城市绿地供需的差异与联系研究进展

doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.202011.018

应用生态学报 ›› 2020, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (11): 3925-3934.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202011.018

城市绿地供需的差异与联系研究进展

陈樟昊^1,2, 黄甘霖^1,2*

¹北京师范大学地表过程与资源生态国家重点实验室, 人与环境系统可持续研究中心, 北京 100875;
²北京师范大学地理科学学部自然资源学院, 土地资源与区域发展研究中心, 北京 100875

收稿日期:2020-06-22 接受日期:2020-09-02 出版日期:2020-11-15 发布日期:2021-06-10
通讯作者: * E-mail: ghuang@bnu.edu.cn
作者简介:陈樟昊, 男, 1993年生, 博士研究生。主要从事城市生态系统服务与人类福祉研究。E-mail: chenzh@mail.bnu.edu.cn
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(31670702)资助

Research progress on the differences and connections between supply and demand of urban green space

CHEN Zhang-hao^1,2, HUANG Gan-lin^1,2*

¹Center for Human-Environment System Sustainability (CHESS), State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China;
²Center for Land Resources and Regional Deve-lopment, School of Natural Resources, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China) .

Received:2020-06-22 Accepted:2020-09-02 Online:2020-11-15 Published:2021-06-10
Contact: * E-mail: ghuang@bnu.edu.cn
Supported by:
the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31670702).

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 作为连接城市绿地与居民需求的重要概念,绿地供需是城市绿地研究和规划决策的重要内容。识别城市绿地供给与需求的区别和关联,有助于城市绿地合理配置、人类福祉提升和城市的可持续发展。本文梳理2016—2020年城市绿地供需研究的主要议题和研究模式,探讨不同议题的差异与联系,并对未来城市绿地供需关系研究提出建议。综述发现,多数研究从供给或需求一方面开展研究,较少将城市供给与需求研究结合一起分析。供给方面主要关注绿地时空分布特征与生态系统服务供给,需求方面侧重于研究居民对绿地的主观偏好与行为。绿地供给、需求的研究对象、研究尺度与研究指标存在较大差异,是二者难以建立联系的主要因素。今后的研究应注重绿地供需匹配的情况。基于主观偏好/客观指标的绿地供需整合研究,是城市绿地供需关系研究的重要方向。

关键词: 城市绿地, 供需差异, 供需联系

Abstract: As an important concept connecting urban green space (UGS) with the residents' demands, supply and demand of UGS is an important part of UGS research and planning. Identifying the difference and connection between UGS supply and demand contributes to proper configuration of UGS, human well-being improvement and urban sustainability. We reviewed literature on UGS supply and demand from 2016 to 2020, summarized common research topics and paradigms, examined associations among these topics, and proposed suggestions for future studies. We found that most studies focused on either USG supply or demand, and rarely analyzed match between UGS supply and demand. The studies of UGS supply mainly focused on the spatial and temporal patterns and the ecosystem services they provided, while the studies of demand focused on residents' subjective preference and behavior. Studies on supply and demand often differ in research objects, scales, and indicators, which was a major obstacle to construct relationships between them. We proposed that future studies should focus on the match of supply and demand. A possible way to achieve this goal is to measure UGS demand by both objective indicators and subjective preference.

Key words: urban green space, differences between supply and demand, connections between supply and demand

陈樟昊, 黄甘霖. 城市绿地供需的差异与联系研究进展[J]. 应用生态学报, 2020, 31(11): 3925-3934.

CHEN Zhang-hao, HUANG Gan-lin. Research progress on the differences and connections between supply and demand of urban green space[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2020, 31(11): 3925-3934.

