Abstract
Increasing urbanization, landscape conversion, and resource consumption represent the most important, visible and irreversible human-induced actions on Earth. As a consequence, nowadays it is of seminal importance to understand and assess how anthropic pressures are related to the provision of ecosystem services (ES). This paper focuses on urban parks and their provision of water-induced ecosystem services (WES) connected to urban hydrologic cycle. The study uses a broad holistic approach to comprehensively understand the links between anthropic pressures and WES production. With the help of biological, chemical, and physical indicators collected in publicly available databases a scoring matrix was created. The method was applied to two different parks in Turin (Italy), the Arrivore Park and the Michelotti Park. The matrices reveal that anthropic pressures are marked, and the most affected WES are habitat maintenance, recreational services, and the provision of drinkable and non-drinkable water. The hydromorphological alterations are the anthropogenic pressures most strongly present in both parks. More specifically, in the Arrivore Park urbanization represents one of the most important pressures while the main pressures in the Michelotti Park are water abstraction for industrial and agricultural use and point source pollution. This study makes a major contribution to research on WES assessment by demonstrating the possibility to understand and to assess the impact of anthropic pressures. Moreover, the proposed matrix method provides an easy tool to support policymakers, public administrations, and private companies within sustainable urban planning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arnold JG, Srinivasan R, Muttiah RS, Williams JR (1998) Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment part I: model development. J Am Water Resour Assoc 34(1):73–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1998.tb05961.x
Aznar-Sánchez JA, Velasco-Muñoz JF, Belmonte-Ureña LJ, Manzano-Agugliaro F (2019) The worldwide research trends on water ecosystem services. Ecol Indic 99:310–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.12.045
Balsotti R, Governa M (2013) Evaluation of groundwater monitoring according to 2000/60/EC and 2006/118/EC directives in Piedmont. Ital J Groundw 2(3). https://doi.org/10.7343/as-041-13-0067
Bennett EM, Peterson GD, Gordon LJ (2009) Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecol Lett 12(12):1394–1404. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01387.x
Boano F, Harvey JW, Marion A, Packman AI, Revelli R, Wörman RidolfiL (2014) Hyporheic flow and transport processes: mechanisms, models, and biogeochemical implications. Rev Geophys 52(4):603–679. https://doi.org/10.1002/2012RG000417
Bolund P, Hunhammar S (1999) Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecol Econ 29(2):293–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00013-0
Boyd J, Banzhaf S (2007) What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecol Econ 63(2):616–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.01.002
Brauman KA (2015) Hydrologic ecosystem services: linking ecohydrologic processes to human well-being in water research and watershed management. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Water 2(4):345–358. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1081
Buffagni A, Armanini DG, Erba S (2009) Does the lentic-lotic character of rivers affect invertebrate metrics used in the assessment of ecological quality? J Limnol 68(1):92–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106563
Burkhard B, Kandziora M, Hou Y, Müller F (2014) Ecosystem service potentials, flows and demands-concepts for spatial localisation, indication and quantification. Landsc Online 34(1):1–32. https://doi.org/10.3097/LO.201434
Carballo R, Cancela JJ, Iglesias G, Marín A, Neira XX, Cuesta TS (2009) WFD indicators and definition of the ecological status of rivers. Water Resour Manag 23(11):2231–2247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-008-9379-9
Cesa M, Baldisseri A, Bertolini G, Dainese E, Col MD, Vecchia UD, Marchesini P, Nimis PL (2013) Implementation of an active ‘bryomonitoring’ network for chemical status and temporal trend assessment under the Water Framework Directive in the Chiampo Valley’s tannery district (NE Italy). J Environ Manag 114:303–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.10.022
Chapin F, Matson P, Mooney HA (2002) Principles of terrestrial ecosystem ecology. Springer New York, Dordrecht, ISBN 978-0-387-21663-8
Depietri Y, Renaud FG, Kallis G (2012) Heat waves and floods in urban areas: a policy-oriented review of ecosystem services. Sustain Sci 7(1):95–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0142-4
Dick J, Maes J, Smith RI, Paracchini ML, Zulian G (2014) Cross-scale analysis of ecosystem services identified and assessed at local and european level. Ecol Indic 38:20–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.10.023
Driscoll C, Lawrence G, Bulger A, Butler T, Cronan C, Eagar C, Lambert K, Likens G, Stoddard J, Weathers K (2001) Acidic deposition in the northeastern United States: sources and inputs, ecosystem effects, and management strategies. Bioscience 51(3):180–198. https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2001)051[0180:ADITNU]2.0.CO;2
European Commission (2012) Communication from the commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions. A blueprint to safeguard Europe’s water resources. COM 673 final.
