城市绿色基础设施对生态系统服务的影响：系统评价

IF 7 2区环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

Ecological Indicators Pub Date : 2025-07-15 DOI:10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113885

Yunong Yao , Hua Zheng , Zhiyun Ouyang , Cheng Gong , Jian Zhang , Lingxiao Ying , Zhi Wen

{"title":"城市绿色基础设施对生态系统服务的影响：系统评价","authors":"Yunong Yao , Hua Zheng , Zhiyun Ouyang , Cheng Gong , Jian Zhang , Lingxiao Ying , Zhi Wen","doi":"10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113885","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Urban green infrastructure (UGI) plays a key role in providing various ecosystem services (ES), which contribute to urban residents’ well-being and sustainable city management. However, the specific ES influenced by different types of UGI and the key level of UGI that impact urban ES are not yet fully understood. We identified 22 ecosystem services (ES) based on the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services and categorized urban green infrastructure (UGI) into six types. We then reviewed 235 publications to examine the relationships between UGI type, level, and ES at different levels. We found that: (1) The research predominantly focuses on “parks and (semi-)natural green spaces” and “green structures connected to gray infrastructure”. (2) At the landscape and community levels, UGI primarily enhances cultural services, influenced mainly by accessibility and area. (3) At the community and individual levels, UGI mainly supports regulating services, with key structural factors being vegetation cover, species diversity, and tree diameter at breast height (DBH) and age, respectively. The findings highlight the importance of considering differences in ES improvement across various levels of urban UGI design. These insights are valuable for the construction and management of UGI, helping to enhance urban resilience, improve ES, and elevate the overall living environment.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11459,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Indicators","volume":"178 ","pages":"Article 113885"},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of urban green infrastructure on ecosystem services: A systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Yunong Yao , Hua Zheng , Zhiyun Ouyang , Cheng Gong , Jian Zhang , Lingxiao Ying , Zhi Wen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ecolind.2025.113885\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Urban green infrastructure (UGI) plays a key role in providing various ecosystem services (ES), which contribute to urban residents’ well-being and sustainable city management. However, the specific ES influenced by different types of UGI and the key level of UGI that impact urban ES are not yet fully understood. We identified 22 ecosystem services (ES) based on the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services and categorized urban green infrastructure (UGI) into six types. We then reviewed 235 publications to examine the relationships between UGI type, level, and ES at different levels. We found that: (1) The research predominantly focuses on “parks and (semi-)natural green spaces” and “green structures connected to gray infrastructure”. (2) At the landscape and community levels, UGI primarily enhances cultural services, influenced mainly by accessibility and area. (3) At the community and individual levels, UGI mainly supports regulating services, with key structural factors being vegetation cover, species diversity, and tree diameter at breast height (DBH) and age, respectively. The findings highlight the importance of considering differences in ES improvement across various levels of urban UGI design. These insights are valuable for the construction and management of UGI, helping to enhance urban resilience, improve ES, and elevate the overall living environment.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11459,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecological Indicators\",\"volume\":\"178 \",\"pages\":\"Article 113885\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecological Indicators\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X25008155\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Indicators","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X25008155","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

城市绿色基础设施（UGI）在提供各种生态系统服务（ES）方面发挥着关键作用，有助于城市居民的福祉和城市的可持续管理。然而，不同类型的UGI对城市生态系统的具体影响程度以及影响城市生态系统的关键UGI水平尚不完全清楚。基于国际生态系统服务功能共同分类，我们确定了22种生态系统服务功能，并将城市绿色基础设施（UGI）划分为6类。然后，我们回顾了235篇出版物，以检查UGI类型、水平和不同水平ES之间的关系。研究发现：(1)研究主要集中在“公园与（半）自然绿地”和“绿色结构与灰色基础设施相连接”。(2)在景观和社区层面，UGI主要增强文化服务，主要受可达性和面积的影响。(3)在群落和个体层面，UGI主要支持调节服务功能，关键结构因子分别为植被覆盖度、物种多样性、胸径和树龄。研究结果强调了在城市UGI设计的不同层次上考虑ES改进差异的重要性。这些见解对UGI的建设和管理具有重要价值，有助于增强城市韧性，改善ES，提升整体生活环境。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Impact of urban green infrastructure on ecosystem services: A systematic review

Urban green infrastructure (UGI) plays a key role in providing various ecosystem services (ES), which contribute to urban residents’ well-being and sustainable city management. However, the specific ES influenced by different types of UGI and the key level of UGI that impact urban ES are not yet fully understood. We identified 22 ecosystem services (ES) based on the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services and categorized urban green infrastructure (UGI) into six types. We then reviewed 235 publications to examine the relationships between UGI type, level, and ES at different levels. We found that: (1) The research predominantly focuses on “parks and (semi-)natural green spaces” and “green structures connected to gray infrastructure”. (2) At the landscape and community levels, UGI primarily enhances cultural services, influenced mainly by accessibility and area. (3) At the community and individual levels, UGI mainly supports regulating services, with key structural factors being vegetation cover, species diversity, and tree diameter at breast height (DBH) and age, respectively. The findings highlight the importance of considering differences in ES improvement across various levels of urban UGI design. These insights are valuable for the construction and management of UGI, helping to enhance urban resilience, improve ES, and elevate the overall living environment.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Ecological Indicators 环境科学-环境科学

CiteScore

11.80

自引率

8.70%

发文量

1163

审稿时长

78 days

期刊介绍： The ultimate aim of Ecological Indicators is to integrate the monitoring and assessment of ecological and environmental indicators with management practices. The journal provides a forum for the discussion of the applied scientific development and review of traditional indicator approaches as well as for theoretical, modelling and quantitative applications such as index development. Research into the following areas will be published. • All aspects of ecological and environmental indicators and indices. • New indicators, and new approaches and methods for indicator development, testing and use. • Development and modelling of indices, e.g. application of indicator suites across multiple scales and resources. • Analysis and research of resource, system- and scale-specific indicators. • Methods for integration of social and other valuation metrics for the production of scientifically rigorous and politically-relevant assessments using indicator-based monitoring and assessment programs. • How research indicators can be transformed into direct application for management purposes. • Broader assessment objectives and methods, e.g. biodiversity, biological integrity, and sustainability, through the use of indicators. • Resource-specific indicators such as landscape, agroecosystems, forests, wetlands, etc.