参考文献

[1] Canedoli C, Bullock C, Collier MJ, et al. Public partici-patory mapping of cultural ecosystem services: Citizen perception and park management in the Parco Nord of Milan (Italy). Sustainability, 2017, 9, doi:10.3390/su9060891
[2] Nowak DJ, Crane DE, Stevens JC. Air pollution removal by urban trees and shrubs in the United States. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2006, 4: 115-123
[3] Kabisch N, Haase D. Green justice or just green? Provision of urban green spaces in Berlin, Germany. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2014, 122: 129-139
[4] Thomas G, Sherin, AP, Ansar S, et al. Analysis of urban heat island in Kochi, India, using a modified local climate zone classification. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 2014, 21: 3-13
[5] Yan J, Lin L, Zhou W, et al. A novel approach for quantifying particulate matter distribution on leaf surface by combining SEM and object-based image analysis. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2016, 173: 156-161
[6] Chen WY. The role of urban green infrastructure in offsetting carbon emissions in 35 major Chinese cities: A nationwide estimate. Cities, 2015, 44: 112-120
[7] Ferenc M, Sedláček O, Fuchs R. How to improve urban greenspace for woodland birds: Site and local-scale determinants of bird species richness. Urban Ecosystems, 2013, 17: 625-640
[8] Roces-Diaz JV, Vayreda J, Banque-Casanovas M, et al. Assessing the distribution of forest ecosystem services in a highly populated Mediterranean region. Ecological Indicators, 2018, 93: 986-997
[9] Andersson E, Barthel S, Borgstrom S, et al. Reconnec-ting cities to the biosphere: Stewardship of green infrastructure and urban ecosystem services. Ambio, 2014, 43: 445-453
[10] Dickinson DC, Hobbs RJ. Cultural ecosystem services: Characteristics, challenges and lessons for urban green space research. Ecosystem Services, 2017, 25: 179-194
[11] Wolch JR, Byrne J, Newell JP. Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: The challenge of making cities ‘just green enough'. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2014, 125: 234-244
[12] Sugiyama T, Leslie E, Giles-Corti B, et al. Associations of neighbourhood greenness with physical and mental health: Do walking, social coherence and local social interaction explain the relationships? Journal of Epide-miology and Community Health, 2008, 62, doi: 10.1136/jech.2007.064287
[13] Almohamad H, Knaack A, Habib B. Assessing spatial equity and accessibility of public green spaces in Aleppo City, Syria. Forests, 2018, 9, doi: 10.3390/f9110706
[14] Guo SH, Song C, Pei T, et al. Accessibility to urban parks for elderly residents: Perspectives from mobile phone data. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2019, 191, doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.103642
[15] Xing LJ, Liu YF, Wang BS, et al. An environmental justice study on spatial access to parks for youth by using an improved 2SFCA method in Wuhan, China. Cities, 2020, 96, doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2019.102405
[16] Xiao Y, Wang D, Fang J. Exploring the disparities in park access through mobile phone data: Evidence from Shanghai, China. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2019, 181: 80-91
[17] Lahoti S, Lahoti A, Saito O. Benchmark assessment of recreational public Urban Green space provisions: A case of typical urbanizing Indian City, Nagpur. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2019, 44, doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2019.126424
[18] Fasihi H, Parizadi T. Analysis of spatial equity and access to urban parks in Ilam, Iran. Journal of Environmental Management, 2020, 260, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110122
[19] Ferguson M, Roberts HE, McEachan RRC, et al. Contrasting distributions of urban green infrastructure across social and ethno-racial groups. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2018, 175: 136-148
[20] Mears M, Brindley P, Maheswaran R, et al. Understanding the socioeconomic equity of publicly accessible greenspace distribution: The example of Sheffield, UK. Geoforum, 2019, 103: 126-137
[21] Hurley PT, Emery MR. Locating provisioning ecosystem services in urban forests: Forageable woody species in New York City, USA. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2018, 170: 266-275
