4.5 Article

A balancing act in urban social-ecology: human appreciation, ponds and dragonflies

期刊

URBAN ECOSYSTEMS
卷 20, 期 4, 页码 743-758

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11252-016-0635-0

关键词

Urban social-ecology; Cultural ecosystem services; Parks; Ponds; Dragonflies

资金

  1. Ministry of National Development EDGE Scholarship (Singapore)
  2. Chevening Scholarship (United Kingdom)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Green spaces in cities provide cultural ecosystems services (CES) such as nature connection, wildlife interaction and aesthetic appreciation which can improve aspects of human well-being. Recognising these benefits, researchers are now examining the complex relationship between humans and nature in urban social-ecology. Most studies investigate people's appreciation and valuation of different green space features and their contribution to urban biodiversity. Recommendations arising from such studies are best practices to achieve a balance between landscape aesthetic and ecological objectives, but many knowledge gaps still exist. In a social-ecological project in Greater London, appreciation of ponds and dragonflies in urban green spaces, and the environmental factors determining dragonfly diversity were investigated. We found ponds and their appearance were valued by people as enhancing their green space experience. The preference for wild-looking ponds was moderate. Dragonflies were enjoyed for their colour and high visibility, especially by those who had basic dragonfly knowledge. Species richness of dragonflies was positively associated with habitat heterogeneity in and around a pond. However, people were unable to relate a heterogeneous pond to more dragonfly species. For the first time, some factors that influence the human appreciation-ponds-dragonflies (HPD) relationship in an urban context are revealed. To fully realise the CES potential of ponds and dragonflies in Greater London, a HPD framework is proposed. The framework underpins strategies that foster cultural sustainability for ponds and dragonfly conservation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据