Course:GEOG350/2024/Ecological Urbanism

From UBC Wiki

Introduction

Human establishment as earth’s dominant species has led to profound technological advancements, globalization and development, but the irrevocable alteration of our planet is finally catching up to us. Amidst rapid urbanization and exhaustion of the Earth’s resources, we grow increasingly disconnected from the natural world around us.  “The impoverishment of living systems” (Chu and Karr)[1] as a result of human activity and consumption threaten to undermine the crucial processes of life, affecting regulation of our water and air, inducing environmental degradation, eliminating the human experience of nature, and ultimately changing the very structure of our planet. In the face of irreversible climate change threatening natural, social, and economic systems, it is imperative to address the ways in which we can remediate the damage we’ve caused and work towards building a sustainable future that prioritizes resilience, equity and environmental stewardship.

As cities worldwide face growing populations and the adverse effects of climate change, the need for urban design that alleviates these impacts through green spaces becomes increasingly crucial. Ecological urbanism is an approach for designing and shaping cities in a way that aligns with the environment to inspire an urbanism that has a greater social inclusivity and sensitivity to the environment. It emphasizes the importance of balancing the needs of human populations with the imperative to protect and integrate natural systems, and ensures that urban growth does not come at the expense of ecological health.

In Vancouver, a city where 92.7% of the population lives near greenspace (Bock et al. para.5)[2], implementation of green spaces is particularly relevant. We will examine the efficacy of greenspaces in Vancouver in the midst of rapid urbanization and development; analyzing it from the perspectives of biodiversity, social well-being and climate resilience. First, we will investigate how greenspaces support and enhance biodiversity by providing habitats for various species and promoting ecological connectivity. Next, we will explore their role in social well-being, considering how access to greenspaces impacts mental and physical health. Finally, we will assess the contribution of greenspaces to climate resilience, focusing on their ability to mitigate urban heat islands and water retention. By examining these impacts, we aim to demonstrate the critical role of greenspaces in creating a sustainable urban environment in Vancouver, reinforcing the importance of ecological urbanism in city planning.

Overview of issue/focus

In light of demands posed by urbanization to accommodate growing populations with housing, employment, and social opportunities, the constraints on available land for development in cities has led to “urban sprawl beyond city limits and into environmentally protected areas and agricultural lands,” (Zhang 245)[3]. It is projected that by 2050, 75% of the global population will be living in highly urbanized environments (Sun et al. 1)[4]. Encroachment of the natural landscape by urban centers, while necessary to meet the demands of increased population size, introduces adverse consequences for the long-term organization and management of the urban environment and the socioeconomic functioning of the city (Shuang Lü et al. 2).[5] Urban development disrupts ecosystems and natural processes that are vital contributors to “climate regulation, water and air purification, pollination and pest control,” (Amorocho 4)[6] and as such, harm the environment and the services it provides us. Numerous studies underscore the importance of having access to greenspaces for physical and mental health of a population, citing benefits such as improved physical states, enhanced emotional responses, and increased social cohesion. As a result of increasing urban sprawl into natural habitats, researchers state that, “the majority of earth’s human population will likely be living in a state of ‘biological poverty’ by the year 2030 (Melles 26)[7], referring to the reduction in biological diversity of species experienced in greenspaces. Biodiversity and its associated ecological processes are essential to not only providing valuable ecosystem services that regulate our air and water purification in addition to food production, but also in contributing to our “sense of place,” (Connery 23)[8]. This direct depletion of nonhuman life driven by urban growth and expansion often irreversibly distills the pool of species and genetic diversity, affecting the ability of plant and animal species to survive, adapt, reproduce, fight disease, and ultimately remain present on Earth. Incorporating ecologically informed decisions into urban planning has been effective in mitigating biodiversity loss and the detrimental effects of urbanization in many cases around the world; for example, the Haizhou wetlands in the heart of of Guangzhou, China boast significantly higher biodiversity compared to the local urban area, in addition to contributing $146.8 million (USD) worth of value via ecosystem services like carbon storage and sequestration, urban cooling, and mental and physical health benefits (Guerry 18)[9].

