Background: Ecosystem services and disservices research from urban ecological infrastructure currently remain under-explored areas in global literature. Community gardens comprise an even rarer part of this research with few previous studies, as emphasis in research is placed on the ‘big and tangible’ urban green spaces like urban forests and parks, and more recently allotment gardens. Community gardens, however, are an important ecological infrastructure as they provide a range of ecosystem services to urban residents, and act as key spaces for meeting social and environmental objectives in urban development plans and policies. Considering cities are the predominant domain of human habitation, it is important that more research goes into better identifying ecosystem services and disservices from urban green space types, in light of global and local sustainable urban development goals. Methods: Using the cities of Berlin and Cape Town as case studies, this study inventories the range of ecosystem services and disservices provisioned by urban community gardens. A total of 26 gardens across both cities were assessed using in-depth field surveys based on indicators derived from the literature and a ranked-scale questionnaire was answered by 46 participants. Results: Community gardens provide important ecosystem services such as food provisioning, local climate regulation, high species richness of vascular plants, are valued highly by gardeners and local residents for their numerous recreation, tourism and social activities, and foster new principles of socio-environmental thinking and practice in neighbourhoods. Gardens are also found to deliver a few disservices that may influence human health like increasing potentials for allergy problems caused by the spread of pollen from the urban nature in them, and can cause economic impacts if the vegetation damages garden infrastructure. It is important to recognise both the benefits and detriments from these urban green spaces so as to better manage them and minimise their impacts and trade-offs to human well-being. Conclusion: Outcomes of this research identify new ecosystem services and disservices inventories and make the net benefit of community gardens explicitly known, which gives credence to their value as a legitimate urban land-use by planners and related decision-makers. Findings show community gardens have a very relevant place in German and South African urban ecosystems research, and this project can significantly impact future work by strengthening the foundation from which we base our understanding – the collection and interpretation of new data. Finally, conclusions show that community gardens can contribute to sustainable urban development in local contexts, and promote Great Transition thinking.:Table of Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………...i Declaration………………………………………………………………………………….ii Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………..……...iii Table of Contents…......…………………………………………………………………..iv List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………….xi List of Figures …………………………….……………………………………………..xiv Chapter One: Introduction……………………………...………………………………...1 1.1. Problem contextualisation …………………………………………..………………1 1.1.1. The changing environment ……………………………………………….....…...1 1.1.2. Ecosystems as the foundation of life ……………………………………………1 1.1.3. Century of the city …………………………………………………………………2 1.1.4. Sustainable Development and the Great Transition ………………………..…4 1.2. Problem statement ……………………………………………….………………….7 1.2.1. Ecosystem services …………………………………………………......………..7 1.2.2. Ecosystem disservices ………………………………………………......……….9 1.2.3. Urban ecosystems and ecological infrastructure .....………………………….11 1.2.4. Aim and objectives ……………………...…...…………………………………..13 1.3. Thesis overview …………………………………………………………..………..14 Chapter Two: State of Research …………………………………………………...….16 2.1. Introduction ……………………………………………………...………………….16 2.2. The role and function of community gardens as urban ecosystems ………....16 2.2.1. Definition of community gardens …………………………………………….....16 2.2.2. Historical context and multi-functional purposes of community gardens …..17 2.2.3. Ecosystem services in community gardens ………………………………......18 2.2.4. Community gardens as the assessment unit for this project ……………......19 2.3. Integrating ecosystem services and disservices concepts into urban planning, environmental management and governance …………………………………….....19 2.3.1. The role of ecosystem services and disservices in urban planning ………..20 2.3.2. The role of ecosystem services and disservices in urban environmental management …………............................................................................................21 2.3.3. The role of ecosystem services and disservices in urban governance …….23 2.4. Research on urban ecosystem services and disservices …………….......