Gabbud C, Lane SN (2016) Ecosystem impacts of Alpine water intakes for hydropower: the challenge of sediment management. Wires Wiley Interdiscip Rev Water 3(1):41–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1124
Giorgio A, De Bonis S, Guida M (2016) Macroinvertebrate and diatom communities as indicators for the biological assessment of river Picentino (Campania, Italy). Ecol Indic 64:85–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.12.001
Gregory AJ, Atkins JP, Burdon D, Elliott M (2013) A problem structuring method for ecosystem-based management: the DPSIR modelling process. Eur J Oper Res 227(3):558–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2012.11.020
Grizzetti B, Lanzanova D, Liquete C, Reynaud A, Cardoso AC (2016) Assessing water ecosystem services for water resource management. Environ Sci Policy 61:194–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.04.008
Haase D, Larondelle N, Andersson E, Artmann M, Borgström S, Breuste J, Gomez-Baggethun E, Gren A, Hamstead Z, Hansen R, Kabisch N, Kremer P, Langemeyer J, Rall EL, McPhearson T, Pauleit S, Qureshi S, Schwarz N, Voigt A, Wurster D, Elmqvist T (2014) A quantitative review of urban ecosystem service assessments: concepts, models, and implementation. AMBIO 43(4):413–433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-014-0504-0
Hussain M, Mumtaz MW, Hussain SM, Abbas MN, Mehmood S, Imran M (2015) Comparative physico-chemical characterization and spatial distribution of pollutants in rural and urban drains water. Soil Environ 34(1):51–64
ISTAT (2014) Urban green. Italian National Institute of Statistics. https://www.istat.it/it/ambiente-ed-energia (italian)
Karabulut A, Egoh BN, Lanzanova D, Grizzetti B, Bidoglio G, Pagliero L, Bouraoui F, Aloe A, Reynaud A, Maes J, Vandecasteele I, Mubareka S (2016) Mapping water provisioning services to support the ecosystem–water–food–energy nexus in the Danube river basin. Ecosyst Serv 17:278–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.08.002
Keeler BL, Polasky S, Brauman KA, Johnson KA, Finlay JC, O’Neille A, Kovacs K, Dalzell B (2012) Linking water quality and well-being for improved assessment and valuation of ecosystem services. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(45):18619–18624. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1215991109
Klijn F (ed) (2013) Ecosystem classification for environmental management (Vol. 2). Springer Science & Business Media
Kopperoinen L, Itkonen P, Niemelä J (2014) Using expert knowledge in combining green infrastructure and ecosystem services in land use planning: an insight into a new place-based methodology. Landsc Ecol 29(8):1361–1375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-014-0014-2
Kroll F, Müller F, Haase D, Fohrer N (2012) Rural-urban gradient analysis of ecosystem services supply and demand dynamics. Land Use Policy 29(3):521–535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.07.008
Kuittinen M, Moinel C, Adalgeirsdottir K (2016) Carbon sequestration through urban ecosystem services: a case study from Finland. Sci Total Environ 563-564:623–632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.03.168
Lyu R, Zhang J, Xu M, Li J (2018) Impacts of urbanization ecosystem services and their temporal relations: a case study in Northern Ningxia, China. Land Use Policy 77:163–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.05.022
Martin-Ortega J, Ferrier R, Gordon I (2015) Water ecosystem services: a global perspective. Cambridge University Press
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2003) Ecosystems and human well-being: a framework for assessment. World Resour Inst. Island Press, Washington, ISBN 9781559634038
Montoya-Tangarife C, De La Barrera F, Salazar A, Inostroza L (2017) Monitoring the effects of land cover change on the supply of ecosystem services in an urban region: a study of Santiago-Valparaíso, Chile. PLoS ONE 12(11). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0188117
Olander LP, Johnston RJ, Tallis H, Kagan J, Maguire LA, Polasky S, Urban D, Boyd J, Wainger L, Palmer M (2018) Benefit relevant indicators: ecosystem services measures that link ecological and social outcomes. Ecol Indic 85:1262–1272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.12.001
Olander LP, Polasky S, Kagan JS, Johnston RJ, Wainger L, Saah D, Maguire L, Boyd J, Yoskowitz D (2017) So you want your research to be relevant? building the bridge between ecosystem services research and practice. Ecosyst Serv 26:170–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.06.003
Pejchar L, Mooney HA (2009) Invasive species, ecosystem services and human well-being. Trends Ecol Evol 24(9):497–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2009.03.016
Peng J, Wang A, Luo L, Liu Y, Li H, Hu Y, Meersmans J, Wu J (2019) Spatial identification of conservation priority areas for urban ecological land: An approach based on water ecosystem services. Land Degrad Dev 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/ldr.3257
Pham HV, Torresan S, Critto A, Marcomini A (2019) Alteration of freshwater ecosystem services under global change—a review focusing on the Po River basin (Italy) and the Red River basin (Vietnam). Sci Total Environ 652:1347–1365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.303
Pisinaras V, Polychronis C, Gemitzi A (2016) Intrinsic groundwater vulnerability determination at the aquifer scale: a methodology coupling travel time estimation and rating methods. Environ Earth Sci 75(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-015-4965-7