Screen Shot 2024-06-14 at 3.30.38 PM.png

The declining trend of urban greenspace is evident in Vancouver—a city that has integrated its surrounding natural landscape at the forefront of its global identity. According to Stats Canada[10], Vancouver saw a 14.2% reduction in greenspace over the past 18 years, dropping from an average of 82.4% in 2000-2004 to 68.2% in 2018-2022, with urban areas experiencing a 10.5% decrease. To visualize this trend, Stats Canada conducted a report[10] using remote sensing to calculate the greenness of urban cities in Canada, using the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), for the years 2001, 2011, and 2019.

This decrease in urban vegetation is alarming as it might exacerbate current issues of greenspaces. A study by Quinton et al. (4)[11] has found Vancouver to be among the top cities in Canada with the least equitable access to greenspace, with ‘greenspace’ being defined to encompass parks, street trees, lawns, and gardens. One explanation for this trend would be the significant global and local relationship established between one’s social identity—such as race, education, income, age, etc.—and their access to safe and adequate urban green space (Quinton et al. 3; Griffiths)[12][11]. For instance, Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside which experiences an “opioid epidemic, poverty, limited employment opportunities, [and] intergenerational trauma”, may experience temperatures 120C hotter due to its lack of tree-lined streets compared to other Vancouver neighborhoods (Nowlan and Linsell para. 2,7)[13]. Meanwhile on a global scale, cities like Coppenhagen invest into urban greening initiatives despite dismantling policies that could combat environmental gentrification (Anguelovski et al. 8)[14]. When placing fifth most livable city on the 2023 Economist Intelligence Unit’s Global Liveability Index in terms of healthcare, education, infrastructure, and stability (Todd para. 11)[15] it may be contradictory to think of Vancouver having any major issues with its natural landscapes. However, the word “livability” can be a subjective term due to the different ways people live in urban settings. While greenspaces such as parks, community gardens, urban canopies have beneficial purposes of increasing biodiversity, improving  social bonds and mental health, as well as fostering urban resilience, not everyone benefits due to disparities such as social class, race and/or ethnicity. This then begs the question “livability for whom?”, if green spaces may only improve the livability of a select few given its broad definition that leaves room for interpretation (Tolfo and Doucet 2)[16]. Alongside social-based inequities, key municipal and community stakeholders may seek out underutilized spaces and be weary of exploitation of land-use policies.

Cities are responding to the future implications of climate change and resource extraction by integrating urban greenspaces—with aspirations to become more ecologically and infrastructurally self-sufficient, while being replicable in other urban contexts (Hodson & Marvin, 479)[17]. Green infrastructures can be incorporated into urban environments in a variety of ways at multiple scales, from large parks, community and rooftop gardens, and green walkways. For example, Singapore has created the LUSH (Landscaping for Urban Spaces and High-Rises) program which mandates and incentivizes high rises and urban developments to include greenery and communal spaces, depending on location and development type; this is a simple way to counteract consequences of urbanization. Another effective way to increase greenspace is utilizing unused land, for example, an abandoned railway in New York City being turned into an attractive linear park featuring gardens and green pathways. In Vancouver, empty lots can be turned into community gardens, and this initiative is encouraged with providing financial benefits for landowners. However, there are notable criticisms for the execution of ecological urbanism. For most urban-based ecological solutions, it is difficult to translate plans from paper to reality due to policy and regulations, expensive costs, and opportunity costs of replacing development space with public green areas. Furthermore, landowners tend to exploit the benefits of urban greenspaces for the sake of economic gain, which comprises the longevity of these spaces and their efficacy in supporting long-term environmental and social benefits. For example, landowners in Vancouver apply for community gardens to receive tax breaks on their land, but soon after replacing the garden with real estate developments (Walker 171)[18] —Third Space hosted a community garden in West Broadway and Alma Street, which was recently torn down to presumably give space for a 14-storey apartment building (Meiszner)[19].

We aim to conduct a comprehensive case study to delve further into the role of urban greenspaces on four key aspects which can be a guide to measure the health of a city: biodiversity, social well-being, urban heat island, and storm water retention. The scale of our study is localized to Vancouver, serving as a representative model for examining the effectiveness of ecological urbanism in a growing urban city. Our case study can be used to provide insights applicable to other urbanized nations, particularly in the Global North with social, political, and geographical conditions similar to Vancouver.