[22] Chen WY, Hu FZY, Li X, et al. Strategic interaction in municipal governments' provision of public green spaces: A dynamic spatial panel data analysis in transitional China. Cities, 2017, 71: 1-10
[23] 张云路, 关海莉, 李雄. 从园林城市到生态园林城市的城市绿地系统规划响应. 中国园林, 2017, 33(2): 71-77 [Zhang Y-L, Guan H-L, Li X. Response of urban green space system planning from garden city to ecological garden city. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2017, 33(2): 71-77]
[24] 毛齐正, 罗上华, 马克明, 等. 城市绿地生态评价研究进展. 生态学报, 2012, 32(17): 5589-5600 [Mao Q-Z, Luo S-H, Ma K-M, et al. Research advances in ecological assessment of urban greenspace. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2012, 32(17): 5589-5600]
[25] Pham TTH, Apparicio P, Séguin AM, et al. Spatial distribution of vegetation in Montreal: An uneven distribution or environmental inequity? Landscape and Urban Planning, 2012, 107: 214-224
[26] Gómez-Baggethun E, Barton DN. Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. Ecological Economics, 2013, 86: 235-245
[27] Wilkerson ML, Mitchell MGE, Shanahan D, et al. The role of socio-economic factors in planning and managing urban ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services, 2018, 31: 102-110
[28] Xing L, Liu Y, Liu X, et al. Spatio-temporal disparity between demand and supply of park green space service in urban area of Wuhan from 2000 to 2014. Habitat International, 2018, 71: 49-59
[29] Boone CG, Buckley GL, Grove JM, et al. Parks and people: An environmental justice inquiry in Baltimore, Maryland. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 2009, 99: 767-787
[30] Wolch J, Wilson JP, Fehrenbach J. Parks and park funding in Los Angeles: An equity-mapping analysis. Urban Geography, 2013, 26: 4-35
[31] Yao L, Liu J, Wang R, et al. Effective green equivalent: A measure of public green spaces for cities. Ecological Indicators, 2014, 47: 123-127
[32] Shen Y, Sun F, Che Y. Public green spaces and human wellbeing: Mapping the spatial inequity and misma-tching status of public green space in the Central City of Shanghai. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2017, 27: 59-68
[33] 屠星月, 黄甘霖, 邬建国. 城市绿地可达性和居民福祉关系研究综述. 生态学报, 2019, 39(2): 421-431 [Tu X-Y, Huang G-L, Wu J-G. Review of the relationship between urban greenspace accessibility and human well-being. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2019, 39(2): 421-431]
[34] Hegetschweiler KT, de Vries S, Arnberger A, et al. Linking demand and supply factors in identifying cultural ecosystem services of urban green infrastructures: A review of European studies. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2017, 21: 48-59
[35] Fang X, Zhou B, Tu X, et al. “What Kind of a Science is Sustainability Science?” An evidence-based reexamination. Sustainability, 2018, 10, doi: 10.3390/su10051478
[36] Xu C, Haase D, Pauleit S. The impact of different urban dynamics on green space availability: A multiple scenario modeling approach for the region of Munich, Germany. Ecological Indicators, 2018, 93: 1-12
[37] Jin JL, Gergel SE, Lu YH, et al. Asian cities are greening while some north american cities are browning: Long-term greenspace patterns in 16 cities of the Pan-Pacific Region. Ecosystems, 2020, 23: 383-399
[38] Koprowska K, Laszkiewicz E, Kronenberg J. Is urban sprawl linked to green space availability? Ecological Indicators, 2020, 108, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105723
[39] Zhu ZQ, Ren J, Liu X. Green infrastructure provision for environmental justice: Application of the equity index in Guangzhou, China. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2019, 46, doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2019.126443
[40] Wang J, Zhou W, Qian Y, et al. Quantifying and cha-racterizing the dynamics of urban greenspace at the patch level: A new approach using object-based image analysis. Remote Sensing of Environment, 2018, 204: 94-108
[41] Haas J, Ban Y. Urban land cover and ecosystem service changes based on sentinel-2A MSI and Landsat TM data. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 2018, 11: 485-497
[42] Luo WB, Su MM. A spatial-temporal analysis of urban park land expansion in China and practical implications to enhance urban sustainability. Sustainability, 2019, 11, doi: 10.3390/su11010138
[43] Qian YG, Li ZQ, Zhou WQ, et al. Quantifying spatial pattern of urban greenspace from a gradient perspective of built-up age. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, 2019, 111: 78-85
