Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cultural Ecosystem Services of Urban Green Spaces. How and What People Value in Urban Nature?

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advanced Technologies for Sustainable Development of Urban Green Infrastructure (SSC 2020)

Part of the book series: Springer Geography ((SPRINGERGEOGR))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This paper discusses the concept of cultural ecosystem services (CES) as a part of a broader framework of ecosystem services provided by urban green spaces. It is based on literature review and evaluation of results from two research projects of urban green spaces conducted in Russia (three public parks in Moscow) and China (six public parks in Xi’an). Both case studies conducted face-to-face interviews of park visitors and stakeholders (in Xi’an) and utilized questionnaires as well as observational studies of people’s activities within parks and their infrastructure. This paper aims to explore how urban dwellers perceive and value urban green spaces (parks) and what particular CES/benefits can be drawn as being most important. CES of urban green spaces (especially urban parks) are discussed from the following viewpoints: a) visitors’ perception and behaviour, b) indicators and methods adapted to CES research and c) identifying and understanding the ecosystem service capacity of an urban green space for attracting visitors of different cultural backgrounds. The results highlight the importance of CES which are provided by urban green spaces for quality of life and human health in cities, and the role of CES in raising environmental awareness and social cohesion and interaction. This paper also provides suggestions for a research framework and conceptual models that can be applied in future studies of CES and provides useful tools for indicators selection and assessment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Charoenkit, S., Piyathamrongchai, K.: A review of urban green spaces multifunctionality assessment: a way forward for a standardized assessment and comparability. Ecol. Ind. 107, (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Voigt, A., Kabisch, N., Wurster, D., Haase, D., Breuste, J.: Structural diversity: a multi-dimensional approach to assess recreational services in urban parks. Ambio 43(4), 480–491 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Hansen, R., Pauleit, S.: From multifunctionality to multiple ecosystem services? A conceptual framework for multifunctionality in green infrastructure planning for urban areas. Ambio 43, 516–529 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-014-0510-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Liquete, C., Kleeschulte, S., Dige, G., Maes, J., Grizzetti, B., Olah, B., Zulian, G.: Mapping green infrastructure based on ecosystem services and ecological networks: a Pan-European case study. Environ. Sci. Policy 54, 268–280 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Lovell, S.T., Taylor, J.R.: Supplying urban ecosystem services through multifunctional green infrastructure in the United States. Landsc. Ecol. 28(8), 1447–1463 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Palliwoda, J., Banzhaf, E., Priess, J.A.: How do the green components of urban green infrastructure influence the use of ecosystem services? Examples from Leipzig, Germany. Landsc. Ecol. 35, 1127–1142 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-020-01004-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bieling, C., Plieninger, T., Pirker, H., Vogl, C.R.: Linkages between landscapes and human well-being: an empirical exploration with short interviews. Ecol. Econ. 105, 19–30 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.05.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dushkova, D., Ignatieva, M.: New trends in urban environmental health research: from geography of diseases to therapeutic landscapes and healing gardens. Geogr. Environ. Sustain. 13(1), 159–171 (2020). https://doi.org/10.24057/2071-9388-2019-99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Irvine, K., Warber, S., Devine-Wright, P., Gaston, K.: Understanding urban green space as a health resource: a qualitative comparison of visit motivation and derived effects among park users in Sheffield, UK. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 10, 417–442 (2013). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph10010417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kothencz, G., Kolcsár, R., Cabrera-Barona, P., Szilassi, P.: Urban green space perception and its contribution to well-being. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 14(7), 766 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14070766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lee, A.C., Maheswaran, R.: The health benefits of urban green spaces: a review of the evidence. J. Public Health 33(2), 212–222 (2011)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Plieninger, T., Dijks, S., Oteros, Rozas E., Bieling, C.: Assessing, mapping and quantifying cultural ecosystem services at community level. Land Use Policy 33, 118–129 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Leemans, R., de Groot, R.S.: Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: A Framework for Assessment. Island Press (2003). http://library.wur.nl/WebQuery/wurpubs/326575. Accessed 29 June 2020

  14. La Rosa, D., Spyra, M., Inostroza, L.: Indicators of cultural ecosystem services for urban planning. A review. Ecol. Ind. 61, 74–89 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Andersson, E., Tengö, M., McPhearson, T., Kremeret, P.: Cultural ecosystem services as a gateway for improving urban sustainability. Ecosyst. Serv. 12 (2014). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.08.002i

