Next Article in Journal
Research on Urban Bearing Capacity of Gas Supply Stations
Next Article in Special Issue
The ‘GartenApp’: Assessing and Communicating the Ecological Potential of Private Gardens
Previous Article in Journal
A Novel Multi-Efficiency Optimization Method for Disassembly Line Balancing Problem
Previous Article in Special Issue
Emerging Urban Forests: Opportunities for Promoting the Wild Side of the Urban Green Infrastructure
Open AccessConcept Paper

A Conceptual Framework for Choosing Target Species for Wildlife-Inclusive Urban Design

1
Terrestrial Ecology Research Group, Department of Ecology and Ecosystem Management, School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technische Universität München, D-85354 Freising, Germany
2
Department of Biosciences, University of Salzburg, 5020 Salzburg, Austria
3
Department for Open Space Planning, University of Kassel, 34127 Kassel, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2019, 11(24), 6972; https://doi.org/10.3390/su11246972
Received: 1 November 2019 / Revised: 28 November 2019 / Accepted: 2 December 2019 / Published: 6 December 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Urban Development)
Recent research has highlighted the significance of cities for biodiversity, making them important places for conservation in their own right. Current conservation approaches in cities are mostly defensive. Thus, they focus on remnant pockets of natural areas or try to protect particular species that occur in the built environment. These approaches are vulnerable to further urban development and do not create habitats. An alternative strategy is to make wildlife an integral part of urban development and thereby create a new habitat in the built-up area. Here we address the challenge of choosing target species for such wildlife-inclusive urban design. The starting point of our conceptual framework is the regional species pool, which can be obtained from geo-referenced species data. The existing habitat types on and around the development site and dispersal barriers limit the species numbers to the local species potential. In the next step, the site’s potential for each species is analyzed—how can it be upgraded to host species given the planned development and the life-cycle of the species? For the final choice of target species, traits related to the human–animal interaction are considered. We suggest that stakeholders will be involved in the final species selection. Our approach differs from existing practice, such as expert choice of priority species, by (1) representing an open process where many species are potential targets of conservation, (2) the involvement of stakeholders in a participatory way. Our approach can also be used at larger spatial scales such as quarters or entire cities. View Full-Text
Keywords: urban planning; wildlife-inclusive urban design; human-wildlife interactions; biodiversity; urban design; stakeholder participation; geo-referenced species data; GIS urban planning; wildlife-inclusive urban design; human-wildlife interactions; biodiversity; urban design; stakeholder participation; geo-referenced species data; GIS
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Apfelbeck, B.; Jakoby, C.; Hanusch, M.; Steffani, E.B.; Hauck, T.E.; Weisser, W.W. A Conceptual Framework for Choosing Target Species for Wildlife-Inclusive Urban Design. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6972.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop