Preview

GEOGRAPHY, ENVIRONMENT, SUSTAINABILITY

Advanced search

Green infrastructure indicators for urban planning: applying the integrated approach for Russian largest cities

https://doi.org/10.24057/2071-9388-2019-123

Full Text:

Abstract

Modern approaches to urban planning assume the dualistic nature of urban green infrastructure (GI). On the one hand, green infrastructure is as an integrated network of natural and semi-natural areas, featuring a delivery of various benefits to humans. On the other hand, GI is multifunctional and provides the residents by complex of ecosystem services to be user-oriented. Most official reports and programs use common indicators that do not characterize distribution, dynamics or state of GI. In our research, we assessed the quality of GI in 15 largest Russian cities by using an integrated assessment of 13 indicators that make up three groups: the ones 1) characterizing general GI availability; 2) supporting a comfortable urban environment («recreational indicators»); and 3) forming a stable ecosystem («integrity indicators»). The cities were ranked by values of every indicator from 1 to 15 and then the results were summed and normalized to get a total mark (max. 100). To assess the development of GI elements of each group, we also ranked cities separately by values of different groups indicators. Thus, our study revealed that satisfactory marks for both recreational and integrity indicators have Ufa, Nizhny Novgorod, Kazan, Ekaterinburg, Perm and Voronezh. In contrast, Saint Petersburg, being a densely built-up city in an auspicious natural zone, got the worst result. According to the final assessment, the quality of green infrastructure in Krasnoyarsk, a large industrial city, and four cities from the steppe zone (Rostov-on-Don, Samara, Omsk, Novosibirsk) is also unsatisfactory. Our method does not cover all GI aspects (like vegetation health) and since it is based solely on remote sensing data and statistics data, there is definitely a room for improvement. However, this method, while being relatively quick and simple to accomplish, allows to assess not only general availability of GI, but its quality and distribution as well, which are essential for urban spatial planning.

About the Authors

Oxana A. Klimanova
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation
Leninskiye Gory 1, Moscow, 119991


Olga I. Illarionova
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation
Leninskiye Gory 1, Moscow, 119991


References

1. Ahern J. (2013). Urban landscape sustainability and resilience: The promise and challenges of integrating ecology with urban planning and design. Landscape Ecology, 28(6), 1203-1212. DOI: 10.1007%2Fs10980-012-9799-z.

2. Ahmad A. (2014). Temporal changes in urban green space based on normalized difference vegetation index. Applied Mathematical Sciences, 8(55), 2743-2751. DOI: 10.12988/ams.2014.432230.

3. Alberti M. (2008). Advances in urban ecology. Integrating humans and ecological processes in urban ecosystems. New York: Springer.

4. Andersson E. and Bodin Ö. (2008). Practical tool for landscape planning? An empirical investigation of network based models of habitat fragmentation. Ecography, 32(1), 123-132. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2008.05435.x.

5. Annerstedt van den Bosch M., Mudu P, Uscila V., Barrdahl M., Kulinkina A., Staatsen B., Swart W., Kruize H., Zurlyte I. and Egorov A.I. (2016). Development of an urban green space indicator and the public health rationale. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 44, 159-167. DOI: 10.1177/1403494815615444.

6. Austin G. (2014). Green Infrastructure for landscape planning: Integrating human and natural systems. New York: Routledge Press.

7. Bell S. and Morse S. (2008). Sustainability indicators: Measuring the immeasurable? Earthscan, London: Sterling.

8. Benedict M.A. and McMahon E.T. (2012). Green infrastructure: Linking landscapes and communities. Chicago: Island Press.

9. Chen X. (2002). Relationships among phenological growing season, time–integrated normalized difference vegetation index and climate forcing in the temperate region of Eastern China. International Journal of Climatology: A Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, 22 (14), 1781-1792. DOI: 10.1002/joc.823.

10. Chen B. and Wang R. (2014). Integrated ecological indicators for sustainable urban ecosystem evaluation and management. Ecological Indicators, 47, 1-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.09.020.

