Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Asian Cities are Greening While Some North American Cities are Browning: Long-Term Greenspace Patterns in 16 Cities of the Pan-Pacific Region

  • Published:
Ecosystems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Pan-Pacific cities are home to nearly 55% of the world’s urban residents. As the fastest growing urban centers in the world, their growth comes with increasing demand for urban amenities such as greenspace. Yet, our understanding of greenspace trends within and among pan-Pacific cities is limited due to a lack of consistent long-term land cover data necessary for transnational comparisons. We tracked and compared greenspace patterns in 16 major pan-Pacific cities over 28 years. We asked: (1) How do long-term trends in greenspace heterogeneity differ among pan-Pacific cities? and (2) How do these patterns vary along urban–rural gradients? To characterize greenspace, we distinguished four vegetation density classes using normalized difference vegetation indices from annual Landsat composites spanning 1984–2012. First, we assessed long-term trends in greenspace spatial patterns. Second, we evaluated greenspace change along a gradient outward from city centers. We found that although GDP increased in all cities in recent decades, their greenspace patterns diverged into either greening or browning trends. In greening cities, expansion of dense vegetation, mostly in the outskirts of cities, resulted in greater greenspace connectivity. In contrast, browning cities lost dense vegetation in rural fringes, yet not in their urban centers. In Asian cities, dense vegetation increased in areal extent and connectivity over time as well as outward along the urban–rural gradient, in contrast to most North American cities. These differences in greenspace heterogeneity and connectivity over time and space imply that strategies and policies derived from North American cities may not be directly applicable to Asian cities.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adler J, Parmryd I. 2010. Quantifying colocalization by correlation: the Pearson correlation coefficient is superior to the Mander’s overlap coefficient. Cytom Part A 77:733–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahn R, Burke TF, McGahan AM. 2015. Innovating for healthy urbanization. Boston, MA: Springer.

  • Akimoto H. 2003. Global air quality and pollution. Science 302:1716–19.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Alberti M, Botsford E, Cohen A. 2001. Quantifying the urban gradient: linking urban planning and ecology. In: Avian ecology and conservation in an urbanizing world. pp 89–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bannari A, Morin D, Bonn F, Huete AR. 1995. A review of vegetation indices. Remote Sens Rev 13:95–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baró F, Gómez-Baggethun E, Haase D. 2017. Ecosystem service bundles along the urban–rural gradient: insights for landscape planning and management. Ecosyst Serv 24:147–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrera F, Reyes-Paecke S, Banzhaf E. 2016. Indicators for green spaces in contrasting urban settings. Ecol Indic 62:212–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batty M. 1994. Urban boundaries and edges. In: Fractal cities. pp 164–98.