…...25 2.4.1. Urban ecosystem services research ……………..………………………........26 2.4.1.1. Categories of ecosystem services in the literature …………………….......26 2.4.1.2. Types of ecological infrastructure in ecosystem services research ……...29 2.4.1.3. Research perspectives in ecosystem services literature ……………….…29 2.4.1.4. Methodology used in ecosystem services research ……………….....…...31 2.4.2. Urban ecosystem disservices research ………………………..……………...33 2.4.2.1. Categories of ecosystem disservices in the literature ………………..……33 2.4.2.2. Types of ecological infrastructure in ecosystem disservices research ......34 2.4.2.3. Research perspectives in ecosystem disservices literature ………………35 2.4.2.4. Methodology used in ecosystem disservices research …………..………..37 2.4.3. Summary of results ………………………………………………………………38 2.5. Research on urban ecosystem services and disservices: Germany and South Africa ……………………...................................................................................…...39 2.5.1. Germany ……………………………………………………..……………………39 2.5.2. South Africa ………………………………………………………………….…...42 2.5.3. Summary of results ………………………………………………………………44 2.6. Research on ecosystem services and disservices from urban gardens with an emphasis on community gardens ……………………………………………………..45 2.6.1. Allotment gardens ………………………………………………………………..45 2.6.2. Home gardens ……………………………………………………………………47 2.6.3. Community gardens ………………………………………………………...…...48 2.6.4. Synthesis ………………………………………………………….………………50 2.7. Conclusions …………………………………………………..…………………….51 Chapter Three: Methods ……..………………………………………………….....…..53 3.1. Introduction ………………………………………………………………………….53 3.2. Case study analysis ………………………………………………………………..55 3.2.1. Case study design ………………………………..……………………………...55 3.2.2. Case study selection …………………………………...………………………..55 3.2.3. Case study methods ……………………………………..………………………56 3.3. Quantification of community garden share ………………………………….…..57 3.3.1. GIS methods ……………………………....……………………………………..57 3.4. Ecosystem services and disservices assessments …………………………….58 3.4.1. Indicator analysis ………………………………………………………………...58 3.4.2. Field protocol ……………………………………….....………………………….65 3.4.2.1. Site walkover procedure and field protocol checklist …………….………...66 3.4.3. Questionnaire …………………………………………………………………….67 3.5. Data-synthesis, -results and -conclusions …………....…………………………70 3.5.1. Quantitative data …………………………………………....……………………70 3.5.2. Qualitative data …………………………………………………………………..70 3.5.3. Burkhard-type matrices ………………………………………………………….71 3.6. Data reliability ………………………………...…………………………………….72 3.7. Data validity …………………………………………………………………………73 3.8. Ethical considerations ………………………………………….………………….73 3.9. Conclusions ……………………………………......……………………………….74 Chapter Four: Case Study Cities ………………………………….……….......……...75 4.1. Introduction …………………………...…………………………………………….75 4.2. Case study: Berlin ………………………..………………………………………...75 4.2.1. Geographical location and demographic set-up ……………………..……….75 4.2.2. Landscape and climate …………………….....………………………………...76 4.2.3. Administrative structure and governance …………………………...………...77 4.2.4. Socio-economic contextualisation …………………………………..………….78 4.2.5. Urban green …………………………………....………………………………...79 4.2.6. Urban gardening regulations ……………………………………….…………..80 4.3. Case study: Cape Town …………………………………………………………...81 4.3.1. Geographical location and demographic set-up …………………………..….81 4.3.2. Landscape and climate ……………………………..…………………………...82 4.3.3. Administrative structure and governance …………………………...………...84 4.3.4. Socio-economic contextualisation ……………………………………..……….85 4.3.5. Urban green ……………………………………....……………………………...85 4.3.6. Urban gardening regulations ……………………………….…………………..86 4.4. Conclusions ………………………..……………………………………………….87 Chapter Five: Results ………………………………………………………….………..88 5.1. Introduction ………………………………………………………………………….88 5.2. Community garden share ………………………………………………………….88 5.3. Ecosystem services assessments ……………………………………....……….92 5.3.1. Provisioning services …………………………………………………………….92 5.3.1.1. Food …………………………………………………………………....……….92 5.3.1.1.1. Crops ……………………………………………………….....……………...92 5.3.1.1.2. Livestock …………………………………………………….....…………….96 5.3.1.2. Raw materials ………………………………………………………......……...98 5.3.1.3. Fresh water supply ………………………………………………….…………99 5.3.1.4. Medicinal resources …………………………………………….....…………102 5.3.2. Regulating services ………………………...…………………………………..104 5.3.2.1. Local climate regulation ………………………………………………….….104 5.3.2.2. Local air quality regulation ……………………………………………….….109 5.3.2.3. Moderation of extreme events: rain and wind storms, flood prevention........................................................................................................…..112 5.3.2.4. Water flow regulation and runoff mitigation ……………....