[44] Guo TD, Morgenroth J, Conway T, et al. City-wide canopy cover decline due to residential property redeve-lopment in Christchurch, New Zealand. Science of the Total Environment, 2019, 681: 202-210
[45] Aklibasinda M, Ok AO. Determination of the urbanization and changes in open-green spaces in Nevsehir City through remote sensing. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2019, 191, doi: 10.1007/s10661-019-7953-7
[46] Abu Kasim J, Yusof MJM, Shafri HZM. Monitoring urban green space (UGS) changes by using high resolution aerial imagery: A case study of Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Pertanika Journal of Science and Technology, 2019, 27: 1971-1990
[47] Guo SH, Yang GG, Pei T, et al. Analysis of factors affecting urban park service area in Beijing: Perspectives from multi-source geographic data. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2019, 181: 103-117
[48] Shimamoto K. Empirical analysis on the determinants of urban parks. Journal of Urban and Regional Analysis, 2019, 11: 87-102
[49] Zhu ZQ, Lang W, Tao XF, et al. Exploring the quality of urban green spaces based on urban neighborhood green index: A case study of Guangzhou City. Sustainability, 2019, 11, doi: 10.3390/su11195507
[50] Wolff M, Haase D. Mediating sustainability and liveability-turning points of green space supply in European cities. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 2019, 7, doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2019.00061
[51] Orsi F. How densely populated and green are the places we live in? A study of the ten largest US cities. Land Use Policy, 2018, 76: 300-316
[52] Arshad HSH, Routray JK. From socioeconomic disparity to environmental injustice: The relationship between housing unit density and community green space in a medium city in Pakistan. Local Environment, 2018, 23: 536-548
[53] Lee LSH, Jim CY, Zhang H. Tree density and diversity in Hong Kong's public housing estates: From provision injustice to socio-ecological inclusiveness. Urban Fores-try & Urban Greening, 2019, 46, doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2019.126468
[54] Rigolon A, Browning M, Jennings V. Inequities in the quality of urban park systems: An environmental justice investigation of cities in the United States. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2018, 178: 156-169
[55] Xing L, Liu Y, Liu X. Measuring spatial disparity in accessibility with a multi-mode method based on park green spaces classification in Wuhan, China. Applied Geography, 2018, 94: 251-261
[56] Tan PY, Samsudin R. Effects of spatial scale on assessment of spatial equity of urban park provision. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2017, 158: 139-154
[57] Rahman K, Zhang D. Analyzing the level of accessibility of public urban green spaces to different socially vulne-rable groups of people. Sustainability, 2018, 10, doi: 10.3390/su10113917
[58] Hoffimann E, Barros H, Ribeiro AI. Socioeconomic inequalities in green space quality and accessibility-evidence from a Southern European City. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2017, 14, doi: 10.3390/ijerph14080916
[59] He SW, Wu YL, Wang L. Characterizing horizontal and vertical perspectives of spatial equity for various urban green spaces: A case study of Wuhan, China. Frontiers in Public Health, 2020, 8, doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.00010
[60] Graça M, Alves P, Gonçalves J, et al. Assessing how green space types affect ecosystem services delivery in Porto, Portugal. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2018, 170: 195-208
[61] Battisti L, Pomatto E, Larcher F. Assessment and mapping green areas ecosystem services and socio-demographic characteristics in turin neighborhoods (Italy). Forests, 2020, 11, doi: 10.3390/f11010025
[62] Feng S, Chen LD, Sun RH, et al. The distribution and accessibility of urban parks in Beijing, China: Implications of social equity. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2019, 16, doi: 10.3390/ijerph16244894
[63] 曹雅琴, 陈樟昊, 黄甘霖, 等. 城市绿地格局与居民社会经济特征关系研究进展. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(10): 3303-3315 [Cao Y-Q, Chen Z-H, Huang G-L, et al. Research progress on relationship between urban greenspace distribution and the socioeconomic characteristics of residents. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2019, 30(10): 3303-3315]
