ROOTED IN RESEARCH
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES IN URBAN AND SUBURBAN LANDSCAPES
Edited for “Rooted in Research” by Casey Reynolds, PhD
If someone were to ask what it costs to build an athletic field, park, landscape, or other greenspace it would be relatively easy to determine, or at least accurately estimate, those costs. However, determining the cost of an item often is quite different than determining its value. If someone were to ask, what is the value of a landscape, athletic field, or other urban greenspace, an accurate answer to that question is often much trickier to determine. Real estate agents may tell you that a nice landscape or greenspace can add 10 to 12 percent to a home’s resale value, but is that really the only value that greenspaces bring to urban and suburban communities? Researchers in the world of Ecosystem Services would tell you no, there is much more value to urban greenspaces than simply increased real estate prices.
A relatively new area of research called Ecosystem Services (ES) is bringing to light the value of natural capital in urban and suburban environments. Ecosystem Services is defined as the many and varied benefits that humans freely gain from the natural environment and properly functioning ecosystems. Te Millennium Ecosystem Assessment group (MEA), which formed in 2001, grouped ecosystem services into four broad categories: supporting services, provisioning services, regulating services, and cultural services. Supporting services include processes such as nutrient recycling and soil formation that make it possible for other ES services to function. Provisioning Services support the production of food and raw materials, while Regulating Services include carbon sequestration, climate regulation, and water and air purification. Cultural Services include recreational experiences, cultural, spiritual, or historical experiences, and therapeutic uses, as well as education and science. One example that illustrates the concept of Ecosystem Services can be found in Figure 1 which uses a heat map to show areas of high and low performance of an area in regard to Water Quantity Control.
106 Figure 1. Garang River Watershed Water Quantity Control 2011
Semarang Performance
Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community
Study Area Boundary 0-0.1 0.1-0.2 0.2-0.3 0.3-0.4 0.4-0.5 0.5-0.6 0.6-0.7 0.7-0.8 0.8-0.9 0.9-1.0
Courtesy of Michelle Kenna Halsey, the EcoMetrix Solutions Group
TPI Turf News November/December 2018
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124