11. Cheng L., Li F. and Deng H.F. (2011). Dynamic of land use and its ecosystem services in China’s megacities. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 31(20), 6194-6203.

12. Dobbs R. (2011). Urban world: mapping the economic power of cities. New York: McKinsley Global Institute.

13. Ekkel E.D. and de Vries S. (2017). Nearby green space and human health: evaluating accessibility metrics. Landscape and Urban Planning, 157, 214-220. DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.06.008.

14. Environmental European Agency (EEA) (2017). Indicators for urban green infrastructure. [online] Environmental European Agency. Available at: www.eea.europa.eu/themes/sustainability-transitions/urban-environment/urban-green-infrastructure/indicators_for_urban-greeninfrastructure [Accessed 1 Sep. 2019].

15. Fang H. (2014). Leaf area index models. Reference Module in Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences, 1-11.

16. Forman R. (2015). Urban ecology: science of cities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

17. Gomez F., Jabaloyes J., Montero L., De Vicente V. and Valcuende M. (2011). Green areas, the most significant indicator of the sustainability of cities: research on their utility for urban planning. Urban Planning Development, 311, 311-328. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000060.

18. Gill S.E., Handley J.F., Ennos A.R. and Pauleit S. (2007). Adapting cities to climate change: the role of the green infrastructure. Built Environment, 33(1), 115-133. DOI: 10.2148/benv.33.1.115.

19. Green Infrastructure and Territorial Cohesion. (2011). Technical Report EEA. [online]. Available at: www.eea.europa.eu/publications/greeninfrastructure-and-territorial-cohesion. [Accessed 1 Sep. 2019].

20. Handley J. (2003). Providing accessible natural green space in towns and cities: a practical guide to assessing the resource and implementing local standards for provision. London: Countryside Council for Wales.

21. Hansen R. (2017). Urban green infrastructure planning: a guide for practitioners. Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen.

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

23. Hansen M.C. (2013). High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science, 342, 850-853. DOI: 10.1126/science.1244693.

24. Huang C. (2017). Green spaces as an indicator of urban health: evaluating its changes in 28 mega-cities. Remote Sensing, 9, 12. DOI: 2072- 4292/9/12/1266.

25. Huang H., Chen Y., Clinton N., Wang J., Wang X., Liu C., Gong P., Yang J., Bai Y., Zheng Y. and Zhu Z. (2017). Mapping major land cover dynamics in Beijing using all Landsat images in Google Earth Engine. Remote Sensing of Environment, 202, 166-176. DOI: 10.1016/j.rse.2017.02.021.

26. Illarionova O. (2018). Transformation of green infrastructure in large cities of South America. Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta, 5(3), 23-29 (in Russian). Available at: www.vestnik5.geogr.msu.ru/jour/article/view/414 [Accessed 1 Sep. 2019].

27. Institute of Urban Economics (2015). Ranking of Russian Central Cities. [online] Available at: http://www.urbaneconomics.ru/centrobshchestvennyh-svyazey/news/reyting-stolichnyh-gorodov-rossii-ot-fonda-institut-ekonomiki (in Russian) [Accessed 1 Sep. 2019].

28. Kabisch N. and Haase D. (2013). Green spaces of European cities revisited for 1990–2006. Landscape and Urban Planning, 110, 113-122. DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.10.017.

29. Klimanova O. (2018). Impacts of urbanization on green infrastructure ecosystem services: the case study of post-soviet Moscow. Belgeo. Revue belge de géographie, 4. Available at: www.journals.openedition.org/belgeo/30889 [Accessed 1 Sep. 2019]. DOI: 10.4000/belgeo.30889.

30. Kötter T. and Friesecke F. (2009). Developing urban indicators for managing mega cities. Land governance in support of the MDGs: Responding to New Challenges, 4-21.

31. Lafortezza R., Davies C., Sanesi G. and Konijnendijk C.C. (2013). Green infrastructure as a tool to support spatial planning in European urban regions. iForest-Biogeosciences and Forestry, 6, 102-108. DOI: 10.3832/ifor0723-006.