  16. Fish, R., Church, A., Winter, M.: Conceptualising cultural ecosystem services: a novel framework for research and critical engagement. Ecosyst. Serv. 21, 208–217 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.09.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Vasiljevic, N., Gavrilovic, S.: Cultural ecosystem services. In: Leal Filho, W., Azul, A., Brandli, L., Özuyar, P., Wall, T. (eds.) Life on Land. Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71065-5_47-1

  18. Haase, D., Haase, A., Rink, D.: Conceptualizing the nexus between urban shrinkage and ecosystem services. Landsc. Urban Plan. 132, 159–169 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hegetschweiler, K.T., de Vries, S., Arnberger, A., Bell, S., Brennan, M., Siter, N., Olafsson, A.S., Voigt, A., Hunziker, M.: Linking demand and supply factors in identifying cultural ecosystem services of urban green infrastructures: a review of European studies. Urban For. Urban Green. 21, 48–59 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Haines-Young, R., Potschin, M.B.: Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) V5.1 and Guidance on the Application of the Revised Structure (2018). www.cices.eu

  21. Daniel, T.C., Muhar, A., Arnberger, A., Aznar, O., Boyd, J.W., Chan, K.M.A., Costanza, R., Elmqvist, T., Flint, C.G., Gobster, P.H., Grêt-Regamey, A., Lave, R., Muhar, S., Penker, M., Ribe, R.G., Schauppenlehner, T., Sikor, T., Soloviy, I., Spierenburg, M., Taczanowska, K., Tam, J., von der Dunk, A.: Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109, 8812–8819 (2012)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Braubach, M., Egorov, A., Mudu, I., et al.: Effects of urban green space on environmental health, equity and resilience. In: Kabisch, N., et al. Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas. Springer (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Ekkel, E.D., de Vries, S.: Nearby green space and human health: evaluating accessibility metrics. Landsc. Urban Plan. 157, 214–220 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Ponizy, L., Majchrzak, W., Zwierzchowska, I.: Cultural ecosystem services of urban green spaces–supply and demand in the densely built-up areas. Poznan old town case study. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 95, 052009 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/95/5/052009

  25. Brancalion, P.H.S., Villarroel, Cardozo I., Camatta, A., Aronson, J., Rodrigues, R.R.: Cultural ecosystem services and popular perceptions of the benefits of an ecological restoration project in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Restor. Ecol. 22, 65–71 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. López-Santiago, C.A., Oteros-Rozas, E., Martín-López, B., Plieninger, T., González, Martín E., González, J.A.: Using visual stimuli to explore the social perceptions of ecosystem services in cultural landscapes: the case of transhumance in Mediterranean Spain. Ecol. Soc. 19(2), 27 (2014). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-06401-190227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Vejre, H., Jensen, F.S., Thorsen, B.J.: Demonstrating the importance of intangible ecosystem services from peri-urban landscapes. Ecol. Complex. 7(3), 338–348 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Brandt, P., Abson, D.J., DellaSala, D.A., Feller, R., von Wehrden, H.: Multifunctionality and biodiversity: Ecosystem services in temperate rainforests of the Pacific Northwest, USA. Biol. Cons. 169(2014), 362–371 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2013.12.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Chen, B., Adimo, O.A., Bao, Z.: Assessment of aesthetic quality and multiple functions of urban green space from the users’ perspective: the case of Hangzhou Flower Garden, China. Landsc. Urban Plan. 93, 76–82 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Cooper, N., Brady, E., Steen, H., Bryce, R.: Aesthetic and spiritual values of ecosystems: recognizing the ontological and axiological plurality of cultural ecosystem services. Ecosyst. Serv. (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.07.014

