Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Spatial configurations of urban woodland in Denmark and Sweden – patterns for
green infrastructure planning
Anders Busse Nielsen (1,2)
Marcus Hedblom (1)
Björn Wiström (1)
Anton Olafsson (2)
(1) Swedish University of Agricultural Science
(2) University of Copenhagen
• In Sweden, urban forest account for 2 % of the national forest cover, but they recieve more than 50 % of all visits (Anon, 2009)
• Forest = tree covered areas > 0.5 ha
• Range from small copses to large wooded landscapes
• Compared to parks and other types of green space, forest tend to be more multipurpose and able to absorb many uses whilst parallel providing a wide range of ecosystem services (Bell et al., 2005 Barbati et al. 2013)
Illustration:Regional Planning Office Stockholm
Forest - the core of Stockholm’s Green Wedges
http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/urban-atlas
Forest a ’natural’ element or even core in the development of green belts, green wedges and green infrastructure across European cities:
• Berlin
• Paris
• London
• Moscow
• Oslo
• St. Petersburg
• Ljubjana
• Vienna
(Konijnendijk 2010, Hladik and Pirnat, 2011)
Woodland - part of the everyday Urban Landscape
Cedric Price, ”Three Eggs Diagra”
• Forest is an integral part of the everyday Urban Landscape
• GI - the ’cure’ for today’s hybrids of cityscape and landscape ?
Forest & open space Central and NW European cities
(Pauleit et al., 2005)
• Forest provision differs enormously between European cities
• Suggesting that the difference are related to corresponding differences in regional forest cover around the cities
• What about forest location and patch size ?
Aim
• Identify differences and commonalities in urban forest cover and its spatial configurations that can support the integration of forest resources into multiple green infrastructure strategies and sustainability agendas that have replicable value beyond the individual city level
What
• Analysis of forest coverage, patch size and locations across the urban-periurban gradient of all Danish and Swedish cities > 10.000 inhabitants (n = 176)
How
• GIS analysis of high resolution land-use data
• General Linear Modelling to identify explanatory variables
Why DK and SE is suitable for the study (Forest map of Europe, EEA and EFI)
Denmark and Sweden were chosen for the study because of the distinct differences in regional landscape type, with cities located in some of the most densely forested regions in Europe through to some of the least forested regions.
Forest region, where cities are settled in a landscape
entirely dominated by forest. Skellefteå, SE
Photo:Kontrast foto, Ljungby
Mosaic region, where cities are settled in rift calley
landscapes with distinct topographical variation and
soil variation creating a mosaic of forest and small
scale agriculture. Gothenburg, Sweden.
Photo: Anders Busse Nieslen
Mosaic region, where cities are settled in a mosaic
of forest and small scale agriculture Sweden.
Photo: Anders Busse Nieslen
Plain region, where cities are settled in landscape
dominated by large scale agricultural. Lund, SE
Photo: Anders Busse Nielsen
European forest cultures (Bell et al. 2005)
NW European forest culture N European forest culture
Country Forest cover Country Forest cover
Britain 12 % Estonia 48 %
Denmark 14 % Finland 75 %
Iceland 1 % Latvia 45 %
Ireland 10 % Lithuania 30 %
The Netherlands 11 % Norway 39 %
Sweden 54 %
In all NW European countries forest is protected by law, and afforestation policies have been issued in which urban areas have highest priority.
Many cities in N Europe have reserved parts of their forest holding for urban exploitation
Why DK and SE is suitable for the study (Map of European Forest cultures, Bell et al., 2005)
Division of cities according to regional landscape structure
• Plain, all DK: 64 cities
• Plain region, SE: 24 cities
• Mosaic region: 40 cities
• Forest region: 48 cities
Forest cover and size configurations in three zones:
• Within city: < 0.2 km (from city border)
• Urban fringe: 0.2-2 km
• Peri-urban: 2-5 km
• (Regional forest cover: 20 km)
Total area surveyed: 38.923 km2
Denmark
64 cities
Survey area : 13.807 km2
32 % of total country area
Forest area: 1.458 km2
25 % of national forest
Sweden
112 cities
Survey area: 25.116 km2
5.6 % of total country area
Forest area: 5.978 km2
4.1 % of national forest
Result: Forest coverage and spatial distribution
• Forest cover differs significantly between cities setteled in regions with different landscape structures
• City size and population growth 1960-2010 only limited influence
• BUT…forest cover peaks at the urban fringe irrespectively of regional landscape structure
Footprint of decades of intentional planning!
Result: Forest coverage and spatial distribution
• Forest cover at the urban fringe is similar to regional forest coverage
64,2%
43,5%
22,1%
14,7%
Regional forest cover
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0,5-1,9
2-4,9
5-9,9
10-19,9
20-49,9
50-99,9
100-249,9
250-499,9
500-999,9
> 1000
Forest Mosaic Plain, SE Plain, DK
Size distribution of forest patches as percentages of total forest count
Result: Forest patch size configurations
• The survey area contained 54.462 forest pacthes
• Forest < 2 ha account for more than 50% of the patches irrespectively of the regional landscape structure
• Relative distribution of forest patches to size classes show similar
patterns across cities in regions with different regional forest cover
0 20 40 60 80
0,5-1,9
2-4,9
5-9,9
10-19,9
20-49,9
50-99,9
100-249,9
250-499,9
500-999,9
> 1000
Forest Mosaic Plain, SE Plain, DK
0 20 40 60 80
0,5-1,9
2-4,9
5-9,9
10-19,9
20-49,9
50-99,9
100-249,9
250-499,9
500-999,9
> 1000
Forest Mosaic Plain, SE Plain, DK
Total forest count
0 20 40 60 80
0,5-1,9
2-4,9
5-9,9
10-19,9
20-49,9
50-99,9
100-249,9
250-499,9
500-999,9
> 1000
Forest Mosaic Plain, SE Plain, DK
Within city borders
Urban fringe zone (0.2-2 km)
0 20 40 60 80
0,5-1,9
2-4,9
5-9,9
10-19,9
20-49,9
50-99,9
100-249,9
250-499,9
500-999,9
> 1000
Forest Mosaic Plain, SE Plain, DK
Peri-urban zone (2-5 km)
Forest patch size configurations across the urban-periurban gradient
Forest coverage and spatial configurations
Functional
urban area
Landscape region Urban area Urban fringe Urban periphery
Forest cover (%)
9.9 C Plains region, DK 8.0 (4.4) d 13.2 (9.2) d 8.5 (5.8) d
13.2 C Plains region, SE 8.1 (6.0) d 15.7 (17.6) d 15.7 (15.8) d
35.5 B Mosaic region, SE 20.4 (6.4) c 45.1 (13.3) b 40.9 (11.4) b
40.8 A Forest region, SE 25.4 (8.2) c 57.3 (14.7) a 39.6 (13.0) b
Mean patch size (ha)
7.7 C Plains region, DK 4.3 (2.3) e 9.8 (6.8) c 8.0 (4.4) c d
12.3 C Plains region, SE 3.5 (1.3) e 11.9 (14.0) c d 11.9 (9.5) c
22.0 B Mosaic region, SE 5.5 (2.0) d e 29.7 (16.8) b 30.1 (11.1) b
34.7 A Forest region, SE 6.1 (2.4) c d 56.4 (34.0) a 52.7 (24.7) a
Patch frequency / km2
1.2 C Plains region, DK 1.9 (0.6) b 1.4 (0.5) b c 1.1 (0.5) d e
1.1 C Plains region, SE 2.1 (1.2) b 1.2 (0,8) c d e 1.1 (0.6) c d e
1.4 B Mosaic region, SE 3.9 (1.1) a 1.7 (0.7) b 1.5 (0.5) b c
1.5 A Forest region, SE 4.4 (1.3) a 1.2 (0.8) c d 0.8 (0.3) e
• Patch frequency significantly higher within city borders compared to fringe and peri-urban zones in all landscape regions
1
How can the results inform GI strategies ?
….that can have replicable value beyond the individual city level
‘Core’ of GI planning strategies
‘Connectors’ in GI planning strategies 1
Green Infrastructure
• Two scales: urban scale and landscape scale
• Strategically planned and delivered green space network
• Linking peri-urban and urban areas
• Spatially explicit delivery of ecosystem services (ESS)
• Closer linked to planning, decision-making, and policy-making than the ESS concept
European Commission
Press release
Brussels, 6 May 2013
Environment: Investing in green infrastructure
will bring multiple returns to nature, society
and people
The European Commission adopted today a new strategy for encouraging the use of green infrastructure, and for ensuring that the enhancement of natural processes becomes a systematic part of spatial planning. Green Infrastructure is a tried and tested tool that uses nature to provide ecological, economic and social benefits.
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-404_en.htm
2
‘The Glue’ for GI across urban and peri-urban areas 2
The peak in forest cover at the urban fringe demonstrates the potential of forest to provide the hub for green infrastructure planning across urban and peri-urban areas.
Fragmented urban fringe landscape, E45 Århus. Photo; Stefan Darlan Boris
2 Said about the ‘urban fringe’
“Edgelands, characterised by rubbish tips and warehouses, super stores and industrial plants, office parks and gypsy encampments, golf courses, allotments and fragmented, frequently scuffy farmland’ (Shoard 2002)
“These edge-lands are classic non-places’, they are anonymeous and lack identify” (Gant et al. 2011)
Accepting that urban expansion will continue, forest can even help articulate and structure fragmented urban fringe landscapes.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2788/4098002656_f73de18c83_b.jpg New York – the city of pocket parks
3
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
0,5-1,9
2-4,9
5-9,9
10-19,9
20-49,9
50-99,9
100-249,9
250-499,9
500-999,9
> 1000
Forest Mosaic Plain, SE Plain, DK
Within city borders
Can a forest really be too small to be enjoyed by man and beast? Adventure
inspiration wonder awe…
Time for promotion of ‘Pocket woods’ Important ecological, - but socially largely untapped - stepping stones 3
Urban densification In Sweden many small forest fall in a vacuum between comprehensive and local plans
Danish National Forest policy : • Double the forest area within one tree generation
• Focusing on urban areas to provide for recreation, natur conservation and protection of ground water (drinking water)
Plain region, SE Mena forest cove:r 8,1% Mean city size: 16,5 km2 Mean forest size: 4,1 ha
Mosaic region, SE Mean forest cove:r 20,4% Mean city size: 28,4 km2 Mean forest size:5,9 ha
DK plains Mean forest cover: 9,0% Mean city size: 30 km2 Mean forest size: 4,7 ha
Forest region, SE Mean forest cover: 25,4% Mean city size: 20,8 km2 Mean forest size: 20,7 ha
A bright future?
Thanks! [email protected]