  • Bawa KS, Koh LP, Lee TM, Liu J, Ramakrishnan PS, Yu DW, Zhang Y, Raven PH. 2010. China, India, and the environment. Science 327:1457–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess J, Harrison CM, Limb M. 1988. People, parks and the urban green: a study of popular meanings and values for open space in the city. Urban Stud 24:455–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buyantuyev A, Wu J, Gries C. 2007. Estimating vegetation cover in an urban environment based on Landsat ETM + imagery: a case study in Phoenix, USA. Int J Remote Sens 28:269–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan KMA, Balvanera P, Benessaiah K, Chapman M, Díaz S, Gómez-Baggethun E, Gould R, Hannahs N, Jax K, Klain S, Luck GW, Martín-López B, Muraca B, Norton B, Ott K, Pascual U, Satterfield T, Tadaki M, Taggart J, Turner N. 2016. Opinion: Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113:1462–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chauvin JP, Glaeser E, Ma Y, Tobio K. 2017. What is different about urbanization in rich and poor countries? Cities in Brazil, China, India and the United States. J Urban Econ 98:17–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choe S-C. 1995. Urban corridors in Pacific Asia. Glob World Large Cities 33:1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dai E, Wu Z, Du X. 2017. A gradient analysis on urban sprawl and urban landscape pattern between 1985 and 2000 in the Pearl River Delta, China. Front Earth Sci 12:791–807.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deininger K, Binswanger H. 1999. The evolution of the World Bank’s land policy: principles, experience, and future challenges. World Bank Res Obs 14:247–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dominy SWJ, Gilsenan R, Mckenney DW, Allen DJ, Hatton T, Koven A, Cary J, Yemshanov D, Sidders D. 2010. A retrospective and lessons learned from Natural Resources Canada’s Forest 2020 afforestation initiative. For Chron 86:339–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekkel ED, Vries S. 2017. Nearby green space and human health: evaluating accessibility metrics. Landsc Urban Plan 157:214–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Er KBH, Innes JL, Martin K, Klinkenberg B. 2005. Forest loss with urbanization predicts bird extirpations in Vancouver. Biol Conserv 126:410–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esau I, Miles VV, Davy R, Miles MW, Kurchatova A. 2016. Trends in normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) associated with urban development in northern West Siberia. Atmos Chem Phys 16:9563–77.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Foley JA, Defries R, Asner GP, Barford C, Bonan G, Carpenter SR, Chapin FS, Coe MT, Daily GC, Gibbs HK, Helkowski JH, Holloway T, Howard EA, Kucharik CJ, Monfreda C, Patz JA, Prentice IC, Ramankutty N, Snyder PK. 2005. Global consequences of land use. Science 309:570–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. 2012. Global forest land-use change 1990–2005. Rome: Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forest Research. 2010. Benefits of green infrastructure. Report to Defra and CLG. Farnham: Forest Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forman RTT. 2014. Urban ecology: science of cities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galvin BMF, Bleil D. 2004. Relationship among tree canopy quantity, community demographics, and Tree City USA program participation in Maryland, U.S. J Arboric 30:321–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gascon M, Cirach M, Martínez D, Dadvand P, Valentín A, Plasència A, Nieuwenhuijsen MJ. 2016. Normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) as a marker of surrounding greenness in epidemiological studies: the case of Barcelona city. Urban For Urban Green 19:88–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert N. 2016. Green space: a natural high. Nature 531:S56–7.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ginkel H. 2008. Urban future. Nature 456:32–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffith JA, Martinko EA, Whistler JL, Price KP. 2016. Interrelationships among landscapes, NDVI, and stream water quality in the U. S. Central Plains. Ecol Appl 12:1702–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross D. 2005. Monitoring agricultural biomass using NDVI time series. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).

