What Is the Future of the Bush Capital? A Socio-Ecological Approach to Enhancing Canberra’s Green Infrastructure
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- (1)
- What are the socio-cultural and ecological values and perspectives regarding Canberra’s green spaces from the perspective of relevant experts?
- (2)
- What are the perceived opportunities and challenges associated with GI planning and green space design practice in Canberra from experts’ perspectives?
- (3)
- How can socio-ecological benefits and concerns regarding Canberra’s existing green spaces be articulated better in future GI planning and governance?
2. Methods
2.1. Case Study
2.2. Methodology
3. Results
3.1. Ecological Perspective
P1: “NCOSS has a high biodiversity value and a high level of volunteers.”
P4: “Many cities are trying to retrofit their cities to have such a thing. NCOSS is a great asset and valued by the community and by the governments.”
P7: “…the beautiful bird life we have in Canberra is because we’ve got trees for those birds to live in…although there are plantings of eucalyptus in some of the public open spaces along creeks and parks as a proportion of the overall area, I don’t think that’s sufficient to maintain the biodiversity values that people also appreciate.”
3.2. The Social Perspective
3.3. GI Planning: Opportunities and Challenges
3.4. GI Governance
4. Discussion
4.1. Abundance of Green Spaces and Maintenance Challenges
4.2. Green Space Connectivity and Multifunctionality for People and the Environment’s Sake
4.3. From Drawing Strategy to Design and Implementation
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Breheny, M. Urban compaction: Feasible and acceptable? Citiesno 1997, 14, 209–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cooper, J.; Donegan, K.; Ryley, T.; Smyth, A.; Granzow, E. Densification and Urban Compaction Reinforcing the Drive for Sustainability. Transp. Res. Rec. 2002, 1817, 102–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jim, C.Y. Green-space preservation and allocation for sustainable greening of compact cities. Cities 2004, 21, 311–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Australian Institute of Landscape Architects. Adapting to Climate Change-Green Infrastructure; Australian Institute of Landscape Architects: Canberra, Australia, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Matthews, T.; Lo, A.Y.; Byrne, J.A. Reconceptualizing green infrastructure for climate change adaptation: Barriers to adoption and drivers for uptake by spatial planners. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2015, 138, 155–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Norton, B.A.; Coutts, A.M.; Livesley, S.J.; Harris, R.J.; Hunter, A.M.; Williams, N.S.G. Planning for cooler cities: A framework to prioritise green infrastructure to mitigate high temperatures in urban landscapes. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2015, 134, 127–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hrdalo, I.; Tomić, D.; Pereković, P. Implementation of green infrastructure principles in Dubrovnik, Croatia to minimize climate change problems. Urbani Izziv. 2015, 26, S38–S49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sandström, U.G. Green infrastructure planning in urban Sweden. Plan. Pract. Res. 2002, 17, 373–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grunewald, K.; Richter, B.; Meinel, G.; Herold, H.; Syrbe, R.U. Proposal of indicators regarding the provision and accessibility of green spaces for assessing the ecosystem service ‘recreation in the city’ in Germany. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manag. 2017, 13, 26–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mata, L.; Ramalho, C.E.; Kennedy, J.; Parris, K.M.; Valentine, L.; Miller, M.; Bekessy, S.; Hurley, S.; Cumpston, Z. Bringing nature back into cities. People Nat. 2020, 2, 350–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Byrne, J.; Jinjun, Y. Can urban greenspace combat climate change? Towards a subtropical cities research agenda. Aust. Plan. 2009, 46, 36–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benedict, M.A.; McMahon, E.T. Green Infrastructure: Smart Conservation for the 21 Century. Renew. Resour. J. 2002, 20, 12–17. [Google Scholar]
