English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Street trees, native plantings, bioswales, and other forms of green infrastructure alleviate urban air and water pollution, diminish flooding vulnerability, support pollinators, and provide other benefits critical to human well-being. Urban planners increasingly value such urban ecosystem services (ES), and effective methods for deciding among alternative planting regimes using urban ES criteria are under active development. In this effort, integrating stakeholder values and concerns with quantitative urban ES assessments is a central challenge; although it is widely recommended, specific approaches have yet to be explored. Here, we develop, apply, and evaluate such a method in the Friendly Area Neighborhood of Eugene, Oregon by investigating the potential for increased urban ES through the conversion of public lawn to alternative planting regimes that align with expressed stakeholder priorities. We first estimated current urban ES from green space mapping and published supply rates, finding lawn cover and associated ES to be dominant. Resident and expert priorities were then revealed through surveys and Delphi analyses; top priorities included air quality, stormwater quality, native plantings, and pollinator habitat, while concerns focused on cost and safety. Unexpectedly, most residents expressed a willingness to support urban ES improvements financially. This evidence then informed the development of planting regime alternatives among which we compared achievable future urban ES delivery, revealing clear differences among those that maximized stakeholder priorities, those that maximized quantitative urban ES delivery, and their integration. The resulting contribution is a straightforward method for identifying planting regimes with a high likelihood of success in delivering desired urban ES in specific local contexts.

A Guide to Public Green Space Planning for Urban Ecosystem Services