Top

Published in:

2023 | OriginalPaper | Chapter

Bridging the People–Nature Divide Using the Participatory Planning of Urban Protected Areas

Authors : Cristian Ioja, Jürgen Breuste, Gabriel-Ovidiu Vânău, Constantina-Alina Hossu, Mihai-Răzvan Niţă, Ana-Maria Popa, Diana-Andreea Onose, Andreea-Raluca Slave

Published in: Making Green Cities

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Urban protected areas offer evident benefits for urban biodiversity, residents, economies and public administration. These benefits are related to the management practices, which have to consider challenges and stakeholder’s interests. This chapter aims to demonstrate the utility of participatory planning instruments in obtaining a consensus between stakeholders for urban protected area management. We tested different participatory planning methods in Văcărești Nature Park (VNP), located in Bucharest, Romania. We used a social survey, an online GIS platform and role-playing workshops. Our results show that participatory planning can bring up many advantages for urban protected areas. The spatial knowledge of local people concerning threats and problems, the position of different stakeholders, and the mapping of species or ecosystem services are only a few of them. We found out that only 45.6% of the residents living in the VNP neighborhood visit the location frequently, VNP being completely unattractive for children. The limited attractivity is related to low security, non-aesthetic landscapes and limited amenities. In terms of management practices, we found a gap between what people expect from VNP, what public decision-makers want it to be and what the real state of facts is. Hence, participatory planning should be considered in urban management.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

previous chapter Urban Protected Areas and Urban Biodiversity

next chapter The Nature Outside Cities: Trade-Offs and Synergies of Cultural Ecosystem Services from Natura 2000 Sites

Artmann M, Kohler M, Meinel G, Gan J, Ioja I-C (2019) How smart growth and green infrastructure can mutually support each other—a conceptual framework for compact and green cities. Ecol Ind 96:10–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOLIND.2017.07.001CrossRef

Ayana AN, Arts B, Wiersum KF (2018) How environmental NGOs have influenced decision making in a ‘semi-authoritarian’ state: the case of forest policy in Ethiopia. World Dev 109:313–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WORLDDEV.2018.05.010CrossRef

Badiu DL, Onose DA, Niță MR, Lafortezza R (2019) From “red” to green? A look into the evolution of green spaces in a post-socialist city. Landsc Urban Plan 187:156–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDURBPLAN.2018.07.015CrossRef

Baur JWR, Gómez E, Tynon JF (2013) Urban nature parks and neighborhood social health in Portland, Oregon. J Park Recreat Adm 31:23–44

Beyea W (2009) Place making through participatory planning. In: Foth M (ed) Handbook of Research on urban informatics. IGI Global, Hershey, pp 55–67

Borgström S, Lindborg R, Elmqvist T (2013) Nature conservation for what? Analyses of urban and rural nature reserves in southern Sweden 1909–2006. Landsc Urban Plan 117:66–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDURBPLAN.2013.04.010CrossRef

Breuste J, Astner A (2018) Which kind of nature is liked in urban context? A case study of solarCity Linz, Austria. Mitteilungen Der Österreichischen Geographischen Gesellschaft (bulletin of the Austrian Geographical Society) 158:105–129

Brown G, Sanders S, Reed P (2018) Using public participatory mapping to inform general land use planning and zoning. Landsc Urban Plan 177:64–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDURBPLAN.2018.04.011CrossRef

Buckmaster AJ, Osborne WS, Webb N (2010) The loss of native terrestrial small mammals in large urban reserves in the Australian capital territory. Pac Conserv Biol 16:36–45. https://doi.org/10.1071/PC100036CrossRef

Conway TM, Almas AD, Coore D (2019) Ecosystem services, ecological integrity, and native species planting: how to balance these ideas in urban forest management? Urban for Urban Green 41:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UFUG.2019.03.006CrossRef

Cox DTC, Hudson HL, Plummer KE, Siriwardena GM, Anderson K, Hancock S, Devine-Wright P, Gaston KJ (2018) Covariation in urban birds providing cultural services or disservices and people. J Appl Ecol 55:2308–2319. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13146CrossRef

