Re-Naturing the City: Linking Urban Political Ecology and Cultural Ecosystem Services
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. The Brescia Quarry Park: Physical Features and Activism of the Local Community
2.2. The Urban Political Ecology of Cultural Ecosystem Services
2.3. Cultural Ecosystem Services through a Participatory Mapping Process
3. Involving the Community in the CES Participatory Mapping Process
- -
- Which place do you want to indicate? Please briefly report anything that comes to mind (e.g., parks, gardens, reeds, fields, agricultural landscapes, streams, rivers, inhabited areas, old buildings, churches, etc.)
- -
- Can you localize it on this paper map?
- -
- Can you describe its characteristics?
- -
- How many times do you go to that place per month?
- -
- Is it accessible to everyone?
- -
- How many people do you meet?
- -
- What can be done in that place? What do you usually do in that place? What do people who frequent it do? (e.g., play or exercise, create or express yourself, producing something or taking care of something, collecting or consuming products)
- -
- What does that place offer, what kind of product or service does it produce? (looking at e.g., tourism, excursions, festivals or events, local food or drinks)
- -
- What benefits does that place give you, as an individual user and the community in terms of identity (e.g., belonging, sense of place, rootedness, spirituality, etc.), experiences (e.g., tranquility, inspiration, escape, discovery, etc.), capabilities (knowledge, health, judgement, etc.)?
4. Results
- Rural landscape (12 points/places): crops, streams, trees along the streams, “cascine” —old buildings typical of the Lombard agricultural landscape (CES: production, sense of place, excursions).
- Urban landscape (nine points/places): green paths and gardens, ancient historical buildings, churches (CES: environmental education/knowledge, spirituality, sense of place).
- Leisure landscape (eight points/places): the re-generated places around the quarry lakes (CES: outdoor activities, sports, excursions).
- Natural landscape (12 points/places): lakes and wetlands and the associated biodiversity in terms of flora and fauna (CES: ecological knowledge, education, inspiration).
- Industrial landscape (six points/places): signs of excavation or other industrial activities such as a spinning mill or a water mill, with a value in terms of industrial archeology (CES: sense of place, knowledge, education).
5. Discussion
- To recognize, protect and valorize the natural and cultural elements as well as the results of the transformation and re-transformation of city–nature relationships which co-determine each other [28] (pp. 11–12) and characterize the metabolism of the re-naturalized area. In line with Bieling et al. [120] (p. 28), our study reveals that “practices, activities, and experiences are closely related to perceived linkages between landscapes and well-being”. Re-naturing the city and in particular re-naturalizing this former industrial area produces benefits in terms of identities, experiences and capabilities.
- To consider the uneven power relations and the impact of the conflicts and strategies adopted by the local community and stakeholders. The renaturing process of the quarries began at the end of their exploitation and most quarry owners did not participate actively in the renaturalization. Therefore, the Local Municipality directly intervened in the transformation of these areas, which returned to being publicly owned, and in the monitoring of environmental conditions of soils and water lakes. Comparing this case study with the brownfield regeneration in Europe [42], it emerges that in our case the local community is the main actor in producing the socio–ecological transformation. The public intervention of the Local Administration characterized the following step and was based on the socio–ecological value of the area perceived by the local community. Now, citizens as well as local stakeholders such as farmers have to play a real role in achieving socio–ecological “sustainability” through a democratically controlled and organized process that identifies the strategies through which a more equitable distribution of social power and a reduction in impacts can be reached.
- To take into account the so-called “local networks” between what is inside and what is in the immediate vicinity. Sustainability is not to be found exclusively within the perimeter, but at the territory level as a whole. The logic behind the protection and valorization of the re-naturalized area is closely connected with the higher anthropogenic pressures implemented beyond the area’s borders [121] (pp. 127–128). The creation of a connective tissue of this green infrastructure [122] with the adjoining areas is therefore a good strategy to guarantee the survival and effectiveness of the protected area itself in terms of sustainability [123] (p. 13) and to maintain the capacity for self-reproduction of the entire territory.