    Google Scholar 

  • Guan Q, Yang L, Pan N, Lin J, Xu C, Wang F, Liu Z. 2018. Greening and browning of the Hexi Corridor in Northwest China: Spatial patterns and responses to climatic variability and anthropogenic drivers. Remote Sens 10:1270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haddad NM, Brudvig LA, Clobert J, Davies KF, Gonzalez A, Holt RD, Lovejoy TE, Sexton JO, Austin MP, Collins CD, Cook WM, Damschen EI, Ewers RM, Foster BL, Jenkins CN, King AJ, Laurance WF, Levey DJ, Margules CR, Melbourne BA, Nicholls AO, Orrock JL, Song D-X, Townshend JR. 2015. Habitat fragmentation and its lasting impact on Earth’s ecosystems. Sci Adv 1:e1500052.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Hamed KH, Ramachandra Rao A. 1998. A modified Mann–Kendall trend test for autocorrelated data. J Hydrol 204:182–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hand KL, Freeman C, Seddon PJ, Recio MR, Stein A, van Heezik Y. 2017. The importance of urban gardens in supporting children’s biophilia. Proc Natl Acad Sci 114:274–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hargis C, Bissonette J, David J. 1998. The behavior of landscape metrics commonly used in the study of habitat fragmentation. Landsc Ecol 13:167–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey RO, Clark WAV. 1965. The nature and economics of urban sprawl. Land Econ 41:1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauser OP, Rand DG, Peysakhovich A, Nowak MA. 2014. Cooperating with the future. Nature 511:220–3.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hermosilla T, Wulder MA, White JC, Coops NC, Hobart GW. 2015. An integrated Landsat time series protocol for change detection and generation of annual gap-free surface reflectance composites. Remote Sens Environ 158:220–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herold M, Scepan J, Clarke KC. 2002. The use of remote sensing and landscape metrics to describe structures and changes in urban land uses. Environ Plan A 34:1443–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicke JA, Asner GP, Randerson JT, Tucker C, Los S, Birdsey R, Jenkins JC, Field C. 2002. Trends in North American net primary productivity derived from satellite observations, 1982–1998. Glob Biogeochem Cycles 16:1018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill MJ, Donald GE. 2003. Estimating spatio-temporal patterns of agricultural productivity in fragmented landscapes using AVHRR NDVI time series. Remote Sens Environ 84:367–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter M. 2011. Using ecological theory to guide urban planting design: an adaptation strategy for climate change. Landsc J 30:173–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby WG. 2000. Loess: a nonparametric, graphical tool for depicting relationships between variables. Elect Stud 19:577–613.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jim CY. 2013. Sustainable urban greening strategies for compact cities in developing and developed economies. Urban Ecosyst 16:741–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jim CY, Chen SS. 2003. Comprehensive greenspace planning based on landscape ecology principles in compact Nanjing city, China. Landsc Urban Plan 65:95–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kabisch N, Strohbach M, Haase D, Kronenberg J. 2016. Urban green space availability in European cities. Ecol Indic 70:586–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katayama N, Amano T, Naoe S, Yamakita T, Komatsu I, Takagawa SI, Sato N, Ueta M, Miyashita T. 2014. Landscape heterogeneity-biodiversity relationship: effect of range size. PLoS ONE 9:e93359.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kong F, Nakagoshi N. 2006. Spatial-temporal gradient analysis of urban green spaces in Jinan, China. Landsc Urban Plan 78:147–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Konijnendijk CC, Nilsson K, Randrup TB, Schipperijn J. 2013. Urban forests and trees. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepczyk CA, Aronson MFJ, Evans KL, Goddard MA, Lerman SB, Macivor JS. 2017. Biodiversity in the city: fundamental questions for understanding the ecology of urban green spaces for biodiversity conservation. Bioscience 67:799–807.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li F, Wang R, Paulussen J, Liu X. 2005. Comprehensive concept planning of urban greening based on ecological principles: a case study in Beijing, China. Landsc Urban Plan 72:325–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu X, Li X, Chen Y, Tan Z, Li S, Ai B. 2010. A new landscape index for quantifying urban expansion using multi-temporal remotely sensed data. Landsc Ecol 25:671–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu Y, Wang Y, Peng J, Du Y, Liu X, Li S, Zhang D. 2015. Correlations between urbanization and vegetation degradation across the world’s metropolises using DMSP/OLS nighttime light data. Remote Sens 7:2067–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu Y, Coops NC, Hermosilla T. 2016. Regional assessment of pan-Pacific urban environments over 25 years using annual gap free Landsat data. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 50:198–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu Y, Coops NC, Hermosilla T. 2017. Estimating urban vegetation fraction across 25 cities in pan-Pacific using Landsat time series data. ISPRS J Photogramm Remote Sens 126:11–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacGarigal K. 2015. Fragstats Help. https://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fra-gstats/. Accessed 17 Nov 2016.

  • Madsen LM. 2002. The Danish afforestation programme and spatial planning: new challenges. Landsc Urban Plan 58:241–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann HB. 1945. Nonparametric tests against trend. J Econ Soc 13:245–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcotullio PJ, Lee YF. 2003. Urban environmental transitions and urban transportation systems. Int Dev Plan Rev 25:325–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin J-L, Maris V, Simberloff DS. 2016. The need to respect nature and its limits challenges society and conservation science. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113:6105–12.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McKinney ML. 2002. Urbanization, biodiversity, and conservation. Bioscience 52:883–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • McPherson EG, Nowak D, Heisler G, Grimmpnd S, Souch C, Grant R, Rowntree R. 1997. Quantifying urban forest structure, function, and value: the Chicago urban forest project. Urban Ecosyst 1:49–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muratet A, Lorrillière R, Clergeau P, Fontaine C. 2013. Evaluation of landscape connectivity at community level using satellite-derived NDVI. Landsc Ecol 28:95–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen AB, Hedblom M, Olafsson AS, Wiström B. 2016. Spatial configurations of urban forest in different landscape and socio-political contexts: identifying patterns for green infrastructure planning. Urban Ecosyst 20:379–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nitoslawski SA, Duinker PN, Bush PG. 2016. A review of drivers of tree diversity in suburban areas: research needs for North American cities. Environ Rev 24:471–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowak DJ, Hirabayashi S, Bodine A, Greenfield E. 2014. Tree and forest effects on air quality and human health in the United States. Environ Pollut 193:119–29.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill RV, Krummel JR, Gardner RH, Sugihara G, Jackson B, DeAngelis DL, Milne BT, Turner MG, Zygmunt B, Christensen SW, Dale VH, Graham RL. 1988. Indices of landscape pattern. Landsc Ecol 1:153–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Özgüner H. 2011. Cultural differences in attitudes towards urban parks and green spaces. Landsc Res 36:599–620.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng S-S, Piao S, Zeng Z, Ciais P, Zhou L, Li LZX, Myneni RB, Yin Y, Zeng H. 2014. Afforestation in China cools local land surface temperature. Proc Natl Acad Sci 111:2915–19.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Prugh LR, Hodges KE, Sinclair ARE, Brashares JS. 2008. Effect of habitat area and isolation on fragmented animal populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105:20770–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reis JP, Silva EA, Pinho P. 2015. Spatial metrics to study urban patterns in growing and shrinking cities. Urban Geogr 3638:246–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riitters KH, O’Neill RV, Hunsaker CT, Wickham JD, Yankee DH, Timmins SP, Jones KB, Jackson BL. 1995. A factor analysis of landscape pattern and structure metrics. Landsc Ecol 10:23–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ripplinger J, Collins SL, York AM, Franklin J. 2017. Boom-bust economics and vegetation dynamics in a desert city: How strong is the link? Ecosphere 8:e01826.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum KL, Lindsay JM. 2001. An overview of national forest funds: current approaches and future opportunities. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Legal Paper Online No. 15.