………………..114 5.3.2.5. Erosion prevention and maintenance of soil fertility ……………………...116 5.3.3. Habitat/Supporting services …………………………………..……………….118 5.3.3.1. Maintenance of genetic diversity ……………………………………………118 5.3.4. Cultural services ………………………………………………………………..128 5.3.4.1. Recreation and mental and physical health …………………....………….128 5.3.4.2. Tourism………………………………....……………………………………...131 5.3.4.3. Aesthetic appreciation and inspiration for culture, art, design …......……133 5.3.4.4. Spiritual experience and sense of place ……………………………...…...135 5.3.5. Discussion of major ecosystem services findings …………………..………138 5.4. Ecosystem disservices assessments ……………………...…………………...142 5.4.1. Ecological impacting disservices ……………………………….....………….142 5.4.1.1. Displacement of native by invasive species that cause harm …………...142 5.4.2. Economic impacting disservices …………………………………….………..145 5.4.2.1. Damage to infrastructure by nature ………………………….....………….145 5.4.2.2. Costs associated with repairs and maintenance of urban vegetation/nature ………...................................................................................................................146 5.4.3. Health impacting disservices ……………………………..…………………...148 5.4.3.1. Allergies/respiratory problems caused by the spread of pollen …….…...148 5.4.3.2. Wild or semi-wild animals in urban green spaces that cause anxiety over fear of attack, safety or inconvenience ……………………………………………...151 5.4.4. Psychological impacting disservices …………………………………………153 5.4.4.1. Certain smells, sounds or behaviours from people, plants and animals may be considered a nuisance or cause annoyance ………………………………........153 5.4.4.2. Aesthetic and hygiene impacts due to animal excrement …………….…155 5.4.4.3. Aesthetic unpleasantness due to dense/overgrown vegetation …………156 5.4.4.4. Psychological feelings of insecurity/fear associated with overgrown or dark urban green spaces ………….………………………………………………………..157 5.4.4.5. Vegetation blocking views ………………………………….....…………….159 5.4.5. General impacting disservices on human well-being ……………….……...161 5.4.5.1. Presence of protected species can restrict the uses of an area, hindering benefit of those seeking to enjoy nature ………………………….…………………161 5.4.6. Discussion of major ecosystem disservices findings ……………….………162 5.5. Final assessment of results using Burkhard-type matrices …………….…….165 5.5.1. Ecosystem services …………………………......……………………………..166 5.5.2. Ecosystem disservices ……………………………..………………………….168 5.5.3. Synthesis ………………………………………………………………………..169 5.6. Conclusions ………………………..……………………………………………...170 Chapter Six: Discussion…………….………………………………………………….172 6.1. Introduction ……………...………………………………………………………...172 6.2. Meeting objectives ……………………………………..…………………………172 6.2.1. Calculate the quantitative share of urban community gardens in Berlin and Cape Town ………................................................................................................173 6.2.2. Identify suitable sampling community gardens in Berlin and Cape Town from which to assess existing ecosystems services and disservices ………………….174 6.2.3. Identify and assess which ecosystems services and disservices are provided by the chosen sampling community gardens in Berlin and Cape Town …….…...175 6.2.4. Demonstrate the relevance and contribution of community gardens to sustainable urban development and the Great Transition ……..………………….176 6.3. Limitations of the study …………….....………………………………………….178 6.3.1 Methods …………………………………..………………………………………178 6.3.2. Field work ……………………………………………..…………………………179 6.4. Outlook …………………………………………………………………………….180 6.4.1. Implications for research ………………………………………..……………..180 6.4.2. Implications for policy and practice ………………………………………..….182 6.5. Conclusions …………………………………………..…………………………...184 Chapter Seven: Conclusions …………………………………………………..……..186 7.1. Summary of thesis …………………………………………………….………….186 7.2. General conclusions …………………………………………………….………..187 7.3 Final insights …………………………………………………...…………………..189 References ………………………………...…………………………………………...190 Appendices ……………………………………………………………………………..223 Appendix A – Comprehensive lists of ecosystem services and disservices indicators derived from the literature ……………….………………………………..223 Appendix B – Field Protocol: site walkover procedure (A) and field protocol checklist (B) ……………...............................................................................…….231 Appendix C – Questionnaire disseminated in this study .………………………….238 Appendix D – Additional information for results of ecosystem services and disservices assessments …….........................................................................…..251 Appendix E – Full calculations of final assessment scores used in Burkhard-type matrices ……………….....................................................................................….320

