Advertisement

Urban Protected Areas and Urban Biodiversity

  • Cristian IojaEmail author
  • Jürgen Breuste
Chapter
  • 127 Downloads
Part of the Cities and Nature book series (CITIES)

Abstract

Protected areas become urban protected areas by their location. The International Union for Nature Conservation defines a protected area as: “Clearly defined geographical space, recognized, dedicated and managed through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with its associated ecosystem services and cultural values.” Different papers in this chapter aim to contribute to increase the understanding about the general concept of urban protected areas (Ioja), trade-offs and synergies of cultural ecosystem services of these areas (Badiu et al.), and perceptions and preferences to urban nature (Hayir-Kanat and Breuste). Likewise, contributions are also provided on social aspects of biodiversity (Dushkova et al.), urban land use aspects of biodiversity (Gan and Breuste), and strategies to increase urban biodiversity in urban parks (Borysiak et al.). The case studies cover a wide range of geographical backgrounds, going from Central Europe (Borysiak et al.) to South Eastern Europe (Ioja, Badiu et al.), and including Russia (Dushkova et al.), the biggest European city, i.e. Istanbul (Hayr-Kanat and Breuste), and one of the biggest Asian cities, i.e. Shanghai (Gan and Breuste). This chapter targets to improve the understanding of nature protection and biodiversity in cities under different natural and societal conditions.

Keywords

Protected areas Urban biodiversity Nature conservation Wild plants Wild animals Urban planning 

References

  1. Akbar KF, Hale WHG, Headley AD (2003) Assessment of scenic beauty of the roadside vegetation in Northern England. Landsc Urban Plan 63:139–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alberti M, Booth D, Hill K et al (2007) The impact of urban patterns on aquatic ecosystems: an empirical analysis in Puget lowland sub-basins. Landsc Urban Plan 80(4):345–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aleksandrova S (2013) Sustainability principles for St. Petersburg landscape with Scandinavian experience in mind: application of Swedish green space research result of “the eight characteristics”. Master’s Thesis, 30 hec, Advanced level, A2E Landscape Architecture, master’s programme, AlnarpGoogle Scholar
  4. Allen AP, O’Connor RJ (2000) Interactive effects of land use and other factors on regional bird distributions. J Biogeogr 27:889–900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alvey AA (2006) Promoting and preserving biodiversity in the urban forest. Urban For Urban Green 5(4):195–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Archive Buro of Moscow (2018) Holiday of liberated labor: the first subbotniks in the capital. https://www.mos.ru/news/item/9998073/. Accessed 10 Jan 2019
  7. Archive Committee of Saint Petersburg (2019) Archive committee of Saint Petersburg. https://spbarchives.ru/. Accessed 10 Jan 2019
  8. Areas E (1997) Ecosystem appropriation by cities. Ambio 26(3):167–172Google Scholar
  9. Artmann M, Kohler M, Meinel G, Gan J, Ioja I-C (2019) How smart growth and green infrastructure can mutually support each other—a conceptual framework for compact and green cities. Ecol Ind 96:10–22.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOLIND.2017.07.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ayana AN, Arts B, Wiersum KF (2018) How environmental NGOs have influenced decision making in a ‘semi-authoritarian’ state: the case of forest policy in Ethiopia. World Dev 109:313–322.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WORLDDEV.2018.05.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Badiu DL, Iojă CI, Pătroescu M, Breuste J, Artmann M, Niță MR, Grădinaru SR, Hossu CA, Onose DA (2016) Is urban green space per capita a valuable target to achieve cities’ sustainability goals? Romania as a case study. Ecol Ind 70:53–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Badiu DL, Onose DA, Niță MR, Lafortezza R (2019) From “red” to green? A look into the evolution of green spaces in a post-socialist city. Landsc Urban Plan 187:156–164.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDURBPLAN.2018.07.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ballantyne R, Packer J, Hughes K (2008) Environmental awareness, interests and motives of botanic gardens visitors: Implications for interpretive practice. Tour Manag 29(3):439–444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bamman D, Eisenstein J, Schnoebelen T (2014) Gender identity and lexical variation in social media. J Socioling 18(2):135–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Banaszek J, Leksy M, Rahmanov O (2017) The ecological diversity of vegetation within urban parks in the Dąbrowski Basin (southern Poland). In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on environmental engineering, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University Lithuania, Vilnius, 27–28 April 2017 http://enviro.vgtu.lt/index.php/enviro2017/2017/paper/viewFile/279/269
  16. Baró F, Haase D, Gómez-Baggethun E, Frantzeskaki N (2015) Mismatches between ecosystem services supply and demand in urban areas: a quantitative assessment in five European cities. Ecol Ind 55:146–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Barton DN, Kelemen E, Dick J, Martin-Lopez B, Gómez-Baggethun E, Jacobs S, Hendriks CMA, Termansen M, García-Llorente M, Primmer E, Dunford R, Harrison PA, Turkelboom F, Saarikoski H, van Dijk J, Rusch GM, Palomo I, Yli-Pelkonen V, Carvalho L, Baro F, Langemeyer J, Tjallingvan der Wal J, Mederly P, Priess JA, Luque S, Berry P, Santos R, Odee D, Martines Pastur G, García Blanco G, Saarela SR, Silaghi D, Pataki G, Masi F, Vădineanu A, Mukhopadhyay R, Lapola DM (2018) (Dis) integrated valuation–Assessing the information gaps in ecosystem service appraisals for governance support. Ecosyst Serv 29:529–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Baur JWR, Gómez E, Tynon JF (2013) Urban nature parks and neighborhood social health in Portland, Oregon. J Park Recreat Adm 31:23–44Google Scholar
  19. Beatley T (2010) Biophilic cities: integrating nature into urban design and planning. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  20. Bebbington A (2005) The ability of A-level students to name plants. J Biol Educ 39:62–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Belaire JA, Westphal LM, Whelan CJ, Minor ES (2015) Urban residents’ perceptions of birds in the neighborhood: biodiversity, cultural ecosystem services, and disservices. The Condor 117(2):192–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Bennett ES, Swasey JE (1996) Perceived stress reduction in urban public gardens. HortTechnology 6(2):125–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Benton TG, Vickery JA, Wilson JD (2003) Farmland biodiversity: is habitat heterogeneity the key? Trends Ecol Evol 18:182–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Berg Å (1997) Diversity and abundance of birds in relation to forest fragmentation, habitat quality and heterogeneity. Bird Study 44(3):355–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Berg A, Ehnstrom B, Gustafsson L et al (1994) Threatened plant, animal, and fungus species in Swedish forests: distribution and habitat associations. Conserv Biol 8:718–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Beyea W (2009) Place making through participatory planning. In: Foth M (ed) Handbook of research on urban informatics. IGI Global, Hershey, pp 55–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Biaduń W, Żmihorski M (2011) Factors shaping a breeding bird community along an urbanization gradient: 26-year study in medium size city (Lublin, SE Poland). Pol J Ecol 59:381–389Google Scholar
  28. BioDAT (2005) Moscow—the Lotten capital of the XXI century. http://biodat.ru/db/birds/sol2005.htm. Accessed 10 Jan 2019
  29. Boll T, von Haaren C, von Ruschkowski E (2014) The preference and actual use of different types of rural recreation areas by urban dwellers—the hamburg case study. PLoS ONE 9(10):e108638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Bolund P, Hunhammar S (1999) Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecol Econ 29:293–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Borgström S, Lindborg R, Elmqvist T (2013) Nature conservation for what? Analyses of urban and rural nature reserves in southern Sweden 1909–2006. Landsc Urban Plan 117:66–80.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDURBPLAN.2013.04.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Borysiak J, Mizgajski A, Speak A (2017) Floral biodiversity of allotment gardens and its contribution to urban green infrastructure. Urban Ecosyst 20:323–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Botzat A, Fischer LK, Kowarik I (2016) Unexploited opportunities in understanding liveable and biodiverse cities. A review on urban biodiversity perception and valuation. Glob Environ Change 39:220–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Bräuniger C, Knapp S, Kuhn I, Klotz S (2010) Testing taxonomic and landscape surrogates for biodiversity in an urban setting. Landsc Urban Plan 97:283–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Bratman GN, Hamilton JP, Daily GC (2012) The impacts of nature experience on human cognitive function and mental health. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1249(1):118–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Breuste J (1994) “Urbanisierung” des Naturschutzgedankens: Diskussion von gegenwärtigen Problemen des Stadtnaturschutzes (“Urbanization” of nature conservation: discussion of current problems of urban conservation). Naturschutz und Landschaftsplanung 26(6):214–220 Google Scholar