  • Santander Meteorology Group. 2012. Package ‘fume’. http://www2.uaem.mx/r-mirror/web/packages/fume/. Accessed 3 Jun 2017.

  • Schmidt KJ, Poppendieck H-H, Jensen K. 2014. Effects of urban structure on plant species richness in a large European city. Urban Ecosyst 17:427–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider A, Friedl MA, Potere D. 2009. A new map of global urban extent from MODIS satellite data. Environ Res Lett 4:044003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen PK. 1968. Estimates of the regression coefficient based on Kendall’s Tau. J Am Stat Assoc 63:1379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seress G, Lipovits Á, Bókony V, Czúni L. 2014. Quantifying the urban gradient: a practical method for broad measurements. Landsc Urban Plan 131:42–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrestha MK, York AM, Boone CG, Zhang S. 2012. Land fragmentation due to rapid urbanization in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area: analyzing the spatiotemporal patterns and drivers. Appl Geogr 32:522–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slayback DA, Pinzon JE, Los SO, Tucker CJ. 2003. Northern hemisphere photosynthetic trends 1982–1999. Glob Change Biol 9:1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steenberg JWN. 2018. People or place? An exploration of social and ecological drivers of urban forest species composition. Urban Ecosyst 21:887–901.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan KW. 2006. A greenway network for singapore. Landsc Urban Plan 76:45–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor L, Hochuli DF. 2017. Defining greenspace: multiple uses across multiple disciplines. Landsc Urban Plan 158:25–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Theil H. 1950. A rank-invariant method of linear and polynomial regression analysis, i, ii, iii. Nederl. Akad. Wetensch., Proc. 53:386–92, 521–25, 1397–412.

  • Tolessa T, Senbeta F, Kidane M. 2016. Landscape composition and configuration in the central highlands of Ethiopia. Ecol Evol 6:7409–21.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Torres A, Jaeger JAG, Alonso JC. 2016. Multi-scale mismatches between urban sprawl and landscape fragmentation create windows of opportunity for conservation development. Landsc Ecol 31:2291–2305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tratalos J, Fuller RA, Warren PH, Davies RG, Gaston KJ. 2007. Urban form, biodiversity potential and ecosystem services. Landsc Urban Plan 83:308–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner T. 1992. Open space planning in London: from standard per 1000 to green strategy. Town Plan Rev 63:365–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN-Habitat and UNESCAP. 2015. The State of Asian and Pacific Cities 2015, urban transformations shifting from quantity to quality. https://www.unescap.org/sit-es/default/files/The%20State%20of%20Asian%20and%20Pacific%20Cities%202015.pdf. Accessed 29 May 2017.

  • United Nations. 2016. The World’s cities in 2016: data booklet. http://www.u-n.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/urbanization/the_worlds_cities_in_2016_data_booklet.pdf. Accessed 29 May 2017.

  • United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. 2014. World Urbanization prospects: the 2014 revision, highlights. https://esa.un.org/un-pd/wup/publications/files/wup2014-highlights.pdf. Accessed 29 May 2017.