32. Li X., Gong, P. and Liang L. (2015). A 30-Year (1984–2013) record of annual urban dynamics of Beijing city derived from Landsat data. Remote Sensing of Environment, 166, 78-90. DOI: 10.1016/j.rse.2015.06.007.

33. Lindley S. (2015). Green infrastructure for climate adaptation in African cities. Urban vulnerability and climate change in Africa. Springer International Publishing.

34. Ma J. (2016). Green infrastructure and urban liveability: Measuring accessibility and equity. Doctoral dissertation. [online]. Available at: www. researchspace.auckland.ac.nz/handle/2292/31220 [Accessed 1 Sep. 2019].

35. McGarigal K. (2014). FRAGSTATS Help. Documentation for FRAGSTATS, 4. Mell I. (2009). Can green infrastructure promote urban sustainability? Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers – Engineering Sustainability, 162(1), 23-34. DOI: 10.1680/ensu.2009.162.1.23.

36. Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of the People’s Republic of China. MOHURD. (2010). Eco-City Implementation Guideline for Green Building. Beijing.

37. Naumann S. (2011). Design, Implementation and Cost Elements of Green Infrastructure Projects. Final report of European Commission. [online]. Available at: www.ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/biodiversity/pdf/GI_DICE_FinalReport.pdf. [Accessed 1 Sep. 2019].

38. Niemeijer D. and de Groot R.S. (2008). A conceptual framework for selecting environmental indicator sets. Ecological Indicators, 8, 14-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2006.11.012.

39. Pakzad P. and Osmond P. (2016). Developing a sustainability indicator set for measuring green infrastructure performance. Procedia, Social and Behavioral Sciences, 216, 68-79. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.12.009

40. Pauleit S. (2003). Promoting the natural green structure of towns and cities: English nature’s accessible natural greenspace standards model. Built Environment, 29(2), 157-170. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2343.1121. Russian Federal State Statistics Service.

41. Rosstat. (2016). Environment. [online]. Available at: www.gks.ru/wps/wcm/connect/rosstat_main/rosstat/ru/statistics/environment/ [Accessed 1 Sep. 2019].

42. Sanitary Regulations and Standards (2003). SANPIN 2.2.1/2.1.1.1200-03 Sanitary Protection Zones and Sanitary Classification of Industrial, Residential and Other Objects. Moscow: Standartinform.

43. Shavnin S.A. (2011). Spatial structure of urban forest ecosystems as an indicator of their sustainability. Izvestiya OGAU, 29(1), 12-16.

44. Sustainable Development Goals (2015). Transforming Our World. General Assembly. [online] Available at: www.unfpa.org/resources/ transforming-our-world-2030-agenda-sustainable-development. [Accessed 1 Sep. 2019].

45. Werner P. (2011). The ecology of urban areas and their functions for species diversity. Landscape and Ecological Engineering, 7(2), 231-240. DOI: 10.1007/s11355-011-0153-4.

46. World Health Organization (WHO) (2016). Urban Green Spaces and Health: A Review of Evidence; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland. [online] Available at: www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/environment-and-health/urban-health/publications/2016/urban-greenspaces-and-health-a-review-of-evidence-2016 [Accessed 1 Sep. 2019].

47. Yang J., Huang C., Zhang Z. and Wang L. (2014). The temporal trend of urban green coverage in major Chinese cities between 1990 and 2010. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 13(1), 19-27. DOI: 10.1016/j.ufug.2013.10.002.

48. Zeng C., Deng X., Xu Sh., Wang Y. and Cui J. (2016). An integrated approach for assessing the urban ecosystem health of megacities in China. Cities, 53, 110-119. DOI: 0.1016/j.cities.2016.01.010.


For citation:


Klimanova O.A., Illarionova O.I. Green infrastructure indicators for urban planning: applying the integrated approach for Russian largest cities. GEOGRAPHY, ENVIRONMENT, SUSTAINABILITY. 2020;13(1):251-259. https://doi.org/10.24057/2071-9388-2019-123

Views: 283


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2071-9388 (Print)
ISSN 2542-1565 (Online)