- To take into account the so-called “global networks of ecosystems”: ecosystems exchange energy and material through a network of worldwide relationships [124,125]. In fact, the relationships analyzed link distant places and ecosystems together and allow us to relate local processes with wider socio–metabolic flows, networks, configurations, and dynamics. As Daniel et al. [110] underline, the ES framework allows to consider the full array of contributions that ecosystems provide for human well-being and it also allows recognition of the interconnectedness of ecosystems across the broad spatial scales over which ecosystems and humans interact. As Bieling et al. [120] state, even if CES are more spatially aggregated than other services, they also include synergies on a broader scale. In fact, when asked about linkages of mapped places to well-being, respondents frequently mentioned biophysical landscape features, that represent the basis of CES. As a consequence, the planning and management processes of this re-naturalized area have to take the ecosystem service categories into account as a whole.
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- European Commission. Living Well, within the Limits of Our Planet: General Union Environment Action Programme to 2020; Europäische Kommission, Ed.; Publication Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2014; ISBN 978-92-79-34724-5. [Google Scholar]
- Liberman, P.B. (Re)Greening the City: Urban Park Restoration as a Spatial Fix. Geogr. Compass 2010, 4, 1392–1407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Z.; Gao, X.; Wang, Z.; Fan, J. Big Data-Based Evaluation of Urban Parks: A Chinese Case Study. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Xie, Q.; Yue, Y.; Sun, Q.; Chen, S.; Lee, S.-B.; Kim, S.W. Assessment of Ecosystem Service Values of Urban Parks in Improving Air Quality: A Case Study of Wuhan, China. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Olwig, K.R. Landscape. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2015; pp. 224–230. ISBN 978-0-08-097087-5. [Google Scholar]
- Antrop, M. Landscape Change and the Urbanization Process in Europe. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2004, 67, 9–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scott, M.; Lennon, M.; Haase, D.; Kazmierczak, A.; Clabby, G.; Beatley, T. Nature-Based Solutions for the Contemporary City/Re-Naturing the City/Reflections on Urban Landscapes, Ecosystems Services and Nature-Based Solutions in Cities/Multifunctional Green Infrastructure and Climate Change Adaptation: Brownfield Greening as an Adaptation Strategy for Vulnerable Communities?/Delivering Green Infrastructure through Planning: Insights from Practice in Fingal, Ireland/Planning for Biophilic Cities: From Theory to Practice. Plan. Theory Pract. 2016, 17, 267–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Beatley, T. Green Cities of Europe; Island Press/Center for Resource Economics: Washington, DC, USA, 2012; ISBN 978-1-59726-220-0. [Google Scholar]
- Beatley, T. Biophilic Cities: Integrating Nature into Urban Design and Planning; EBSCO Ebook Academic Collection; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2010; ISBN 978-1-59726-986-5. [Google Scholar]
- Wheeler, S.M. Planning for Sustainability: Creating Livable, Equitable and Ecological Communities; Taylor & Francis: London, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2004; ISBN 978-1-134-35171-8. [Google Scholar]
- Wheeler, S.M.; Beatley, T. The Sustainable Urban Development Reader; Routledge urban reader series; Routledge: London, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2004; ISBN 978-0-415-31187-8. [Google Scholar]
- Howard, E. Garden Cities of To-Morrow: (Being the Second Edition of “To-Morrow: A Peaceful Path to Real Reform”); Garden City Association; S. Sonnenschein & Company, Limited: London, UK, 1902. [Google Scholar]
- Corbusier, L. The City of To-Morrow and Its Planning; J. Rodker: London, UK, 1929. [Google Scholar]
- Register, R. Ecocities: Building Cities in Balance with Nature; Berkeley Hills Books: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2002; ISBN 978-1-893163-37-9. [Google Scholar]
- Tsolakis, N.; Anthopoulos, L. Eco-Cities: An Integrated System Dynamics Framework and a Concise Research Taxonomy. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2015, 17, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Antrobus, D. Smart Green Cities: From Modernization to Resilience? Urban Res. Pract. 2011, 4, 207–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Premalatha, M.; Tauseef, S.M.; Abbasi, T.; Abbasi, S.A. The Promise and the Performance of the World’s First Two Zero Carbon Eco-Cities. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013, 25, 660–669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rapoport, E. Utopian Visions and Real Estate Dreams: The Eco-City Past, Present and Future: Utopian Visions and Real Estate Dreams. Geogr. Compass 2014, 8, 137–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tomozeiu, D.; Joss, S.; Cowley, R. Eco-Cities—A Global Survey 2011: Eco-City Profiles; University of Westminster: London, UK, 2011; ISBN 978-0-9570527-0-3. [Google Scholar]
