IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i8p1161-d872412.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrated Approaches to Ecosystem Services: Linking Culture, Circular Economy and Environment through the Re-Use of Open Spaces and Buildings in Europe

Author

Listed:
  • Liana Ricci

    (School of Architecture, Planning and Environmental Policy University College, D04 V1W8 Dublin, Ireland)

Abstract

Green and blue infrastructure, nature-based solutions, and cultural and built heritage play a key role in enhancing ecosystem services provision and shaping urban quality and communities’ wellbeing calling for an integrated approach to ecosystem services in urban policy and planning and decision-making. On the other side, under-used spaces and buildings have social, cultural, economic, as well as ecological functions and benefits, which are essential to sustainable urban development. The EU has been developing and implementing policies for an integrated approach to urban development and sustainable land use through the implementation of the Urban Agenda for the EU and fourteen associated Partnerships. Thus, it engaged a broad range of institutions and stakeholders across Europe in promoting local projects and sharing best practices on sustainable land use and nature-based solutions, the circular economy, and cultural heritage. This paper reviews the experiences of cities involved in the Partnerships of the Urban Agenda for the EU by illustrating how they related to different modes of ecosystem governance and associated challenges, discussing how three case studies integrate different dimensions of ecosystem services and regeneration in under-used areas and what type of knowledge as well as regulation and governance modes they have developed for supporting innovation in land use planning and management for urban ecosystem services. The results show that appropriate alternative regulations and policies are little explored and that cities adopt an integrated approach, combining cultural, environmental, economic, and social dimensions in their interventions, directly or indirectly enhancing the benefits of built and natural heritage and urban ecosystems in under-used areas. However, some issues, such as nature-based solutions and climate change, are still partially integrated into the projects while priority is given to the cultural, aesthetic, and economic dimensions.

Suggested Citation

  • Liana Ricci, 2022. "Integrated Approaches to Ecosystem Services: Linking Culture, Circular Economy and Environment through the Re-Use of Open Spaces and Buildings in Europe," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-14, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:8:p:1161-:d:872412
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/8/1161/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/8/1161/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark Scott & Mick Lennon & Dagmar Haase & Aleksandra Kazmierczak & Gerry Clabby & Tim Beatley, 2016. "Nature-based solutions for the contemporary city/Re-naturing the city/Reflections on urban landscapes, ecosystems services and nature-based solutions in cities/Multifunctional green infrastructure and," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(2), pages 267-300, April.
    2. De Vreese, R. & Leys, M. & Dendoncker, N. & Van Herzele, A. & Fontaine, C.M., 2016. "Images of nature as a boundary object in social and integrated ecosystem services assessments. Reflections from a Belgian case study," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 269-279.
    3. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Barton, David N., 2013. "Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 235-245.
    4. Potschin-Young, M. & Haines-Young, R. & Görg, C. & Heink, U. & Jax, K. & Schleyer, C., 2018. "Understanding the role of conceptual frameworks: Reading the ecosystem service cascade," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 428-440.
    5. Raymond, Christopher M. & Bryan, Brett A. & MacDonald, Darla Hatton & Cast, Andrea & Strathearn, Sarah & Grandgirard, Agnes & Kalivas, Tina, 2009. "Mapping community values for natural capital and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1301-1315, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Evans, Nicole M. & Carrozzino-Lyon, Amy L. & Galbraith, Betsy & Noordyk, Julia & Peroff, Deidre M. & Stoll, John & Thompson, Aaron & Winden, Matthew W. & Davis, Mark A., 2019. "Integrated ecosystem service assessment for landscape conservation design in the Green Bay watershed, Wisconsin," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    2. Heink, Ulrich & Jax, Kurt, 2019. "Going Upstream — How the Purpose of a Conceptual Framework for Ecosystem Services Determines Its Structure," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 264-271.
    3. Eduardo Blanco & Maibritt Pedersen Zari & Kalina Raskin & Philippe Clergeau, 2021. "Urban Ecosystem-Level Biomimicry and Regenerative Design: Linking Ecosystem Functioning and Urban Built Environments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, January.
    4. Jaung, Wanggi & Carrasco, L. Roman & Bae, Jae Soo, 2019. "Integration of ecosystem services as public values within election promises: evidence from the 2018 local elections in Korea," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    5. Breyne, Johanna & Dufrêne, Marc & Maréchal, Kevin, 2021. "How integrating 'socio-cultural values' into ecosystem services evaluations can give meaning to value indicators," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    6. Bryan, Brett A. & Ye, Yanqiong & Zhang, Jia'en & Connor, Jeffery D., 2018. "Land-use change impacts on ecosystem services value: Incorporating the scarcity effects of supply and demand dynamics," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PA), pages 144-157.
    7. Saarikoski, Heli & Jax, Kurt & Harrison, Paula A. & Primmer, Eeva & Barton, David N. & Mononen, Laura & Vihervaara, Petteri & Furman, Eeva, 2015. "Exploring operational ecosystem service definitions: The case of boreal forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 144-157.
    8. Dennis, Matthew & James, Philip, 2017. "Ecosystem services of collectively managed urban gardens: Exploring factors affecting synergies and trade-offs at the site level," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 17-26.
    9. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    10. Remme, Roy P. & Edens, Bram & Schröter, Matthias & Hein, Lars, 2015. "Monetary accounting of ecosystem services: A test case for Limburg province, the Netherlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 116-128.
    11. Anna Biasin & Mauro Masiero & Giulia Amato & Davide Pettenella, 2023. "Nature-Based Solutions Modeling and Cost-Benefit Analysis to Face Climate Change Risks in an Urban Area: The Case of Turin (Italy)," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-32, January.
    12. Enrica, Garau & Josep, Pueyo-Ros & Amanda, Jiménez-Aceituno & Garry, Peterson & Albert, Norström & Anna, Ribas Palom & Josep, Vila-Subirós, 2023. "Landscape features shape people’s perception of ecosystem service supply areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    13. Jax, Kurt & Furman, Eeva & Saarikoski, Heli & Barton, David N. & Delbaere, Ben & Dick, Jan & Duke, Guy & Görg, Christoph & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Harrison, Paula A. & Maes, Joachim & Pérez-Soba, Mart, 2018. "Handling a messy world: Lessons learned when trying to make the ecosystem services concept operational," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 415-427.
    14. Gissi, Elena & Garramone, Vito, 2018. "Learning on ecosystem services co-production in decision-making from role-playing simulation: Comparative analysis from Southeast Europe," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 228-253.
    15. Zuzana Drillet & Tze Kwan Fung & Rachel Ai Ting Leong & Uma Sachidhanandam & Peter Edwards & Daniel Richards, 2020. "Urban Vegetation Types are Not Perceived Equally in Providing Ecosystem Services and Disservices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-14, March.
    16. Tapio Riepponen & Mikko Moilanen & Jaakko Simonen, 2023. "Themes of resilience in the economics literature: A topic modeling approach," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 326-356, April.
    17. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    18. Veerkamp, Clara J. & Schipper, Aafke M. & Hedlund, Katarina & Lazarova, Tanya & Nordin, Amanda & Hanson, Helena I., 2021. "A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    19. Yangang Xing & Phil Jones & Iain Donnison, 2017. "Characterisation of Nature-Based Solutions for the Built Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-20, January.
    20. Massoni, Emma Soy & Barton, David N. & Rusch, Graciela M. & Gundersen, Vegard, 2018. "Bigger, more diverse and better? Mapping structural diversity and its recreational value in urban green spaces," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 502-516.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:8:p:1161-:d:872412. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.