Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Ecosystem services in managing residential landscapes: priorities, value dimensions, and cross-regional patterns

  • Published:
Urban Ecosystems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although ecosystem services have been intensively examined in certain domains (e.g., forests and wetlands), little research has assessed ecosystem services for the most dominant landscape type in urban ecosystems—namely, residential yards. In this paper, we report findings of a cross-site survey of homeowners in six U.S. cities to 1) examine how residents subjectively value various ecosystem services, 2) explore distinctive dimensions of those values, and 3) test the urban homogenization hypothesis. This hypothesis posits that urbanization leads to similarities in the social-ecological dynamics across cities in diverse biomes. By extension, the thesis suggests that residents’ ecosystem service priorities for residential landscapes will be similar regardless of whether residents live in the humid East or the arid West, or the warm South or the cold North. Results underscored that cultural services were of utmost importance, particularly anthropocentric values including aesthetics, low-maintenance, and personal enjoyment. Using factor analyses, distinctive dimensions of residents’ values were found to partially align with the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment’s categories (provisioning, regulating, supporting, and cultural). Finally, residents’ ecosystem service priorities exhibited significant homogenization across regions. In particular, the traditional lawn aesthetic (neat, green, weed-free yards) was similarly important across residents of diverse U.S. cities. Only a few exceptions were found across different environmental and social contexts; for example, cooling effects were more important in the warm South, where residents also valued aesthetics more than those in the North, where low-maintenance yards were a greater priority.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. See also the Claritas web site at http://www.claritas.com/.

  2. All cities had at least 20 research participants, yet some data from Los Angeles was eliminated from the analysis due to errors. This explains the relatively low sample size for LA.

References

  • Bormann FH, Balmori D, Geballe GT (2001) Redesigning the American lawn: a search for environmental harmony. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT

    Google Scholar 

  • Cadenasso ML, Pickett ST, Schwarz K (2007) Spatial heterogeneity in urban ecosystems: reconceptualizing land cover and a framework for classification. Front Ecol Environ 5:80–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter SR et al (2009) Science for managing ecosystem services: beyond the millennium ecosystem assessment. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106:1305–1312

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Chan K, Satterfield T, Goldstein J (2012) Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values. Ecol Econ 74:8–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chazdon RL (2008) Beyond deforestation: restoring forests and ecosystem services on degraded lands. Science 320:1458–1460

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cook EM, Hall SJ, Larson KL (2012) Residential landscapes as social-ecological systems: a synthesis of multi-scalar interactions between people and their home environment. Urban Ecosyst 15:19–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R, Wilson MA, Troy A, Voinov A, Liu S, D’Agostino J (2006) The value of New Jersey’s ecosystem services and natural capital. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

  • Dahmus ME, Nelson KC (2014a) Nature discourses in the residential yard in Minnesota. Landsc Urban Plan 125:183–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahmus ME, Nelson KC (2014b) Yard stories: examining residents’ conceptions of their yards as part of the urban ecosystem in Minnesota. Urban Ecosyst 17:173–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davenport MA, Anderson DH (2005) Getting from sense of place to place-based management: an interpretive investigation of place meanings and perceptions of landscape change. Soc Nat Resour 18:625–641

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Groot R, Stuip M, Finlayson M, Davidson N (2006) Valuing wetlands: guidance for valuing the benefits derived from wetland ecosystem services. Ramsar Technical Report No. 3, Convention on Biological Diversity Technical Series No. 27, Gland, Switzerland. http://www.ramsar.org/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/lib/lib_rtr03.pdf

  • De Groot RS, Alkemade R, Braat L, Hein L, Willemen L (2010) Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol Complex 7:260–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farber SC, Costanza R, Wilson MA (2002) Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 41:375–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frisk E, Larson KL (2011) Educating for sustainability: competencies & practices for transformative action. J Sustain Educ 2:1–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimm NB, Grove JM, Pickett STA, Redman CL (2000) Integrated approaches to long-term studies of urban ecological systems. Bioscience 50:571–584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groffman PM et al (2014) Ecological homogenization of urban USA. Front Ecol Environ 12:74–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grove JM, Locke DH, O’Neil-Dunne JP (2014) An ecology of prestige in New York city: examining the relationships among population density, socio-economic status, group identity, and residential canopy cover. Environ Manag 54:402–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heberlein TA (2012) Navigating environmental attitudes. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson KT (1985) Crabgrass frontier: the suburbanization of the United States. Oxford University Press, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellner D (2002) Theorizing globalization. Sociol Theory 20:285–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim JO, Mueller CW (1978) Introduction to factor analysis: what it is and how to do it. SAGE Publications Inc., Thousands Oak, California