  37. Breuste J (2004) Decision making, planning and design for the preservation of indigenous vegetation within urban development. Landscape Urban Plan 68:439–452CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Breuste J (2012) Der suburbane Raum in ökologischer PerspektivePotenziale und Herausforderungen (Suburban space in ecological perspectivePotentials and challenges). In: Scheck W, Küh M, Leibenath M, Tzschaschel S (eds) Suburbane Räume als Kulturlandschaften (= Forschungs- und Sitzungsberichte der ARL, 236). ARL, Hannover, pp 148–166Google Scholar
  39. Breuste J, Astner A (2018) Which kind of nature is liked in urban context? A case study of solarCity Linz, Austria. Mitt. Österr. Geogr. Ges. (Bull. Austrian Geogr. Soc.) 158:105–129Google Scholar
  40. Breuste JH, Qureshi S, Xue F (2015) Urban ecosystems: functions, services and sustainable management. Ecocity Green Build 42–52Google Scholar
  41. Brown G, Hausner VH (2017) An empirical analysis of cultural ecosystem values in coastal landscapes. Ocean Coast Manag 142:49–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Brown G, Kyttä M (2014) Key issues and research priorities for public participation GIS (PPGIS): a synthesis based on empirical research. Appl Geogr 46:122–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Brown G, Sanders S, Reed P (2018) Using public participatory mapping to inform general land use planning and zoning. Landsc Urban Plan 177:64–74.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDURBPLAN.2018.04.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Bruun O, Kalland A (2014) Images of nature: an ıntroduction to the study of man-environment relations in Asia. In: Bruun O, Kalland A (eds) Asian perceptions of nature: a critical approach. Routledge, London, pp 1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Buckmaster AJ, Osborne WS, Webb N (2010) The loss of native terrestrial small mammals in large urban reserves in the Australian capital territory. Pac Conserv Biol 16:36–45.  https://doi.org/10.1071/PC100036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Bunin AV (1953) Istoriya gradostroitelnogo iskusstva (History of urban planning). Gosudarstvennoje Izdatel’stvo Literatury po stroitel’stvu i Arhitekture, Moscow (in Russian) Google Scholar
  47. Bunin AV, Ilyin LA, Polyakov NH, Shkarikov VA (1945) Gradostroitel’stvo (urban planning). Izdatel’stvo Akademii Arhitektury SSSR, Mosow (in Russian)Google Scholar
  48. Burkhard B, Kroll F, Nedkov S, Müller F (2012) Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecol Ind 21:17–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Canedoli C, Manenti R, Padoa-Schioppa E (2018) Birds biodiversity in urban and periurban forests: environmental determinants at determinants at local and landscape scales. Urban Ecosystems 21:779–793CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Cantwell MD, Forman RTT (1993) Landscape graphs: ecological modeling with graph theory to detect configurations common to diverse landscapes. Landsc Ecol 8(4):239–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Castro AJ, Martín-López B, López E, Plieninger T, Alcaraz-Segura D, Vaughn CC, Cabello J (2015) Do protected areas networks ensure the supply of ecosystem services? Spatial patterns of two nature reserve systems in semi-arid Spain. Appl Geogr 60:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Chan KM, Guerry AD, Balvanera P, Klain S, Satterfield T, Basurto X, Bostrom A, Chuenpagdee R, Gould R, Halpern BS, Hannahs N, Levine J, Norton B, Ruckelshaus M, Russell R, Tam J, Woodside U (2012) Where are cultural and social in ecosystem services? A framework for constructive engagement. BioScience 62(8):744–756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Chartrand TL, Bargh JA (1999) The chameleon effect: the perception–behavior link and social interaction. J Pers Soc Psychol 76(6):893CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Chiesura A (2004) The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landsc Urban Plan 68(1):129–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Conway TM, Almas AD, Coore D (2019) Ecosystem services, ecological integrity, and native species planting: how to balance these ideas in urban forest management? Urban For Urban Green 41:1–5.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UFUG.2019.03.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Cooper N, Brady E, Steen H, Bryce R (2016) Aesthetic and spiritual values of ecosystems: recognising the ontological and axiological plurality of cultural ecosystem ‘services’. Ecosyst Serv 21:218–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Costanza R, d’Arge R, De Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naeem S, O’Neill RV, Paruelo J, Raskin RG, Sutton P, van den Belt M (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 6630(6630):253–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Council of the European Commission (1979) Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds. Official Journal of the European Union, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  59. Council of the European Commission (1992) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Official Journal of the European Union, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  60. Convention on Biological Diversity (COP) (2009) Report on the First Expert Workshop on the Development of the City Biodiversity Index in the First Expert Workshop on the Development of the City Biodiversity Index, Singapore City, 10–12 February 2009. http://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/city/ewdcbi-01/official/ewdcbi-01-03-en.pdf. Accessed 22 Sept 2010
  61. Convention on Biological Diversity (COP) (2010) Report on the Second Workshop on the Development of the City Biodiversity Index in the Second Expert Workshop on the Development of the City Biodiversity Index, Singapore City, 1–3 July 2010. http://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/city/ewdcbi-02/official/ewdcbi-02-03-en.pdf. Accessed 22 Sept 2010
  62. Cox DTC, Hudson HL, Plummer KE, Siriwardena GM, Anderson K, Hancock S, Devine-Wright P, Gaston KJ (2018) Covariation in urban birds providing cultural services or disservices and people. J Appl Ecol 55:2308–2319.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Cramer V, Torgersen S, Kringlen E (2004) Quality of life in a city: the effect of population density. Soc Indic Res 69(1):103–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Cundill G, Bezerra JC, Ntingana N (2017) Beyond benefit sharing: place attachment and the importance of access to protected areas for surrounding communities. Ecosyst Serv 28:140–148.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOSER.2017.03.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. da Silva JMC, deCastro Dias TCA, da Cunha AC, Cunha HFA (2019) Public spending in federal protected areas in Brazil. Land Use Policy 86:158–164.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2019.04.035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Dadashpoor H, Ahani S (2019) Land tenure-related conflicts in peri-urban areas: a review. Land Use Policy 85:218–229.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2019.03.051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Dallimer M, Irvine KN, Skinner AM, Davies ZG, Rouquette JR, Maltby LL, Warren PH, Armsworth PR, Gaston KJ (2012) Biodiversity and the feel-good factor: understanding associations between self-reported human well-being and species richness. Bioscience 62(1):47–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. De Leon RC, Kim SM (2017) Stakeholder perceptions and governance challenges in urban protected area management: the case of the Las PiñasParañaque Critical Habitat and Ecotourism Area, Philippines. Land Use Policy 63:470–480.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2017.02.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Dedov I, Penev L (2000) Species composition and origins of the terrestrial gastropod fauna of Sofia City, Bulgaria. Ruthenica 10:121–131Google Scholar
  70. DEMP—Department for Environmental Management and Protection (2018) Norms and rules for the design of objects of non-traditional types of gardening in the city of Moscow (unpublished). http://www.dpioos.ru/eco/ru/activity/n_160/o_13279. Accessed 20 Oct 2018
  71. Dijksterhuis A, Bargh JA (2001) The perception-behavior expressway: automatic effects of social perception on social behavior. Adv Exp Soc Psychol 33:1–40Google Scholar
  72. Dirzo R, Raven PH (2003) Global state of biodiversity and loss. Annu Rev Environ Resour 28:137–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Dushkova D, Krasovskaya T (2018) Post-Soviet single-industry cities in northern Russia: movement towards sustainable development. A case study of Kirovsk. Belgeo (on-line). Revue Belge Géogr 4:1–25.  https://doi.org/10.4000/belgeo.27427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Dushkova D, Haase D, Haase A (2016) Urban green space in transition: historical parks and soviet heritage in Arkhangelsk, Russia. Crit Hous Anal 3(2):61–70.  https://doi.org/10.13060/23362839.2016.3.2.300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Dzhambov AM, Dimitrova DD (2014) Urban green spaces’ effectiveness as a psychological buffer for the negative health impact of noise pollution: a systematic review. Noise and Health 16(70):157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Elands B, Kaae BC (2010) Unique experiences. In: Pröbstl U, Wirth V, Elands B, Bell S (eds) Management of recreation and nature based tourism in European forests. Springer-Verlag, Berlin and Heidelberg, pp 266–285Google Scholar
