4.7 Article

The relationship between landscape design style and the conservation value of parks: A case study of a historical park in Weimar, Germany

Journal

LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING
Volume 107, Issue 2, Pages 111-117

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.05.006

Keywords

Biodiversity; Historical gardens; Horticulture; Urban parks; Vegetation

Funding

  1. Weimar Classic Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Urban parks can be invasion sources through planting of introduced taxa. On the other hand, parks may act as hot spots of biodiversity in urban areas and can support the preservation of endangered and rare taxa. Even if historic urban parks are evaluated first of all as heritage sites, they are also credited for their ecosystem services and positive aesthetical and social values. Although there are numerous studies in Europe on the design, philosophies and historical background of parks as well as their biological diversity, little research has posed the question of how landscape design principles have influenced the biological conservation value of parks. Because the landscape park style was one of the most influential historical landscape design fashions in Europe we focused our study on the 'Park an der Ilm' in Weimar. Germany which was created in the late 18th century and is since 1998 part of the UNESCO World heritage. Our research questions were: 1. Which design principles, plant material and technical implementation were used during the creation and management of the park? 2. What is the current value of the park for biological conservation especially for the conservation of endangered plant species and habitats? 3. What is the relationship between design principles and the present-day value of the park? We compared our results with similar landscape parks and made suggestions for future sustainable park design, restoration and management. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available