ArticleSustainability science2024
Urban novel ecosystems as affective landscapes.
Article in Sustainability science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intertwined within a patchwork of different types of land use and land cover, novel ecosystems are urban ecosystems that have no historical analogues and contain novel species assemblages. Some researchers and practitioners in the field of conservation and restoration regard urban novel ecosystems unworthy of concern, while other groups call for their preservation due to the rate of biodiversity loss in cities and limited access to nature among some social groups. However, very little is known about how people perceive novel ecosystems (such as informal green spaces, post-industrial or derelict land sites awaiting redevelopment, brownfield sites, vacant lots, interstitial or gap spaces) which are often characterised by assemblages of wild, spontaneous, and overgrown vegetation, but also remanent or derelict urban infrastructure in cities. This paper addresses this gap by firstly asking how people percieve assemblages of wild-looking vegetation and urban infrastructure often found in novel ecosystems and how our affective and aesthetic responses to these ecosystems affects our attitudes towards wildness in cities. To begin to unpack this question, we obtain data from a series of exploratory workshops held in four cities in the global north where we asked people 'what is urban nature?' Our findings suggest that value judgements that people ascribe to novel ecosystems are often deeply polarised, but they are influenced by different ecological and urban conditions that people encounter within them. However, some negative perceptions about novel ecosystems may be mediated by situational cues; these situational cues could have important implications for rewilding and restoration programmes that aim to reconnect urban communities with nature through socio-ecological stewardship. To conclude, areas for further research that could improve our understanding of the social values of novel ecosystems in cities and the influence that these ecosystems may have on affective encounters with urban nature are proposed. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11625-024-01539-w.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.