  31. Stewart, O.T., Moudon, A.V., Fesinmeyer, M.D., Zhou, C., Saelens, B.E.: The association between park visitation and physical activity measured with accelerometer, GPS, and travel diary. Health Place 38, 82–88 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2016.01.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Frank, S., Fuerst, C., Koschke, L., Witt, A., Makeschin, F.: Assessment of landscape aesthetics-validation of a landscape metrics-based assessment by visual estimation of the scenic beauty. Ecol. Ind. 32, 222–231 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Klain, S.C., Chan, K.M.A.: Navigating coastal values: participatory mapping of ecosystem services for spatial planning. Ecol. Econ. 82, 104–113 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Bieling, C., Plieninger, T.: Recording manifestations of cultural ecosystem services in the landscape. Landsc. Res. 38, 649–667 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2012.691469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sander, H.A., Haight, R.G.: Estimating the economic value of cultural ecosystem services in an urbanizing area using hedonic pricing. J. Environ. Manag. 113, 194–205 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.08.031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Kulczyk, S., Wozniak, E., Derek, M.: Landscape, facilities and visitors: an integrated model of recreational ecosystem services. Ecosyst. Serv. 31, 491–501 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Cortinovis, C., Zulian, G., Geneletti, D.: Assessing nature-based recreation to support urban green infrastructure planning in Trento (Italy). Land 7, 112 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3390/land7040112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Villamagna, A., Mogollón, B., Angermeier, P.L.: A multi-indicator framework for mapping cultural ecosystem services: the case of freshwater recreational fishing. Ecol. Ind. 45, 255–265 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.04.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Maes, J., Egoh, B., Willemen, L., Liquete, C., Vihervaara, P., Schägner, J.P., Grizzetti, B., Drakou, E.G., La Notte, A., Zulian, G., Bouraoui, F., Paracchini, M.L., Braat, L., Bidoglio, G.: Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union. Ecosyst. Serv. 1, 31–39 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Weyland, F., Laterra, P.: Recreation potential assessment at large spatial scales: a method based in the ecosystem services approach and landscape metrics. Ecol. Ind. 39, 34–43 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Paracchini, M.L., Zulian, G., Kopperoinen, L., et al.: Mapping cultural ecosystem services: a framework to assess the potential for outdoor recreation across the EU. Ecol. Ind. 45, 371–385 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.04.018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Bryce, R., Irvine, K.N., Church, A., Fish, R., Ranger, S., Kenter, J.O.: Subjective wellbeing indicators for large-scale assessment of cultural ecosystem services. Ecosyst. Serv. 21, 258–269 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.07.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Sturm, R., Cohen, D.: Proximity to urban parks and mental health. J. Ment. Health Policy Econ. 17, 19–24 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Nordh, H.: Quantitative methods of measuring restorative components in urban public parks. J. Landsc. Arch. 7(1), 46 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Bertram, C., Rehdanz, K.: Preferences for cultural urban ecosystem services: comparing attitudes, perception, and use. Ecosyst. Serv. 12, 187–199 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.12.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Bertram, C., Larondelle, N.: Going to the woods is going home: Recreational benefits of a larger urban forest site – a travel cost analysis for Berlin, Germany. Ecol. Econ. 132, 255–263 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Liekens, I., Schaafsma, M., De Nocker, L., Broekx, S., Staes, J., Aertsens, J., Brouwer, R.: Developing a value function for nature development and land use policy in Flanders, Belgium. Land Use Policy 30(1), 549–559 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.04.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Van Berkel, D.B., Verburg, P.H.: Spatial quantification and valuation of cultural ecosystem services in an agricultural landscape. Ecol. Ind. 37(Part A), 163–174 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Rall, E., Bieling, C., Zytynska, S., Haase, D.: Exploring city-wide patterns of cultural ecosystem service perceptions and use. Ecol. Ind. 77, 80–95 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Riechers, M., Barkmann, J., Tscharntke, T.: Perceptions of cultural ecosystem services from urban green. Ecosyst. Serv. 17, 33–39 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Grahn, P., Stigsdotter, U.K.: The relation between perceived sensory dimensions of urban green space and stress restoration. Landsc. Urban Plan. 94, 264–275 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2009.10.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Szeremeta, B., Zannin, P.H.T.: Analysis and evaluation of soundscapes in public parks through interviews and measurement of noise. Sci. Total Environ. 407, 6143–6149 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.08.039