  • Vadell E, de-Miguel S, Pemán J. 2016. Large-scale reforestation and afforestation policy in Spain: a historical review of its underlying ecological, socioeconomic and political dynamics. Land Use Policy 55:37–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verbyla D. 2008. The greening and browning of Alaska based on 1982–2003 satellite data. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 17:547–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Wachsmuth D, Aldana Cohen D, Angelo H. 2016. Expand the frontiers of urban sustainability. Nature 536:391–3.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wang X, Hamann A, Cumming SG. 2012. Measuring boreal forest fragmentation after fire: which configuration metrics are best? Ecol Indic 13:189–95.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wickham H, Chang W. 2016. Create elegant data visualisations using the grammar of graphics. https://cloud.r-project.org/web/packages/ggplot2/ggplot2.pdf. Accessed 19 Jun 2017.

  • World Bank. 1998. China—national afforestation. China—Natl Afforestation. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/673541474586969252/China-National-Afforestatio. Accessed 13 Jun 2017.

  • World Health Organization (WHO). 2016. Urban green spaces and health: a review of the evidence. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Shen W, Sun W, Tueller PT. 2002. Empirical patterns of the effects of changing scale on landscape metrics. Landsc Ecol 17:761–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu Q, Hu D, Wang R, Li H, He Y, Wang M, Wang B. 2006. A GIS-based moving window analysis of landscape pattern in the Beijing metropolitan area, China. Int J Sustain Dev World Ecol 13:419–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang J, Huang C, Zhang Z, Wang L. 2014. The temporal trend of urban green coverage in major Chinese cities between 1990 and 2010. Urban For Urban Green 13:19–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang XJ. 2013. China’s rapid urbanization. Science 342:310–11.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yokohari M, Takeuchi K, Watanabe T, Yokota S. 2000. Beyond greenbelts and zoning: a new planning concept for the environment of Asian mega-cities. Landsc Urban Plan 47:159–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • You X, Meng J, Zhang M, Dong T. 2013. Remote sensing based detection of crop phenology for agricultural zones in China using a new threshold method. Remote Sens 5:3190–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zanchi G, Thiel D, Green T, Lindner M. 2007. Forest area change and afforestation in Europe: critical analysis of available data and the relevance for international environmental policies. Joensuu: European Forest Institute (EFI). pp 4–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao S, Liu S, Zhou D. 2016. Prevalent vegetation growth enhancement in urban environment. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113:6313–18.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao S, Zhou D, Zhu C, Sun Y, Wu W, Liu S. 2015. Spatial and temporal dimensions of urban expansion in China. Environ Sci Technol 49:9600–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou D, Zhang L, Hao L, Sun G, Liu Y, Zhu C. 2016. Spatiotemporal trends of urban heat island effect along the urban development intensity gradient in China. Sci Total Env 544:617–26.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou W, Schwarz K, Cadenasso ML. 2010. Mapping urban landscape heterogeneity: agreement between visual interpretation and digital classification approaches. Landsc Ecol 25:53–67.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ziter C. 2016. The biodiversity–ecosystem service relationship in urban areas: a quantitative review. Oikos 125:761–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zurita G, Pe’er G, Bellocq MI, Hansbauer MM. 2012. Edge effects and their influence on habitat suitability calculations: a continuous approach applied to birds of the Atlantic forest. J Appl Ecol 49:503–12.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We deeply appreciate Karly J. Harker, Tanya L. Gallagher, David A.R. Williams, and Kevin F. Yang at the UBC Landscape Ecology Laboratory for assistance with English language and grammar editing of the manuscript. This work was supported by a scholarship from China Scholarship Council (CSC), NSERC-DG to SEG (Grant No. 2014-05012, SG), and Special Fund for Forest Scientific Research in the Public Welfare (Grant No. 201404301).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jiali Jin.

Additional information

Author’s contribution

JJ, SEG, YL, and NCC conceived the study and contributed new methods; JJ and YL performed research and undertook data processing and data analysis; JJ wrote the paper with contributions from the other authors; SEG contributed to data analysis and crafting of the paper; CW supported in writing the results and discussion.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jin, J., Gergel, S.E., Lu, Y. et al. Asian Cities are Greening While Some North American Cities are Browning: Long-Term Greenspace Patterns in 16 Cities of the Pan-Pacific Region. Ecosystems 23, 383–399 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-019-00409-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-019-00409-2

Keywords

Navigation