Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 14 (2015) 760–771

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Urban Forestry & Urban Greening

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ufug

Review

Challenges and strategies for urban green-space planning in cities

undergoing densification: A review
Christine Haaland ∗ , Cecil Konijnendijk van den Bosch
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Landscape Architecture, Planning and Management, Box 58, SE-230 53 Alnarp, Sweden

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The compact city approach has gained global impact as a planning approach for sustainable devel-
Received 8 April 2014 opment in areas with increasing urban population. Through densification and compact building, the
Received in revised form 22 July 2015 approach aims to counteract negative effects of urban sprawl in terms of ineffective land-use and related
Accepted 23 July 2015
environmental problems. In spite of its benefits various problems and challenges are associated with
Available online 10 August 2015
implementing the compact city approach. This review looks at the effects of urban densification and
compact city development on urban green space and its planning. It identifies problems, challenges and
Keywords:
strategies of urban green space planning during densification processes. Findings confirm that urban
Compact city
Green infrastructure
densification processes, including consolidation and infill development, can pose a threat to urban green
Green space change space. However, the literature on the compact city approach often lacks specific suggestions for urban
Infill development green space conservation and planning. Provision of urban green space in compact city environments
Public participation and during densification processes is described as a major challenge. Loss of private urban green space
Sustainable urban development rarely seems offset by provision of more public green space. Several ways are identified to deal with these
challenges, while also highlighting research gaps, e.g., as to how loss of green space quantity can be offset
by increased green space quality.
© 2015 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

Introduction problems, and social inequalities (Power, 2001). Even urban areas
with a declining population (i.e., shrinking cities) can expand in
Worldwide, the percentage of people living in urban areas terms of area (Couch et al., 2005). Alternative, more sustainable
will increase from 50% in 2010 to nearly 70% by 2050 (United urban forms include neo-traditional development, urban contain-
Nations, 2013). This will result in expansion and/or densification ment, the compact city and the eco-city (Jabareen, 2006), and in
of urbanised areas. As migration to urban areas is ongoing globally, particular compact or dense city form (Jenks et al., 1996b; Burton,
the need for sustainable urban development is becoming increas- 2000; Randolph, 2006; OECD, 2012), since it aims to counteract
ingly important. In an urban context this implies creation of both the negative effects of urban expansion and sprawl. The ‘compact
resource efficient systems and good, engaging urban design for city’ is characterised by high density housing, mixed use, well-
attractive cities with good quality of life. Urban sustainability has functioning public transport (transit oriented development) and
been related to urban form (Jenks and Jones, 2010a) and alternative, promotion of cycling and walking (Burton, 2000).
more sustainable urban forms than urban sprawl have been sug- Nevertheless, negative effects of certain aspects of city den-
gested (e.g., Jenks et al., 1996a; Jabareen, 2006; Sonne, 2009). Urban sification are increasingly evident (e.g., crowding, lower living
sprawl can be defined as urban development with low-density quality) and certain positive characteristics assigned to the dense
housing, both residential and commercial, segregated land-use, city are being questioned (less traffic, less environmental prob-
high level of automobile use combined with lack of public trans- lems; Williams, 2000; Neuman, 2005; Howley et al., 2009; Melia
port, which is in high demand for land (Johnson, 2001). Related et al., 2011; Hofstad, 2012). One issue identified is the lack of urban
problems are non-efficient use of resources e.g., of land and energy green space in densified urban areas and the removal of green space
causing a larger urban footprint, loss of biodiversity, environmental when densifying city areas (e.g., Jim, 2004; Fuller and Gaston, 2009;
Brunner and Cozens, 2013). This paper reviews research on the
challenges to urban green space planning in cities under densifi-
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +46 40 41 5481. cation on the one hand, and strategies for sound urban green space
E-mail address: [email protected] (C. Haaland). planning under these conditions on the other. Urban green space is

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2015.07.009
1618-8667/© 2015 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.
 C. Haaland, C.K. van den Bosch / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 14 (2015) 760–771 761

defined here as “any vegetation found in the urban environment, Table 1

Key word combinations of the systematic literature search (compare methodology
including parks, open spaces, residential gardens, or street trees” to Kabisch et al., 2015).
(Kabisch and Haase, 2013, p. 113).
Planning and management of urban green space is a crucial Type of urban green Densification process