Cundill G, Bezerra JC, Ntingana N (2017) Beyond benefit sharing: place attachment and the importance of access to protected areas for surrounding communities. Ecosyst Serv 28:140–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOSER.2017.03.011CrossRef

da Silva JMC, deCastro Dias TCA, da Cunha AC, Cunha HFA (2019) Public spending in federal protected areas in Brazil. Land Use Policy 86:158–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2019.04.035CrossRef

Dadashpoor H, Ahani S (2019) Land tenure-related conflicts in peri-urban areas: a review. Land Use Policy 85:218–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2019.03.051CrossRef

De Leon RC, Kim SM (2017) Stakeholder perceptions and governance challenges in urban protected area management: the case of the Las Piñas—Parañaque Critical Habitat and Ecotourism Area, Philippines. Land Use Policy 63:470–480. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2017.02.011CrossRef

Enedino TR, Loures-Ribeiro A, Santos BA (2018) Protecting biodiversity in urbanizing regions: the role of urban reserves for the conservation of Brazilian Atlantic forest birds. Perspect Ecol Conserv 16:17–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PECON.2017.11.001CrossRef

Fischer LK, Honold J, Cvejić R, Delshammar T, Hilbert S, Lafortezza R, Nastran M, Nielsen AB, Pintar M, van der Jagt APN, Kowarik I (2018) Beyond green: Broad support for biodiversity in multicultural European cities. Glob Environ Chang 49:35–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GLOENVCHA.2018.02.001CrossRef

Foo K (2018) Examining the Role of NGOs in urban environmental governance. Cities 77:67–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CITIES.2018.01.002CrossRef

Frantzeskaki N (2019) Seven lessons for planning nature-based solutions in cities. Environ Sci Policy 93:101–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVSCI.2018.12.033CrossRef

Fujitani M, McFall A, Randler C, Arlinghaus R (2017) Participatory adaptive management leads to environmental learning outcomes extending beyond the sphere of science. Sci Adv 3, American Association for the Advancement of Science:e1602516. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1602516

Greer K, Day K, McCutcheon S (2017) Efficacy and perception of trail use enforcement in an urban natural reserve in San Diego, California. J Outdoor Recreat Tour 18:56–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JORT.2017.02.002CrossRef

Gutsch M, Larondelle N, Haase D (2019) Of bugs and men: how forest pests and their management strategies are perceived by visitors of an urban forest. Urban for Urban Green 41:248–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UFUG.2019.03.003CrossRef

Henseke A, Breuste JH (2015) Climate-change sensitive residential areas and their adaptation capacities by urban green changes: case study of Linz, Austria. J Urban Plan Devel 141:A5014007. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000262CrossRef

Hersperger AM, Ioja I-C, Steiner F, Tudor CA (2015) Comprehensive consideration of conflicts in the land-use planning process: a conceptual contribution. Carpathian J Earth Environ Sci 10:5–13

Hertzog T, Poussin J-C, Tangara B, Kouriba I, Jamin J-Y (2014) A role playing game to address future water management issues in a large irrigated system: experience from Mali. Agric Water Manag 137:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2014.02.003CrossRef

Honda T, Iijima H, Tsuboi J, Uchida K (2018) A review of urban wildlife management from the animal personality perspective: the case of urban deer. Sci Total Environ 644:576–582. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2018.06.335CrossRef

Hossu CA, Ioja I-C, Susskind LE, Badiu DL, Hersperger AM (2018) Factors driving collaboration in natural resource conflict management: evidence from Romania. Ambio 47:816–830. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-018-1016-0CrossRef

Ianoş I, Sorensen A, Merciu C (2017) Incoherence of urban planning policy in Bucharest: its potential for land use conflict. Land Use Policy 60:101–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2016.10.030CrossRef

Iojă C-I, Rozylowicz L, Pătroescu M, Niţă MR, Vânau GO (2011) Dog walkers’ versus other park visitors’ perceptions: the importance of planning sustainable urban parks in Bucharest Romania. Landsc Urban Plan 103:74–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDURBPLAN.2011.06.002CrossRef