[64] Lara-Valencia F, Garcia-Perez H. Disparities in the provision of public parks in neighbourhoods with varied Latino composition in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area. Local Environment, 2018, 23: 1107-1120
[65] You H. Characterizing the inequalities in urban public green space provision in Shenzhen, China. Habitat International, 2016, 56: 176-180
[66] Baro F, Calderon-Argelich A, Langemeyer J, et al. Under one canopy? Assessing the distributional environmental justice implications of street tree benefits in Barcelona. Environmental Science & Policy, 2019, 102: 54-64
[67] 北京市城市规划设计院. 北京市绿地系统规划[EB/OL]. (2019-11-29) [2020-08-19]. http://yllhj.beijing.gov.cn/zwgk/ghxx/gh/201911/P020191129502960-993686.pdf [Beijing Municipal Institute of City Planning & Design. Beijing Green Space System Planning [EB/OL]. (2019-11-29) [2020-08-19]. http://yllhj.beijing.gov.cn/zwgk/ghxx/gh/201911/P020191129502960-993686.pdf]
[68] 深圳市城市管理局, 深圳市规划和国土资源委员会(市海洋局). 深圳市绿地系统规划修编(2014—2030)[EB/OL]. (2017-08-01) [2020-08-19]. http://www.xhjjxh.cn/news/show-50-456.htm [Shenzhen Municipal Administration Bureau, and Planning, Land and Resources Commission of Shenzhen Municipality (Shen-zhen Oceanic Bureau). Shenzhen Greenspace System Planning Revision (2014-2030) [EB/OL]. (2017-08-01) [2020-08-19]. http://www.xhjjxh.cn/news/show-50-456.htm]
[69] Almeida CMVB, Mariano MV, Agostinho F, et al. Comparing costs and supply of supporting and regulating services provided by urban parks at different spatial scales. Ecosystem Services, 2018, 30: 236-247
[70] Yang J, Guan Y, Xia JC, et al. Spatiotemporal variation characteristics of green space ecosystem service value at urban fringes: A case study on Ganjingzi District in Dalian, China. Science of the Total Environment, 2018, 639: 1453-1461
[71] Song PH, Kim G, Mayer A, et al. Assessing the ecosystem services of various types of urban green spaces based on i-Tree Eco. Sustainability, 2020, 12, doi: 10.3390/su12041630
[72] Baró F, Gómez-Baggethun E, Haase D. Ecosystem ser-vice bundles along the urban-rural gradient: Insights for landscape planning and management. Ecosystem Services, 2017, 24: 147-159
[73] Zhou W, Huang G, Pickett STA, et al. 90 years of forest cover change in an urbanizing watershed: Spatial and temporal dynamics. Landscape Ecology, 2011, 26: 645-659
[74] Evenson KR, Wen F, Hillier A, et al. Assessing the contribution of parks to physical activity using global positioning system and accelerometry. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 2013, 45: 1981-1987
[75] Lin BB, Fuller RA, Bush R, et al. Opportunity or orientation? Who uses urban parks and why. PLoS One, 2014, 9: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087422
[76] Aragon NU, Stuhlmacher M, Smith JP, et al. Urban ag-riculture's bounty: Contributions to Phoenix's sustainability goals. Environmental Research Letters, 2019, 14, doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/ab428f
[77] Zhang SN, Ramirez FM. Assessing and mapping ecosystem services to support urban green infrastructure: The case of Barcelona, Spain. Cities, 2019, 92: 59-70
[78] Liu H, Hu Y, Li F, et al. Associations of multiple ecosystem services and disservices of urban park ecological infrastructure and the linkages with socioeconomic factors. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018, 174: 868-879
[79] Giedych R, Maksymiuk G. Specific features of parks and their impact on regulation and cultural ecosystem ser-vices provision in Warsaw, Poland. Sustainability, 2017, 9, doi: 10.3390/su9050792
[80] Palliwoda J, Banzhaf E, Priess JA. How do the green components of urban green infrastructure influence the use of ecosystem services? Examples from Leipzig, Germany. Landscape Ecology, 2020, 35, doi: 10.1007/s10980-020-01004-w
[81] Zwierzchowska I, Hof A, Iojă IC, et al. Multi-scale assessment of cultural ecosystem services of parks in Central European cities. Urban Forestry & Urban Gree-ning, 2018, 30: 84-97
[82] Liu H, Li F, Xu L, et al. The impact of socio-demographic, environmental, and individual factors on urban park visitation in Beijing, China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2017, 163: S181-S188
[83] Coppel G, Wüstemann H. The impact of urban green space on health in Berlin, Germany: Empirical findings and implications for urban planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2017, 167: 410-418
[84] Larson LR, Keith SJ, Fernandez M, et al. Ecosystem services and urban greenways: What's the public's perspective? Ecosystem Services, 2016, 22: 111-116