- Tzaninis, Y.; Mandler, T.; Kaika, M.; Keil, R. Moving Urban Political Ecology beyond the ‘Urbanization of Nature’. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Connolly, C. Urban Political Ecology Beyond Methodological Cityism. Int. J. Urban Reg. Res. 2019, 43, 63–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heynen, N. Urban Political Ecology III: The Feminist and Queer Century. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2018, 42, 446–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Heynen, N. Urban Political Ecology II: The Abolitionist Century. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2016, 40, 839–845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heynen, N. Urban Political Ecology I: The Urban Century. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2014, 38, 598–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaika, M.; Swyngedouw, E. The Urbanization of Nature: Great Promises, Impasse, and New Beginnings. In The New Blackwell Companion to the City; Bridge, G., Watson, S., Eds.; Wiley-Blackwell: Oxford, UK, 2012; pp. 96–107. ISBN 978-1-4443-9510-5. [Google Scholar]
- Zimmer, A. Urban Political Ecology. Theoretical Concepts, Challenges, and Suggested Future Directions. Erdkunde 2010, 64, 343–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Swyngedouw, E.; Kaika, M. The Environment of the City… or the Urbanization of Nature. In A Companion to the City; Bridge, G., Watson, S., Eds.; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2008; pp. 567–580. ISBN 978-0-470-69341-4. [Google Scholar]
- Heynen, N.; Kaika, M.; Swyngedouw, E. In the Nature of Cities: Urban Political Ecology and the Politics of Urban Metabolism; Taylor & Francis: London, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2006; ISBN 978-1-134-20646-9. [Google Scholar]
- Swyngedouw, E. The City as a Hybrid: On Nature, Society and Cyborg Urbanization. Capital. Nat. Soc. 1996, 7, 65–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harvey, D. The Nature of Environment: Dialectics of Social and Environmental Change. In Social Register. Real Problems, False Solutions; Miliband, R., Panitch, L., Eds.; Merlin Press: London, UK, 1993; pp. 1–51. [Google Scholar]
- Swyngedouw, E. Circulations and Metabolisms: (Hybrid) Natures and (Cyborg) Cities. Sci. Cult. 2006, 15, 105–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Franz, M.; Güles, O.; Prey, G. Place-Making and “green” Reuses of Brownfields in the Ruhr. Tijdschrift Voor Economische en Sociale Geografie 2008, 99, 316–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raco, M. Assessing the Discourses and Practices of Urban Regeneration in a Growing Region. Geoforum 2003, 34, 37–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Healey, P. Planning in Relational Space and Time: Responding to New Realities. In A Companion to the City; Bridge, G., Watson, S., Eds.; Blackwell: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2000; pp. 517–530. [Google Scholar]
- Lefebvre, H. The Production of Space; Blackwell: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1991; ISBN 978-0-631-18177-4. [Google Scholar]
- Swyngedouw, E. Modernity and Hybridity: Nature, Regeneracionismo, and the Production of the Spanish Waterscape, 1890–1930. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 1999, 89, 443–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, H.; Zhu, Y.; Ahmad, N.; Han, Q. A Scientometric Analysis and Visualization of Global Research on Brownfields. Environ Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 17666–17684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Song, Y.; Kirkwood, N.; Maksimović, Č.; Zhen, X.; O’Connor, D.; Jin, Y.; Hou, D. Nature Based Solutions for Contaminated Land Remediation and Brownfield Redevelopment in Cities: A Review. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 663, 568–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cortinovis, C.; Geneletti, D. Mapping and Assessing Ecosystem Services to Support Urban Planning: A Case Study on Brownfield Regeneration in Trento, Italy. One Ecosyst. 2018, 3, e25477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hula, R. Reclaiming Brownfields. A Comparative Analysis of Adaptive Reuse of Contaminated Properties; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2012; ISBN 978-1-315-60390-2. [Google Scholar]
- Popescu, G.; Pǎtrǎşcoiu, R. Brownfield Sites—Between Abandonment and Redevelopment Case Study: Craiova City. Hum. Geogr. 2012, 6, 91–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Franz, M.; Pahlen, G.; Nathanail, P.; Okuniek, N.; Koj, A. Sustainable Development and Brownfield Regeneration. Environ. Sci. 2006, 3, 135–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yount, K.R. What Are Brownfields? Finding a Conceptual Definition. Environ. Pract. 2003, 5, 25–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rink, D.; Arndt, T. Investigating Perception of Green Structure Configuration for Afforestation in Urban Brownfield Development by Visual Methods-A Case Study in Leipzig, Germany. Urban For. Urban Green. 2016, 15, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harrison, C.; Davies, G. Conserving Biodiversity That Matters: Practitioners’ Perspectives on Brownfield Development and Urban Nature Conservation in London. J. Environ. Manag. 2002, 65, 95–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Sousa, C. Brownfield Redevelopment versus Greenfield Development: A Private Sector Perspective on the Costs and Risks Associated with Brownfield Redevelopment in the Greater Toronto Area. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2000, 43, 831–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EU Regional Policy. EU Regional Policy Workshop on Re-Using Brownfield Sites and Buildings; EU Regional Policy: Luxembourg, 2010; Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/archive/conferences/sustainable-growth/doc/rfec_brownfield_en.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2020).