- Mell, I.C. Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail ? Examining the ‘ green ’ of Green Infrastructure development. Local Environ. 2013, 18, 152–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liao, K.H. The socio - ecological practice of building blue-green infrastructure in high-density cities: What does the ABC Waters Program in Singapore tell us ? Socio-Ecol. Pract. Res. 2019, 1, 67–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Wright, H. Understanding green infrastructure: The development of a contested concept in England. Local Environ. 2011, 16, 1003–1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Capotorti, G.; Ortí, M.M.A.; Copiz, R.; Fusaro, L.; Mollo, B.; Salvatori, E.; Zavattero, L. Biodiversity and ecosystem services in urban green infrastructure planning: A case study from the metropolitan area of Rome (Italy). Urban For. Urban Green. 2019, 37, 87–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hunter, A.J.; Luck, G.W. Defining and measuring the social-ecological quality of urban greenspace: A semi-systematic review. Urban Ecosyst. 2015, 18, 1139–1163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gulsrud, N.M.; Hertzog, K.; Shears, I. Innovative urban forestry governance in Melbourne?: Investigating ‘green placemaking’ as a nature-based solution. Environ. Res. 2018, 161, 158–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heymans, A.; Breadsell, J.; Morrison, G.M.; Byrne, J.J.; Eon, C. Ecological urban planning and design: A systematic literature review. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- de Groot, R.S.; Alkemade, R.; Braat, L.; Hein, L.; Willemen, L. Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol. Complex. 2010, 7, 260–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mooney, P. A systematic approach to incorporating multiple ecosystem services in landscape planning and design. Landsc. J. 2014, 33, 141–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Millenium Ecosystem Assessment Synthesis Report; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Hagemann, F.A.; Randrup, T.B.; Sang, Å.O. Challenges to implementing the urban ecosystem service concept in green infrastructure planning: A view from practitioners in Swedish municipalities. Socio-Ecol. Pract. Res. 2020, 2, 283–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tzoulas, K.; Korpela, K.; Venn, S.; Yli-Pelkonen, V.; Kaźmierczak, A.; Niemela, J.; James, P. Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using Green Infrastructure: A literature review. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2007, 81, 167–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Buffam, I.; Hagemann, F.A.; Emilsson, T.; Gamstetter, D.; Pálsdóttir, A.M.; Randrup, T.B.; Yeshitela, K.; Ode Sang, Å. Priorities and barriers for urban ecosystem service provision: A comparison of stakeholder perspectives from three cities. Front. Sustain. Cities 2022, 4, 838971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pauleit, S.; Andersson, E.; Anton, B.; Buijs, A.; Haase, D.; Hansen, R.; Kowarik, I.; Stahl Olafsson, A.; Van der Jagt, S. Urban green infrastructure–connecting people and nature for sustainable cities. Urban For. Urban Green. 2019, 40, 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zuniga-teran, A.A.; Staddon, C.; de Vito, L.; Gerlak, A.K.; Ward, S.; Schoeman, Y.; Hart, A.; Booth, G. Challenges of mainstreaming green infrastructure in built environment professions. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2020, 63, 710–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Almulhim, A.I.; Bibri, S.E.; Sharifi, A.; Ahmad, S.; Almatar, K.M. Emerging Trends and Knowledge Structures of Urbanization and Environmental Sustainability: A Regional Perspective. Sustainability 2022, 14, 13195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beatley, T.; Newman, P. Green Urbanism down Under: Learning from Sustainable Communities in Australia; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Stenhouse, R.N. Local government conservation and management of native vegetation in urban Australia. Environ. Manag. 2004, 34, 209–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Williams, N.S.G.; McDonnell, M.J.; Seager, E.J. Factors influencing the loss of an endangered ecosystem in an urbanising landscape: A case study of native grasslands from Melbourne, Australia. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2005, 71, 35–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garrard, G.E.; Williams, N.S.G.; Mata, L.; Thomas, J.; Bekessy, S.A. Biodiversity Sensitive Urban Design. Conserv. Lett. 2018, 11, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alexandra, J.; Norman, B. The city as forest-integrating living infrastructure, climate conditioning and urban forestry in Canberra, Australia. Sustain. Earth 2020, 3, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, B.; Brack, C.L. Urban forest responses to climate change: A case study in Canberra. Urban For. Urban Green. 2020, 57, 126910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cooke, B. The politics of urban greening: An introduction. Aust. Geogr. 2020, 51, 137–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Irga, P.J.; Braun, J.T.; Douglas, A.N.J.; Pettit, T.; Fujiwara, S.; Burchett, M.D.; Torpy, F.R. The distribution of green walls and green roofs throughout Australia: Do policy instruments in fl uence the frequency of projects ? Urban For. Urban Green. 2017, 24, 164–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ACT Government. ACT Planning Strategy 2018; Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate, ACT: Canberra, Australia, 2018.