  77. Elands BHM, van Koppen CSA (2013) Biocultural diversity in the Netherlands: from ecologically noble savages towards biocultural creatives. In: Arts B, van Bommel S, Ros-Tonen M, Verschoor G (eds) Forest people interfaces. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, pp 181–193Google Scholar
  78. Ellen RF (2003) The cognitive geometry of nature: a contextual approach. In: Descola P, Pálsson G (eds) Nature and society. Anthropologic Perspective, Routledge, London, pp 113–134Google Scholar
  79. Elmqvist T, Fragkias M, Goodness J, Güneralp B, Marcotullio PJ, McDonald RI, Parnell S, Schewenius M, Sendstad M, Seto KC, Wilkinson C (eds) (2013) Urbanization, Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services: Challenges and Opportunities. A Global Assessment. A Part of the Cities and Biodiversity Outlook Project. Springer, Dordrecht, Heidelberg, New York, LondonGoogle Scholar
  80. Enedino TR, Loures-Ribeiro A, Santos BA (2018) Protecting biodiversity in urbanizing regions: the role of urban reserves for the conservation of Brazilian Atlantic Forest birds. Perspect Ecol Conserv 16:17–23.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PECON.2017.11.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Fassio O, Rollero C, De Piccoli N (2013) Health, quality of life and population density: a preliminary study on “contextualized” quality of life. Soc Indic Res 110(2):479–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Federal Russian Government (1995) Federal Law of Russia No. 33 “On specially protected natural territories” from 14.03.1995. www.oopt.info. Accessed 21 Dec 2018 (in Russian)
  83. Fischer LK, Honold J, Cvejić R, Delshammar T, Hilbert S, Lafortezza R, Nastran M, Nielsen AB, Pintar M, van der Jagt APN, Kowarik I (2018) Beyond green: broad support for biodiversity in multicultural European cities. Glob Environ Change 49:35–45.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GLOENVCHA.2018.02.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Folke C, Jansson A, Larsson J, Costanza R (1997) Ecosystem appropriation of cities. Ambio 26(3):167–172Google Scholar
  85. Foo K (2018) Examining the role of NGOs in urban environmental governance. Cities 77:67–72.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CITIES.2018.01.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Frantzeskaki N (2019) Seven lessons for planning nature-based solutions in cities. Environ Sci Policy 93:101–111.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVSCI.2018.12.033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Fujitani M, McFall A, Randler C, Arlinghaus R (2017) Participatory adaptive management leads to environmental learning outcomes extending beyond the sphere of science. Sci Adv 3, Am Assoc Adv Sci e1602516.  https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1602516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Fuller RA, Gaston KJ (2009) The scaling of green space coverage in European cities. Biol Let 5(3):352–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Fuller RA, Irvine KN, Devine-Wright P, Warren PH, Gaston KJ (2007) Psychological benefits of greenspace increase with biodiversity. Biol Let 3(4):390–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Gan (2018) Urban biodiversity and built environment. Tongji University Press, ShanghaiGoogle Scholar
  91. Gan J, Guo GP, Yao XY (2019) Supporting services of urban roadside green spaces to biodiversity and their affections by built environment—case study of birds in roadside green space patches along century avenue, Shanghai. Landsc Arch 1:47–52Google Scholar
  92. Gaston KJ, Warren PH, Thompson K, Smith RM (2005) Urban domestic gardens (IV): the extent of the resource and its associated features. Biodivers Conserv 14:3327–3349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Gavrilidis AA, Niță MR, Onose DA, Badiu DL, Năstase II (2019) Methodological framework for urban sprawl control through sustainable planning of urban green infrastructure. Ecol Ind 96:67–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Genplan Moskvy (Masterplan Moscow) (1935) O generalnom plane rekonstrukcii Moskvy. Partizdat, Moscow (in Russian)Google Scholar
  95. Gibbs JP (2000) Wetland loss and biodiversity conservation. Conserv Biol 14:314–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Gidlöf-Gunnarsson A, Öhrström E (2007) Noise and well-being in urban residential environments: the potential role of perceived availability to nearby green areas. Landsc Urban Plan 83(2):115–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Gliozzo G, Pettorelli N, Haklay M (2016) Using crowdsourced imagery to detect cultural ecosystem services: a case study in South Wales, UK. Ecol Soc 21(3):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Glistra DJ, Devault TL, Dewoody JA et al (2009) A review of mitigation measures for reducing wildlife mortality on roadways. Landsc Urban Plan 91(1):1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Godefroid S, Koedam N (2003) How important are large vs small forest remnants for the conservation of the woodland flora in an urban context? Glob Ecol Biogeogr 12(4):287–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Goertzen D, Suhling F (2013) Promoting dragonfly diversity in cities: major determinants and implications for urban pond design. J Insect Conserv 17:399–409Google Scholar
  101. Gómez-Baggethun E, Barton DN (2013) Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. Ecol Econ 86:235–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Goretskaya A, Toporina V (2017) The ecological framework of the city. In: M Ignatieva (ed) Three pillars of landscape architecture: design, planning and management. New visionsGoogle Scholar
  103. Grahn P, Stigsdotter UA (2003) Landscape planning and stress. Urban For Urban Green 2(1):1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Greer K, Day K, McCutcheon S (2017) Efficacy and perception of trail use enforcement in an urban natural reserve in San Diego, California. J Outdoor Recreat Tour 18:56–64.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JORT.2017.02.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Gregory RD, Baillie SR (1998) Large-scale habitat use of some declining British birds. J Appl Ecol 35:785–799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Guerrero P, Møller MS, Olafsson AS, Snizek B (2016) Revealing cultural ecosystem services through Instagram images: the potential of social media volunteered geographic information for urban green infrastructure planning and governance. Urban Plan 1(2):1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Gutsch M, Larondelle N, Haase D (2019) Of bugs and men: how forest pests and their management strategies are perceived by visitors of an urban forest. Urban For Urban Green 41:248–254.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UFUG.2019.03.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Haase D (2017) Urban ecosystem, their services and town planning. Critical reflections of selected shortcomings. URBANISTICA 159:90–94Google Scholar
  109. Haase D, Dushkova D, Haase A, Kronenberg J (2019) Green infrastructure in post-socialist cities: evidence and experiences from Russia, Poland and Eastern Germany. In: Tuvikene T, Sgibnev W, Neugebauer CS (eds) Post-socialist urban infrastructures. Taylor and Francis/Routledge, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Hansmann R, Hug S-M, Seeland K (2007) Restoration and stress relief through physical activities in forests and parks. Urban For Urban Green 6(4):213–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Hartel T, Schweiger O, Öllerer K, Cogălniceanu D, Arntzen JW (2010) Amphibian distribution in a traditionally managed rural landscape of Eastern Europe: probing the effect of landscape composition. Biol Cons 143(5):1118–1124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Hartig T, Mitchell R, De Vries S, Frumkin H (2014) Nature and health. Annu Rev Public Health 35:207–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Henseke A, Breuste JH (2015) Climate-change sensitive residential areas and their adaptation capacities by urban green changes: case study of Linz, Austria. J Urban Plan Dev 141:A5014007.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Hermy M, Honnay O, Firbank L, Grashof-Bokdam C, Lawesson JE (1999) An ecological comparison between ancient and other forest plant species in Europe, and the implications for forest conservation. Biol Conserv 91:9–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Hersperger AM, Ioja I-C, Steiner F, Tudor CA (2015) Comprehensive consideration of conflicts in the land-use planning process: a conceptual contribution. Carpath J Earth Environ Sci 10:5–13Google Scholar
  116. Hertzog T, Poussin J-C, Tangara B, Kouriba I, Jamin J-Y (2014) A role playing game to address future water management issues in a large irrigated system: experience from Mali. Agric Water Manag 137:1–14.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2014.02.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Holman CD, Donovan RJ, Corti B (1996) Factors influencing the use of physical activity facilities: results from qualitative research. Health Promot J Aust Off J Aust Assoc Health Promot Prof 6(1):16Google Scholar