Qiu J, Wardropper CB, Rissman AR, Turner MG (2017) Spatial fit between water quality policies and hydrologic ecosystem services in an urbanizing agricultural landscape. Landsc Ecol 32(1):59–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-016-0428-0
Rall E, Bieling C, Zytynska S, Haase D (2017) Exploring city-wide patterns of cultural ecosystem service perceptions and use. Ecol Indic 77:80–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.02.001
Regione Piemonte (2019) Area Plan for the Po river fluvial park. https://www.regione.piemonte.it/web/temi/ambiente-territorio/biodiversita-aree-naturali/parchi/piano-darea-parco-fluviale-po (Italian)
Regione Piemonte (2020a) Geoportale Arpa Piemonte. Agenzia Regionale per la Protezione dell’Ambiente—Regione Piemonte. http://webgis.arpa.piemonte.it/geoportale/index.php/tematiche/tutti-i-geoservizi (italian)
Regione Piemonte (2020b) Regione Piemonte—Ambiente Energia e Territorio. http://www.geoportale.piemonte.it/geocatalogorp/?sezione=catalogo (italian)
Regione Piemonte (2020c) Regione Piemonte—Banche Dati Naturalistiche Regionali. http://www.regione.piemonte.it/bdnol/RicercaAction.do (italian) (italian)
Regione Piemonte (2020d) Regione Piemonte e Arpa Piemonte. Agenzia Regionale per la Protezione dell’Ambiente—Stato dell’Ambiente in Piemonte. http://relazione.ambiente.piemonte.it/2019/it (italian)
Rinaldi M, Belletti B, Bussettini M, Comiti F, Golfieri B, Lastoria B, Marchese E, Nardi L, Surian N (2017) New tools for the hydromorphological assessment and monitoring of european streams. J Environ Manag 202:363–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.11.036
Robinson DA, Hockley N, Cooper DM, Emmett BA, Keith AM, Lebron I, Reynolds B, Tipping E, Tye AM, Watts CW, Whalley WR, Black HIJ, Warren GP, Robinson JS (2013) Natural capital and ecosystem services, developing an appropriate soils framework as a basis for valuation. Soil Biol Biochem 57:1023–1033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2012.09.008
Sabater S, Tockner K (2010) Effects of hydrologic alterations on the ecological quality of river ecosystems. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1:15–39
Sand-Jensen K (2013) Freshwater ecosystems, human impact on. Encyclopedia of biodiversity, 2nd edn, 570–586. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-384719-5.00369-5
Schröter M, Barton DN, Remme RP, Hein L (2014) Accounting for capacity and flow of ecosystem services: a conceptual model and a case study for Telemark, Norway. Ecol Indic 36:539–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.09.018
Smokorowski KE, Metcalfe RA, Finucan SD, Jones N, Marty J, Power M, Pyrce RS, Steele R (2011) Ecosystem level assessment of environmentally based flow restrictions for maintaining ecosystem integrity: a comparison of a modified peaking versus unaltered river. Ecohydrology 4(6):791–806. https://doi.org/10.1002/eco.167
Spitale D (2017) Performance of the STAR ICMI macroinvertebrate index and implications for classification and biomonitoring of rivers. Knowl Manag Aquat Ecosyst 418(20). https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae/2017012
Steinberger N, Wohl E (2003) Impacts to water quality and fish habitat associated with maintaining natural channels for flood control. Environ Manag 31(6):724–740. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-003-2838-4
Sun G, Hallema DW, Asbjornsen H (2017) Ecohydrological processes and ecosystem services in the Anthropocene: a review. Ecol Process 6(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13717-017-0104-6
Taboada-Castro M, Diéguez-Villar A, Rodríguez-Blanco ML, Taboada-Castro MT (2012) Agricultural impact of dissolved trace elements in runoff water from an experimental catchment with land-use changes. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 43(1-2):81–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2012.631421
Tuinstra J, van Wensem J (2014) Ecosystem services in sustainable groundwater management. Sci Total Environ 485-486:798–803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.03.098
Valeriani F, Zinnà L, Vitali M, Spica VR, Protano C (2015) River water quality assessment: comparison between old and new indices in a real scenario from Italy. Int J River Basin Manag 13(3):325–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/15715124.2015.1012208
Wolff S, Schulp CJE, Verburg PH (2015) Mapping ecosystem services demand: a review of current research and future perspectives. Ecol Indic 55:159–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.03.016
Zheng H, Li Y, Robinson BE, Liu G, Ma D, Wang F, Lu F, Ouyang Z, Daily GC (2016) Using ecosystem service trade-offs to inform water conservation policies and management practices. Front Ecol Environ 14(10):527–532. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1432
Acknowledgements
We thank the constructive comments by two anonymous reviewers. This project has partially received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement “ECO.G.U.S.—ECOsystem services for resilient and sustainable cities: an eco-hydrological approach for Green Urban Spaces” (#701914).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rosini, C., Revelli, R. A Scoring Matrix Method for Integrated Evaluation of Water-Related Ecosystem Services Provided by Urban Parks. Environmental Management 66, 756–769 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-020-01369-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-020-01369-3