Iojă I-C, Osaci-Costache G, Breuste J, Hossu CA, Grădinaru SR, Onose DA, Nită MR, Skokanová H (2018) Integrating urban blue and green areas based on historical evidence. Urban for Urban Green 34:217–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UFUG.2018.07.001CrossRef

IUCN (2008) Urban protected areas—profiles and best practice guidelines, best practice protected area guidelines series 22. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. https://www.iucn.org/content/urban-protected-areas-profiles-and-best-practice-guidelines. Accessed on 23 Feb 2019

Ives CD, Lentini PE, Threlfall CG, Ikin K, Shanahan DF, Garrard GE, Bekessy SA, Fuller RA, Mumaw L, Rayner L (2016) Cities are hotspots for threatened species. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 25:117–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12404CrossRef

Karanth KK, Gopalaswamy AM, DeFries R, Ballal N (2012) Assessing patterns of human-wildlife conflicts and compensation around a central Indian protected area. PLoS ONE 7:e50433. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0050433

Kendal D, Zeeman BJ, Ikin K, Lunt ID, McDonnell MJ, Farrar A, Pearce LM, Morgan JW (2017) The importance of small urban reserves for plant conservation. Biol Cons 213:146–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOCON.2017.07.007CrossRef

Kim G, Miller PA, Nowak DJ (2018) Urban vacant land typology: a tool for managing urban vacant land. Sustain Cities Soc 36:144–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2017.09.014CrossRef

Knight RL, Gutzwiller K (eds) (2019) Wildlife and recreationists coexistence through management and research. Island Press, Washington, D.C

Kowarik I (2011) Novel urban ecosystems, biodiversity, and conservation. Environ Pollut 159:1974–1983. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVPOL.2011.02.022CrossRef

Kowarik I (2018) Urban wilderness: supply, demand, and access. Urban for Urban Green 29:336–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UFUG.2017.05.017CrossRef

Le Roux DS, Ikin K, Lindenmayer DB, Blanchard W, Manning AD, Gibbons P (2014) Reduced availability of habitat structures in urban landscapes: implications for policy and practice. Landsc Urban Plan 125:57–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDURBPLAN.2014.01.015CrossRef

Manea G, Matei E, Vijulie I, Tîrlă L, Cuculici R, Cocoş O, Tişcovschi A (2016) Arguments for integrative management of protected areas in the cities—case study in Bucharest city. Procedia Environ Sci 32:80–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PROENV.2016.03.014CrossRef

Maseko MST, Zungu MM, Ehlers Smith DA, Ehlers Smith YC, Downs CT (2019) High microhabitat heterogeneity drives high functional traits in forest birds in five protected forest areas in the urban mosaic of Durban, South Africa. Global Ecol Conserv e00645. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GECCO.2019.E00645

Mayfield H, Faulkner S, Briggs PA, Faulkner SC, Hilton GM (2017) Twenty years of bat monitoring at the London wetland centre: showing the biodiversity value of a man-made urban reserve. London Naturalist 96:102–114

McCarthy DP, Donald PF, Scharlemann JPW, Buchanan GM, Balmford A, Green JMH, Bennun LA, Burgess ND, Fishpool LD, Garnett ST, Leonard DL, Maloney RF, Morling P, Schaefer HM, Symes A, Wiedenfeld DA, Butchart SH (2012) Financial costs of meeting global biodiversity conservation targets: current spending and unmet needs. Science 338:946–949. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1229803CrossRef

McDonald RI, Kareiva P, Forman RTT (2008) The implications of current and future urbanization for global protected areas and biodiversity conservation. Biol Cons 141:1695–1703. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOCON.2008.04.025CrossRef

McEvoy S, van de Ven FHM, Blind MW, Slinger JH (2018) Planning support tools and their effects in participatory urban adaptation workshops. J Environ Manage 207:319–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.10.041CrossRef

McKinney ML (2002) Urbanization, biodiversity, and conservation. The impacts of urbanization on native species are poorly studied, but educating a highly urbanized human population about these impacts can greatly improve species conservation in all ecosystems. Bioscience 52:883–890. https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0883:ubac]2.0.co;2CrossRef

