IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/gadadp/260789.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bewertung kultureller Ökosystemleistungen von Berliner Stadtgrün entlang eines urbanen-periurbanen Gradienten

Author

Listed:
  • Riechers, Maraja
  • Barkmann, Jan
  • Tscharntke, Teja

Abstract

Stadtgrün steht unter hohem Nutzungsdruck. Gerade Erholungsfunktionen werden von An- wohner unterschiedlich wahrgenommen. Eine Möglichkeit, Bewertungen für Grünflächen zu erheben, sind kulturelle Ökosystemleistungen. In dieser Studie vereinen wir qualitative und quantitative Methoden, um Informationen zu kulturellen Ökosystemleistungen und Besuchs- verhalten zu Grünflächen in Berlin zu erhalten. Quaitative Bewertungen von kulturellen Ökosystemleistungen wurden durch semi- strukturierte Interviews mit Berliner Einwohnern (Problemzentrierte Interviews, n = 22) und Experten (Experteninterviews, n = 19) erhalten. Kategorien kultureller Ökosystemleistungen wurden an den urbanen Kontext Berlins angepasst, um detaillierte Informationen über die Bedeutung von Stadtgrün zu erhalten. Zusätzlich wurden quantitative Bewertungen durch direkte Umfragen, basierend auf proportionalem Klumpenauswahlverfahren erhalten. Daten (n = 558) wurden in zwei Runden in fier Ortsteilen Berlins erhoben. Unsere Ergebnisse zeigen, dass sich Nutzung und Bewertung von Stadtgrün je nach Popula- tionsdichte des Berliner Ortsteils unterscheidet. Außerdem werden kulturelle Ökosystemleis- tungen zwischen sozialen Gruppen –jüngere im urbanen Ballungsraum lebende Befragte und ältere in weniger eng besiedelten Gegenden – unterschiedlich bewertet. Unsere Resultate zeigen räumliche, zeitliche und soziale Faktoren auf, die der Bewertung von kulturellen Ökosystemleistungen unterliegen. Kulturelle Ökosystemleistungen haben einen heterogenen Charakter und das Verständnis dessen ist von großer Bedeutung für Grünflächenmanage- ment und Forschung im Bereich der Ökosystemleistung. Urban green experiences high use-pressures. Especially recreation is perceived differently by inhabitants. One possibility to assess values for green spaces are cultural ecosystem services. In the paper at hand we combine qualitative and quantitative valuations to gain information on cultural ecosystem services and visiting behavior towards urban green spaces in Berlin. Qualitative values of cultural ecosystem services were assessed through semi-structured interviews with Berlin inhabitants (problem-centered interviews, n = 22) and experts (expert interviews, n = 19). Categories of cultural ecosystem services were uniquely adjusted to fit to the urban context and detailed information on the benefits of urban green for local inhabit- ants gained. Additionally, quantitative values were assessed using a face-to-face survey, based on proportioned stratified sampling. Data (n = 558) were collected in two sampling rounds in four districts of Berlin. Results show that green space utilization and valuation of cultural ecosystem services differs by population density of the sampled district of Berlin. Additionally, different social groups – in Berlin, younger urban dwellers versus older residents in less densely populated areas – perceive cultural ecosystem services differently. We uncovered spatial, temporal and social factors which underlie cultural ecosystem service valuation. Cultural ecosystem services have a heterogeneous character and their understanding is of great importance for green space management, spatial planning and ecosystem service research.

Suggested Citation

  • Riechers, Maraja & Barkmann, Jan & Tscharntke, Teja, 2015. "Bewertung kultureller Ökosystemleistungen von Berliner Stadtgrün entlang eines urbanen-periurbanen Gradienten," Department of Agricultural and Rural Development (DARE) Discussion Papers 260789, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:gadadp:260789
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.260789
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/260789/files/k%C3%96SL-Diskussionspapier-Riechers%20et%20al..pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/260789/files/k%C3%96SL-Diskussionspapier-Riechers%20et%20al..pdf?subformat=pdfa
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.260789?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicola Dempsey & Glen Bramley & Sinéad Power & Caroline Brown, 2011. "The social dimension of sustainable development: Defining urban social sustainability," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(5), pages 289-300, September.
    2. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    3. Chan, Kai M.A. & Satterfield, Terre & Goldstein, Joshua, 2012. "Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 8-18.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Janis Arnold & Janina Kleemann & Christine Fürst, 2018. "A Differentiated Spatial Assessment of Urban Ecosystem Services Based on Land Use Data in Halle, Germany," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-29, August.

