https://www.kth.se/social/upload/4ea53de1f27654240a000000/Bolund%20and%20Hunhammar%201999.pdf

Ecosystem services in urban areas

Ecological studies of terrestrial urban systems have been approached along several kinds of contrasts: ecology in as opposed to ecology of cities; biogeochemical compared to organismal perspectives, land use planning versus biological, and disciplinary versus interdisciplinary. In order to point out how urban ecological studies are poised for significant integration, we review key aspects of these disparate literatures. We emphasize an open definition of urban systems that accounts for the exchanges of material and influence between cities and surrounding landscapes. Research on ecology in urban systems highlights the nature of the physical environment, including urban climate, hydrology, and soils. Biotic research has studied flora, fauna, and vegetation, including trophic effects of wildlife and pets. Unexpected interactions among soil chemistry, leaf litter quality, and exotic invertebrates exemplify the novel kinds of interactions that can occur in urban systems. Vegetation and faunal responses suggest that the configuration of spatial heterogeneity is especially important in urban systems. This insight parallels the concern in the literature on the ecological dimensions of land use planning. The contrasting approach of ecology of cities has used a strategy of biogeochemical budgets, ecological footprints, and summaries of citywide species richness. Contemporary ecosystem approaches have begun to integrate organismal, nutrient, and energetic approaches, and to show the need for understanding the social dimensions of urban ecology. Social structure and the social allocation of natural and institutional resources are subjects that are well understood within social sciences, and that can be readily accommodated in ecosystem models of metropolitan areas. Likewise, the sophisticated understanding of spatial dimensions of social differentiation has parallels with concepts and data on patch dynamics in ecology and sets the stage for comprehensive understanding of urban ecosystems. The linkages are captured in the human ecosystem framework.

/pdf/urban-ecological-systems-linking-terrestrial-ecological-2kwkdbwzer.pdf

Urban ecological systems: linking terrestrial ecological, physical, and socioeconomic components of metropolitan areas

Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning

Forest soils and carbon sequestration

This quote captures the spirit of the new urban emphasis in the US Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) network. We know now that Earth abounds with both subtle and pronounced evidence of the influence of people on natural ecosystems (Russell 1993, Turner and Meyer 1993). Arguably, cities are the most human dominated of all ecosystems. Recent calls for studies on “human-dominated ecosystems” (Vitousek et al. 1997) finally have been heeded, over 60 years after Tansley penned his warning, with the addition of two metropolises (Phoenix and Baltimore) to the LTER network. In this article, we describe an emerging approach to understanding the ecology of urban areas by contrasting these two metropolises, and we present a call to action for ecologists to integrate their science with that of social scientists to achieve a more realistic and useful understanding of the natural world in general and its ecology in particular (Pickett and McDonnell 1993, Ehrlich 1997). We begin by framing a conceptual basis for the study of urban ecological systems: the rationale, contrasting approaches, and special considerations for including human interactions at different scales and in a spatial context. We then discuss the application of our conceptual approach by comparing site conditions and initial research results in Baltimore and Phoenix. We conclude with a summary and synthesis of implications for the integration of social and ecological sciences.

https://www.fs.fed.us/nrs/pubs/jrnl/2000/ne_2000_grimm_001.pdf

Integrated approaches to long-term studies of urban ecological systems

This paper is a review of research in Chicago that linked analyses of vegetation structure with forest functions and values. During 1991, the regions trees removed an estimated 5575 metric tons of air pollutants, providing air cleansing worth 9.2 million. Each year they sequester an estimated 315 800 metric tons of carbon. Increasing tree cover 10% or planting about three trees per building lot saves annual heating and cooling costs by an estimated 50 to 90 per dwelling unit because of increased shade, lower summertime air temperatures, and reduced neighborhood wind speeds once the trees mature. The net present value of the services trees provide is estimated as 402 per planted tree. The present value of long-term benefits is more than twice the present value of costs.

https://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/jrnl/1997/ne_1997_mcpherson_001.pdf

Rich Grant

Papers

Quantifying urban forest structure, function, and value: the Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project

Analysis of the spatial and temporal patterns in land use land cover in Belize city from 1991 to 2021