Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHeikkinen, Anna
dc.contributor.authorMäkelä, Hannele
dc.contributor.authorKujala, Johanna
dc.contributor.authorNieminen, Jere
dc.contributor.authorJokinen, Ari
dc.contributor.authorRekola, Hanna
dc.date.accessioned2025-03-08T10:27:12Z
dc.date.available2025-03-08T10:27:12Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.date.submitted2019-10-17 14:55:54
dc.date.submitted2020-04-01T12:29:39Z
dc.date.submitted2018-09-05 23:55
dc.date.submitted2019-10-17 14:55:54
dc.date.submitted2020-04-01T12:29:39Z
dc.identifier1000440
dc.identifierOCN: 1076717341
dc.identifierhttp://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/29498
dc.identifier.urihttps://doab-dev.siscern.org/handle/20.500.12854/194567
dc.description.abstractThis chapter argues that the discussion of urban sustainability is in urgent need of new understanding of how ecosystem services are generated in places where human and non-human stakeholders interact within the urban landscape. More than half of the world’s population currently lives in urban areas, and the rate of urbanisation is estimated to increase rapidly in the next three decades ( United Nations, 2014 ). This scale of urbanisation strains both urban and rural ecosystems, which are required to provide nutrition, clean water, fresh air, recreational opportunities, wellbeing and other life-supporting and life-enhancing opportunities to urban dwellers ( Chiesura and de Groot, 2003 ; Fischer and Eastwood, 2016 ; Standish, Hobbs, and Miller, 2013 ). Amidst such challenges as rapid urbanisation and abrupt climatic changes, ecosystem services are needed to provide the material and non-material benefi ts required to keep ever-growing cities liveable ( Alberti, 2016 ; Andersson et al., 2014 ; Finco and Nijkamp, 2001 ; Rees and Wackernagel, 1996 ). However, the current understanding of ecosystem services is inadequate, and the extant research has been criticised for both its anthropocentric bias and its focus on instrumental and monetary valuations of ecosystem services ( Pelenc and Ballet, 2015 ; Schröter et al., 2014 ). Moreover, the lack of a detailed elaboration of the socio-ecological interface of ecosystem services has resulted in the continued segregation of human and non-human processes in ecosystem service generation ( Andersson, Barthel, and Ahrné, 2007 ; Fischer and Eastwood, 2016 ; Maes et al., 2012 )
dc.languageEnglish
dc.rightsopen access
dc.subject.othersustainable development
dc.subject.othersocial aspects
dc.subject.otherenvironmental protection
dc.subject.otherbiodiversity
dc.subject.othernature
dc.subject.otherhuman influences
dc.subject.othersustainable development
dc.subject.othersocial aspects
dc.subject.otherenvironmental protection
dc.subject.otherbiodiversity
dc.subject.othernature
dc.subject.otherhuman influences
dc.subject.otherCapability approach
dc.subject.otherEcological economics
dc.subject.otherEcology
dc.subject.otherEcosystem
dc.subject.otherEcosystem services
dc.subject.otherRadical democracy
dc.subject.otherStormwater
dc.subject.otherUrban ecosystem
dc.subject.otherthema EDItEUR::R Earth Sciences, Geography, Environment, Planning
dc.titleChapter 7 Urban ecosystem services and stakeholders
dc.title.alternativeTowards a sustainable capability approach
dc.typechapter
oapen.relation.isPublishedByfa69b019-f4ee-4979-8d42-c6b6c476b5f0
oapen.relation.isPartOfBookacf9536b-ac01-4f8c-ab46-eeaf27f7404f
oapen.relation.isbn9780815387213; 9780815387220; 9781351173643
oapen.imprintRoutledge
oapen.pages20
dc.anonymitySingle-anonymised
dc.peerreviewidbc80075c-96cc-4740-a9f3-a234bc2598f1
dc.peerreviewtitleProposal review
dc.openreviewNo
dc.responsibilityPublisher
dc.stagePre-publication
dc.reviewtypeProposal
dc.reviewertypeInternal editor
dc.reviewertypeExternal peer reviewer


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record