- Mofrad, F.; Ignatieva, M.; Vernon, C. The discourses, opportunities, and constraints in Canberra’ s Green Infrastructure planning. Urban For. Urban Green. 2022, 74, 127628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steffen, W.; Burbidge, A.; Hughes, L.; Kitching, R.; Lindenmayer, D.; Musgrave, W.; Smith, M.S.; Werner, P. Australia’s Biodiversity and Climate Change: A Strategic Assessment of the Vulnerability of Australia’s Biodiversity to Climate Change; The Department of Climate Change: Canberra, Australia, 2009.
- Mackenzie, S.; Wood-Bradley, I.; Headon, D.; Vernon, C. The Griffin Legacy: Canberra the Nation’s Capital in the 21st Century; National Capital Authority: Canberra, Australia, 2004.
- Vernon, C. Where Landscape is Pre-eminent. In Planning Twentieth Century Capital Cities; Gordon, D.L., Ed.; Routledge: Canberra, Australia, 2006; pp. 130–149. [Google Scholar]
- Freestone, R. Greenbelts in City and Regional Planning. In From Garden City to Green City; Parsons, K.C., Schuyler, D., Eds.; Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD, USA, 2002; pp. 67–98. [Google Scholar]
- Morison, I. Whatever became of Canberra’ s Y-Plan ? Aust. Plan. 1987, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- National Capital Authority. National Capital Plan; National Capital Authority: Canberra, Australia, 2016.
- Pauli, N.; Mouat, C.M.; Prendergast, K.; Chalmer, L.; Ramalho, C.E.; Ligtermoet, E. The Social and Ecological Values of Native Gardens along Streets: A Socio-Ecological Study in the Suburbs of Perth; Report for the Clean Air and Urban Landscapes Hub (CAUL): Melbourne, Australia, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dickinson, D.C.; Ramalho, C.E. A balancing act: Biodiversity and human wellbeing considerations in the management of urban forest in a global biodiversity hotspot. Urban For. Urban Green. 2022, 74, 127656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kelley, K.; Clark, B.; Brown, V.; Sitzia, J. Good practice in the conduct and reporting of survey research. Int. J. Qual. Health Care 2003, 15, 261–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Bryman, A. Social Research Methods, 5th ed.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Palinkas, L.A.; Horwitz, S.M.; Green, C.A.; Wisdom, J.P.; Duan, N.; Hoagwood, K. Purposeful Sampling for Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis in Mixed Method Implementation Research. Adm. Policy Ment. Health Ment. Health Serv. Res. 2015, 42, 533–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Deming, M.E.; Swaffield, S. Landscape Architectural Research: Inquiry, Strategy, Design, 1st ed.; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Hsieh, H.F.; Shannon, S.E. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual. Health Res. 2005, 15, 1277–1288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Şenik, B.; Uzun, O. A process approach to the open green space system planning. Landsc. Ecol. Eng. 2022, 18, 203–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ely, M.; Pitman, S. Green infrastructure: Life support for human habitats, Botanic Gardens of South Australia. Green Infrastructure, Botanic Gardens of South Australia. 2014. Available online: http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/botanicgardens/Learn/Green_Infrastructure (accessed on 12 December 2022).
- Parker, J.; Simpson, G.D. A theoretical framework for bolstering human-nature connections and urban resilience via green infrastructure. Land 2020, 9, 252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, B.; Zhang, Q.; Cui, F. Scientific Research on Ecosystem Services and Human Well-Being: A Bibliometric Analysis. Ecol. Indic. 2021, 125, 107449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davies, C.; MacFarlane, R.; McGloin, C.; Roe, M. Green Infrastructure Planning Guide. Project: Final Report 2006. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265012095_GREEN_INFRASTRUCTURE_PLANNING_GUIDE_Authors?channel=doi&linkId=564dbb4208aeafc2aab0069f&showFulltext=true (accessed on 21 September 2021).
