4.7 Article

Incorporating soil ecosystem services into urban planning: status, challenges and opportunities

Journal

LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY
Volume 33, Issue 7, Pages 1087-1102

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10980-018-0652-x

Keywords

Soil; Ecosystem services; Urban planning; Sustainable development; Integrated planning

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Traditionally soils have not received much attention in urban planning. For this, tools are needed that can both be understood both by soil scientists and urban planners. The purpose of this paper is to enhance the role of soil knowledge in urban planning practice, through the following objectives: (1) identifying the role soil plays in recent urban plans; (2) analysing the ecosystem services and indicators used in soil science in an urban context; and (3) inferring the main challenges and opportunities to integrate soil into urban planning. Seven urban plans and reports of world cities that include sustainability goals were analysed using text-mining and qualitative analysis, with a critical view on the inclusion of soil-related concepts. Secondly, the contribution of soil science to urban planning was assessed with an overview of case studies in the past decade that focus on soil-related ecosystem services in urban context. The results show an overall weak attention to soil and soil-related ecosystem services in the implementation and monitoring phases of urban plans. The majority of soil science case studies uses a haphazard approach to measure ecosystem service indicators which may not capture the ecosystem services appropriately and hence lack relevance for urban planning. Even though the most urban plans assessed recognize soil as a key resource, most of them fail to integrate indicators to measure or monitor soil-related functions. There is a need to develop soil-related ecosystem services that can be easily integrated and understood by other fields.

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