No description available.

Die vorliegende Dissertation exploriert Innovationsaktivitäten von Unternehmen des produzierenden Gewerbes in zwei unterschiedlich strukturierten peripheren Regionen: in Südestland und dem Erzgebirgskreis. Die Arbeit erweitert bestehende Forschung, da periphere Regionen und low-tech Industriezweige sich nur vereinzelt in wirtschaftsgeographischen Forschungsagenden finden. Ausgehend von einer relationalen Perspektive fokussiert die Forschungsarbeit auf Akteursbeziehungen und insbesondere darauf, wie diese Beziehungen Wirtschaftsprozesse wie Wissensgenerierung und Innovation bedingen. Als analytische Perspektiven innerhalb dieses relationalen Rahmens werden Netzwerke und unterschiedliche Dimension von Nähe und Distanz herangezogen (geographische, soziale, kognitive, institutionelle und organisationale). Die Dissertation erarbeitet kontextualisierte Erkenntnisse zu räumlichen und relationalen Elementen von Innovationsaktivitäten in peripheren Regionen. Methodisch orientiert sich die Arbeit am Ansatz der Innovationsbiographien. Dazu werden konkrete Innovationsprojekte und ihre Netzwerke aus räumlicher und zeitlicher Perspektive rekonstruiert. Entsprechend wird im empirischen Teil der Arbeit ein evolutionäres, interaktives und wissensbasiertes Innovationsverständnis aufgegriffen. Die Arbeit stellt heraus, dass Unternehmen in beiden Untersuchungsregionen aktiv Innovationsprozesse vorantreiben bzw. an diesen teilhaben. Periphere Lage und sozioökonomische Herausforderungen prägen die Innovationspraktiken der Unternehmen entlang unterschiedlicher Dimensionen. Insbesondere lassen sich zielgerichtete Netzwerkaktivitäten, ein hoher Mobilitätgrad sowie die strategische Ausrechterhaltung bzw. der Ausbau einer umfassenden Technologie- und Fertigungstiefe identifizieren. Diese Praktiken fungieren als Mechanismen zur Überwindung potenzieller Strukturnachteile peripherer Regionen. Basierend auf diesen Erkenntnissen illustriert die Dissertation Ansätze zur Erweiterung wirtschaftsgeographischer Innovationstheorie und diskutiert Maßnahmen zur Förderung der Innovationstätigkeit von Unternehmen in peripheren Regionen. / This dissertation explores innovation activities of LMT manufacturing firms located in two differently structured peripheral regions: South Estonia and the Erzgebirgskreis. Thus, the dissertation expands existing scholarship in economic geography by investigating innovation in localities and sectors that are not part of broader research agendas. Operating from a relational perspective, this research emphasises the diverse actor relations and how these relations shape economic processes of knowledge creation and innovation. Within this relational framework, networks and multi-layered dimension of proximity and distance (geographical, social, cognitive, institutional and organisational) are mobilised as central analytical perspectives. Thereby, the dissertation provides contextually grounded insights on the spatial and relational elements that drive innovation activities in peripheral regions. Methodologically, this research is guided by the innovation biographies approach. Specific innovation projects and their networks are traced throughout space and time. Thereby, the evolutionary, interactive and knowledge grounded understanding of innovation is empirically addressed. This research finds that firms in both study regions actively pursue and participate in innovation activities. Operating at distance shapes the practices of firms in a number of decisive ways: purposive networking activities, high levels of actor mobility and maintenance of comprehensive internal capacities are identified in particular. These practices operate as mechanisms to overcome potential shortcomings of peripheral regions. Based on its findings, the dissertation outlines avenues to expand dominant approaches towards innovation theory in economic geography and provides avenues for policy measures that aim at fostering firm innovation in peripheral regions.

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

The paper is an edited transcription of the journal of a missionary based in Freetown (Sierra Leone), who in 1850 visited part of what is today Guinea-Conakry, inhabited by Susu people. It is particularly informative about the protocols established in this region for commerce. The original text is supplemented by an introduction, a map, annotation and a detailed index.

This volume is a new edition of a work by Assistant Staff Surgeon Peter McLachlan, published in Freetown (Sierra Leone) in 1821. It was one of the first monographs published in tropical Africa and the first systematic attempt to describe the Baga and Susu. This edition is supplemented by an introduction, extensive annotation, maps, figures and an appendix. It also includes a substantial bibliography relating to the Baga peoples of coastal Guinea-Conakry.

This volume is an exception to this generalisation. It looks at various ways in which an African 'presence' was felt in the German city of Leipzig before 1950. Among the topics covered are: - the collection of 'curiosities', ethnographic artefacts, books and travellers' records - the publication of books - missionary work - teaching and research at the university (languages, 'racial science', ethnology etc.) - the display of Africans at trade fairs and exhibitions. Short biographies of 17 men who studied or taught at the University of Leipzig and made a contribution to the study of Africa are also included.

Noun class systems are reported from a number of areas in the world, including Africa, the Pacific, the Caucasus, and various parts of North America. This paper deals with such systems found in Africa and the Pacific because of fairly idiosyncratic interests, not because they are especially closely related.

The dynamic element of Xhosa oral poetry has clearly changed and is continuing to change with changes in the Nguni society. The aim of this paper is to investigate the changes that have intruded into Xhosa praise poetry during 1990s.

This volume contains reports by six of the Leipzig students who took part in an excursion to southern Ghana in February-March 2002. In addition to reports based on stays in Abetifi, Amedzofe and Ho it includes an article on chiefs and development. / Dieser Band beinhaltet Berichte von sechs Leipziger Studenten, die an einer Exkursion nach Süd-Ghana (von Februar bis März 2002) teilgenommen haben. Zusätzlich zu den Berichten, die auf Aufenthalten in Abetifi, Amedzofe und Ho basieren, enthält der Band einen Artikel zu Chiefs und Entwicklung.

This issue contains two papers by two different authors (Irmtraud Herms, Harriet J. Ottenheimer) on aspects of lexicography of two Bantu languages: Shinzwani of the Comoro Islands, and Kiswahili.