  118. Honda T, Iijima H, Tsuboi J, Uchida K (2018) A review of urban wildlife management from the animal personality perspective: the case of urban deer. Sci Total Environ 644:576–582.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2018.06.335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Hossu CA, Ioja IC, Niță MR, Hartel T, Badiu DL, Hersperger AM (2017) Need for a cross-sector approach in protected area management. Land Use Policy 69:586–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Hossu CA, Ioja I-C, Susskind LE, Badiu DL, Hersperger AM (2018) Factors driving collaboration in natural resource conflict management: evidence from Romania. Ambio 47:816–830.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-018-1016-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Howe C, Suich H, Vira B, Mace GM (2014) Creating win-wins from trade-offs? Ecosystem services for human well-being: a meta-analysis of ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies in the real world. Glob Environ Change 28:263–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Hüse B, Szabó S, Deák B, Tóthmérész B (2016) Mapping an ecological network of green habitat patches and their role in maintaining urban biodiversity in and around Debrecen city (Eastern Hungary). Land Use Policy 57:574–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Ianoş I, Sorensen A, Merciu C (2017) Incoherence of urban planning policy in Bucharest: its potential for land use conflict. Land Use Policy 60:101–112.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDUSEPOL.2016.10.030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Ignatieva M (1997) The mystery of ancient Russian gardens. Lustgarden. J Swed Soc Dendrol Park Cult 69–78Google Scholar
  125. Ignatieva M (2010) Design and future of urban biodiversity. In: Müller N, Werner P, Kelcey J (eds) Urban biodiversity and design. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, pp 118–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Ignatieva M (2013) Historic gardenswhere nature meets culturecan be urban biodiversity hotspots. The nature of cities. https://www.thenatureofcities.com/2013/01/27/historic-gardens-where-nature-meets-culture-can-be-urban-biodiversity-hotspots/. Accessed 22 Oct 2018
  127. Ignatieva M, Ahrné K (2013) Biodiverse green infrastructure for the 21st century: from “green desert” of lawns to biophilic cities. J Archit Urban 37(1):1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Ignatieva M, Konechnaya G, Stewart G. (2011a) St. Petersburg. In: Kelcey J, Müller N (eds) Plants and habitats of European cities. Springer Science and Business Media, pp 407–452Google Scholar
  129. Ignatieva M, Murray R, Waldenström H (2015) Can large parks be urban green saviors? The nature of cities. https://www.thenatureofcities.com/2015/12/03/can-large-parks-be-urban-green-saviors/. Accessed 28 Oct 2018
  130. Ignatieva M, Stewart GH, Meurk C (2011b) Planning and design of ecological networks in urban areas. Landsc Ecol Eng 7:17–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Ignatieva M, Golosova E, Melnichuk I, Smertin V (2018) Development of biophilic cities in Russia: from ideal scientific town and Ecopolis to the green strategy of the modern megapolis. In: IFLA World Congress Singapore proceedings, Singapore, 2018. http://www.ifla2018.com/eproceedings
  132. Iojă CI, Pătroescu M, Rozylowicz L, Popescu V, Vergheleț M, Zotta M, Felciuc M (2010) The efficacy of Romania’s protected areas network in conserving biodiversity. Biol Cons 143:2468–2476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Iojă C-I, Rozylowicz L, Pătroescu M, Niţă MR, Vânau GO (2011) Dog walkers’ vs. other park visitors’ perceptions: the importance of planning sustainable urban parks in Bucharest, Romania. Landsc Urban Plan 103:74–82.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDURBPLAN.2011.06.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Iojă CI, Hossu CA, Niţă MR, Onose DA, Badiu DL, Manolache S (2016) Indicators for environmental conflict monitoring in natura 2000 sites. Proced Environ Sci 32:4–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. Iojă I-C, Osaci-Costache G, Breuste J, Hossu CA, Grădinaru SR, Onose DA, Nită MR, Skokanová H (2018) Integrating urban blue and green areas based on historical evidence. Urban For Urban Green 34:217–225.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UFUG.2018.07.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. IUCN (2008) Urban protected areas—profiles and best practice guidelines, best practice protected area guidelines series 22. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. https://www.iucn.org/content/urban-protected-areas-profiles-and-best-practice-guidelines. Accesed on 23 Feb 2019
  137. Ives CD, Lentini PE, Threlfall CG, Ikin K, Shanahan DF, Garrard GE, Bekessy SA, Fuller RA, Mumaw L, Rayner L (2016) Cities are hotspots for threatened species. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 25:117–126.  https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Jackowiak B (1990) Antropogeniczne przemiany flory roślin naczyniowych miasta Poznania. Wyd. Nauk. UAM, Biol 42, PoznańGoogle Scholar
  139. Jacobs S, Burkhard B, Van Daele T, Staes J, Schneiders A (2015) ‘The matrix reloaded’: a review of expert knowledge use for mapping ecosystem services. Ecol Model 295:21–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Jacobs S, Dendoncker N, Martín-López B, Barton DN, Gomez-Baggethun E, Boeraeve F, McGrath F, Vierikko K, Geneletti D, Sevecke K, Pipart N, Primmer E, Mederly P, Schmidt S, Aragão A, Baral H, Bark RH, Briceno T, Brogna D, Cabral P, De Vreese R, Liquete C, Mueller H, Peh KSH, Phelan A, Rincón AR, Rogers SH, Turkelboom F, Van Reeth W, van Zanten BT, Wam HK, Washbourne CL (2016) A new valuation school: integrating diverse values of nature in resource and land use decisions. Ecosyst Serv 22:213–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Jacobs S, Martín-López B, Barton DN, Dunford R, Harrison PA, Kelemen E, Saarikoski H, Termansen M, García-Llorente M, Gómez-Baggethun E, Kopperoinen L, Luque S, Palomo I, Priess JA, Rusch GM, Tenerelli P, Turkelboom F, Demeyer R, Hauck J, Keune H, Smith R (2018) The means determine the endpursuing integrated valuation in practice. Ecosyst Serv 29:515–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Jones L, Norton L, Austin Z, Browne AL, Donovan D, Emmett BA, Grabowski ZJ, Howard DC, Jones JPG, Kenter JO, Manley W, Morris C, Robinson DA, Short C, Siriwardena GM, Stevens CJ, Storkey J, Waters RD, Willis GF (2016) Stocks and flows of natural and human-derived capital in ecosystem services. Land Use Policy 52:151–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. Kabisch N, Korn H, Stadler J, Bonn A (2017) Nature-based solutions to climate change adaptation in urban areas. Springer International Publishing, Cham.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56091-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Kalusová V, Čeplová N, Lososová Z (2017) Which traits influence the frequency of plant species occurrence in urban habitat types? Urban Ecosyst 20:65–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Karanth KK, Gopalaswamy AM, DeFries R, Ballal N (2012) Assessing patterns of human-wildlife conflicts and compensation around a central Indian protected area. PLoS ONE 7:e50433.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0050433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Kart N (2005) Emirgan parkında kullanıcıların memnuniyet derecelerinin değerlendirilmesi. J Fac For Istanb Univ (İstanbul Üniversitesi Orman Fakültesi Dergisi) 55(1):185–208Google Scholar
  147. Kartinki24.ru (2019) Vasily Polenov. Moscow courtyard. http://www.kartinki24.ru/kartinki/art/16906-vasiliy-polenov-moskovskiy-dvorik.html. Accessed 10 Jan 2019
  148. Kathryn F (1995) Assessing effects of agriculture on terrestrial wildlife: developing a hierarchical approach for the US EPA. Landsc Urban Plan 31(1–3):99–115Google Scholar
  149. Kendal D, Zeeman BJ, Ikin K, Lunt ID, McDonnell MJ, Farrar A, Pearce LM, Morgan JW (2017) The importance of small urban reserves for plant conservation. Biol Cons 213:146–153.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOCON.2017.07.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Kim G, Miller PA, Nowak DJ (2018) Urban vacant land typology: a tool for managing urban vacant land. Sustain Cities Soc 36:144–156.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2017.09.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Khodakov Y (1986) Gorodskoje Ozelenenije (The urban greenery). Lenisdat, Leningrad (in Russian)Google Scholar
  152. Klain SC, Chan KM (2012) Navigating coastal values: participatory mapping of ecosystem services for spatial planning. Ecol Econ 82:104–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. Klimanova OA, Kolbovsky EYu (2013) Protected areas in the system of territorial planning and functional zoning of the Moscow city. Reg Geoecol Issues 177–180 (In Russian)Google Scholar
  154. Knapp S, Kühn I, Wittig R, Ozinga WA, Poschlod P, Klotz S (2008) Urbanization causes shifts in species’ trait state frequencies. Preslia 80:375–388Google Scholar
  155. Knight RL, Gutzwiller K (eds) (2019) Wildlife and recreationists coexistence through management and research. Island Press, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  156. Kochurov BI, Ivashkina IV (2015) Urban landscapes of Moscow and their spatial transformation. Ecol Urban Areas 2:48–54Google Scholar
  157. Konijnendijk CC (2018) The healthy forest. In: Konijnendijk CC (ed) The forest and the city. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 127–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. Konvicka M, Kadlec T (2011) How to increase the value of urban areas for butterfly conservation? A lesson from Prague nature reserves and parks. Eur J Entomol 108:219–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. Korzhev MP (ed) (1954) Ozelenenije sovetskih gorodov: Posobie po Projektirovaniju (Greening of Soviet cities: green projects manual). Gosudarstvennoje Isdatelstvo literaturi po stroitelstvu i architecture, Moscow (in Russian)Google Scholar
  160. Kowarik I (1992) Berücksichtigung von nichteinheimischen Pflanzenarten, von »Kulturflüchtlingen« sowie von Pflanzenvorkommen auf Sekundärstandorten bei der Aufstellung Roter Listen (Consideration of non-native plant species, “culture refugees” as well as plant occurrences on secondary sites in the preparation of red lists). Schriftenreihe für Vegetationskunde 23:175–190Google Scholar