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Tengberg, A., Fredholm, S., Eliasson, I., Knez, I., Saltzman, K., Wetterberg, O.: Cultural ecosystem services provided by landscapes: assessment of heritage values and identity. J. Ecosyst. Serv. 2, 14–26 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Moore, T., Hunt, W.F.: Ecosystem service provision by stormwater wetlands and ponds - a means for evaluation? Water Res. 46(20), 6811–6823 (2012)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Mocior, E., Kruse, M.: Educational values and services of ecosystems and landscapes – an overview. Ecol. Ind. 60, 137–151 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.06.031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Sherrouse, B.C., Semmens, D.J., Clement, J.M.: An application of social values for ecosystem services (solves) to three national forests in Colorado and Wyoming. Ecol. Ind. 36, 68–79 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Kaźmierczak, A.: The contribution of local parks to neighborhood social ties. Landsc. Urban Plan. 109, 31–44 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.05.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Acott, T., Urquhart, J.: Sense of place and socio-cultural values in fishing communities along the English Channel. In: Urquhart, J., Acott, T., Symes, D., Zhao, M. (eds.) Social Issues in Sustainable Fisheries Management, pp. 257–278. Springer, Dordrecht (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  59. Buchel, S., Frantzeskaki, N.: Citizens’ voice: a case study about perceived ecosystem services by urban park users in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Ecosyst. Serv. 12, 169–177 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Ryfield, F., Cabana, D., Brannigan, J., Crowe, T.: Conceptualizing ‘sense of place’ in cultural ecosystem services: a framework for interdisciplinary research. Ecosyst. Serv. 36, (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Palacios-Agundez, I., Peña, L., Ametzaga-Arregi, I., Rodríguez-Loinaz, G., Onaindia, M.: Sustainable landscape management based on cultural ecosystem services. Chang. Adapt. Soc.-Ecol. Syst. 3, 103–110 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  62. Grunewald, K., Syrbe, R., Walz, U., Richter, B., Meinel, G., Herold, H., Marzelli, S.: Germany’s ecosystem services – state of the indicator development for a nationwide assessment and monitoring. One Ecosyst. 2, (2017). https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.2.e14021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Berghöfer, A., Schneider, A.: Indicators for managing ecosystem services – Options & Examples. ValuES Project Report. Helmholtz Zentrum für Umweltforschung (UFZ) GmbH, Leipzig, and Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, Eschborn. Germany (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  64. Brown, C., Reyers, B., Ingwall, L., Mapendembe, A., Nel, J., O’Farrell, P., Dixon, M., Bowles-Newark, N.J.: Measuring Ecosystem Services: Guidance on Developing Ecosystem Service Indicators. UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge, UK (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  65. van Oudenhoven, A.P.E., Schröter, M., Drakou, E., Geijzendorffer, I., Jacobs, S., et al.: Key criteria for developing ecosystem service indicators to inform decision making. Ecol. Ind. 95, 417–426 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.06.020. hal-01945046f

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Igntieva, M., Konechnaya, G., Stewart, G.: St. Petersburg. In: Kelcey, J.G., Müller, N. (eds.) Plants and Habitats of European Cities, p. 407. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-89684-7_12

  67. Ignatieva, M.E., Xiu, N., Yang, F.: Chinese urban green areas: classic gardens to a globalized landscape (2015). http://www.thenatureofcities.com/2015/04/05/chineseurban-green-areas-classic-gardens-to-a-globalized-landscape/. Accessed 21 Aug 2020

  68. Dushkova, D., Ignatieva, M., Melnichuk, I.: Urban greening as a response to societal challenges. towards biophilic megacities (case studies of Saint Petersburg and Moscow, Russia). In: Breuste, J., et al. (eds.) Making Green Cities: Concepts, Challenges and Practice, pp. 352–370. Springer Nature (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37716-8_6_5

  69. Dushkova, D., Konstantinova, A.: Urban green spaces as source of well-being of residents in megacities: lessons learnt from park survey in Moscow, Russia (in preparation) (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  70. Matasov, V., Belelli Marchesini, L., Yaroslavtsev, A., Sala, G., Fareeva, O., Seregin, I., Castaldi, S., Vasenev, V., Valentini, R.: IoT monitoring of urban tree ecosystem services: possibilities and challenges. Forests 11(7), 775 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/f11070775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Goldstein, J., Satterfield, T., Kikiloi, K., Hannahs, N.: Cultural services and non-use values. In: Natural Capital. Oxford University Press (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  72. Yang, F., Ignatieva, M., Larsson, A., Zhang S., Ni, N.: Public perceptions and preferences regarding lawns and their alternatives in China: a case study of Xi’an. Urban For. Urban Green. 126478 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2019.126478

