IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i10p4051-d1393189.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interrelationships and Trade-Offs between Urban Natural Space Use and Biodiversity

Author

Listed:
  • Elena Prioreschi

    (Institute for Environmental Design and Engineering, The Bartlett Faculty of the Built Environment, University College London, London WC1H 0NN, UK)

  • Nici Zimmermann

    (Institute for Environmental Design and Engineering, The Bartlett Faculty of the Built Environment, University College London, London WC1H 0NN, UK)

  • Michael Davies

    (Institute for Environmental Design and Engineering, The Bartlett Faculty of the Built Environment, University College London, London WC1H 0NN, UK)

  • Irene Pluchinotta

    (Institute for Environmental Design and Engineering, The Bartlett Faculty of the Built Environment, University College London, London WC1H 0NN, UK)

Abstract

Urban natural spaces provide important ecosystem services and a wide range of health- and well-being-related benefits for their visitors. They are also essential spaces for biodiversity protection and promotion in a world of rising urbanisation rates and worsening impacts of climate change. However, these spaces are often underutilised by urban residents. When they are utilised, this usage often leads to some level of environmental degradation and biodiversity loss. Hence, understanding how to promote both use and biodiversity levels in urban natural spaces is critical. While various reports have studied the broad factors associated with urban natural space use, the specific relationship between biodiversity and use remains to be explored. This paper uses a Systems Thinking approach to unpack the complex relationship between urban natural space use and biodiversity and to help guide the design and management of these spaces in a way that promotes both use and biodiversity. With data collected from a systematic literature review, a causal loop diagram (CLD) was constructed and analysed. The CLD construction and analysis highlighted various key factors that play an important role in relating urban natural space use and biodiversity. Among these is the role of individual and social perceptions and values in determining how biodiversity levels will affect usage, and vice versa. The results were applied to a case study: the Thamesmead regeneration project undertaken by the social housing association Peabody. We made recommendations regarding Peabody’s biodiversity and green infrastructure plans for Thamesmead, presenting new design and maintenance techniques and assessing various existing techniques mentioned in the documents. Through the CLD analysis, we uncovered various unintended consequences from common design and maintenance techniques and discuss these trade-offs and relationships.

