2019 / Ecosystem services, Green spaces, Health and well-being, Urban

Social-Ecological and Technological Factors Moderate the Value of Urban Nature

Citation

Keeler, B. L., Hamel, P., McPhearson, T., Hamann, M. H., Donahue, M. L., Meza Prado, K. A., … Bratman, G. N., … Wood, S. A. (2019). Social-ecological and technological factors moderate the value of urban nature. Nature Sustainability, 2(1), 29-38. doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0202-1

Link to file

Green spaces in cities can A bioswale to help reduce urban runoff a lot. They clean the air and water, reduce flooding, boost physical and mental health, and strengthen communities. Despite providing so many benefits, nobody really knows how much they are worth, especially when you consider how different cities are from one another. A park in one neighborhood might provide huge cooling and flood protection benefits, while a similar park somewhere else might not.

This study took a close look at ten of the most commonly cited benefits that urban nature provides, including stormwater management, air purification, heat reduction, and improved well-being. The researchers reviewed what’s known about the factors that influence how valuable those benefits actually are, and whether they’re distributed fairly across different communities.

What they found is that context matters a lot. The same type of green space can deliver very different results depending on local climate, infrastructure, who lives nearby, and how the space is designed and maintained. That means there’s no one-size-fits-all solution.

By understanding what makes urban nature work — or not work — in different settings, cities can do a better job of planning and funding nature-based solutions that actually deliver, and deliver equitably.

Abstract

Figure 1. Actions lead to changes in the value of urban ecosystem services, defined by a change in human well-being, which may be different for different groups of people, hence the importance of considering equity. The relationships between actions and value are moderated by social, ecological or technological factors. For each action that leads to a change in value, there may also be co-benefits (for example, positive impacts on other sustainability goals) and disservices (for example, unintended negative consequences). Finally, decision-makers require the ability to compare the net value of urban ecosystem services relative to substitutes or alternative interventions designed to meet the same goals.

Urban nature has the potential to improve air and water quality, mitigate flooding, enhance physical and mental health, and promote social and cultural well-being. However, the value of urban ecosystem services remains highly uncertain, especially across the diverse social, ecological and technological contexts represented in cities around the world. We review and synthesize research on the contextual factors that moderate the value and equitable distribution of ten of the most commonly cited urban ecosystem services. Our work helps to identify strategies to more efficiently, effectively and equitably implement nature-based solutions.