- Baczyńska, E.; Lorenc, M.W.; Kaźmierczak, U. The Landscape Attractiveness of Abandoned Quarries. Geoheritage 2018, 10, 271–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vooslo, P. Post-Industrial Urban Quarries as Places of Recreation and the New Wilderness—A South African Perspective. Town Reg. Plan. 2018, 72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dal Sasso, P.; Ottolino, M.A.; Caliandro, L.P. Identification of Quarries Rehabilitation Scenarios: A Case Study Within the Metropolitan Area of Bari (Italy). Environ. Manag. 2012, 49, 1174–1191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lintukangas, M.; Suihkonen, A.; Salomäki, P.; Selonen, O. Post-Mining Solutions for Natural Stone Quarries. J. Min. Sci. 2012, 48, 123–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Damigos, D.; Kaliampakos, D. Assessing the Benefits of Reclaiming Urban Quarries: A CVM Analysis. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2003, 64, 249–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McLain, R.; Poe, M.; Biedenweg, K.; Cerveny, L.; Besser, D.; Blahna, D. Making Sense of Human Ecology Mapping: An Overview of Approaches to Integrating Socio-Spatial Data into Environmental Planning. Hum. Ecol. 2013, 41, 651–665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Municipality of Brescia. Relazione Proposta Plis Cave Brescia; Piano di Governo del Territorio: Brescia, Italy, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Ziyaee, M. Assessment of Urban Identity through a Matrix of Cultural Landscapes. Cities 2018, 74, 21–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Conzen, M.P. Cultural Landscape in Geography. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences; Smelser, N.J., Baltes, P.B., Eds.; Pergamon: Oxford, UK, 2001; pp. 3086–3092. ISBN 978-0-08-043076-8. [Google Scholar]
- Cosgrove, D.E. Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape; Croom Helm historical geography series; Croom Helm: London, UK, 1984; ISBN 978-0-7099-0780-0. [Google Scholar]
- Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (Program), Ed.; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005; ISBN 978-1-59726-040-4. [Google Scholar]
- Fish, R.; Church, A.; Winter, M. Conceptualising Cultural Ecosystem Services: A Novel Framework for Research and Critical Engagement. Ecosyst. Serv. 2016, 21, 208–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kull, C.A.; Arnauld de Sartre, X.; Castro-Larrañaga, M. The Political Ecology of Ecosystem Services. Geoforum 2015, 61, 122–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Peterson, M.J.; Hall, D.M.; Feldpausch-Parker, A.M.; Peterson, T.R. Obscuring Ecosystem Function with Application of the Ecosystem Services Concept. Conserv. Biol. 2010, 24, 113–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Norgaard, R.B. Ecosystem Services: From Eye-Opening Metaphor to Complexity Blinder. Ecol. Econ. 2010, 69, 1219–1227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Swift, M.J.; Izac, A.-M.N.; Van Noordwijk, M. Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in Agricultural Landscapes—Are We Asking the Right Questions? Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2004, 104, 113–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lamarque, P.; Quétier, F.; Lavorel, S. The Diversity of the Ecosystem Services Concept and Its Implications for Their Assessment and Management. Comptes Rendus Biol. 2011, 334, 441–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Van Hecken, G.; Bastiaensen, J. Payments for Ecosystem Services: Justified or Not? A Political View. Environ. Sci. Policy 2010, 13, 785–792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Corbera, E.; Brown, K.; Adger, N.W. The Equity and Legitimacy of Markets for Ecosystem Services. Dev. Change 2007, 38, 587–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daw, T.; Brown, K.; Rosendo, S.; Pomeroy, R. Applying the Ecosystem Services Concept to Poverty Alleviation: The Need to Disaggregate Human Well-Being. Environ. Conserv. 