[85] Li FZ, Guo SY, Li D, et al. A multi-criteria spatial approach for mapping urban ecosystem services demand. Ecological Indicators, 2020, 112, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106119
[86] Sun RH, Li F, Chen LD. A demand index for recreational ecosystem services associated with urban parks in Beijing, China. Journal of Environmental Management, 2019, 251, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109612
[87] Zhang S, Zhou W. Recreational visits to urban parks and factors affecting park visits: Evidence from geotagged social media data. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2018, 180: 27-35
[88] Yen Y, Wang Z, Shi Y, et al. The predictors of the behavioral intention to the use of urban green spaces: The perspectives of young residents in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Habitat International, 2017, 64: 98-108
[89] Rose RAC, Basri NEA. Analysis of visitor satisfaction levels in Sabah recreational public parks. Geografia-Malaysian Journal of Society & Space, 2019, 15: 336-349
[90] Mertens L, Van Cauwenberg J, Veitch J, et al. Diffe-rences in park characteristic preferences for visitation and physical activity among adolescents: A latent class analysis. PLoS One, 2019, 14: e0212920
[91] Luz AC, Buijs M, Aleixo C, et al. Should I stay or should I go? Modelling the fluxes of urban residents to visit green spaces. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2019, 40: 195-203
[92] Shanahan DF, Lin BB, Gaston KJ, et al. What is the role of trees and remnant vegetation in attracting people to urban parks? Landscape Ecology, 2015, 30: 761-762
[93] Schindler M, Le Texier M, Caruso G. Spatial sorting, attitudes and the use of green space in Brussels. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2018, 31: 169-184
[94] Shan XZ. Association between the time patterns of urban green space visitations and visitor characteristics in a high-density, subtropical city. Cities, 2020, 97, doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2019.102562
[95] Gu XK, Li Q, Chand S. Factors influencing residents' access to and use of country parks in Shanghai, China. Cities, 2020, 97, doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2019.102501
[96] Zhang JY, Tan PY. Demand for parks and perceived accessibility as key determinants of urban park use beha-vior. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2019, 44, doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2019.126420
[97] Lagbas AJ. Social valuation of regulating and cultural ecosystem services of Arroceros Forest Park: A man-made forest in the city of Manila, Philippines. Journal of Urban Management, 2019, 8: 159-177
[98] Tian YQ, Wu HJ, Zhang GS, et al. Perceptions of ecosystem services, disservices and willingness-to-pay for urban green space conservation. Journal of Environmental Management, 2020, 260, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110140
[99] Contesse M, van Vliet BJM, Lenhart J. Is urban agriculture urban green space? A comparison of policy arrangements for urban green space and urban agriculture in Santiago de Chile. Land Use Policy, 2018, 71: 566-577
[100] Zinia NJ, McShane P. Ecosystem services management: An evaluation of green adaptations for urban development in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2018, 173: 23-32
[101] Martinho da Silva I, Oliveira Fernandes C, Castiglione B, et al. Characteristics and motivations of potential users of urban allotment gardens: The case of Vila Nova de Gaia municipal network of urban allotment gardens. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2016, 20: 56-64
[102] Andrews B, Ferrini S, Bateman I. Good parks-bad parks: The influence of perceptions of location on WTP and preference motives for urban parks. Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2017, 6: 204-224
[103] Latinopoulos D, Mallios Z, Latinopoulos P. Valuing the benefits of an urban park project: A contingent valuation study in Thessaloniki, Greece. Land Use Policy, 2016, 55: 130-141
[104] Xiao Y, Lu Y, Guo Y, et al. Estimating the willingness to pay for green space services in Shanghai: Implications for social equity in urban China. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2017, 26: 95-103
[105] Jim CY, Shan X. Socioeconomic effect on perception of urban green spaces in Guangzhou, China. Cities, 2013, 31: 123-131
[106] Sathyakumar V, Ramsankaran R, Bardhan R. Linking remotely sensed Urban Green Space (UGS) distribution patterns and Socio-Economic Status (SES): A multi-scale probabilistic analysis based in Mumbai, India. Giscience & Remote Sensing, 2019, 56: 645-669
[107] Sabyrbekov R, Dallimer M, Navrud S. Nature affinity and willingness to pay for urban green spaces in a deve-loping country. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2020, 194, doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.103700
[108] Chen H, Qiu L, Gao T. Application of the eight perceived sensory dimensions as a tool for urban green space assessment and planning in China. Urban Fores-try & Urban Greening, 2019, 40: 224-235
[109] Locke DH, Baine G. The good, the bad, and the inte-rested: How historical demographics explain present-day tree canopy, vacant lot and tree request spatial variability in New Haven, CT. Urban Ecosystems, 2014, 18: 391-409
[110] Abass K, Appiah DO, Afriyie K. Does green space matter? Public knowledge and attitude towards urban greenery in Ghana. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2019, 46, doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2019.126462
[111] Guenat S, Dougill AJ, Kunin WE, et al. Untangling the motivations of different stakeholders for urban greenspace conservation in sub-Saharan Africa. Ecosystem Services, 2019, 36, doi: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100904
[112] Arabomen OJ, Chirwa PW, Babalola FD. Willingness-to-pay for environmental services provided by trees in core and fringe areas of Benin City, Nigeria. Interna-tional Forestry Review, 2019, 21: 23-36
[113] Opacic V, Gasparovic S, Dolenc N. Analysis of recreational function of chosen green spaces in the city of Zagreb: Differences in visitors' habits. Geoadria, 2019, 24: 23-51
[114] Xu C, Haase D, Pribadi DO, et al. Spatial variation of green space equity and its relation with urban dynamics: A case study in the region of Munich. Ecological Indicators, 2018, 93: 512-523
[115] 姚雪松. 基于空间公平的城市公园供给与规划调控研究. 博士论文. 哈尔滨: 哈尔滨工业大学, 2019 [Yao X-S. Study of Urban Park Supply and Planning Regulation Based on Spatial Equity: A Case Study in Changchun. PhD Thesis. Harbin: Harbin Institute of Technology, 2019]
[116] Li LJ, Du QY, Ren F, et al. Assessing spatial accessibility to hierarchical urban parks by multi-types of travel distance in Shenzhen, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2019, 16, doi: 10.3390/ijerph16061038
[117] Tan CD, Tang YH, Wu XF. Evaluation of the equity of urban park green space based on population data spatialization: A case study of a central area of Wuhan, China. Sensors, 2019, 19, doi: 10.3390/s19132929
[118] Ortiz MSO, Geneletti D. Assessing mismatches in the provision of urban ecosystem services to support spatial planning: A case study on recreation and food supply in Havana, Cuba. Sustainability, 2018, 10, doi: 10.3390/su10072165
[119] Wu H, Liu L, Yu Y, et al. Evaluation and planning of urban green space distribution based on mobile phone data and two-step floating catchment area method. Sustainability, 2018, 10, doi: 10.3390/su10010214
[120] Kabisch N, Strohbach M, Haase D, et al. Urban green space availability in European cities. Ecological Indicators, 2016, 70: 586-596
[121] de Roo M. The Green City Guidelines. Wormerveer: Zwaan Printmedia, 2011
[122] 许基伟, 方世明, 刘春燕. 基于G2SFCA的武汉市中心城区公园绿地空间公平性分析. 资源科学, 2017, 39(3): 430-440 [Xu J-W, Fang S-M, Liu C-Y. Spatial equity of public green in Wuhan central districts based on gravity two-step floating catchment area method. Resources Science, 2017, 39(3): 430-440]
[123] Ji YW, Zhang L, Liu J, et al. Optimizing spatial distribution of urban green spaces by balancing supply and demand for ecosystem services. Journal of Chemistry, 2020, doi: 10.1155/2020/8474636
[124] Parsa VA, Salehi E, Yavari AR, et al. An improved method for assessing mismatches between supply and demand in urban regulating ecosystem services: A case study in Tabriz, Iran. PLoS One, 2019, 14: e0220750
[125] Natural England. “Nature Nearby” Accessible Natural Greenspace Guidance [EB/OL]. (2010-03-02) [2019-09-27]. https://www.naturalengland.org.uk.
[126] United Nations. Sustainable Development Goals Report: Goal 11 Make Cities and Human Settlements Inclusive [EB/OL]. (2016-03-03) [2019-09-27]. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/files/metadata-compilation/Metadata-Goal-11.pdf.