As the planet rapidly urbanizes and demand for locally-produced ecosystem services grows, the effective management of urban green infrastructure is increasingly important. A number of digital tools have recently been developed and released that share information and incite citizen participation in the governance, management and planning of urban green infrastructure. In this paper, I analyse six different e-tools within the context of New York City with a focus on the types of knowledge they share and the forms of participation they incite in relation to urban green infrastructure. I explore how e-tool knowledge exchange and participation relate to civic stewardship of urban green spaces, as stewards play a significant role in the local production of urban ecosystem services. The findings indicate that most e-tools are designed to share a large amount of data describing social-ecological systems. In many cases, the tool developers hope that through gaining knowledge about the system, users will develop an ethical consideration for the environmental resource and even take action as environmental stewards. Additionally, while many of the e-tools present complex, exploratory digital learning environments, many also combine virtual experiences with in-person trainings, workshops and coaching. These hybrid approaches harness the power of digital platforms to organize diverse social networks and share large amounts of data while employing more traditional on-the-ground organizing techniques and offer a way forward in an age of increasing dominance of digital data. Further research on these types of hybrid digital approaches is warranted. Future research on e-tool usership and connections to stewardship outcomes could enrich the understanding of how e-tools operate as well as their social-ecological potential and impact.

No description available.

Bibliography: p. 105-107. / The imminent promulgation of the Environment Conservation Act, No. 73 of 1989, which made provision for the devolution of responsibility for environmental matters to the third tier of government authority, was the primary motivation for this research, conducted throughout South Africa between 1988 and 1990. Local authority officials were concerned that they did not have the knowledge, manpower and infrastructural resources to accept this responsibility. This concern was reinforced by the rapid urbanization of predominantly disadvantaged communities for whom little provision had been made. A stratified selection for study purposes of urban areas from the whole of South Africa and all its population groups ensured a reasonable sample of metropolitan regions, regional centres, principle towns and smaller outlying urban areas. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with representatives of government authorities, Non-Government and Community Organizations and practitioners, either implementing or interacting with environmentally related legislation at the local level. With the permission of all participants, the interviews were recorded on audio-cassettes and later transcribed by the interviewers using a word processing programme. Out of these transcriptions, approximately 1000 problem-and-solution groupings were identified and classified. The most widely held perceptions of factors constraining the resolution of urban environmental problems at local authority level were subsequently compared to the provisions of the Environment Conservation Act. It was found that these perceptions of factors requiring attention for the resolution of urban environmental problems are strongly linked to the establishment, maintenance and improvement of environments which contribute to a generally acceptable quality of life. This accords with only one of the four explicit provisions of the Environment Conservation Act. There is a widespread perception that until human needs (Maslow, 1968) are either satisfied or at least addressed, and the whole population incorporated into a more equitable legal framework, the successful implementation of environmental conservation in South Africa will be severely impaired. Furthermore, that the South African ' Government's adherence to the political ideology of separate development constitutes an abuse and exploitation of scarce resources. Recommendations are that the human needs of the whole population of South Africa must be addressed and environmentally destructive legislation repealed in order to truly resolve urban environmental problems, that the participation of the public in matters relating to the effective protection and controlled utilization of the environment be required, that administrative, natural and functional boundaries need to be aligned, and that the structure and responsibilities of bureaucratic hierarchies responsible for environmental management in urban areas need to be set out clearly.

La présente thèse cherche une nouvelle approche de la mobilité à Beyrouth, à travers une étude de l’écologie urbaine. L’objet principal est de déterminer les obstacles auxquelles fait face la mobilité dans cette ville et de trouver : quelles influences ont les qualités spatiales sur les pratiques de mobilité à Beyrouth ? L’étude consiste en un croisement entre la notion d’architecture par l’analyse de l’environnement bâti, la notion de paysage en ayant recours aux expériences sensori-motrices et la notion sociale par l’étude des pratiques de mobilité des beyrouthins. Nous avons développé la méthodologie de recherche à partir d’une synthèse des projets et des études contemporains de la mobilité. La thèse est répartie en trois parties essentielles. Au départ, une étude du contexte urbain de la ville de Beyrouth englobe l’analyse rétrospective de l’infrastructure routière, ainsi que l’étude des différentes pratiques de mobilité. La deuxième partie, envisage le rôle des acteurs publics et privés de la mobilité. Nous avons ainsi formulé une interprétation des projets de mobilité actuels et en cours d’étude. La dernière partie de la thèse représente trois études de cas, de zones à caractère social et à formes urbaines distinctes. Par l’intermédiaire des analyses cartographiques et d’une enquête sociale, l’étude paysagère et sociale sont explicites.Les résultats de la recherche, se résument en trois idées centrales. Premièrement, la volonté politique et une bonne gouvernance prennent un rôle fondamental des stratégies durables de la mobilité. Ensuite, les études du site ont démontré l’intérêt du travail sur les multiples échelles de la mobilité, afin de limiter la congestion. Alors que l’influence de l’environnement urbain sur les pratiques de mobilité, promeut l’utilisation des ambiances urbaines pour favoriser les déplacements doux. Une mobilité écologique impulsera l’attractivité et sensibilisera l’hospitalité dans Beyrouth. / The present thesis pursues a new approach regarding mobility in Beirut, through a study of the urban ecology. The main concern is to define the obstacles that the mobility is facing in this city, and to find out: what influences do spatial qualities have on mobility practices in Beirut? The study consists of a cross between the notion of architecture by the analysis of the built environment, the notion of landscape through senses and movement experiences and the social notion by the study of Beirut citizen’s mobility practices. We have developed the research methodology from a synthesis of contemporary mobility, projects and studies. The thesis is divided into three main parts. To start, a study of Beirut urban context includes a retrospective analysis of road infrastructure, as well as the study of the different mobility practices. The second part considers the role of public and private stakeholders. We have thus formulated an interpretation of current and ongoing mobility projects. The final part of the thesis represents three case studies of distinct social and urban forms areas of Beirut. Landscape and social studies are exposed through social survey and mapping.The results of this research, summed up in three key ideas. First, political will and good governance play a fundamental role in implementing sustainable mobility strategies. Secondly, site survey demonstrated the interest of working on the multiple scales of mobility, in order to limit the congestion. Whereas, the influence of urban environment on mobility practices, promotes use of urban environments to favor soft modes of transport. Eco-friendly mobility will stimulate attractiveness and will promote hospitality in Beirut.

No description available.