2011, 38, 370–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fairhead, J.; Leach, M.; Scoones, I. Green Grabbing: A New Appropriation of Nature? J. Peasant Stud. 2012, 39, 237–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gómez-Baggethun, E.; de Groot, R.; Lomas, P.L.; Montes, C. The History of Ecosystem Services in Economic Theory and Practice: From Early Notions to Markets and Payment Schemes. Ecol. Econ. 2010, 69, 1209–1218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heynen, N.; Robbins, P. The Neoliberalization of Nature: Governance, Privatization, Enclosure and Valuation. Capital. Nat. Soc. 2005, 16, 5–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McAfee, K. Nature in the Market-World: Ecosystem Services and Inequality. Development 2012, 55, 25–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mcafee, K. The Contradictory Logic of Global Ecosystem Services Markets. Dev. Chang. 2012, 43, 105–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCarthy, J.; Prudham, S. Neoliberal Nature and the Nature of Neoliberalism. Geoforum 2004, 35, 275–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Laurier, E. Participant observation. In Key Methods in Geography; Clifford, N.J., French, S., Valentine, G., Eds.; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2010; pp. 116–130. ISBN 978-1-4129-3508-1. [Google Scholar]
- Blakeley, G. Governing Ourselves: Citizen Participation and Governance in Barcelona and Manchester. Int. J. Urban Reg. Res. 2010, 34, 130–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guarneros-Meza, V.; Geddes, M. Local Governance and Participation under Neoliberalism: Comparative Perspectives. Int. J. Urban Reg. Res. 2010, 34, 115–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Silver, H.; Scott, A.; Kazepov, Y. Participation in Urban Contention and Deliberation. Int. J. Urban Reg. Res. 2010, 34, 453–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Swyngedouw, E. The Antinomies of the Postpolitical City: In Search of a Democratic Politics of Environmental Production. Int. J. Urban Reg. Res. 2009, 33, 601–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tononi, M.; Pietta, A.; Bonati, S. Alternative Spaces of Urban Sustainability: Results of a First Integrative Approach in the Italian City of Brescia. Geogr. J. 2017, 183, 187–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Swyngedouw, E.; Heynen, N.C. Urban Political Ecology, Justice and the Politics of Scale. Antipode 2003, 35, 898–918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Canedoli, C.; Bullock, C.; Collier, M.J.; Joyce, D.; Padoa-Schioppa, E. Public Participatory Mapping of Cultural Ecosystem Services: Citizen Perception and Park Management in the Parco Nord of Milan (Italy). Sustainability 2017, 9, 891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rall, E.; Bieling, C.; Zytynska, S.; Haase, D. Exploring City-Wide Patterns of Cultural Ecosystem Service Perceptions and Use. Ecol. Indic. 2017, 77, 80–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buchel, S.; Frantzeskaki, N. Citizens’ Voice: A Case Study about Perceived Ecosystem Services by Urban Park Users in Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Ecosyst. Serv. 2015, 12, 169–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Langemeyer, J.; Baró, F.; Roebeling, P.; Gómez-Baggethun, E. Contrasting Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in Urban Areas: The Case of Park Montjuïc in Barcelona. Ecosyst. Serv. 2015, 12, 178–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zwierzchowska, I.; Hof, A.; Iojă, I.C.; Mueller, C.; Poniży, L.; Breuste, J.; Mizgajski, A. Multi-Scale Assessment of Cultural Ecosystem Services of Parks in Central European Cities. Urban For. Urban Green. 2018, 30, 84–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bertram, C.; Rehdanz, K. Preferences for Cultural Urban Ecosystem Services: Comparing Attitudes, Perception, and Use. Ecosyst. Serv. 2015, 12, 187–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tononi, M.; Pietta, A. Moving through the quarries park. The case of Brescia. In Pedestrians, Urban Spaces and Health, Proceedings of the XXIV International Conference on Living and Walking in Cities, Brescia, Italy, 12–13 September 2019; Tira, M., Pezzagno, M., Richiedei, A., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2020; pp. 186–190. ISBN 978-1-00-302737-9. [Google Scholar]