Case Studies of the Issue

Biodiversity

Amongst the numerous ways that green space can be incorporated into urban areas, community gardens are an ecologically and socially comprehensive way to provide habitat space and mitigate the detrimental effects of urbanization on local plant, animal and invertebrate species. Urban sprawl in the face of population growth introduces an array of negative biological effects, such as biotic homogenisation, prominence of invasive species, shifts in trophic structure and food web dynamics, and altered nutrient cycling, primary production and plant growth (Goddard et al. 91)[20], all of which contribute to reductions in the efficacy of valuable ecosystem services. Ecosystem services broadly refers to the benefits generated by nature and biodiversity, including “climate regulation, water and air purification, pollination and pest control,” (Amorocho 4)[6] which are vitally important to sustaining quality of life, human health and wellbeing under the environmental stressors associated with urban sprawl and population growth (Goddard et al. 90)[20]. Community gardens as a refuge for native species preserve local biodiversity: the array of plant, animal and insect species that contribute to the wellbeing of ecosystems and associated services. In the absence of biodiversity, ecological uniformity leaves flora and fauna susceptible to accelerated disease transmission, species loss, and ultimately ecosystem degradation. Urban gardens are considered a way for individual citizens to increase, “net ecological function and biodiversity of urban environments,” (Sperling and Lortie 229)[21] in addition to the social and psychological benefits bolstered by regular interactions with elements of nature. Rich plant biodiversity has been found to attract and sustain invertebrate pollinator populations (Corbet et al.)[22], which further contribute to the biotic diversity of gardens via fundamental roles in nutrient cycling, organic substance decomposition, pollination, and soil aeration (Kremen et al. 308)[23].

Vancouver Community Gardens
Community gardens can serve a multitude of purposes, supporting local wildlife, food production and social interaction.
2010 Davie Street community garden Vancouver BC Canada 5045979145.jpg

While community gardens may seem spatially deficient in terms of available habitat area, many studies stress the importance of connective green space interspersed in cities in order to reap the benefits of sustaining local biodiversity, and community gardens provide this connectivity. Urban gardens are habitat fragments that contribute to the viability of the greater ecosystem, as described in an analysis (Rudd et al)[24] of garden habitats in Vancouver to providing “functional connectivity between green spaces,” (Goddard et al. 93)[20]. Situating gardens peripheral to urban parks has been found to increase species richness (Chamberlain et al. 87)[25] through minimizing habitat isolation, thus elevating the functionality and purpose of these parks as spaces for preserving biodiversity. In the context of rapid urbanization, conserving local biodiversity within our cities is imperative to hindering both species extinction and, “extinction of the human experience of wildlife,” (Goddard et al. 95)[20] and urban community gardens are an undervalued method of biodiversity enhancement.

Despite their ecologically beneficial attributes, various barriers to the success of urban gardens have been described: loss of interest, land or lack of funding were described as primary contributors to the loss of 20% of gardens across the US and Canada between 2007-2012 (Drake and Lawson 247)[26]. The temporary nature of gardens implemented in vacant lot space contributes to the uncertainty of stakeholders in the future of their gardening efforts, in addition to issues with soil contamination or water availability (Diaz et al. 197)[27]. At a community level, disparities in access to urban gardens produces a spatial inequality; low-income gardeners may be unable to contribute financially to garden upkeep, and communities of color with unequal access to political leaders and groups can see difficulty securing public funds and resources (Cohen and Reynolds 109)[28].

Social Well-being

Greenspaces, such as parks, gardens, and urban forests, play a pivotal role in enhancing social well-being in urban environments. Numerous studies have documented the influence of direct exposure to greenspaces on the mental, physical, and social well-being of the general population. Such empirical research conducted globally, have concluded that proportion of usable and quality greenspace accessible, as well as distance to nearest quality green space, have statistically significant association with reduction of anxiety, stress, and mental fatigue (Beyer et al. 3455; Nutsford et al. 1008; Shuang Lü et al. 2)[29][30][5]. Beyer et al. (3454)[29] have analyzed brain wave data measured by EEG devices and determined that time spent in urban green has notable impacts on cognitive functions; their study found that children with ADHD, exhibited improved attention and concentration levels following a walk in a park compared to a walk in the downtown area. Furthermore, parks, trails, and greenways encourage more physical movement within a community—which is crucial for preventing chronic cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, or obesity—thus contributing to a higher quality of life and well-being. Safe and maintained green spaces can serve as community gathering areas that foster social interaction and cohesion critical for collective and social well-being (Jennings & Bamkole 2)[31]. Urban green spaces which are purposefully planned and maintained encourage more public use and boost participation in community life. Hunter et al.[32] have analyzed the efficacy of green spaces across 38 case studies, and their findings argue that “greening of vacant lots'' should be accompanied by promotion and marketing programmes to maximize motivation for the general public to use such urban green spaces and participate in socially interactive physical activities. However, given that ‘greenspace’ is a broad term, it is important for urban green developments to be accompanied by appropriate planning and policies which serve the community. If greening strategies are market-driven, they will prioritize affluent communities and create further social inequity (Haase et al., 42)[33]. A study by Knapp et al.[34] has found that although minority communities have access to parks, they are in poorer conditions and are susceptible to crime such as theft and vandalism. Thus, undermining the social well-being benefits of urban greenspaces.

Ecological urbanism contributes to environmental sustainability, which is crucial for long-term social well-being. Urban greenery helps mitigate the effects of climate change by absorbing carbon dioxide, reducing urban heat islands, and improving air quality. A healthier environment supports better public health outcomes, reducing the prevalence of respiratory diseases and other ailments associated with poor air quality and pollution. Including possible green areas in the form of community gardens, rooftop parks, or trailways are efficient adaptation efforts that Vancouver could undertake (Metro Vancouver 3)[35] to strengthen its urban resilience.

Urban Resilience

Urban resilience describes the capacity of a city and its ecological, social and technical systems to maintain their current state, adapt to change, and/or prepare for future events (Meerow et al. 39)[36]. In the context of ecological urbanism this describes how cities create community or technologically-based solutions to alleviate impacts of climate change such as heat, flooding, or biodiversity loss. Likewise green spaces can foster social connection, community wellbeing and overall improve emotional resilience. Thus resiliency has an important role in creating more environmentally sustainable cities, as urban infrastructures and its residents must resist the impacts of climate change. While urban resilience has multiple foundations and outlooks, we will specifically address the role of greenspaces in urban heat and stormwater retention.

Urban Heat Island

Greenspaces are essential for mitigating climate change effects, particularly extreme heat, which poses significant risks to urban health and ecosystems. Urban areas affected by the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect, absorb and retain heat due to concentrations of buildings an pavement, exacerbated in areas with sparse tree canopy and greenspaces.

Vancouver’s initiative to increase urban forest canopy to 30% by 2050 focuses on planting trees in low canopy areas, improving soil volumes, and selecting climate-adapted species for better resilience against extreme heat and drought (City of Vancouver)[37]. Street tree planting in low canopy areas like DTES and Marpole aims to reduce heat exposure and enhance urban resilience. Trees and vegetation provide shade, reducing solar radiation and lowering surface temperatures through evapotranspiration. These efforts increase greenspace efficiency, fostering cooler environments.

Vancouver could enhance its strategy by looking at other cities like New York, which uses living roofs to cool building surfaces by lowering temperatures above and around the building (Corburn 471).[38] This would help provide further cooling while reducing air temperatures and energy demand.

Stormwater Retention

In the midst of climate change, Vancouver is susceptible to urban flooding due to sea level rise and excessive rainfall (CBC Vancouver)[39]. Thus, greenspaces throughout the city are one method to mitigate excess precipitation by retaining water in their soil. In Vancouver, these systems can be spotted as green roofs, porous pavement lined with trees, rain gardens, parks, and swales (“Green Rainwater Infrastructure”).

Indeed, nature-based solutions to manage stormwater helps mitigate natural hazards, lower infrastructural damage costs, improve human well-being and biodiversity (Oral et al. 113)[40]. In fact, depending on the bio-retention system this runoff reduction can range from 40-99% (Kõiv-Vainik et al. 4)[41]. The importance of greenspaces are even more prevalent since city staff say that Vancouver’s sewers have “inadequate capacity and heavy rainfall events that overwhelm [them]” (Chan para. 7)[42]. In short, greenspaces contribute to urban resilience by reducing potential infrastructural damages, improving environmental conditions for public health, and increasing Vancouver’s capacity to mitigate excess water due to climate change.

Green Roofs Porous/Permeable Pavement Rain Gardens
Green roofs help absorb and retain rainwater, with an additional benefit of cooling the surface temperature of the building it resides on.
Green roofs help absorb and retain rainwater, with an additional benefit of cooling the surface temperature of the building it resides on.
 Porous pavement allows rain to seep through into underground storage which can be directed away from sewage systems or used for nearby vegetation
Milwaukee Public Museum permeable pavement - 52197509944.jpg
 Rain gardens are plots of native plants and filtration systems that absorb excess precipitation and remove potential pollutants from entering sewage systems.
Rain gardens are plots of native plants and filtration systems that absorb excess precipitation and remove potential pollutants from entering sewage systems.
Parks Swales
Urban parks are comprised of an array of vegetation that cleans and absorbs excess rainwater. In turn, the plants benefit as well.
Kits-8.jpg
 Similar to rain gardens, swales are found alongside streets with plants and soil in order to decrease the flow of water into storm drains through absorption.
Fescue Bioswale at Playfields.jpg
Criticisms

While green spaces are important for building resilient infrastructures against climate change, the extent to which these interventions can foster resilient communities remains in question given the disproportionate impacts on marginalised communities. For instance, areas like the DTES face higher heat vulnerability and health risks, underscoring how incorporating these communities' voices in urban planning is essential for equitable climate resilience.

Moreover, while stormwater retention interventions sound effective in theory, most cities still have conventional storm sewers (Kõiv-Vainik et al. 2)[41]. In Vancouver fiscal, spatial, temporal, and equity conflicts prove challenging. Such instances include funding deficits, conflict between land-use for resilience and land-use to support urban growth, aligning 4-year voting periods with 50–100 infrastructure investments, or fulfilling needs of marginalized communities in the design flood construction, respectively (Yumagulova and Vertinsky 8)[43]. This then highlights the importance of readily available infrastructures since a lack of may create a “disproportionate exposure to environmental risks and hazards” between communities (Adger et al. 1593)[44].

Lesson learned

Our research underscores the interconnectedness between ecological health and social well-being. Greenspaces in Vancouver support biodiversity and ecological connectivity, enhancing communitie’s mental and physical health. Access to green areas promotes active lifestyles, reduces stress, and fosters social cohesion, highlighting the essential role of nature in urban public health. Greenspaces, as vital urban infrastructure, offer recreation, relaxation, and social interaction, contributing to inclusive and resilient cities. Enhancing greenspaces in urban planning can create sustainable and equitable environments, prioritizing community health and happiness. Prioritizing greenspaces helps manage climate risks, enhance sustainability, and improve urban quality of life. Adopting green infrastructure strategies builds resilient cities capable of withstanding climate challenges while promoting healthier communities.

Vancouver’s experiences demonstrate how cities can harmonize urban development with ecological sustainability, showing that green infrastructures are crucial for shaping resilient, thriving communities. While Vancouver is making progress in integrating sustainable practices, there is still room for improvement. Enhancing the effectiveness and inclusivity of these initiatives remains a challenge that requires ongoing attention and innovation.

Future Research

Ecological urbanism is a vast topic and more in-depth review can be done to analyze its influence and future implications on all aspects of cities. Looking forward, future ecological urbanism policies should aim to address barriers to greenspace equity and accessibility, and prioritize community engagement in initiatives. Through our literature review, we found certain limitations that can be addressed through a more extensive research into all topics under the umbrella of ecological urbanism.

Biodiversity

To maximize biodiversity and ecosystem services conservation, further research is necessary to explore the interrelatedness of biodiversity and both urban green space distribution and diversity (Zhao 11)[45]. Integrating city-specific social and economic factors into urban planning is key to addressing drivers of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation due to spatial inequalities. In Vancouver, socioeconomic status strongly correlates with the abundance and diversity of bird species in a neighborhood and their green spaces (Melles 31)[7]; Neighborhoods with the lowest incomes and highest population density, often with a significant Indigenous population, “had the fewest small parks and were the farthest from large urban parks,” (Melles 31)[7]. These disparities exemplify how “social health may be inextricably linked to ecological health,” (Melles 34)[7], perpetuating cycles of biological poverty and thus extinction of the human experience of nature and support for environmental protection. Figure 1 (Goddard et al. 94)[20] illustrates the dynamics of urban gardens as "socioecological constructs."

Urban Resilience

Future research should focus on identifying factors contributing to higher health risks in marginalized neighbourhoods, as well as investigating direct and indirect health effects of climate change, including mental health, on these communities. By evaluating and improving the effectiveness of current adaptation measures in vulnerable areas, we can help inform equitable and effective planning and policy.

Map of the relationship between green space distribution in Metro Vancouver Neighbourhoods (Lee).


Understanding how to mitigate urban flooding in high-risk communities is crucial for urban resilience and sustainability. Vancouver’s Floodplain map showcases vulnerable areas like Kerrisdale and West Point Grey, with most impacted areas in Vancouver South, East Vancouver, and North East False Creek/Strathcona, which are areas that are known to have less green spaces and/or vegetation cover as of 2020 (Lee)[46]. Future research should investigate “participatory methodologies that capture the lived experiences of marginalised groups”, fostering stronger stakeholder connections (Adger, 2020)[44].





References

This resource was created by the UBC Wiki Community.



  1. ↑ Chu, E. W., and J. R. Karr. “Environmental Impact: Concept, Consequences, Measurement.” Reference Module in Life Sciences, vol. 1, no. 1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809633-8.02380-3. ncbi.
  2. ↑ Bock, Johanna L., et al. “Attributes and Benefits of Urban Green Space Visits – Insights from the City of Vancouver.” Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, vol. 98, Elsevier BV, June 2024, pp. 128399–99, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2024.128399. Accessed 24 June 2024.
  3. ↑ Zhang, Xing Quan. “The Trends, Promises and Challenges of Urbanisation in the World.” Habitat International, vol. 54, no. 3, May 2016, pp. 241–52, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.11.018.
  4. ↑ Sun, Yan, et al. “Literature Review Reveals a Global Access Inequity to Urban Green Spaces.” Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 3, Jan. 2022, p. 1062, https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031062.
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 Shuang Lü, et al. “The Change of Green Space Well-Being during Rapid Urbanization: A Case Study in Jinan, China, 2006–2018.” PLOS ONE, vol. 18, no. 9, Public Library of Science, Sept. 2023, pp. e0289480–80, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0289480.
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 Amorocho, Vanessa. “Classifying and Mapping Urban Green Interventions to Support Biodiversity and Connectivity in Vancouver.” UBC Sustainability, Aug. 2023, sustain.ubc.ca/about/resources/classifying-and-mapping-urban-green-interventions-support-biodiversity-and#:~:text=This%20project%20identifies%20key%20observations,Vancouver’s%20ecological%20health%20and%20biodiversity.
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 Melles, Stephanie. “Urban Bird Diversity as an Indicator of Human Social Diversity and Economic Inequality in Vancouver, British Columbia.” Urban Habitats, vol. 3, no. 1, 2005, www.eaglehill.us/urban-habitats/Vol%203/vancouver_pdf.pdf.
  8. ↑ Connery, Kevin. “Biodiversity and Urban Design: Seeking an Integrated Solution.” Journal of Green Building, vol. 4, no. 2, May 2009, pp. 23–38, https://doi.org/10.3992/jgb.4.2.23.
  9. ↑ Guerry, Anne D., et al. Urban Nature and Biodiversity for Cities POLICY BRIEF. The World Bank Group, 2021, www.thegpsc.org/sites/gpsc/files/final_urban_nature_and_biodiversity_for_cities.pdf.
  10. ↑ 10.0 10.1 Lantz, Nicholas, et al. "Urban Greenness, 2001, 2011, 2019". Statistics Canada, Government of Canada, 17 Aug. 2021, https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/16-002-x/2021001/article/00002-eng.htm
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 Quinton, Jessica, et al. "Wealthy, Educated, And...Non-Millenial? Variable Patterns of Distributional Inequity in 31 Canadian Cities." Landscape and Urban Planning, vol. 227, Nov. 2022, p. 104535, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2022.104535.
  12. ↑ Griffiths, Nathan. "Vancouver among Least Equitable Cities for Green Space: Study." Vancouver Sun, 2 Oct. 2022, vancouversun.com/news/local-news/vancouver-among-least-equitable-cities-for-green-space-study#:~:text=Vancouver%20ranks%20among%20the%20least,by%20the%20University%20of%20B.C.
  13. ↑ Nowlan, Linda, and Tim Linsell. “Extreme Heat, Extreme Inequality: Addressing Climate Justice in Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside - Beyond.” Beyond.ubc.ca, 2023, beyond.ubc.ca/extreme-heat-extreme-inequality-addressing-climate-justice-in-vancouvers-downtown-eastside/. Accessed 23 June 2024.
  14. ↑ Anguelovski, Isabelle, et al. “Green Gentrification in European and North American Cities.” Nature Communications, vol. 13, no. 1, July
  15. ↑ Todd, Douglas. “Douglas Todd: How Global Livability Rankings Cursed Vancouver.” Vancouversun, Vancouver Sun, 2 Mar. 2023, vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/douglas-todd-how-global-livability-rankings-cursed-vancouver. Accessed 24 June 2024.
  16. ↑ Tolfo, Giuseppe, and Brian Doucet. “Livability for Whom?: Planning for Livability and the Gentrification of Memory in Vancouver.” Cities, vol. 123, Elsevier BV, Apr. 2022, pp. 103564–64, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103564. Accessed 24 June 2024.
  17. ↑ Hodson, Mike, and Simon Marvin. “Can Cities Shape Socio-Technical Transitions and How Would We Know If They Were?” Research Policy, vol. 39, no. 4, May 2010, pp. 477–85, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.020.
  18. ↑ Walker, Samuel. “Urban Agriculture and the Sustainability Fix in Vancouver and Detroit.” Urban Geography, vol. 37, no. 2, July 2015, pp. 163–82, https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2015.1056606.
  19. ↑ Meiszner, Peter. “Bold Design for Rental Apartments at West Broadway and Alma.” UrbanYVR, 17 May 2019, www.urbanyvr.com/west-broadway-alma-rentals/. Accessed 24 June 2024.
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 20.2 20.3 20.4 Goddard, Mark A., et al. “Scaling up from Gardens: Biodiversity Conservation in Urban Environments.” Trends in Ecology & Evolution, vol. 25, no. 2, Feb. 2010, pp. 90–98, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2009.07.016.
  21. ↑ Sperling, Corinne D., and Christopher J. Lortie. “The Importance of Urban Backgardens on Plant and Invertebrate Recruitment: A Field Microcosm Experiment.” Urban Ecosystems, vol. 13, no. 2, Sept. 2009, pp. 223–35, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-009-0114-y.
  22. ↑ Corbet, Sarah A., et al. “Native or Exotic? Double or Single? Evaluating Plants for Pollinator-Friendly Gardens.” Annals of Botany, vol. 87, no. 2, Feb. 2001, pp. 219–32, https://doi.org/10.1006/anbo.2000.1322.
  23. ↑ Kremen, Claire, et al. “Pollination and Other Ecosystem Services Produced by Mobile Organisms: A Conceptual Framework for the Effects of Land-Use Change.” Ecology Letters, vol. 10, no. 4, Apr. 2007, pp. 299–314, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2007.01018.x.
  24. ↑ Rudd, Hillary, et al. “Importance of Backyard Habitat in a Comprehensive Biodiversity Conservation Strategy: A Connectivity Analysis of Urban Green Spaces.” Restoration Ecology, vol. 10, no. 2, June 2002, pp. 368–75, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-100x.2002.02041.x.
  25. ↑ Chamberlain, D. E., et al. “Determinants of Bird Species Richness in Public Green Spaces.” Bird Study, vol. 54, no. 1, Mar. 2007, pp. 87–97, https://doi.org/10.1080/00063650709461460. Accessed 22 Aug. 2020.
  26. ↑ Drake, Luke, and Laura J. Lawson. “Results of a US and Canada Community Garden Survey: Shared Challenges in Garden Management amid Diverse Geographical and Organizational Contexts.” Agriculture and Human Values, vol. 32, no. 2, Oct. 2014, pp. 241–54, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-014-9558-7.
  27. ↑ Diaz, John M., et al. “Barriers to Community Garden Success: Demonstrating Framework for Expert Consensus to Inform Policy and Practice.” Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, vol. 31, Apr. 2018, pp. 197–203, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2018.02.014.
  28. ↑ Cohen, Nevin, and Kristin Reynolds. “Resource Needs for a Socially Just and Sustainable Urban Agriculture System: Lessons from New York City.” Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, vol. 30, no. 1, July 2014, pp. 103–14, https://doi.org/10.1017/s1742170514000210.
  29. ↑ 29.0 29.1 Beyer, Kirsten, et al. “Exposure to Neighborhood Green Space and Mental Health: Evidence from the Survey of the Health of Wisconsin.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 11, no. 3, Mar. 2014, pp. 3453–72, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110303453.
  30. ↑ Nutsford, D., et al. “An Ecological Study Investigating the Association between Access to Urban Green Space and Mental Health.” Public Health, vol. 127, no. 11, Nov. 2013, pp. 1005–11, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2013.08.016.
  31. ↑ Jennings, Viniece, and Omoshalewa Bamkole. “The Relationship between Social Cohesion and Urban Green Space: An Avenue for Health Promotion.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 16, no. 3, Feb. 2019, p. 452, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16030452.
  32. ↑ Hunter, R. F., et al. “Environmental, Health, Wellbeing, Social and Equity Effects of Urban Green Space Interventions: A Meta-Narrative Evidence Synthesis.” Environment International, vol. 130, Sept. 2019, p. 104923, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.104923.
  33. ↑ Haase, Dagmar, et al. “Greening Cities – to Be Socially Inclusive? About the Alleged Paradox of Society and Ecology in Cities.” Habitat International, vol. 64, June 2017, pp. 41–48, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.04.005.
  34. ↑ Knapp, Megan, et al. “The Relationships between Park Quality, Park Usage, and Levels of Physical Activity in Low-Income, African American Neighborhoods.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 16, no. 1, Dec. 2018, p. 85, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16010085.
  35. ↑ Metro Vancouver. Air Quality and Weather in 2022. 2022, metrovancouver.org/services/air-quality-climate-action/Documents/annual-air-quality-summary-2022.pdf.
  36. ↑ Meerow, Sara, et al. “Defining Urban Resilience: A Review.” Landscape and Urban Planning, vol. 147, Mar. 2016, pp. 38–49, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.11.011.
  37. ↑ City of Vancouver. “Green Rainwater Infrastructure: Sustainably Managing Our Rainwater.” Vancouver.ca, 2024, vancouver.ca/home-property-development/green-infrastructure.aspx. Accessed 24 June 2024.
  38. ↑ Corburn, Jason. “Cities, Climate Change and Urban Heat Island Mitigation: Localising Global Environmental Science.” Urban Studies, vol. 46, no. 2, Feb. 2009, pp. 413–27, https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098008099361.
  39. ↑ CBC Vancouver. “New Data Shows Increased Flooding Risk in Metro Vancouver.” YouTube, 7 Apr. 2024, www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-700-0zvhU. Accessed 24 June 2024.
  40. ↑ Oral, Hasan Volkan, et al. “A Review of Nature-Based Solutions for Urban Water Management in European Circular Cities: A Critical Assessment Based on Case Studies and Literature.” Blue-Green Systems, vol. 2, no. 1, Jan. 2020, pp. 112–36, https://doi.org/10.2166/bgs.2020.932.
  41. ↑ 41.0 41.1 Kõiv-Vainik, Margit, et al. “Urban Stormwater Retention Capacity of Nature-Based Solutions at Different Climatic Conditions.” Nature-Based Solutions, vol. 2, Dec. 2022, p. 100038, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbsj.2022.100038.
  42. ↑ Chan, Kenneth. “City of Vancouver Identifies Need to Accelerate Sewer Separation Work.” Dailyhive.com, Daily Hive, Feb. 2023, dailyhive.com/vancouver/vancouver-sewer-separation-overflow. Accessed 24 June 2024.
  43. ↑ Yumagulova, Lilia, and Ilan Vertinsky. “Managing Trade-Offs between Specific and General Resilience: Insights from Canada’s Metro Vancouver Region.” Cities, vol. 119, Dec. 2021, p. 103319, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103319. Accessed 2 Jan. 2022.
  44. ↑ 44.0 44.1 Adger, W. Neil, et al. “Commentary: Inequality, Precarity and Sustainable Ecosystems as Elements of Urban Resilience.” Urban Studies, vol. 57, no. 7, Mar. 2020, pp. 1588–95, https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098020904594.
  45. ↑ Zhao, Xuancheng, et al. “Biodiversity in Urban Green Space: A Bibliometric Review on the Current Research Field and Its Prospects.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 19, no. 19, Oct. 2022, p. 12544, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191912544.
  46. ↑ Lee, Hyunji. “Percent Green Space by Census Tract in Metro Vancouver, BC.” ArcGIS StoryMaps, Esri, 21 Nov. 2020, storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/0706abfb4f9942259794f9811c00eee2. Accessed 24 June 2024.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.ubc.ca/index.php?title=Course:GEOG350/2024/Ecological_Urbanism&oldid=841170"