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar M, Kumar P (2008) Valuation of the ecosystem services: a psycho-cultural perspective. Ecol Econ 64:808–819

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen L, Harlan SL (2006) Desert dreamscapes: residential landscape preference and behavior. Landsc Urban Plan 78:85–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson KL (2010) An integrated theoretical approach to understanding the sociocultural basis of multidimensional environmental attitudes. Soc Nat Resour 23:898–907

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson KL, Brumand J (2014) Paradoxes in landscape management and water conservation: examining neighborhood norms and institutional forces. Cities Environ (CATE) 7:6

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson KL, Casagrande D, Harlan SL, Yabiku ST (2009) Residents’ yard choices and rationales in a desert city: social priorities, ecological impacts, and decision tradeoffs. Environ Manag 44:921–937

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahan B, Polasky S, Adams R (2000) Valuing urban wetlands: a property price approach land economics. Land Econ 76:100–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin CA, Peterson KA, Stabler LB (2003) Residential landscaping in phoenix, Arizona, US: practices and preferences relative to covenants, codes, and restrictions. J Arboric 9:9–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Martini NF, Nelson KC, Hobbie SE, Baker LA (2015) Why “feed the lawn”? Exploring the influences on residential turf grass fertilization in the Minneapolis − Saint Paul metropolitan area. Environ Behav 47(2):158–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martín-López B et al (2012) Uncovering ecosystem service bundles through social preferences. PLoS ONE 7, e38970

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie-Mohr D, Smith W (1999) Fostering sustainable behavior: an introduction to community-based social marketing. New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island B.C., Canada

    Google Scholar 

  • Milesi C, Running SW, Elvidge CD, Dietz JB, Tuttle BT, Nemani RR (2005) Mapping and modeling the biochemical cycling of turf grasses in the United States. Environ Manag 36:426–438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Assessment Board (2005) Millennium ecosystem assessment. New Island Press, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Nassauer JI (1988) The aesthetics of horticulture: neatness as a form of care. HortSci 23(6):973–977

    Google Scholar 

  • Nassauer JI (1995) Messy ecosystems, orderly frames. Landsc J 14(2):161–170

    Google Scholar 

  • Nassauer JI, Wang Z, Dayrell E (2009) What will the neighbors think? Cultural norms and ecological design. Landsc Urban Plan 92:282–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson E et al (2009) Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Front Ecol Environ 7:4–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielson L, Smith CL (2005) Influences on residential yard care and water quality: Tualatin watershed, Oregon. J Am Water Resour Assoc 41:93–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pataki DE et al (2011) Coupling biogeochemical cycles in urban environments: ecosystem services, green solutions, and misconceptions. Front Ecol Environ 9:27–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polsky C et al (2014) Assessing the homogenization of urban land management with an application to US residential lawn care. Proc Natl Acad Sci 111:4432–4437

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Robbins P (2007) Lawn people: how grasses, weeds and chemicals make us who we are. Tempe University Press, Philadelphia, PA

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbins P, Sharp JT (2003) Producing and consuming chemicals: the moral economy of the American lawn. Econ Geogr 79:425 (414)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robins K, Webster F (1999) Times of the technoculture. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultz PW, Zelezny L (1999) Values as predictors of environmental attitudes: evidence for consistency across 14 countries. J Environ Psychol 19:255–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz PW, Nolan JM, Cialdini RB, Goldstein NJ, Griskevicius V (2007) The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychol Sci 18(5):429–434

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith WR (1956) Product differentation and market segmentaton as alternative marketing strateiges. J Mark 21(1):3–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steele M et al (2014) Convergent surface water distributions in US cities. Ecosystems 17:685–697

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg T (2006) American green: the obsessive quest for the perfect lawn. W.W. Norton and Company, Inc., New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern PC, Dietz T (1994) The value basis of environmental concern. J Soc Issues 50:65–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Troy AR (2008) Geodemographic segmentation. In: Shenkar S, Xiong H (eds) Encyclopedia of geographical information science. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag, pp 347–355