    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. Riechers, Maraja & Barkmann, Jan & Tscharntke, Teja, 2015. "Bewertung kultureller Ökosystemleistungen von Berliner Stadtgrün entlang eines urbanen-periurbanen Gradienten," DARE Discussion Papers 1507, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    2. 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.
    3. Peck, Megan & Khirfan, Luna, 2021. "Improving the validity and credibility of the sociocultural valuation of ecosystem services in Amman, Jordan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    4. De Valck, Jeremy & Beames, Alistair & Liekens, Inge & Bettens, Maarten & Seuntjens, Piet & Broekx, Steven, 2019. "Valuing urban ecosystem services in sustainable brownfield redevelopment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 139-149.
    5. 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).
    6. Dumenu, William Kwadwo, 2013. "What are we missing? Economic value of an urban forest in Ghana," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 137-142.
    7. Dickinson, Dawn C. & Hobbs, Richard J., 2017. "Cultural ecosystem services: Characteristics, challenges and lessons for urban green space research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 179-194.
    8. Xiao, Lan & Haiping, Tang & Haoguang, Liang, 2017. "A theoretical framework for researching cultural ecosystem service flows in urban agglomerations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 95-104.
    9. Fiona Nevzati & Mart Külvik & Joanna Storie & Liisa-Maria Tiidu & Simon Bell, 2023. "Assessment of Cultural Ecosystem Services and Well-Being: Testing a Method for Evaluating Natural Environment and Contact Types in the Harku Municipality, Estonia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-24, June.
    10. Maraja Riechers & Micha Strack & Jan Barkmann & Teja Tscharntke, 2019. "Cultural Ecosystem Services Provided by Urban Green Change along an Urban-Periurban Gradient," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-10, January.
    11. Song Liu & Peiyu Shen & Yishan Huang & Li Jiang & Yongjiu Feng, 2022. "Spatial Distribution Changes in Nature-Based Recreation Service Supply from 2008 to 2018 in Shanghai, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-17, October.
    12. Washbourne, Carla-Leanne & Goddard, Mark A. & Le Provost, Gaëtane & Manning, David A.C. & Manning, Peter, 2020. "Trade-offs and synergies in the ecosystem service demand of urban brownfield stakeholders," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    13. Langemeyer, Johannes & Baró, Francesc & Roebeling, Peter & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik, 2015. "Contrasting values of cultural ecosystem services in urban areas: The case of park Montjuïc in Barcelona," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 178-186.
    14. Gugulica, Madalina & Burghardt, Dirk, 2023. "Mapping indicators of cultural ecosystem services use in urban green spaces based on text classification of geosocial media data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    15. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Barton, David N., 2013. "Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 235-245.
    16. Krasny, Marianne E. & Russ, Alex & Tidball, Keith G. & Elmqvist, Thomas, 2014. "Civic ecology practices: Participatory approaches to generating and measuring ecosystem services in cities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 177-186.
    17. Buchel, Sophie & Frantzeskaki, Niki, 2015. "Citizens’ voice: A case study about perceived ecosystem services by urban park users in Rotterdam, the Netherlands," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 169-177.
    18. Jindong Wu, 2019. "Developing General Equations for Urban Tree Biomass Estimation with High-Resolution Satellite Imagery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-19, August.
    19. 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.
    20. Gaodi Xie & Wenhui Chen & Shuyan Cao & Chunxia Lu & Yu Xiao & Changshun Zhang & Na Li & Shuo Wang, 2014. "The Outward Extension of an Ecological Footprint in City Expansion: The Case of Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-16, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    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:ags:gadadp:260789. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iagoede.html .

    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.