  161. Kowarik I (2011) Novel urban ecosystems, biodiversity, and conservation. Environ Pollut 159:1974–1983.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVPOL.2011.02.022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Kowarik I (2018) Urban wilderness: supply, demand, and access. Urban For Urban Green 29:336–347.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UFUG.2017.05.017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. Kowarik I, Kendal D (2018) The contribution of wild urban ecosystems to liveable cities. Urban For Urban Green 29:334–335Google Scholar
  164. Kowarik I, Körner S (eds) (2005) Wild Urban woodlands. new perspectives for urban forestry. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg Google Scholar
  165. Kroll F, Müller F, Haase D, Fohrer N (2012) Rural–urban gradient analysis of ecosystem services supply and demand dynamics. Land Use Policy 29(3):521–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. Kümmerling M, Müller N (2012) The relationship between landscape design style and the conservation value of parks: a case study of historical park in Weimar, Germany. Landsc Urban Plan 107:111–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. Landy F (ed) (2018) From urban national parks to natured cities in the global south. The quest for naturbanity. Springer-Verlag, Berlin HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  168. Lavorel S, Grigulis K (2012) How fundamental plant functional trait relationships scale-up to trade-offs and synergies in ecosystem services. J Ecol 100(1):128–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. Le Roux DS, Ikin K, Lindenmayer DB, Blanchard W, Manning AD, Gibbons P (2014) Reduced availability of habitat structures in urban landscapes: implications for policy and practice. Landsc Urban Plan 125:57–64.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LANDURBPLAN.2014.01.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. Leslie E, Sugiyama T, Ierodiaconou D, Kremer P (2010) Perceived and objectively measured greenness of neighbourhoods: are they measuring the same thing? Landsc Urban Plan 95:28–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. Li J, Tu QY (2014) Improvement of urban space in super cities from the perspective of ecological civilization-taking Shanghai as example. Shanghai Urban Manag 6:9–14Google Scholar
  172. Lindemann-Matthies P, Bose E (2008) How many species are there? Public understanding and awareness of biodiversity in Switzerland. Human Ecol 36:731–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  173. Lindemann-Matthies P, Junge X, Matthies D (2010) The influence of plant diversity on people’s perception and aesthetic appreciation of grassland vegetation. Biol Cons 143(1):195–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. Lososová Z, Chytrý M, Cimalová S, Kropáč Z, Otýpková Z et al (2004) Weed vegetation of arable land in Central Europe: gradients of diversity and species composition. J Veg Sci 15:415–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  175. Lososová Z, Horsák M, Chytrý M, Čejka T, Danihelka J et al (2011) Diversity of Central European urban biota: effect of human-made habitat types on plants and land snails. J Biogeogr 38:1152–1163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  176. Lu L, Liang J et al (2016) Research on basic ecological network planning strategy of Shanghai. Urban Constr Shanghai 2:62–68Google Scholar
  177. Lynch HJ, Grant EHC, Muneepeerakul R (2011) How restructuring river connectivity changes freshwater fish biodiversity and biogeography. Water Resour Res 47:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  178. Maes J, Egoh B, Willemen L, Liquete C, Vihervaara P, Schägner JP, Grizzetti B, Drakou EG, La Notte A, Zulian G, Bouraoui F, Paracchini ML, Braat L, Bidoglio G (2012) Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union. Ecosyst Serv 1(1):31–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  179. Maes J, Teller A, Erhard M, Liquete C, Braat L, Berry P, Paracchini ML (2013) Mapping and assessment of ecosystems and their services: an analytical framework for ecosystem assessments under action. Tech Rep 5:1–58Google Scholar
  180. Magura T, Lövei GL, Tóthmérész B (2010) Does urbanization decrease diversity in ground beetle (Carabidae) assemblages? Glob Ecol Biogeogr 19:16–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  181. Manea G, Matei E, Vijulie I, Tîrlă L, Cuculici R, Cocoş O, Tişcovschi A (2016) Arguments for Integrative management of protected areas in the citiescase study in Bucharest City. Proc Environ Sci 32:80–96.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PROENV.2016.03.014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  182. Manfredo MJ, Driver B, Tarrant M (1996) Measuring leisure motivation: a meta-analysis of the recreation experience preference scales. J Leis Res 28(3):188–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  183. Manolache S, Ciocănea CM, Rozylowicz L, Nita A (2017) Natura 2000 in Romania–a decade of governance challenges. Eur J Geogr 8(2):24–34Google Scholar
  184. Marion JL, Reid SE (2007) Minimising visitor impacts to protected areas: the efficacy of low impact education programmes. J Sustain Tour 15(1):5–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  185. Martín-López B, Iniesta-Arandia I, García-Llorente M, Palomo I, Casado-Arzuaga I, Del Amo DG, Gómez-Baggethun E, Oteros-Rozas E, Palacios-Agundez P, Willaarts B, González JA, Santos-Martín F, Onaindia M, López-Santiago C, Montes C (2012) Uncovering ecosystem service bundles through social preferences. PLoS ONE 7(6):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  186. Maseko MST, Zungu MM, Ehlers Smith DA, Ehlers Smith YC, Downs CT (2019) High microhabitat heterogeneity drives high functional traits in forest birds in five protected forest areas in the urban mosaic of Durban, South Africa. Glob Ecol Conserv e00645.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GECCO.2019.E00645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  187. Mason CF (2000) Thrushes now largely restricted to the built environment in eastern England. Divers Distrib 6:189–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  188. Matuszkiewicz W (2011) Przewodnik do oznaczania zbiorowisk roślinnych Polski. Wyd. PWN, WarszawaGoogle Scholar
  189. Maurer U, Peschel T, Schmitz S (2000) The flora of selected urban land-use types in Berlin and Potsdam with regard of nature conservation in cities. Landsc Urban Plan 46:209–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  190. Mayfield H, Faulkner S, Briggs PA, Faulkner SC, Hilton GM (2017) Twenty years of bat monitoring at the London Wetland Centre: showing the biodiversity value of a man-made urban reserve. Lond Natl 96:102–114Google Scholar
  191. McCarthy DP, Donald PF, Scharlemann JPW, Buchanan GM, Balmford A, Green JMH, Bennun LA, Burgess ND, Fishpool LD, Garnett ST, Leonard DL, Maloney RF, Morling P, Schaefer HM, Symes A, Wiedenfeld DA, Butchart SH (2012) Financial costs of meeting global biodiversity conservation targets: current spending and unmet needs. Science 338:946–949.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1229803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  192. McDonald R, Marcotullio P (2011) Global effects of urbanization on ecosystem services. In: Breuste JH, Guntenspergen G, McIntyre NE et al (eds) Urban ecology: patterns, processes, and applications. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  193. McDonald RI, Kareiva P, Forman RTT (2008) The implications of current and future urbanization for global protected areas and biodiversity conservation. Biol Cons 141:1695–1703.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOCON.2008.04.025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  194. McDonald RI, Forman RT, Kareiva P, Neugarten R, Salzer D, Fisher J (2009) Urban effects, distance, and protected areas in an urbanizing world. Landsc Urban Plan 93(1):63–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  195. McEvoy S, van de Ven FHM, Blind MW, Slinger JH (2018) Planning support tools and their effects in participatory urban adaptation workshops. J Environ Manage 207:319–333.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.10.041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  196. McKinney ML (2002) Urbanization, biodiversity, and conservation the impacts of urbanization on native species are poorly studied, but educating a highly urbanized human population about these impacts can greatly improve species conservation in all ecosystems. BioScience 52:883–890.  https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052(0883:ubac)2.0.co;2
  197. Mc Neely J (2001a) Globally significant biodiversity within city limits: the case of South Africa’s Cape. In: Mc Neely JA (ed) Cities and protected areas. Parks. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, p 44–47. https://www.iucn.org/protected...protected.../urban-conservation-strategies. Accessed 12 Oct 2016
  198. Mc Neely JA (ed) (2001b) Cities and protected areas. Parks. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. https://www.iucn.org/protected...protected.../urban-conservation-strategies. Accessed 12 Oct 2016
  199. MEAB - Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Board (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being. Synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  200. Melnichuk I (2017) St. Petersburg green infrastructure and methods of its formation. In: Ignatieva M, Melnichuk I (eds) Three pillars of landscape architecture: design, planning and management, pp 105–112. New visions. Conference proceedings, Saint-Petersburg State Polytechnic University, 2017. Polytechnic University Publishing House, Saint-Petersburg, pp 23–24Google Scholar