城市绿地供需的差异与联系研究进展

Research progress on the differences and connections between supply and demand of urban green space

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	邱瑶, 罗涛, 王琼, 蒋思雨. 夏热冬暖地区绿量构成对城市热环境的影响——以福州居住区为例 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(7): 1932-1940.
[2]	唐雨倩, 吴晓奕, 宗桦. 成都青羊区背街小巷行道树孢粉致敏风险分析 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(6): 1615-1621.
[3]	李海防, 俞洁蕾, 邵西宁, 周春玲. 半湿润地区城市绿地灌木的截留集水功能及其影响因素 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(5): 1363-1369.
[4]	李肖肖, 唐丽玉, 彭巍, 陈建新, 麻霞. 基于背包式激光雷达测量系统的城市绿地树木三维绿量估算方法 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(10): 2777-2784.
[5]	韩继刚, 李刚, 张维维, 刘文, 刘舒, 马想, 张浪, 朱永官. 城市绿地土壤健康质量问题与对策 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(1): 268-276.
[6]	李琪, 陈文波, 郑蕉, 谢涛, 卢陶捷. 南昌市中心城区绿地景观对PM_2.5的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(11): 3855-3862.
[7]	孙守家, 雷帅, 仇兰芬, 李春友, 舒健骅. 北京城市绿地与周边道路空气CO₂浓度和δ¹³C值的差异及影响因素 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(11): 3844-3854.
[8]	曹雅琴, 陈樟昊, 黄甘霖, 陈力原, 姜亚琼, 张征恺, 屠星月, 华野毓. 城市绿地格局与居民社会经济特征关系研究进展 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2019, 30(10): 3303-3315.
[9]	刘凤凤, 闫伟姣, 孔繁花, 尹海伟, 班玉龙, 徐文彬. 基于气温实地调查的城市绿地降温效应研究现状与未来展望 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2017, 28(4): 1387-1396.
[10]	孙守家1,2**,孟平1,2,张劲松1,2,舒健骅3,郑宁1,2 . 城市绿地系统内外CO₂浓度、δ¹³C、δ¹⁸O差异和来源及影响因素 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2015, 26(10): 3000-3010.
[11]	姚正阳,刘建军**. 西安市4种城市绿化灌木单株生物量估算模型 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2014, 25(1): 111-116.
[12]	李志国1,张过师1,刘毅1,万开元1,张润花2,陈防1**. 湖北省主要城市园林绿地土壤养分评价 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2013, 24(8): 2159-2165.
[13]	桂昆鹏1,徐建刚1,张翔2**. 基于供需分析的城市绿地空间布局优化——以南京市为例 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2013, 24(5): 1215-1223.
[14]	杨玉萍,周志翔,蔡绍平,高凯,贾若. 城市居民对城市近自然园林的态度——以武汉市洪山区为例 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2011, 22(07): 1849-1856.
[15]	张侃;张建英;陈英旭;朱荫湄. 基于土地利用变化的杭州市绿地生态服务价值CITYgreen模型评价 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2006, 17(10): 1918-1922 .