Suggested Citation

  • Elena Prioreschi & Nici Zimmermann & Michael Davies & Irene Pluchinotta, 2024. "Interrelationships and Trade-Offs between Urban Natural Space Use and Biodiversity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-29, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:10:p:4051-:d:1393189
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/10/4051/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/10/4051/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raffaele Giordano & Marcela Brugnach & Irene Pluchinotta, 2017. "Ambiguity in Problem Framing as a Barrier to Collective Actions: Some Hints from Groundwater Protection Policy in the Apulia Region," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(5), pages 911-932, September.
    2. Virginia Harris & Dave Kendal & Amy K. Hahs & Caragh G. Threlfall, 2018. "Green space context and vegetation complexity shape people’s preferences for urban public parks and residential gardens," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 150-162, January.
    3. Sarah A. Costigan & Jenny Veitch & David Crawford & Alison Carver & Anna Timperio, 2017. "A Cross-Sectional Investigation of the Importance of Park Features for Promoting Regular Physical Activity in Parks," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-10, November.
    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. Sigit D. Arifwidodo & Orana Chandrasiri & Niramon Rasri & Wipada Sirawarong & Panitat Rattanawichit & Natsiporn Sangyuan, 2022. "Association between Park Visitation and Physical Activity among Adults in Bangkok, Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-11, October.
    2. Stephanie L. Orstad & Kristin Szuhany & Kosuke Tamura & Lorna E. Thorpe & Melanie Jay, 2020. "Park Proximity and Use for Physical Activity among Urban Residents: Associations with Mental Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-13, July.
    3. Suzanne J. Dobbinson & Jody Simmons & James A. Chamberlain & Robert J. MacInnis & Jo Salmon & Petra K. Staiger & Melanie Wakefield & Jenny Veitch, 2020. "Examining Health-Related Effects of Refurbishment to Parks in a Lower Socioeconomic Area: The ShadePlus Natural Experiment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-21, August.
    4. Alicia Thomas & Muntazar Monsur & Carol S. Lindquist & Thayne Montague & Catherine R. Simpson, 2024. "Impacts of Landscape Types and Flower Colors on the Emotional Perceptions of Military Service Members," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-17, December.
    5. Maria Ignatieva & Duy Khiem Tran & Rosangela Tenorio, 2023. "Challenges and Stakeholder Perspectives on Implementing Ecological Designs in Green Public Spaces: A Case Study of Hue City, Vietnam," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-18, September.
    6. Thomas G. Kuijpers & H. Susan J. Picavet & Jeroen Lakerveld & Johannes Mark Noordzij & G.C. Wanda Wendel-Vos & Barbara A. M. Snoeker, 2025. "Physical Activity Friendliness of Neighborhoods: Do Subjective and Objective Measures Correspond Within a Mid-Sized Dutch Town?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 22(4), pages 1-16, April.
    7. Yunwon Choi & Heeyeun Yoon, 2020. "Do the Walkability and Urban Leisure Amenities of Neighborhoods Affect the Body Mass Index of Individuals? Based on a Case Study in Seoul, South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-20, March.
    8. Erkkilä, Antti & Herdieckerhoff, Ida & Mustalahti, Irmeli & Tumaini, Ubaldus J. & Maro, Aristarik H., 2024. "Ambiguity and forest-based bioeconomy: The case of forest fires in the Southern Highlands of Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    9. Haneen Ahmad & Yuxin Cao & Ayat Almomani & Lama Akmeel & Lijun Wang, 2025. "Exploring Safety Perceptions Among Women Using Factor and Cluster Analysis: A Case Study of Neighborhood Parks in Jordan," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-20, March.
    10. Raihan Jamil & Jason P. Julian & Meredith K. Steele, 2025. "Vegetation Structure and Distribution Across Scales in a Large Metropolitan Area: Case Study of Austin MSA, Texas, USA," Geographies, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-22, March.
    11. Alicia Thomas & Muntazar Monsur & Carol S. Lindquist & Thayne Montague & Catherine R. Simpson, 2024. "Evaluation of Military Service Member Preferences of Landscape Design Elements in Therapeutic Gardens," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-15, May.
    12. Aleksandra Lis & Karolina Zalewska & Marek Grabowski & Magdalena Zienowicz, 2025. "Signs of Children’s Presence in Two Types of Landscape: Residential and Park: Research on Adults’ Sense of Safety and Preference: Premises for Designing Sustainable Urban Environments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-26, May.
    13. Mengyao Wang & Yu Yan & Mingxuan Li & Long Zhou, 2024. "Differences in Emotional Preferences toward Urban Green Spaces among Various Cultural Groups in Macau and Their Influencing Factors," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-22, March.
    14. Meredith Perry & Lucy Cotes & Benjamin Horton & Rebecca Kunac & Isaac Snell & Blake Taylor & Abbey Wright & Hemakumar Devan, 2021. "“Enticing” but Not Necessarily a “Space Designed for Me”: Experiences of Urban Park Use by Older Adults with Disability," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-19, January.
    15. William L. Hargrove & Josiah M. Heyman, 2020. "A Comprehensive Process for Stakeholder Identification and Engagement in Addressing Wicked Water Resources Problems," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-21, April.
    16. Xiaoqi Feng & Thomas Astell-Burt, 2022. "Perceived Qualities, Visitation and Felt Benefits of Preferred Nature Spaces during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Australia: A Nationally-Representative Cross-Sectional Study of 2940 Adults," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-16, June.
    17. Claudia Fongar & Geir Aamodt & Thomas B. Randrup & Ingjerd Solfjeld, 2019. "Does Perceived Green Space Quality Matter? Linking Norwegian Adult Perspectives on Perceived Quality to Motivation and Frequency of Visits," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-16, July.
    18. Marianne Lefebvre & Masha Maslianskaia-Pautrel & Pauline Laille, 2022. "Alternative adaptation scenarios towards pesticide-free urban green spaces: Welfare implication for French citizens," Post-Print hal-03694169, HAL.
    19. Young, Anisa & Tucker, Emily L. & Fernandez, Mariela & White, David & Brookover, Robert & Harris, Brandon, 2024. "An optimization approach to improve equitable access to local parks," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    20. James Cunningham & Alistair R. Anderson, 2018. "Inspired or Foolhardy: Sensemaking, Confidence and Entrepreneurs’ Decision-Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 393-415, June.

    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:16:y:2024:i:10:p:4051-:d:1393189. 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.