- Kirkpatrick, J.B.; Daniels, G.D.; Davison, A. Temporal and spatial variation in garden and street trees in six eastern Australian cities. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2011, 101, 244–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eyles, K. Harness the ‘love’–using social connections to re-frame how we manage urban nature reserves. In Proceedings of the SOAC 2017, 8th State of Australian Cities National Conference, Adelaide, Australia, 28–30 November 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thornton, A. ‘The Lucky country ’? A critical exploration of community gardens and city–community relations in Australian cities. Local Environ. 2017, 22, 969–985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Artmann, M.; Sartison, K. The role of urban agriculture as a nature-based solution: A review for developing a systemic assessment framework. Sustainability 2018, 10, 1937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Edmondson, J.L.; Cunningham, H.; Densley Tingley, D.O.; Dobson, M.C.; Grafius, D.R.; Leake, J.R.; McHugh, N.; Nickles, J.; Phoenix, G.K.; Ryan, A.J.; et al. The hidden potential of urban horticulture. Nat. Food 2020, 1, 155–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Guitart, D.A.; Pickering, C.M.; Byrne, J.A. Color me healthy: Food diversity in school community gardens in two rapidly urbanising australian cities. Health Place 2014, 26, 110–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ligtermoet, E.; Ramalho, C.E.; Martinus, K.; Chalmer, L.; Pauli, N. Stakeholder Perspectives on the Role of the Street Verge in Delivering Ecosystem Services: A Study from the Perth Metropolitan Region; Report for the Clean Air and Urban Landscapes (CAUL) Hub: Melbourne, Australia, 2021; Available online: https://api.research-repository.uwa.edu.au/ws/portalfiles/portal/105428416/StakeholderValuesofVerges_2021_03_16_Final.pdf (accessed on 18 July 2022).
- Kingsley, J.; Egerer, M.; Nuttman, S.; Keniger, L.; Pettitt, P.; Frantzeskaki, N.; Gray, T.; Ossola, A.; Lin, B.; Bailey, A.; et al. Urban agriculture as a nature-based solution to address socio-ecological challenges in Australian cities. Urban For. Urban Green. 2021, 60, 127059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Robin, L. Nationalising nature: Wattle days in Australia Nationalising Nature: Wattle Days in Australia. J. Aust. Stud. 2002, 26, 13–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gooch, M. A sense of place: Ecological identity as a driver for catchment volunteering. Aust. J. Volunt. 2003, 8, 23–32. Available online: http://www.ozcoasts.gov.au/nrm_rpt/pdf/RRR03_Sense_of_place.pdf (accessed on 5 May 2022).
- Lisle, J. Climate change adaptation: The role of biodiversity in Urban open space. Aust. Plan. 2010, 47, 113–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wellmann, T.; Andersson, E.; Knapp, S.; Lausch, A.; Palliwoda, J.; Priess, J.; Scheuer, S.; Haase, D. Reinforcing nature-based solutions through tools providing social-ecological-technological integration. Ambio 2022. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kirk, H.; Garrard, G.E.; Croeser, T.; Backstrom, A.; Berthon, K.; Furlong, C.; Hurley, J.; Thomas, F.; Webb, A.; Bekessy, S.A. Building biodiversity into the urban fabric: A case study in applying Biodiversity Sensitive Urban Design (BSUD). Urban For. Urban Green. 2021, 62, 127176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frantzeskaki, N.; Ossola, A.; Bush, J. Nature-based solutions for changing urban landscapes: Lessons from Australia. Urban For. Urban Green. 2022, 73, 127611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahern, J. From fail-safe to safe-to-fail: Sustainability and resilience in the new urban world. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2011, 100, 341–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hansen, R.; Pauleit, S. From Multifunctionality to Multiple Ecosystem Services? A Conceptual Framework for Multifunctionality in Green Infrastructure Planning for Urban Areas. Ambio 2014, 43, 516–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Benedict, M.; Mahon, E.A.M.C. Green Infrastructure: Linking Landscapes and Communities; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Garmendia, E.; Apostolopoulou, E.; Adams, W.M.; Bormpoudakis, D. Biodiversity and Green Infrastructure in Europe: Boundary object or ecological trap ? Land Use Policy 2016, 56, 315–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Meerow, S.; Newell, J.P. Spatial planning for multifunctional green infrastructure: Growing resilience in Detroit. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2017, 159, 62–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hansen, R.; Olafsson, A.S.; van der Jagt, A.P.N.; Rall, E.; Pauleit, S. Planning multifunctional green infrastructure for compact cities: What is the state of practice? Ecol. Indic. 2019, 96, 99–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gholami, M.; Torreggiani, D.; Tassinari, P.; Barbaresi, A. Developing a 3D City Digital Twin: Enhancing Walkability through a Green Pedestrian Network ( GPN ) in the City of Imola, Italy. Land 2022, 11, 1917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hämäläinen, M. Urban development with dynamic digital twins in Helsinki city. IET Smart Cities 2021, 3, 201–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ignatieva, M.; Stewart, G.H.; Meurk, C. Planning and design of ecological networks in urban areas. Landsc. Ecol. Eng. 2011, 7, 17–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ignatieva, M. Evolution of the Approaches to Planting Design of Parks and Gardens as Main Greenspaces of Green Infrastructure. In Urban Services to Ecosystems. Future City, Vol 17; Catalano, C., Andreucci, M.B., Guarino, R., Bretzel, F., Leone, M., Pasta, S., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 435–452. [Google Scholar]
- ACT Government. ACT Climate Change Strategy 2019-25; Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate: Canberra, Australia, 2019.
