data collection, and the value of incorporating ecosystem service assessments into wider suitability and cost-benefit analyses.en_UK
dc.identifier10.1016/j.ecoser.2022.101405
dc.identifier.citationEvans DL, Falagán N, Hardman CA, et al., (2022) Ecosystem service delivery by urban agriculture and green infrastructure – a systematic review. Ecosystem Services, Volume 54, April 2022, Article number 101405en_UK
dc.identifier.issn2212-0416
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2022.101405
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/handle/1826/17583
dc.language.isoenen_UK
dc.publisherElsevieren_UK
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/*
dc.subjectUrban agricultureen_UK
dc.subjectGreen infrastructureen_UK
dc.subjectEcosystem servicesen_UK
dc.subjectGrowing spaceen_UK
dc.titleEcosystem service delivery by urban agriculture and green infrastructure – a systematic reviewen_UK
dc.typeArticleen_UK

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Ecosystem_service_delivery-2022.pdf
Size:
4.09 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.63 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

Staff publications (SWEE)