  73. Zhang, T., Gobster, P.H.: Leisure preferences and open space needs in an. J. Archit. Plan. Res. 15(4), 338–355 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  74. Özgüner, H.: Cultural differences in attitudes towards urban parks and green spaces. Landsc. Res. 36(5), 599–620 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Ode, Sang Å., Knez, I., Gunnarsson, B., Hedblom, M.: The effects of naturalness, gender, and age on how urban green space is perceived and used. Urban For. Urban Green. 18, 268–276 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Shwartz, A., Turbé, A., Simon, L., Julliard, R.: Enhancing urban biodiversity and its influence on city-dwellers: an experiment. Biol. Conserv. 171, 82–90 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Ignatieva, M., Ahrné, K.: Biodiverse green infrastructure for the 21st century: from “green desert” of lawns to biophilic cities. J. Arch. Urban. 37(1), 1–9 (2013). https://doi.org/10.3846/20297955.2013.786284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Zwierzchowska, I., Hof, A., Iojă, I.-C., Mueller, C., Poniży, L., Breuste, J., Mizgajski, A.: Multi-scale assessment of cultural ecosystem services of parks in central european cities. Urban For. Urban Green. 30, 84–97 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.12.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Mao, Q., Wang, L., Guo, Q., Li, Y., Liu, M., Xu, G.: Evaluating cultural ecosystem services of urban residential green spaces from the perspective of residents’ satisfaction with green space. Front Public Health 8, 226 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.00226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Stålhammar, S., Pedersen, E.: Recreational cultural ecosystem services: how do people describe the value? Ecosyst. Serv. 26, 1–9 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.05.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Ridding, L.E., Redhead, J.W., Oliver, T.H., Schmucki, R., McGinlay, J., Graves, A.R., et al.: The importance of landscape characteristics for the delivery of cultural ecosystem services. Environ. Manag. 206, 1145–1154 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.11.066

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The Russian part of this research was funded by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (RFBR) project “Mathematical-cartographic assessment of the medico-ecological situation in cities of European Russia for their integrated ecological characteristics” (grant number 18-05-00236/18). Social survey and data analysis were supported by Russian Science Foundation project “Smart technologies to monitor, model and evaluate ecosystem services provided by urban green infrastructure and soils to support decision making in sustainable city development under global changes” (grant number 19-77-30012). Analysis and aggregation of the methodology to assess cultural ecosystem services were supported by German Academic Exchange Service – DAAD (Program of East Partnership) project between Humboldt University Berlin and Lomonosov Moscow State University “Urban ecosystem services and their assessment: exchange of experiences between Germany and Russia” (2019–2021). The Chinese part of the research was supported by Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (SWU 019038). The authors sincerely thank Mr. Pavel Ivanov and Mr. Kirill Kadygrob for supporting the process of interviewing and participatory observation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department Urban and Environmental Sociology, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ, Leipzig, Germany

    Diana Dushkova

  2. School of Design, Department of Architecture, Landscape Architecture + Urban Design, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia

    Maria Ignatieva

  3. Agrarian and Technological Institute, Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia – RUDN University, Moscow, Russia

    Diana Dushkova & Anastasia Konstantinova

  4. Department of Landscape Architecture, College of Horticulture and Landscape Architecture, Southwest University, Chongqing, China

    Fengping Yang

Authors
  1. Diana Dushkova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria Ignatieva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anastasia Konstantinova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fengping Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Diana Dushkova .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Agrarian-Technological Institute, RUDN University, Moscow, Russia

    Viacheslav Vasenev

  2. RUDN University, Moscow, Russia

    Elvira Dovletyarova

  3. University of Tuscia, Viterbo, Italy

    Riccardo Valentini

  4. Brooklyn College, New York, NY, USA

    Zhongqi Cheng

  5. National Research Counci, Institute of Research on Terrestrial Ecosystem, Porano, Italy

    Carlo Calfapietra

  6. Institute of Geography, Ruhr University Bochum, Bochum, Germany

    Luis Inostroza

  7. Institute of Geography, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

    Michael Leuchner

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Dushkova, D., Ignatieva, M., Konstantinova, A., Yang, F. (2021). Cultural Ecosystem Services of Urban Green Spaces. How and What People Value in Urban Nature?. In: Vasenev, V., et al. Advanced Technologies for Sustainable Development of Urban Green Infrastructure. SSC 2020. Springer Geography. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-75285-9_28

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation