» Articles » PMID: 24740622

From Multifunctionality to Multiple Ecosystem Services? A Conceptual Framework for Multifunctionality in Green Infrastructure Planning for Urban Areas

Overview
Journal Ambio
Date 2014 Apr 18
PMID 24740622
Citations 31
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Green infrastructure (GI) and ecosystem services (ES) are promoted as concepts that have potential to improve environmental planning in urban areas based on a more holistic understanding of the complex interrelations and dynamics of social-ecological systems. However, the scientific discourses around both concepts still lack application-oriented frameworks that consider such a holistic perspective and are suitable to mainstream GI and ES in planning practice. This literature review explores how multifunctionality as one important principle of GI planning can be operationalized by approaches developed and tested in ES research. Specifically, approaches developed in ES research can help to assess the integrity of GI networks, balance ES supply and demand, and consider trade-offs. A conceptual framework for the assessment of multifunctionality from a social-ecological perspective is proposed that can inform the design of planning processes and support stronger exchange between GI and ES research.

Citing Articles

Exploring the relationship between urban green infrastructure connectivity, size and multifunctionality: a systematic review.

Li L, Carter J Landsc Ecol. 2025; 40(3):61.

PMID: 40078170 PMC: 11893650. DOI: 10.1007/s10980-025-02069-1.


Co-benefits of nature-based solutions: A health impact assessment of the Barcelona Green Corridor (Eixos Verds) plan.

Iungman T, Caballe S, Segura-Barrero R, Cirach M, Mueller N, Daher C Environ Int. 2025; 196:109313.

PMID: 39919507 PMC: 11839897. DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2025.109313.


Mapping the Green Urban: A Comprehensive Review of Materials and Learning Methods for Green Infrastructure Mapping.

Dobrinic D, Miler M, Medak D Sensors (Basel). 2025; 25(2).

PMID: 39860833 PMC: 11768631. DOI: 10.3390/s25020464.


Evaluating the benefits of urban green infrastructure: Methods, indicators, and gaps.

Khalili S, Kumar P, Jones L Heliyon. 2024; 10(19):e38446.

PMID: 39430535 PMC: 11489314. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e38446.


New criteria for sustainable land use planning of metropolitan green infrastructures in the tropical Andes.

LaRota-Aguilera M, Zapata-Caldas E, Buitrago-Bermudez O, Marull J Landsc Ecol. 2024; 39(6):112.

PMID: 38817738 PMC: 11133195. DOI: 10.1007/s10980-024-01911-2.


References
1.
Sanon S, Hein T, Douven W, Winkler P . Quantifying ecosystem service trade-offs: the case of an urban floodplain in Vienna, Austria. J Environ Manage. 2012; 111:159-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.06.008. View

2.
Wurster D, Artmann M . Development of a concept for non-monetary assessment of urban ecosystem services at the site level. Ambio. 2014; 43(4):454-65. PMC: 3989515. DOI: 10.1007/s13280-014-0502-2. View

3.
Haase D, Larondelle N, Andersson E, Artmann M, Borgstrom S, Breuste J . A quantitative review of urban ecosystem service assessments: concepts, models, and implementation. Ambio. 2014; 43(4):413-33. PMC: 3989520. DOI: 10.1007/s13280-014-0504-0. View

4.
Pickett S, Cadenasso M, Grove J, Boone C, Groffman P, Irwin E . Urban ecological systems: scientific foundations and a decade of progress. J Environ Manage. 2010; 92(3):331-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.08.022. View

5.
Berbes-Blazquez M . A participatory assessment of ecosystem services and human wellbeing in rural Costa Rica using photo-voice. Environ Manage. 2012; 49(4):862-75. DOI: 10.1007/s00267-012-9822-9. View