  201. Minin AA (2014) Sustainable development and ecosystem services of natural areas of Moscow. Bulletin “Towards the sustainable development of Russia” 69:2–9Google Scholar
  202. Ministry of Culture and Tourism (2019) Istanbul provincial directorate of culture and tourısm. http://www.istanbulkulturturizm.gov.tr/TR-165068/cografya.html. 08.05.2019
  203. Ministry of Environment (2011a) Natura 2000 standard form for sites of community importance. Ministry of Environment, BucharestGoogle Scholar
  204. Ministry of Environment (2011b) Natura 2000 standard form for special protection areas. Ministry of Environment, BucharestGoogle Scholar
  205. Ministry of Environmental Protection of People’s Republic of China (2011) Standard for the assessment of regional biodiversity (HJ623-2011). Environmental Science Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  206. Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development of People’s Republic of China (2017) Standard for classification of urban green space (CJJ 85-2017). China Architecture and Building Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  207. Mirek Z, Piękoś–Mirkowa H, Zając A, Zając M (2002) Flowering plants and pteridophytes of Poland. A checklist. W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences, KrakówGoogle Scholar
  208. Mörtberg U, Wallentinus HG (2000) Red-listed forest bird species in an urban environment assessment of green space corridors. Landsc Urban Plan 50:215–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  209. Moscow City Council (1999, with modifications of 2014) Moscow law on the protection of green areas. http://docs.cntd.ru/document/901734936. Accessed 21 Dec 2018 (in Russian)
  210. Mosecomonitoring (2017) The state reports of department of environmental management and environmental protection of Moscow for 2016. Mosecomonitoring, Moscow. http://mosecom.ru/reports/2014/report2014.pdf. Accessed 28 Oct 2018 (in Russian)
  211. Mosgorstat Moscow (2018) Moscow city committee of statistics by Russian Federal State Statistics Service. About demographic, economic and social situation in Moscow in 2018. http://moscow.gks.ru/wps/wcm/connect/rosstat_ts/moscow/ru/statistics/population/. Accessed 26 Oct 2018 (in Russian)
  212. Mostert E, Gaertner M, Holmes PM, O’Farrell PJ, Richardson DM (2018) A multi-criterion approach for prioritizing areas in urban ecosystems for active restoration following invasive plant control. Environ Manage 62:1150–1167.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-018-1103-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  213. Müller N, Werner P (2010) Urban biodiversity and the case for implementing the convention on biological diversity in towns and cities. In: Müller N, Werner P, Kelcey (eds) Urban biodiversity and design. Blackwell Publishing, pp 1–33.  https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444318654.ch1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  214. Müller N, Werner P, Kelcey JG (eds) (2010) Urban biodiversity and design. Wiley-Blackwell, ChichesteGoogle Scholar
  215. Muñoz L, Hausner V, Brown G, Runge C, Fauchald P (2019) Identifying spatial overlap in the values of locals, domestic- and international tourists to protected areas. Tour Manag 71:259–271.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TOURMAN.2018.07.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  216. Naidoo R, Gerkey D, Hole D, Pfaff A, Ellis AM, Golden CD, Herrera D, Johnson K, Mulligan M, Ricketts TH, Fisher B (2019) Evaluating the impacts of protected areas on human well-being across the developing world. Science 5:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  217. Naturvation (2017) NATure-based URban innoVATION, project H2020-SCC-NBS-1stage-2016. https://naturvation.eu/. Accesed 20 Mar 2019
  218. Nedkov S, Burkhard B (2012) Flood regulating ecosystem services—mapping supply and demand, in the Etropole municipality, Bulgaria. Ecol Ind 21:67–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  219. Nielsen AB, van den Bosch M, Maruthaveeran S, van den Bosch CK (2014) Species richness in urban parks and its drivers: a review of empirical evidence. Urban Ecosyst 17:305–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  220. Nilsson K, Åkerlund U, Konijnendijk van den Bosch C, Alekseev A, Caspersen O, Guldager S, Kuznetsov E, Mezenko A, Selikhovkin A (2007) Implementing urban greening aid projectsthe case of St. Petersburg, Russia. Urban For Urban Green 6:93–101.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2007.01.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  221. Nygrén NA (2019) Scenario workshops as a tool for participatory planning in a case of lake management. Futures 107:29–44.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FUTURES.2018.10.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  222. Okulicz-Kozaryn A, Mazelis JM (2018) Urbanism and happiness: a test of Wirth’s theory of urban life. Urban Stud 55(2):349–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  223. OpenStreetMap Foundation (2014) Street map of Shanghai. http://www.openstreetmap.org. Accessed 20 Jan 2018
  224. Ortega-Alvareza R, MacGregor-Fors I (2009) Living in the big city: effects of urban land-use on bird community structure, diversity, and composition. Landsc Urban Plan 90(3–4):189–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  225. Oteros-Rozas E, Martín-López B, Fagerholm N, Bieling C, Plieninger T (2018) Using social media photos to explore the relation between cultural ecosystem services and landscape features across five European sites. Ecol Ind 94:74–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  226. Page C (2016) The evolution and effects of suburbanization. https://faculty.nipissingu.ca. Accessed 12 Oct 2016
  227. Palliwoda J, Kowarik I, von der Lippe M (2017) Human-biodiversity interactions in urban parks: the species level matters. Landsc Urban Plan 157:394–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  228. Palomo I, Martín-López B, López-Santiago C, Montes C (2011) Participatory scenario planning for protected areas management under the ecosystem services framework: the Doñana social-ecological system in southwestern Spain. Ecol Soc 16(1):1–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  229. Palomo I, Martín-López B, Potschin M, Haines-Young R, Montes C (2013) National Parks, buffer zones and surrounding lands: mapping ecosystem service flows. Ecosyst Serv 4:104–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  230. Palomo I, Martín-López B, Zorrilla-Miras P, Del Amo DG, Montes C (2014) Deliberative mapping of ecosystem services within and around Doñana National Park (SW Spain) in relation to land use change. Reg Environ Change 14(1):237–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  231. Paracchini ML, Zulian G, Kopperoinen L, Maes J, Schägner JP, Termansen M, Zandersen M, Perez-Soba M, Scholefield PA, Bidoglio G (2014) Mapping cultural ecosystem services: a framework to assess the potential for outdoor recreation across the EU. Ecol Ind 45:371–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  232. Pastur GM, Peri PL, Lencinas MV, García-Llorente M, Martín-López B (2016) Spatial patterns of cultural ecosystem services provision in Southern Patagonia. Landsc Ecol 31(2):383–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  233. Paul MJ, Meyer JL (2001) Streams in the urban landscape. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 32:333–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  234. Pauleit S, Olafsson AS, Rall E, van der Jagt A, Ambrose-Oji B, Andersson E, Anton B, Buijs A, Haase D, Elands B, Hansen R, Kowarik I, Kronenberg J, Mattijssen T (2018) Urban green infrastructure in Europestatus quo, innovation and perspectives. Urban For Urban Green. Rosstat 2017. Federal State statistics service. Russia 2016Statistical pocketbook, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  235. Petrostat (2018) Department of Federal State Statistics Service of St. Petersburg and Leningrad region. About demographic, economic and social situation in Saint Petersburg in 2018. http://petrostat.gks.ru/wps/wcm/connect/rosstat_ts/petrostat/ru/statistics/Sant_Petersburg/. Accessed 26 Oct 2018 (in Russian)
  236. Pilgrim SE, Cullen LC, Smith DJ, Pretty J (2008) Ecological knowledge is lost in wealthier communities and countries. Environ Sci Technol 42:1004–1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  237. Plieninger T, Dijks S, Oteros-Rozas E, Bieling C (2013) Assessing, mapping, and quantifying cultural ecosystem services at community level. Land Use Policy 33:118–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  238. Plummer R, Fennell DA (2009) Managing protected areas for sustainable tourism: prospects for adaptive co-management. J Sustain Tour 17(2):149–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  239. Popescu VD, Rozylowicz L, Cogălniceanu D, Niculae IM, Cucu AL (2013) Moving into protected areas? Setting conservation priorities for Romanian reptiles and amphibians at risk from climate change. PLoS ONE 8(11):1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  240. Potgieter LJ, Gaertner M, Irlich UM, O’Farrell PJ, Stafford L, Vogt H, Richardson DM (2018) Managing urban plant invasions: a multi-criteria prioritization approach. Environ Manag 62:1168–1185.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-018-1088-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  241. Prévot A-C, Cheval H, Raymond R, Cosquer A (2018) Routine experiences of nature in cities can increase personal commitment toward biodiversity conservation. Biol Cons 226:1–8.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOCON.2018.07.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  242. Rands MRW, Adams WM, Bennun L et al (2010) Biodiversity conservation: challenges beyond 2010. Science 329:1298–1303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  243. Raymond C, Curtis A (2013) Mapping community values for regional sustainability in the lower hunter region. University of Tasmania, TasmaniaGoogle Scholar