  • Vihervaara P, Rönkä M, Walls M (2010) Trends in ecosystem service research: early steps and current drivers. Ambio 39:314–324

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace KJ (2007) Classification of ecosystem services: problems and solutions. Biol Conserv 139:235–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wedel M, Kamakura W (2000) Market segmentation: conceptual and methodological foundations. International series in quantitative marketing, 2nd edn. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Newell, Massachusetts

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Williams DR, Stewart SI (1998) Sense of place: an elusive concept that is finding a home in ecosystem management. J For 96:18–23

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the MacroSystems Biology Program in the Emerging Frontiers Division of the Biological Sciences Directorate at the National Science Foundation (NSF) under grants EF-1065548, 1065737, 1065740, 1065741, 1065772, 1065785, 1065831, 121238320. The work arose from research funded by grants from the NSF Long-Term Ecological Research Program supporting work in Baltimore (DEB-0423476), Phoenix (BCS-1026865), Plum Island (Boston) (OCE-1058747), Cedar Creek (Minneapolis–St Paul) (DEB-0620652), and Florida Coastal Everglades (Miami) (DBI-0620409). This research was also supported by the NSF-funded Decision Center for a Desert City II: Urban Climate Adaptation (SES-0951366). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NSF.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning, School of Sustainability, Arizona State University, Mail Code 5302, Tempe, AZ, 85287-5302, USA

    K. L. Larson

  2. Department of Forest Resources and Department of Fisheries, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology, University of Minnesota, 115 Green Hall, 1530 Cleveland Ave. N, St. Paul, MN, 55108, USA

    K. C. Nelson

  3. Herberger Institute for Design and the Arts, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, 85287, USA

    S. R. Samples

  4. School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, 427 E Tyler Mall, Tempe, AZ, 85287, USA

    S. J. Hall & J. Learned

  5. Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Millbrook, NY, 12545, USA

    N. Bettez & P. M. Groffman

  6. Department of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN, 55108, USA

    J. Cavender-Bares, M. Grove & S. E. Hobbie

  7. Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Suite 350, 5523 Research Park Drive, Baltimore, MD, 21228, USA

    J. Cavender-Bares, M. Grove & S. E. Hobbie

  8. Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Box 90328, Durham, NC, 27708, USA

    J. B. Heffernan

  9. Department of Environmental Science and Management, Portland State University, PO Box 751, Portland, OR, 97207, USA

    J. L. Morse

  10. The Ecosystems Center, Marine Biological Laboratory, 7 MBL St, Woods Hole, MA, 02543, USA

    C. Neill

  11. Department of Anthropology, Dartmouth University, HB 6047 Silsby Hall, Hanover, NH, 03755, USA

    L. A. Ogden

  12. Spatial Analysis Laboratory, Rubenstein School of Environment, & Natural Resources, 205 George D. Aiken Center, Burlington, VT, 05405-0088, USA

    J. O’Neil-Dunne

  13. Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Delaware, 531 S. College Ave, 152 Townsend Hall, Newark, DE, 19716, USA

    D. E. Pataki & T. L. E. Trammell

  14. Florida Center for Environmental Studies, Florida Atlantic University, FL 3200 College Ave, Building DW Davie, Boca Raton, FL, 33314, USA

    C. Polsky

  15. Department of Geography, Indiana University, Student Building 120, 701 E. Kirkwood Ave, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA

    R. Roy Chowdhury

  16. Department of Crop and Soil Environmental Science, Virginia Tech, Smyth Hall, 185 Ag-Quad Ln #330, Blacksburg, VA, 24061, USA

    M. Steele

Authors
  1. K. L. Larson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. C. Nelson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. R. Samples
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. J. Hall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. N. Bettez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. J. Cavender-Bares
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. P. M. Groffman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. M. Grove
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. J. B. Heffernan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. S. E. Hobbie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. J. Learned
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. J. L. Morse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. C. Neill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. L. A. Ogden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. J. O’Neil-Dunne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. D. E. Pataki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. C. Polsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. R. Roy Chowdhury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. M. Steele
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. T. L. E. Trammell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. L. Larson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Larson, K.L., Nelson, K.C., Samples, S.R. et al. Ecosystem services in managing residential landscapes: priorities, value dimensions, and cross-regional patterns. Urban Ecosyst 19, 95–113 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-015-0477-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-015-0477-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation