Urban forests, ecosystem services, green infrastructure and nature-based solutions: Nexus or evolving metaphors?

Título traducido de la contribución: Bosques urbanos, servicios ecosistémicos, infraestructura verde y soluciones basadas en la naturaleza: ¿Nexo o metáforas en evolución?: ¿Nexo o metáforas en evolución?

Francisco J. Escobedo, Vincenzo Giannico, C. Y. Jim, Giovanni Sanesi, Raffaele Lafortezza

Resultado de la investigación: Contribución a RevistaArtículo

17 Citas (Scopus)

Resumen

Los enfoques y conceptos que nutren el conocimiento interdisciplinario sobre los ecosistemas urbanos han evolucionado en las últimas décadas y han adoptado una serie de metáforas, incluyendo los servicios de los ecosistemas (ES), la infraestructura verde (GI) y las soluciones basadas en la naturaleza (NBS). Del mismo modo, la investigación y la promoción de los bosques urbanos (UF) y sus múltiples funciones han crecido recientemente como medio para abordar los problemas que afectan a las zonas urbanas en todo el mundo. Independientemente de la metáfora utilizada, la silvicultura urbana ha proporcionado históricamente un lenguaje común, prácticas basadas en la ciencia y experiencias para la planificación y la gestión de árboles y espacios verdes en las ciudades con el fin de proporcionar tales beneficios. Por lo tanto, realizamos una revisión de la literatura para comprender mejor el origen, las tendencias y la evolución de estas metáforas y sus interpretaciones institucionales y contextuales. Las relaciones entre los términos, las tendencias de publicación y los países de origen de los estudios se utilizaron para identificar el nexo entre la silvicultura urbana y estas metáforas. Encontramos que ES aparece en 2006, GI en 2007 y NBS en 2015. Las definiciones basadas en publicaciones académicas fundamentales se incluyen ahora en los instrumentos normativos nacionales de varios países y regiones. Sin embargo, en términos de publicaciones en inglés, Estados Unidos lidera por un margen notable, seguido por China, los países más grandes de la Unión Europea, Brasil, Australia y Canadá. Del mismo modo, la brecha Norte-Sur es evidente en términos de productividad de las publicaciones científicas y de financiación de este tipo de investigación. En varias publicaciones internacionales se encuentran directrices y soluciones científicas y basadas en datos empíricos para integrar y aplicar prácticas y experiencias de silvicultura urbana. Sugerimos que tales metáforas, y sus implicaciones socio-políticas, no son tan importantes como los mensajes inherentes. De hecho, los cambios tanto en la disciplina como en el lenguaje son clave para comunicar la importancia documentada de la silvicultura urbana para mejorar el bienestar humano. También se presenta un conjunto de criterios que podrían ser adoptados para guiar el uso de estas y futuras metáforas.
Idioma originalEnglish (US)
Páginas (desde-hasta)3-12
Número de páginas9
PublicaciónUrban Forestry and Urban Greening
Volumen37
DOI
EstadoPublished - ene 2 2019

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Forestry
  • Ecology
  • Soil Science

Citar esto

Escobedo, Francisco J. ; Giannico, Vincenzo ; Jim, C. Y. ; Sanesi, Giovanni ; Lafortezza, Raffaele. / Urban forests, ecosystem services, green infrastructure and nature-based solutions: Nexus or evolving metaphors?. En: Urban Forestry and Urban Greening. 2019 ; Vol. 37. pp. 3-12.
@article{0a90e42cc17942fda09811ffa99d8241,
title = "Urban forests, ecosystem services, green infrastructure and nature-based solutions: Nexus or evolving metaphors?",
abstract = "Approaches and concepts nurturing interdisciplinary knowledge on urban ecosystems have evolved over recent decades and adopted a series of metaphors, including Ecosystem services (ES), Green infrastructure (GI), and Nature-based solutions (NBS). Similarly, research and promotion of urban forests (UF) and their multiple functions have recently grown as a means to address issues affecting urban areas throughout the world. Regardless of the metaphor used, urban forestry has historically provided a common language, science-based practices, and experiences for planning and managing trees and green spaces in cities to provide such benefits. Therefore, we conducted a review of the literature to better understand the origin, trends, and evolution of these metaphors and their institutional and contextual interpretations. Relationships among terms, publication trends and the studies' countries of origin were then used to identify the nexus between urban forestry and these metaphors. We found that ES appears in 2006, GI in 2007 and NBS in 2015. Definitions based on seminal academic publications are now included in national-level policy instruments in several countries and regions. However, in terms of English language publications, the United States leads by a notable margin followed by China, larger European Union countries, Brazil, Australia, and Canada. Similarly, the North-South divide is evident in terms of scientific publication productivity and funding for this type of research. Science and evidence-based guidelines and solutions for integrating and implementing urban forestry practices and experiences are found in several international publications. We suggest that such metaphors, and their socio-political implications, are not as important as the inherent messages. Indeed, changes in both discipline and language are key for communicating the documented importance of urban forestry for enhancing human well-being. A set of criteria that could be adopted to guide the use of these and future metaphors is also presented.",
author = "Escobedo, {Francisco J.} and Vincenzo Giannico and Jim, {C. Y.} and Giovanni Sanesi and Raffaele Lafortezza",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1016/j.ufug.2018.02.011",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "37",
pages = "3--12",
journal = "Urban Forestry and Urban Greening",
issn = "1618-8667",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",

}

Urban forests, ecosystem services, green infrastructure and nature-based solutions: Nexus or evolving metaphors? / Escobedo, Francisco J.; Giannico, Vincenzo; Jim, C. Y.; Sanesi, Giovanni; Lafortezza, Raffaele.

En: Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, Vol. 37, 02.01.2019, p. 3-12.

Resultado de la investigación: Contribución a RevistaArtículo

TY - JOUR

T1 - Urban forests, ecosystem services, green infrastructure and nature-based solutions: Nexus or evolving metaphors?

AU - Escobedo, Francisco J.

AU - Giannico, Vincenzo

AU - Jim, C. Y.

AU - Sanesi, Giovanni

AU - Lafortezza, Raffaele

PY - 2019/1/2

Y1 - 2019/1/2

N2 - Approaches and concepts nurturing interdisciplinary knowledge on urban ecosystems have evolved over recent decades and adopted a series of metaphors, including Ecosystem services (ES), Green infrastructure (GI), and Nature-based solutions (NBS). Similarly, research and promotion of urban forests (UF) and their multiple functions have recently grown as a means to address issues affecting urban areas throughout the world. Regardless of the metaphor used, urban forestry has historically provided a common language, science-based practices, and experiences for planning and managing trees and green spaces in cities to provide such benefits. Therefore, we conducted a review of the literature to better understand the origin, trends, and evolution of these metaphors and their institutional and contextual interpretations. Relationships among terms, publication trends and the studies' countries of origin were then used to identify the nexus between urban forestry and these metaphors. We found that ES appears in 2006, GI in 2007 and NBS in 2015. Definitions based on seminal academic publications are now included in national-level policy instruments in several countries and regions. However, in terms of English language publications, the United States leads by a notable margin followed by China, larger European Union countries, Brazil, Australia, and Canada. Similarly, the North-South divide is evident in terms of scientific publication productivity and funding for this type of research. Science and evidence-based guidelines and solutions for integrating and implementing urban forestry practices and experiences are found in several international publications. We suggest that such metaphors, and their socio-political implications, are not as important as the inherent messages. Indeed, changes in both discipline and language are key for communicating the documented importance of urban forestry for enhancing human well-being. A set of criteria that could be adopted to guide the use of these and future metaphors is also presented.

AB - Approaches and concepts nurturing interdisciplinary knowledge on urban ecosystems have evolved over recent decades and adopted a series of metaphors, including Ecosystem services (ES), Green infrastructure (GI), and Nature-based solutions (NBS). Similarly, research and promotion of urban forests (UF) and their multiple functions have recently grown as a means to address issues affecting urban areas throughout the world. Regardless of the metaphor used, urban forestry has historically provided a common language, science-based practices, and experiences for planning and managing trees and green spaces in cities to provide such benefits. Therefore, we conducted a review of the literature to better understand the origin, trends, and evolution of these metaphors and their institutional and contextual interpretations. Relationships among terms, publication trends and the studies' countries of origin were then used to identify the nexus between urban forestry and these metaphors. We found that ES appears in 2006, GI in 2007 and NBS in 2015. Definitions based on seminal academic publications are now included in national-level policy instruments in several countries and regions. However, in terms of English language publications, the United States leads by a notable margin followed by China, larger European Union countries, Brazil, Australia, and Canada. Similarly, the North-South divide is evident in terms of scientific publication productivity and funding for this type of research. Science and evidence-based guidelines and solutions for integrating and implementing urban forestry practices and experiences are found in several international publications. We suggest that such metaphors, and their socio-political implications, are not as important as the inherent messages. Indeed, changes in both discipline and language are key for communicating the documented importance of urban forestry for enhancing human well-being. A set of criteria that could be adopted to guide the use of these and future metaphors is also presented.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85043270716&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85043270716&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ufug.2018.02.011

DO - 10.1016/j.ufug.2018.02.011

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85043270716

VL - 37

SP - 3

EP - 12

JO - Urban Forestry and Urban Greening

JF - Urban Forestry and Urban Greening

SN - 1618-8667

ER -