  244. Raymond CM, Frantzeskaki N, Kabisch N, Berry P, Breil M, Nita MR, Geneletti D, Calfapietra C (2017) A framework for assessing and implementing the co-benefits of nature-based solutions in urban areas. Environ Sci Policy 77:15–24.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVSCI.2017.07.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  245. Reddy PR (2014) Freshwater ecosystems and biodiversity-a case study of Kolleru Lake, India: a review. J Indian Geophys Union 18(2):277–288Google Scholar
  246. Research and Project Institute of Moscow City Master Plan (2018) Research and Project Institute of Moscow City Master plan. https://genplanmos.ru. Accessed 10 Jan 2019
  247. Richards DR, Friess DA (2015) A rapid indicator of cultural ecosystem service usage at a fine spatial scale: content analysis of social media photographs. Ecol Ind 53:187–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  248. Rinaldo A, Gatto M, Rodriguez-Iturbe I (2018) River networks as ecological corridors: a coherent ecohydrological perspective. Adv Water Resour 112:27–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  249. Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson Å, Chapin FS III, Lambin E, Lenton TM, Scheffer M, Folke C, Schellnhuber JH, Nykvist B, de Wit CA, Hughes T, van der Leeuw S, Rodhe H, Sörlin S, Snyder PK, Costanza R, Svedin U, Falkenmark M, Karlberg L, Corell RW, Fabry VJ, Hansen J, Walker B, Liverman D, Richardson K, Crutzen P, Foley J (2009) Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecol Soc 14(2):32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  250. Romagosa F, Eagles PF, Lemieux CJ (2015) From the inside out to the outside in: exploring the role of parks and protected areas as providers of human health and well-being. J Outdoor Recreat Tour10:70–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  251. Rose G (2007) Visual methodologiesan introduction to the interpretation of visual methodologies, 2nd edn. Sage Publications Ltd., LondonGoogle Scholar
  252. Rozylowicz L, Nita A, Manolache S, Popescu VD, Hartel T (2019) Navigating protected areas networks for improving diffusion of conservation practices. J Environ Manage 230:413–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  253. Rzeszowski K, Sterzyńska M (2016) Changes through time in soil Collembola communities exposed to urbanization. Urban Ecosyst 19:143–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  254. Rzeszewski M, Kotus J (2019) Usability and usefulness of internet mapping platforms in participatory spatial planning. Appl Geogr 103:56–69.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APGEOG.2019.01.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  255. Säumel I, Kowarik I, Butenschön S (2009) Green traces from past to future: the interplay of culture and ecological processes in European historical parks. Acta Horticult 881:933–938Google Scholar
  256. Santos SM, Lourenço R, Mira A, Beja P (2013) Relative effects of road risk, habitat suitability, and connectivity on wildlife roadkills: the case of Tawny Owls (Strix aluco). PLoS ONE 8:e79967.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0079967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  257. Scanes CG (2018) Human activity and habitat loss: destruction, fragmentation, and degradation. In: Colin Scanes CG, Toukhsati SR (eds) Animals and human society. Academic Press, London, San Diego, Cambridge, Kidlington, pp 451–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  258. Schipperijn J, Ekholm O, Stigsdotter UK, Toftager M, Bentsen P, Kamper-Jørgensen F, Randrup TB (2010) Factors influencing the use of green space: results from a Danish national representative survey. Landsc Urban Plan 95(3):130–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  259. Schirpke U, Scolozzi R, De Marco C, Tappeiner U (2014) Mapping beneficiaries of ecosystem services flows from Natura 2000 sites. Ecosyst Serv 9:170–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  260. Schütz C, Schulze CH (2015) Functional diversity of urban bird communities: effects of landscape composition, green space area and vegetation cover. Ecol Evol 5:5230–5239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  261. Schulze ED (1982) Plant life forms and their carbon, water and nutrient relations. In: Lange OL, Nobel PS, Osmond CB, Ziegler H (eds) Physiological plant ecology II. Encyclopedia of plant physiology (New series), 12/B. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 615–676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  262. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010) Global biodiversity outlook 3. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. Accessed 20 Jan 2018
  263. Seto K, Reenberg A (eds) (2014) Rethinking global land use in an urban era. In: Lupp J (ed) Struengmann forum reports, vol 14. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  264. Sezer B, Akova O (2016) Kent sakinlerinin rekreasyon tercihleri, rekreasyon alanlarının algılanan değeri ve gerçek kullanımı arasındaki ilişki (The relations between recreation preferences of residences, the perceived value of recreational areas and their real use). Fac Econ Adm Sci E-J 5(2):94–115Google Scholar
  265. Shanghai Environmental Protection Bureau, Shanghai greening and city appearance Administration, Shanghai Municipal Agriculture Commission, Shanghai Water Affairs Bureau (2013) Shanghai biodiversity conservation strategy and action plan (2012–2030). https://sthj.sh.gov.cn/fa/cms/upload/uploadFiles/2013-06-20/file1234.pdf. Accessed 20 Jan 2018
  266. Shanghai Statistics Bureau (2012) Shanghai statistical yearbook. http://www.stats-sh.gov.cn/html/sjfb/201701/1000198.html. Accessed 20 Jan 2018
  267. Shanghai Urban Planning and Land Resource Administration Bureau (2013) Shanghai ArcGIS map. Shanghai Urban Planning and Land Resource Administration Bureau, ShanghaiGoogle Scholar
  268. Shanghai Urban Planning and Land Resource Administration Bureau (2018a) Atlas of Shanghai Master Plan (2017–2035). Shanghai Urban Planning and Land Resource Administration Bureau, ShanghaiGoogle Scholar
  269. Shanghai Urban Planning and Land Resource Administration Bureau (2018b) Shanghai Master Plan (2017–2035). http://www.shanghai.gov.cn/newshanghai/xxgkfj/2035004.pdf. Accessed 20 Jan 2018
  270. Sherrouse BC, Clement JM, Semmens DJ (2011) A GIS application for assessing, mapping, and quantifying the social values of ecosystem services. Appl Geogr 31(2):748–760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  271. Shumilova OV (2016) Methods of St. Petersburg green infrastructure formation. St. Petersburg State Forest Techical University, St. Petersburg (in Russian)Google Scholar
  272. Shwartz A, Turbé A, Simon L, Julliard R (2014) Enhancing urban biodiversity and its influence on city-dwellers: an experiment. Biol Cons 171:82–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  273. Sikorski P, Sikorska D, Studzińska M (2011) Long term changes in plant species composition in urban parks on the example of Łazienki Królewskie Park in Warsaw. The Probl Landsc Ecol 30:177–182Google Scholar
  274. Ślipiński P, Żmichorski M, Czechowski W (2012) Species diversity and nestedness of ant assemblages in an urban environment. Eur J Entomol 109:197–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  275. Soliku O, Schraml U (2018) Making sense of protected area conflicts and management approaches: a review of causes, contexts and conflict management strategies. Biol Cons 222:136–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  276. Sonnentag S, Fritz C (2007) The recovery experience questionnaire: development and validation of a measure for assessing recuperation and unwinding from work. J Occup Health Psychol 12(3):204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  277. St. Petersburg City Council (2004, with modifications of 2010) St. Petersburg law on the protection of green areas. http://pravo.gov.ru/proxy/. Accessed 05 Jan 2019 (in Russian)
  278. Stancioiu PT, Abrudan IV, Dutca I (2010) The Natura 2000 ecological network and forests in Romania: implications on management and administration. Int For Rev 12(1):106–113Google Scholar
  279. State Research and Design Center of Saint Petersburg Masterplan (2018) State research and design center of Saint Petersburg Masterplan. http://www.gugenplan.spb.ru. Accessed 10 Jan 2019
  280. Stringer LC, Paavola J (2013) Participation in environmental conservation and protected area management in Romania: a review of three case studies. Environ Conserv 40(2):138–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  281. Sudnik-Wójcikowska B, Galera H (2005) Floristic differences in some anthropogenic habitats in Warsaw. Ann Bot Fenn 42:185–193Google Scholar
  282. Sugiyama T, Francis J, Middleton NJ, Owen N, Giles-Corti B (2010) Associations between recreational walking and attractiveness, size, and proximity of neighborhood open spaces. Am J Public Health 100(9):1752–1757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  283. TEEB (2010) The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: mainstreaming the economics of nature: a synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. United Nations Environment Programme, MaltaGoogle Scholar