- Kindon, S.L.; Pain, R.; Kesby, M. Participatory Action Research Approaches and Methods: Connecting People, Participation and Place; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2007; ISBN 978-0-415-40550-8. [Google Scholar]
- Breitbart, M.M. Participatory research methods. In Key Methods in Geography; Clifford, N.J., French, S., Valentine, G., Eds.; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2010; pp. 141–156. ISBN 978-1-4129-3508-1. [Google Scholar]
- Cornwall, A.; Jewkes, R. What Is Participatory Research? Soc. Sci. Med. 2010, 1667–1676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kesby, M.; Kindon, S.L.; Pain, R. Participatory approaches and diagramming techniques. In Methods in Human Geography: A Guide for Students Doing a Research Project; Flowerdew, R., Martin, D.M., Eds.; Pearson Prentice Hall: London, UK, 2008; ISBN 978-1-315-83727-7. [Google Scholar]
- McLafferty, S.L. Conducting questionnaire surveys. In Key Methods in Geography; Clifford, N.J., French, S., Valentine, G., Eds.; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2010; pp. 77–88. ISBN 978-1-4129-3508-1. [Google Scholar]
- Burini, F. Cartografia Partecipativa. Mapping per La Governance Ambientale e Urbana; Nuove geografie; Franco Angeli: Milano, Italy, 2016; ISBN 978-88-917-4087-8. [Google Scholar]
- Casti, E. Reflexive Cartography: A New Perspective in Mapping; Elsevier Science: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2015; ISBN 978-0-12-803556-6. [Google Scholar]
- Brown, G.; Kyttä, M. Key Issues and Research Priorities for Public Participation GIS (PPGIS): A Synthesis Based on Empirical Research. Appl. Geogr. 2014, 46, 122–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Craig, W.J.; Harris, T.M.; Weiner, D. Community Participation and Geographical Information Systems; CRC Press: London, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2002; ISBN 978-0-203-46948-4. [Google Scholar]
- Elwood, S. Geographic Information Science: Emerging Research on the Societal Implications of the Geospatial Web. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2010, 34, 349–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brown, G. Public Participation GIS (PPGIS) for Regional and Environmental Planning: Reflections on a Decade of Empirical Research. URISA J. 2012, 25, 7–18. [Google Scholar]
- Capineri, C.; Haklay, M.; Huang, H.; Antoniou, V.; Kettunen, J.; Ostermann, F.; Purves, R. European Handbook of Crowdsourced Geographic Information; Ubiquity Press: London, UK, 2016; ISBN 978-1-909188-79-2. [Google Scholar]
- Goodchild, M.F. Citizens as Sensors: The World of Volunteered Geography. GeoJournal 2007, 69, 211–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Soini, K. Exploring Human Dimensions of Multifunctional Landscapes through Mapping and Map-Making. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2001, 57, 225–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perkins, C. Cartography: Mapping Theory. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2003, 27, 341–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fox, J. Siam Mapped and Mapping in Cambodia: Boundaries, Sovereignty, and Indigenous Conceptions of Space. Soc. Nat. Resour. 2002, 15, 65–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peluso, N.L. Whose Woods Are These? Counter-Mapping Forest Territories in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Antipode 1995, 27, 383–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rundstrom, R.A. A Cultural Interpretation of Inuit Map Accuracy. Geogr. Rev. 1990, 80, 155–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harley, J.B. Maps, Knowledge and power. In The Iconography of Landscape: Essays on the Symbolic Representation, Design and Use of Past Environments; Cosgrove, D.E., Daniels, S., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1988; pp. 277–312. [Google Scholar]
- Bethel, M.B.; Brien, L.F.; Danielson, E.J.; Laska, S.B.; Troutman, J.P.; Boshart, W.M.; Giardino, M.J.; Phillips, M.A. Blending Geospatial Technology and Traditional Ecological Knowledge to Enhance Restoration Decision-Support Processes in Coastal Louisiana. J. Coast. Res. 2011, 27, 555–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Herlihy, P.H. Participatory Research Mapping of Indigenous Lands in Darién, Panama. Hum. Organ. 2003, 62, 315–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Claval, P. Reading the Rural Landscapes. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2005, 70, 9–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daniel, T.C.; Muhar, A.; Arnberger, A.; Aznar, O.; Boyd, J.W.; Chan, K.M.A.; Costanza, R.; Elmqvist, T.; Flint, C.G.; Gobster, P.H.; et al. Contributions of Cultural Services to the Ecosystem Services Agenda. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, 8812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Council of Europe. European Landscape Convention; Council of Europe: Strasbourg, France, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Castree, N. Nature; Key Ideas in Geography; Taylor & Francis: London, UK, 2005; ISBN 978-1-134-30216-1. [Google Scholar]
- Castree, N.; Braun, B. Social Nature: Theory, Practice and Politics; Blackwell: Oxford, UK, 2001; ISBN 978-0-631-21568-4. [Google Scholar]
- Castree, N.; Braun, B. Remaking Reality: Nature at the Millenium; Routledge: London, UK, 1998; ISBN 978-0-415-14493-3. [Google Scholar]
- Connolly, C. Landscape Political Ecologies of Urban "swiftlet Farming’ in George Town, Malaysia. Cult. Geogr. 2017, 24, 421–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, K.M.A.; Goldstein, J.; Satterfield, T.; Hannahs, N.; Kikiloi, K.; Naidoo, R.; Vadeboncoeur, N.; Woodside, U. Cultural services and non-use values. In Natural Capital; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2011; ISBN 978-0-19-958899-2. [Google Scholar]
- Lowenthal, D. The Past Is a Foreign Country; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1985; ISBN 978-0-521-29480-5. [Google Scholar]
- Pagani, L. Il lago d’Iseo tra passato e presente. Note geografiche. In Atlante del Sebino e della Franciacorta: Uomini, Vicende, Paesi; Atlante bresciano; Grafo: Brescia, Italy, 1983; pp. 125–168. ISBN 978-88-7385-193-6. [Google Scholar]
- Dematteis, G. La Geografia Dei Beni Culturali Come Sapere Progettuale. Rivista Geografica Italiana 1998, 105, 25–35. [Google Scholar]
- Bieling, C.; Plieninger, T.; Pirker, H.; Vogl, C.R. Linkages between Landscapes and Human Well-Being: An Empirical Exploration with Short Interviews. Ecol. Econ. 2014, 105, 19–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gambino, R.; Segre, A. Quadri ambientali e patrimonio culturale. In Geografia Politica delle Regioni Italiane; Coppola, P., Ed.; Biblioteca Einaudi; Einaudi: Torino, Italy, 1997; pp. 95–145. ISBN 978-88-06-14121-9. [Google Scholar]
- Petrişor, A.-I.; Andronache, I.C.; Petrişor, L.E.; Ciobotaru, A.-M.; Peptenatu, D. Assessing the Fragmentation of the Green Infrastructure in Romanian Cities Using Fractal Models and Numerical Taxonomy. Procedia Environ. Sci. 2016, 32, 110–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ruocco, D. Beni Culturali e Geografia. Studi e Ricerche di Geografia 1979, 2, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Odum, E.P. Ecology: A Bridge Between Science and Society; Sinauer Associates: Sunderland, MA, USA, 1997; ISBN 978-0-87893-630-4. [Google Scholar]
- Volk, T. Gaia’s Body: Toward a Physiology of Earth; Copernicus Books/Springer-Verlag: New York, NY, USA, 1998; ISBN 978-0-387-98270-0. [Google Scholar]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Pietta, A.; Tononi, M. Re-Naturing the City: Linking Urban Political Ecology and Cultural Ecosystem Services. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1786. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041786
Pietta A, Tononi M. Re-Naturing the City: Linking Urban Political Ecology and Cultural Ecosystem Services. Sustainability. 2021; 13(4):1786. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041786
Chicago/Turabian StylePietta, Antonella, and Marco Tononi. 2021. "Re-Naturing the City: Linking Urban Political Ecology and Cultural Ecosystem Services" Sustainability 13, no. 4: 1786. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13041786