Ecosystem services in managing residential landscapes: priorities, value dimensions, and cross-regional patterns

K. L. Larson, Kristen C Nelson, S. R. Samples, S. J. Hall, N. Bettez, Jeannine M Cavender-Bares, P. M. Groffman, M. Grove, J. B. Heffernan, Sarah E Hobbie, J. Learned, J. L. Morse, C. Neill, L. A. Ogden, J. O’Neil-Dunne, D. E. Pataki, C. Polsky, R. Roy Chowdhury, M. Steele, T. L.E. Trammell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

35 Scopus citations

Abstract

Although ecosystem services have been intensively examined in certain domains (e.g., forests and wetlands), little research has assessed ecosystem services for the most dominant landscape type in urban ecosystems—namely, residential yards. In this paper, we report findings of a cross-site survey of homeowners in six U.S. cities to 1) examine how residents subjectively value various ecosystem services, 2) explore distinctive dimensions of those values, and 3) test the urban homogenization hypothesis. This hypothesis posits that urbanization leads to similarities in the social-ecological dynamics across cities in diverse biomes. By extension, the thesis suggests that residents’ ecosystem service priorities for residential landscapes will be similar regardless of whether residents live in the humid East or the arid West, or the warm South or the cold North. Results underscored that cultural services were of utmost importance, particularly anthropocentric values including aesthetics, low-maintenance, and personal enjoyment. Using factor analyses, distinctive dimensions of residents’ values were found to partially align with the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment’s categories (provisioning, regulating, supporting, and cultural). Finally, residents’ ecosystem service priorities exhibited significant homogenization across regions. In particular, the traditional lawn aesthetic (neat, green, weed-free yards) was similarly important across residents of diverse U.S. cities. Only a few exceptions were found across different environmental and social contexts; for example, cooling effects were more important in the warm South, where residents also valued aesthetics more than those in the North, where low-maintenance yards were a greater priority.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)95-113
Number of pages19
JournalUrban Ecosystems
Volume19
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2016

Keywords

  • Ecosystem services
  • Human values
  • Land management
  • Lawns
  • Residential landscapes
  • Urban sustainability

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Ecosystem services in managing residential landscapes: priorities, value dimensions, and cross-regional patterns'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Larson, K. L., Nelson, K. C., Samples, S. R., Hall, S. J., Bettez, N., Cavender-Bares, J. M., Groffman, P. M., Grove, M., Heffernan, J. B., Hobbie, S. E., Learned, J., Morse, J. L., Neill, C., Ogden, L. A., O’Neil-Dunne, J., Pataki, D. E., Polsky, C., Chowdhury, R. R., Steele, M., & Trammell, T. L. E. (2016). Ecosystem services in managing residential landscapes: priorities, value dimensions, and cross-regional patterns. Urban Ecosystems, 19(1), 95-113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-015-0477-1