  284. Tenerelli P, Demšar U, Luque S (2016) Crowdsourcing indicators for cultural ecosystem services: a geographically weighted approach for mountain landscapes. Ecol Ind 64:237–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  285. Terraube J, Fernández-Llamazares Á, Cabeza M (2017) The role of protected areas in supporting human health: a call to broaden the assessment of conservation outcomes. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 25:50–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  286. Tokarska-Guzik B, Dajdok Z, Zając M, Zając A, Urbisz A et al (2012) Rośliny obcego pochodzenia w Polsce ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem gatunków inwazyjnych. GDOŚ, WarszawaGoogle Scholar
  287. Totalarch (2019) Regular gardens of Peter’s time. Regular style evolution and later baroque mid-18th century. http://landscape.totalarch.com/russian_gardens/baroque. Accessed 10 Jan 2019
  288. Trzaskowska E, Adamiec P (2011) Runo parków miejskich Lublina. Acta Sci Pol, Form Circ 10:51–59Google Scholar
  289. Trzyna T (2006) The value of Biodiversity to cities. www.unep.org/urban_environment/.../TrzynaAfricities9-2006.pdf. Accessed 12 Oct 2016
  290. Trzyna T (2014a) Urban protected areas: Important for urban people, important for nature conservation globally. Claremont. https://www.thenatureofcities.com/2014/10/08/urban-protected-areas-important-for-urban-people-important-for-nature-conservation-globally/. Accessed 12 Oct 2016
  291. Trzyna T (2014b) Urban protected areas: profiles and best practice guidelines. Best practice protected area guidelines series. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. https://www.iucn.org/protected...protected.../urban-conservation-strategies. Accessed 18 Oct 2018
  292. Trzyna T, Edmiston JT, Hyman G, Mc Neely JA, da Cunha e Menezes P, Myrdal B, Phillips A (2014) Urban Protected areas: profiles and best practice guidelines. IUCN, GlandGoogle Scholar
  293. Tudor CA, Iojă I-C, Rozylowicz L, Pǎtru-Stupariu I, Hersperger AM (2015) Similarities and differences in the assessment of land-use associations by local people and experts. Land Use Policy 49:341–351.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.07.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  294. Turkelboom F, Thoonen M, Jacobs S, Berry P (2015) Ecosystem service trade-offs and synergies. Ecol Soc 21:43Google Scholar
  295. Tyrväinen L, Pauleit S, Seeland K, de Vries S (2005) Benefits and uses of urban forests and trees, vol 81–114. Springer, Berlin, HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  296. Tyrväinen L, Ojala A, Korpela K, Lanki T, Tsunetsugu Y, Kagawa T (2014) The influence of urban green environments on stress relief measures: a field experiment. J Environ Psychol 38:1–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JENVP.2013.12.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  297. Tzoulas K, James P (2010a) Making biodiversity measures accessible to non-specialists: an innovative method for rapid assessment of urban biodiversity. Urban Ecosyst 13:113–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  298. Tzoulas K, James P (2010b) Peoples’ use of, and concerns about, green space networks: a case study of Birchwood, Warrington New Town, UK. Urban For Urban Green 9:121–128 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  299. United Nations (1992) Convention on biological diversity. www.dgvn.de/fileadmin/user.../UEbereinkommen_ueber_biologische_Vielfalt.pdf. Accessed 17 Apr 2018
  300. United Nations (2018) World urbanization prospects: the 2018 revision. https://population.un.org/wup/Publications/Files/WUP2018-KeyFacts.pdf. Accessed 12 Mar 2019
  301. Van den Berg AE, Jorgensen A, Wilson ER (2014) Evaluating restoration in urban green spaces: does setting type make a difference? Landsc Urban Plan 127:173–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  302. van Riper CJ, Kyle GT, Sutton SG, Barnes M, Sherrouse BC (2012) Mapping outdoor recreationists’ perceived social values for ecosystem services at Hinchinbrook Island National Park, Australia. Appl Geogr 35(1–2):164–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  303. van Zanten BT, van Berkel DB, Meentemeyer RK, Smith JW, Tieskens KF, Verburg PH (2016) Continental-scale quantification of landscape values using social media data. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113(46):12974–12979CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  304. Vasenev I, Dovletyarova E, Chen Z, Valentini R (2017) Megacities 2050: environmental consequences of urbanization. In: Proceedings of the VI international conference on landscape architecture to support city sustainable development. Springer International Publishing.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70557-6Google Scholar
  305. Vent W, Schubert R (1976) Exkursionsflora für die Gebiete der DDR und der BRD. Kritischer Band. Volk und Wissen Volkseigener Verlag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  306. Vieira FA, Bragagnolo C, Correia RA, Malhado AC, Ladle RJ (2018) A salience index for integrating multiple user perspectives in cultural ecosystem service assessments. Ecosyst Serv 32:182–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  307. Vilisics F, Hornung E (2009) Urban areas as hot-spots for introduced and shelters for native isopod species. Urban Ecosyst 12:333–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  308. Wang Q, Ruan JJ, Sha CY et al (2012) Human impacts on the spatial pattern of biodiversity of Shanghai City. Ecol Environ Sci 21(2):279–285Google Scholar
  309. Wang Y, Kotze DJ, Vierikko K, Niemelä J (2019) What makes urban greenspace uniquerelationships between citizens’ perceptions on unique urban nature, biodiversity and environmental factors. Urban For Urban Green 42:1–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UFUG.2019.04.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  310. Weber D, Anderson D (2010) Contact with nature: Recreation experience preferences in Australian parks. Ann Leis Res 13(1–2):46–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  311. Weiner DR (2002) A little corner of freedom: Russian nature protection from Stalin to Gorbachev. University of California PressGoogle Scholar
  312. Whitehead AN (1919) The concept of nature. The Tarner lectures, delivered in Trinity college, November 1919. http://archives.library.illinois.edu/erec/University%20Archives/1515022/OriginalFiles/LITERATURE/WHITEHEAD/Concept%20of%20Nature%20Whitehead.pdf (Google Scholar) Open URL, 08.05.2019
  313. WHOWorld health organisation (2017) Urban green space interventions and health: a review of impacts and effectiveness. Full report. WHO Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen. http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/337690/FULL-REPORT-for-LLP.pdf?ua=1. Accessed 20 Dec 2018
  314. Witt JK (2011) Action’s effect on perception. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 20(3):201–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  315. Wittig R (2004) The origin and development of the urban flora of Central Europe. Urban Ecosyst 7:323–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  316. Yang l (2016) Urban ecological land optimization study-case study of Shanghai Pudong new area as example. Master’s thesis, Tongji University, ShanghaiGoogle Scholar
  317. Yanitsky O, Usacheva O (2017) History of the “Green City” in Russia. J Cult Art Res 6(6):125–131.  https://doi.org/10.7596/taksad.v6i6.1330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  318. Yiğit A, Hayir-Kanat M (2017) İstanbul şehrinde ağırlıklı nüfus merkezinin değişimi ve nedenleri: 1990–2010 dönemi (Changes of population gravity center in İstanbul: period 1990–2010). Int J Soc Sci Res 114–123Google Scholar
  319. Zając A, Zając M (2009) Elementy geograficzne rodzimej flory Polski. Pracownia Chorologii Komputerowej UJ, KrakówGoogle Scholar
  320. Zarzycki K, Trzcińska-Tacik H, Różański W, Szeląg Z, Wołek J et al (2002) Ecological indicator values of vascular plants of Poland. W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences, KrakówGoogle Scholar
  321. Zefferman EP, McKinney ML, Cianciolo T, Fritz BI (2018) Knoxville’s urban wilderness: moving toward sustainable multifunctional management. Urban For Urban Green 29:357–366.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UFUG.2017.09.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  322. Zemvopros.ru (2019) The master plan of St. Petersburg 2015–2025. Functional area map. https://www.zemvopros.ru/genplan.php. Accessed 10 Jan 2019
  323. Zerbe S, Maurer U, Peschel T, Schmitz S, Sukopp H (2004) Diversity of flora and vegetation in European cities as a potential for nature conservation in urban-industrial areaswith examples from Berlin and Potsdam (Germany). In: Proceedings of the 4th international urban wildlife symposium, University of Arizona, Tuscon, 2004Google Scholar
  324. Ziv G, Hassall C, Bartkowski B, Cord AF, Kaim A, Kalamandeen M, Landaverde-González P, Melo JLB, Seppelt R, Shannon C, Václavík T, Zoderer BM, Beckmann M (2018) A bird’s eye view over ecosystem services in Natura 2000 sites across Europe. Ecosyst Serv 30:287–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  325. Zorrilla-Pujana J, Rossi S (2016) Environmental education indicators system for protected areas management. Ecol Ind 67:146–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  326. Zwierzchowska I, Hof A, Iojă I-C, Mueller C, Poniży L, Breuste J, Mizgajski A (2018) Multi-scale assessment of cultural ecosystem services of parks in Central European cities. Urban For Urban Green 30:84–97.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.UFUG.2017.12.017CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department Regional Geography and EnvironmentBucharestRomania
  2. 2.Department of Geography and GeologyUniversity of SalzburgSalzburgAustria

Personalised recommendations