IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i13p7733-d847072.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Cultural Ecosystem Services as an Element Supporting Manor Landscape Protection

Author

Listed:
  • Dorota Sikora

    (Department of Landscape Art, Institute of Environmental Engineering, Warsaw University of Life Sciences-SGGW, 02-787 Warszawa, Poland)

  • Małgorzata Kaczyńska

    (Department of Landscape Art, Institute of Environmental Engineering, Warsaw University of Life Sciences-SGGW, 02-787 Warszawa, Poland)

Abstract

Nowadays, agricultural landscapes of suburban zones may undergo rapid urbanization that destroys their identity. This phenomenon is particularly problematic for areas connected compositionally with historical residences. The aim of the research is to determine a framework for urban policies appropriate for cultural landscapes of agricultural origin associated with significant historic palace-garden complexes. As an example of such a landscape, the area around the historic Wilanów residence was chosen for study. The research focused on the degree of preservation of the agricultural surroundings of this historic site, the directions of contemporary urban policies towards it, and its potential to provide cultural ecosystem services to local residents and tourists. The research showed that the character of the landscape under study is changing—apart from cultivated fields, wastelands have appeared, indicating a gradual abandonment of agricultural use. The analysis of local spatial development plans confirmed that many fragments of the landscape are not sufficiently protected, which causes their degradation. The study of the potential of this area to provide cultural ecosystem services using statistical methods proved its many values: aesthetic, cultural, educational, spiritual, recreational, and touristic which predestine it to perform Urban Green Spaces and Informal Green Spaces functions. The research was compared to the findings of other authors, studying analogous landscapes. Based on our results, general guidelines were developed for further protection and maintaining function of cultural landscapes of agricultural origin associated with significant historic palace-garden complexes in similar situations to that of Wilanów.

Suggested Citation

  • Dorota Sikora & Małgorzata Kaczyńska, 2022. "The Cultural Ecosystem Services as an Element Supporting Manor Landscape Protection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-33, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:13:p:7733-:d:847072
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/13/7733/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/13/7733/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gladkikh, Tatiana M. & Gould, Rachelle K. & Coleman, Kimberly J., 2019. "Cultural ecosystem services and the well-being of refugee communities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    2. Thanasis Kizos & Tobias Plieninger & Theodoros Iosifides & María García-Martín & Geneviève Girod & Krista Karro & Hannes Palang & Anu Printsmann & Brian Shaw & Julianna Nagy & Marie-Alice Budniok, 2018. "Responding to Landscape Change: Stakeholder Participation and Social Capital in Five European Landscapes," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-12, January.
    3. Knut Per Hasund & Mitesh Kataria & Carl Johan Lagerkvist, 2011. "Valuing public goods of the agricultural landscape: a choice experiment using reference points to capture observable heterogeneity," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(1), pages 31-53.
    4. Chen Yang & Jeannie Sim & Gillian Lawson, 2016. "Deciphering Historic Landscapes: A Case Study of Slender West Lake in Yangzhou, China," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(1), pages 95-112, January.
    5. Karin K. Peschardt & Ulrika K. Stigsdotter & Jasper Schipperrijn, 2016. "Identifying Features of Pocket Parks that May Be Related to Health Promoting Use," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(1), pages 79-94, January.
    6. Rędzińska, Katarzyna & Szulczewska, Barbara, 2019. "Landscape in change as perceived by its residents: A case study of Wilanow West in Warsaw," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 259-270.
    7. Megan Heckert & Jeremy Mennis, 2012. "The Economic Impact of Greening Urban Vacant Land: A Spatial Difference-In-Differences Analysis," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 44(12), pages 3010-3027, December.
    8. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    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. Daams, Michiel N. & Sijtsma, Frans J. & Veneri, Paolo, 2019. "Mixed monetary and non-monetary valuation of attractive urban green space: A case study using Amsterdam house prices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 1-1.
    2. Goran Krsnik & Sonia Reyes-Paecke & Keith M. Reynolds & Jordi Garcia-Gonzalo & José Ramón González Olabarria, 2023. "Assessing Relativeness in the Provision of Urban Ecosystem Services: Better Comparison Methods for Improved Well-Being," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    3. Alexander V. Rusanov, 2019. "Dacha dwellers and gardeners: garden plots and second homes in Europe and Russia," Population and Economics, ARPHA Platform, vol. 3(1), pages 107-124, April.
    4. Hui, Ling Chui & Jim, C.Y., 2022. "Urban-greenery demands are affected by perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices, and socio-demographic and environmental-cultural factors," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    5. Monika Kopecká & Daniel Szatmári & Konštantín Rosina, 2017. "Analysis of Urban Green Spaces Based on Sentinel-2A: Case Studies from Slovakia," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-17, April.
    6. 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).
    7. Ahmet Tolunay & Çağlar Başsüllü, 2015. "Willingness to Pay for Carbon Sequestration and Co-Benefits of Forests in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, March.
    8. 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.
    9. Somajita Paul & Harini Nagendra, 2017. "Factors Influencing Perceptions and Use of Urban Nature: Surveys of Park Visitors in Delhi," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-23, April.
    10. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    11. Zhu, Chen & Xia, Yuqing & Liu, Qing & Hou, Bojun, 2023. "Deregulation and green innovation: Does cultural reform pilot project matter," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 84-105.
    12. Jiafeng Gu, 2021. "Effects of Patent Policy on Outputs and Commercialization of Academic Patents in China: A Spatial Difference-in-Differences Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-17, December.
    13. Gao, Kang & Yuan, Yijun, 2022. "Government intervention, spillover effect and urban innovation performance: Empirical evidence from national innovative city pilot policy in China," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    14. Aggelos Tsaligopoulos & Stella Kyvelou & Nefta-Eleftheria Votsi & Aimilia Karapostoli & Chris Economou & Yiannis G. Matsinos, 2021. "Revisiting the Concept of Quietness in the Urban Environment—Towards Ecosystems’ Health and Human Well-Being," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-19, March.
    15. Jonas Smit Andersen & Sara Maria Lerer & Antje Backhaus & Marina Bergen Jensen & Hjalte Jomo Danielsen Sørup, 2017. "Characteristic Rain Events: A Methodology for Improving the Amenity Value of Stormwater Control Measures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-18, October.
    16. Jeroen Degerickx & Martin Hermy & Ben Somers, 2020. "Mapping Functional Urban Green Types Using High Resolution Remote Sensing Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-35, March.
    17. Jacqueline Theis & Christopher K. Woolley & Philip J. Seddon & Danielle F. Shanahan & Claire Freeman & Maibritt Pedersen Zari & Yolanda van Heezik, 2025. "The New Zealand Biodiversity Factor—Residential (NZBF-R): A Tool to Rapidly Score the Relative Biodiversity Value of Urban Residential Developments," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-32, March.
    18. Holt, Alison R. & Mears, Meghann & Maltby, Lorraine & Warren, Philip, 2015. "Understanding spatial patterns in the production of multiple urban ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 33-46.
    19. Karen T. Lourdes & Chris N. Gibbins & Perrine Hamel & Ruzana Sanusi & Badrul Azhar & Alex M. Lechner, 2021. "A Review of Urban Ecosystem Services Research in Southeast Asia," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, January.
    20. Qindong Fan & Xiaoyu Yang & Chenming Zhang, 2022. "A Review of Ecosystem Services Research Focusing on China against the Background of Urbanization," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-17, July.

    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:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:13:p:7733-:d:847072. 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.