Mostert E, Gaertner M, Holmes PM, O’Farrell PJ, Richardson DM (2018) A multi-criterion approach for prioritizing areas in urban ecosystems for active restoration following invasive plant control. Environ Manage 62:1150–1167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-018-1103-9CrossRef

Muñoz L, Hausner V, Brown G, Runge C, Fauchald P (2019) Identifying spatial overlap in the values of locals, domestic- and international tourists to protected areas. Tour Manage 71:259–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TOURMAN.2018.07.015CrossRef

Naidoo R, Gerkey D, Hole D, Pfaff A, Ellis AM, Golden CD, Herrera D, Johnson K, Mulligan M, Ricketts TH, Fisher B (2019) Evaluating the impacts of protected areas on human well-being across the developing world. Science 5:1–7

Naturvation (2017) NATure-based URban innoVATION, project H2020-SCC-NBS-1stage-2016. https://naturvation.eu/. Accessed 20 Mar 2019

Nygrén NA (2019) Scenario workshops as a tool for participatory planning in a case of lake management. Futures 107:29–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FUTURES.2018.10.004CrossRef

Potgieter LJ, Gaertner M, Irlich UM, O’Farrell PJ, Stafford L, Vogt H, Richardson DM (2018) Managing urban plant invasions: a multi-criteria prioritization approach. Environ Manage 62:1168–1185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-018-1088-4CrossRef

Prévot A-C, Cheval H, Raymond R, Cosquer A (2018) Routine experiences of nature in cities can increase personal commitment toward biodiversity conservation. Biol Cons 226:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOCON.2018.07.008CrossRef

Raymond CM, Frantzeskaki N, Kabisch N, Berry P, Breil M, Nita MR, Geneletti D, Calfapietra C (2017) A framework for assessing and implementing the co-benefits of nature-based solutions in urban areas. Environ Sci Policy 77:15–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVSCI.2017.07.008CrossRef

Rzeszewski M, Kotus J (2019) Usability and usefulness of internet mapping platforms in participatory spatial planning. Appl Geogr 103:56–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APGEOG.2019.01.001CrossRef

Santos SM, Lourenço R, Mira A, Beja P (2013) Relative effects of road risk, habitat suitability, and connectivity on wildlife roadkills: the case of Tawny Owls (Strix aluco). PLoS ONE 8:e79967. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0079967CrossRef

Tudor CA, Iojă I-C, Rozylowicz L, Pǎtru-Stupariu I, Hersperger AM (2015) Similarities and differences in the assessment of land-use associations by local people and experts. Land Use Policy 49:341–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.07.001CrossRef

Tyrväinen L, Ojala A, Korpela K, Lanki T, Tsunetsugu Y, Kagawa T (2014) The influence of urban green environments on stress relief measures: a field experiment. J Environ Psychol 38:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JENVP.2013.12.005CrossRef

Wang Y, Kotze DJ, Vierikko K, Niemelä J (2019) What makes urban greenspace unique—relationships between citizens’ perceptions on unique urban nature, biodiversity and environmental factors. Urban for Urban Green 42:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UFUG.2019.04.005CrossRef

Zefferman EP, McKinney ML, Cianciolo T, Fritz BI (2018) Knoxville’s urban wilderness: moving toward sustainable multifunctional management. Urban for Urban Green 29:357–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UFUG.2017.09.002CrossRef

Zwierzchowska I, Hof A, Iojă I-C, Mueller C, Poniży L, Breuste J, Mizgajski A (2018) Multi-scale assessment of cultural ecosystem services of parks in Central European cities. Urban for Urban Green 30:84–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UFUG.2017.12.017CrossRef

Title: Bridging the People–Nature Divide Using the Participatory Planning of Urban Protected Areas
Authors: Cristian Ioja
Jürgen Breuste
Gabriel-Ovidiu Vânău
Constantina-Alina Hossu
Mihai-Răzvan Niţă
Ana-Maria Popa
Diana-Andreea Onose
Andreea-Raluca Slave
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Book: Making Green Cities
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-73088-8

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-030-73089-5

Copyright Year: 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73089-5_21

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"