No description available.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / This study explores the shared history of West Indianapolis and the White River and reveals an interdependent, yet conflicted, relationship between the people and the river. This relationship was part of a broader set of attitudes that natural resources were unlimited and that humans must master the landscape. From the founding of Indianapolis in 1821 until the flood of 1913, a series of uncoordinated human actions related to settlement and growth of the city took place. Despite noble intentions of progress and improvement, the cumulative effect of these actions resulted in unintended and undesired consequences in the form of a flood disaster in 1913, an unhealthy environment in West Indianapolis, and a negative identity for that community. One might argue that these results occurred because nineteenth century settlers in the Indianapolis area lacked an understanding of the nature of rivers or that scientists had not yet proven the germ theory. As shown in this study, however, the historical sources support an argument that the relationship between the people and the river dictated the fate of the river and the community of West Indianapolis, which suffered significant damage when White River overflowed its banks in the “Great Flood” of 1913.

No description available.

The rise of vector-borne diseases transmitted by the Aedes spp. mosquitoes is attributed, in part, to the dramatic rates of contemporary urbanization. Over the past 30 years, scientists have developed a wealth of knowledge around the drivers of heterogeneity in Aedes-borne disease risk within and between cities. However, in current Aedes-borne disease research, characterizations of “urban” are oversimplified, with the built environment and social institutions of the city often relegated to a background context. To mitigate the spread of Aedes-borne diseases, under the dual global pressures of urbanization and climate change, there is an urgent need to incorporate the multi-dimensionality of urban systems in driving Aedes-borne disease risk. This dissertation is anchored in socio-ecological sciences, and tailored to the complexities of urban eco-epidemiological dynamics. Herein, theory and methods from ecology, epidemiology, geography, and urban science are synthesized to develop and implement a novel urban systems approach for Aedes-borne diseases. T he first chapter establishes the theoretical foundation for this approach, integrating concepts from three bodies of knowledge: “cities as complex adaptive systems”, hierarchical patch systems theory, and relational geography. In the framework, cities are conceptualized as hierarchically-structured patches of different land uses and characteristics. Patch composition determines localized disease risk, while patch configuration and connectivity contribute to emergent patterns of disease risk and spread. Complexity is added to the system by considering the cross-scale and dynamical processes occurring within a city. Furthermore, the framework establishes how individual and collective social structures interact with the biophysical landscape to generate risk. The empirical research for this dissertation uses a range of data sets, from open source remotely-sensed environmental data and census-derived socio-economic data to fine-scale household survey and entomological data. Chapter 2 is carried out at the scale of the city, and examines how extreme climate and weather conditions in Colombia differentially affects the onset of peak dengue incidence for urban settlements with varying landscape and socio-economic properties. Using Bayesian spatio-temporal hierarchical models we discovered that extreme temperature anomalies (10–12°C) result in an earlier onset of dengue risk for high-elevation compared to low-elevation settlements, which experience increases in dengue risk two to four months after extreme temperature anomalies. Furthermore, the risk of dengue after extremely dry conditions is higher and extends for a longer duration in highly urban areas compared to areas with a low proportion of the population living in urban settlements. These findings indicate the potential for landscape-specific dengue early warning and forecasting frameworks. Chapter 3 is based in a mid-sized, rapidly growing city (Ibagué) embedded within the Andes Mountains of Colombia, and establishes homogenous urban typologies of dengue risk. Measuring dengue incidence across census block and higher order urban sections, we show that distinctive signatures of incidence can emerge from interactions between heterogeneous socio-environmental composition and configuration. Finally, Chapter 4 is carried out at the household and neighborhood scale in Ibagué, and examines how water governance and neighborhood-based social processes drive household-level dengue risk. We documented the role of collective societal memory of water scarcity in fostering a culture of water storage. We determined that neighborhood-based metrics of social cohesion do not necessarily translate to dengue household preventative practices and that to scale dengue prevention strategies, public health agencies may consider interventions rooted in “place-making” to foster linkages between perceived neighborhood-level versus household-level risk. This dissertation demonstrates how trans-disciplinary research bridges urban science, ecology, and public health research communities, and provides a pathway for mosquito-borne disease interventions to be incorporated into national-level early warning systems as well as community-based initiatives that collectively, set cities on more healthy and sustainable trajectories for the 21st century.