- ACT Government. Canberra’s Living Infrastructure Plan: Cooling the City; Australian Capital Territory, Environment Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate: Canberra, Australia, 2019.
- ACT Government Environment Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate- Environment. Act Practice Guidelines for Water Sensitive Urban Design; ACT: Canberra, Australia, 2017.
- Lien, M.E.; Davison, A. ROOTS, RUPTURE AND The Tasmanian Lives of the Monterey Pine. J. Mater. Cult. 2010, 15, 233–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Participants (P) | Expertise |
---|---|
P1 | Landscape Architecture |
P2 | Urban Ecology |
P3 | Urban Design |
P4 | Town and Regional Planning and Urban Governance |
P5 | Urban ecology and Botany |
P6 | Urban planning |
P7 | Urban Forestry |
P8 | Urban Forestry and environmental science |
P9 | Urban design |
P10 | Urban Planning |
P11 | Landscape Architecture and urban design |
P12 | Landscape Architecture |
Total | 12 |
| |
1 | Includes education, academic position, research focus, and study experience on the urban green spaces and GI (in Canberra and Australia) |
| |
2 | Which type of green space, in your opinion, is more vulnerable to climate-related challenges and urban development pressure in Canberra? (Why? Which factors do they contain that make them more vulnerable?) |
3 | Which type of green space, in your opinion, is more resilient? (Why? Which factors do they contain that make them resilient?) |
| |
4 | Which type of green space in Canberra is more associated with socio-cultural values? |
5 | How can we involve socio-cultural values in urban GI planning? |
6 | What is the contribution of native and exotic trees in creating green spaces’ cultural and social values? |
| |
7 | Which types of UGS are more important in the planning of Australian cities and particularly in Canberra? Please explain why you think they are more important (e.g., culturaland ecological significance, national significance, etc.) |
8 | What are the strengths and challenges in GI planning practice in Australia? What about Canberra? What are the research gaps in GI planning? |
9 | How can the government use community resources to better manage and maintain green spaces? |
10 | What steps are necessary for GI planning for sustainable development patterns (implications for policymakers, community groups, etc.)? |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2022 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 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Mofrad, F.; Ignatieva, M. What Is the Future of the Bush Capital? A Socio-Ecological Approach to Enhancing Canberra’s Green Infrastructure. Land 2023, 12, 39. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12010039
Mofrad F, Ignatieva M. What Is the Future of the Bush Capital? A Socio-Ecological Approach to Enhancing Canberra’s Green Infrastructure. Land. 2023; 12(1):39. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12010039
Chicago/Turabian StyleMofrad, Fahimeh, and Maria Ignatieva. 2023. "What Is the Future of the Bush Capital? A Socio-Ecological Approach to Enhancing Canberra’s Green Infrastructure" Land 12, no. 1: 39. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12010039
APA StyleMofrad, F., & Ignatieva, M. (2023). What Is the Future of the Bush Capital? A Socio-Ecological Approach to Enhancing Canberra’s Green Infrastructure. Land, 12(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12010039