issue in the context of the compact city concept, as these spaces Urban AND Green space AND Compact city
provide essential benefits to urban dwellers (e.g., Pauleit, 2003; OR Green infrastructure OR Densification
OR Park OR Intensification
Tzoulas et al., 2007; James et al., 2009), while also offering crucial
OR Garden OR Consolidation
habitat for wildlife (Goddard et al., 2010). Green space multifunc- OR Infill
tionality has often been emphasised as relating to recreation, social
interaction, aesthetics, cultural heritage and ecological functions
(Pauleit, 2003; Priemus et al., 2004; Mell, 2009). Many of these Method
functions, which are seen as important for sustainable urban devel-
opment, have to be realised within limited space (Baycan-Levent Literature was identified by structured and semi-structured
et al., 2009; James et al., 2009). The concept of ecosystem services searches in selected major scientific databases (Scopus, Web of
(Costanza et al., 1997; Millenium Ecosystem Assessment, 2003), Knowledge and Google Scholar), with additional cross-referencing.
embodying the human benefits derived from ecosystem functions, Additional searches were based on the authors own knowledge of
has also been applied to urban green spaces (Tratalos et al., 2007; potentially relevant work. Structured searches were carried out in
Ernstson et al., 2008; Niemelä et al., 2010; Young, 2010; Kabisch, November 2012 in Scopus and Web of Knowledge with the key-
2015; Hansen et al., 2015). Among the so-called regulating ser- words green space or park combined with compact city, densification
vices, air purification (Bell et al., 2011; Tallis et al., 2011; Saebo or high-density, planning and additionally on green space change.
et al., 2012), water and climate regulation (Bowler et al., 2010; These were complemented and updated during 2013 and 2014,
Depietri et al., 2012), carbon storage (Davies et al., 2011; Strohbach and extended with keywords such as infill development and urban
et al., 2012) and stormwater regulation (Zhang et al., 2012) are consolidation. In January and February 2015 structured, quantita-
important examples. They are also crucial for biodiversity con- tive searches were carried out in Scopus using the key words (title,
servation within urban areas (Goddard et al., 2010; Nielsen et al., abstract, keywords) urban, green space, green infrastructure, park,
2014). garden combined with compact city, densification, intensification,
There is also an increasing interest in the perception of urban consolidation or infill (Table 1). The same searches were carried out
nature by humans (Chiesura, 2004; Standish et al., 2013), relation- in Web of Knowledge (topic). This methodology follows a system-
ships between biodiversity and health benefits (Fuller et al., 2007; atic review approach (Petticrew, 2001; Roy et al., 2012; Kabisch
Jorgensen and Gobster, 2010; Dean et al., 2011; Wolch et al., 2014) et al., 2015). The literature considered in the quantitative analysis
and generally in human–environment interactions (Kabisch et al., was restricted to publications in English; conference proceedings
2015). Cultural ecosystem services such as recreation, aesthet- and other literature difficult to locate were excluded. Focus was on
ics and cultural heritage, are often prioritised in planning, design international, peer-reviewed journals. Articles not related or only
and management of urban green spaces. Urban green spaces offer marginally related to the topic of the review were excluded, while
possibilities for restoration (Nordh et al., 2009), physical activity additional relevant articles found via cross references were added.
(Hillsdon et al., 2006; Gardsjord et al., 2014), and social interac- The searches comprised articles published from January 2000 until
tion and community attachment (Seeland et al., 2009; Arnberger 10th of February 2015. Due to the fact that snowballing and per-
and Eder, 2012; Kaźmierczak, 2013). Because of the considerable sonal knowledge of the literature were used in addition to the
health benefits urban green space provide (e.g., Tzoulas et al., systematic search, the literature search is not entirely replicable,
2007), access to green space has been a central issue in green which is a limitation. On the other hand these additions provided
space research in relation to human well-being (e.g., Barbosa et al., highly valuable supplementary information.
2007).
Provisioning services of urban green space have gained Framework and key concepts
increasing attention over last decade, e.g., concerning urban
agriculture (De Bon et al., 2009) and community gardening As a background, a brief account is given of the compact city
(Holland, 2004; Guitart et al., 2012). The importance of study- concept and the debate on whether compact city development
ing interrelations, especially synergies of ecosystem services contributes to sustainable urban development. This section pro-
or functions has been highlighted (Shmelev and Shmeleva, vides a brief context rather than a comprehensive review. Next,
2009). Provision of vital multiple ecosystem services makes the quantitative literature search is analysed. Evidence for green
urban green space a fundamental part of sustainable urban space change is summarised in general, but in particular regarding
development. densification processes. Then literature on green space and densi-
As urban sprawl can threaten countryside areas, densification fication is reviewed. The final section identifies research gaps and
processes in town and cities can potentially threaten urban green directions for future research.
spaces. There is evidence that urban green space is under pressure
due to densification processes such as infill development (Pauleit The compact city concept and urban densification
et al., 2005; Rafiee et al., 2009; Byomkesh et al., 2012). Green
space planning and management can be very challenging, espe- Urban expansion and sprawl have in the past led to degradation
cially in city areas under densification, since important ecosystem of inner-city areas, which lost population and commerce. Moreover
services are supposed to be delivered by limited green spaces. they have resulted in destruction and or fragmentation of natu-
Therefore existing studies need to be reviewed that have looked ral or semi-natural vegetation at the urban periphery and in rural
at urban green space planning in cities undergoing densification. areas (Johnson, 2001). These problems have been recognised and
Questions to be answered by this review are: (1) how do the com- discussed as early as during the 1960s (Jacobs, 1961). The term
pact city approach and densification processes affect urban green ‘compact city’ dates back to the 1970s (Dantzig and Saaty, 1973,
space planning? (2) Which particular challenges and problems arise cited in Breheny, 1996) and has been increasingly debated since
from this? And (3) which strategies and solutions are offered for the 1990s (Newman, 1992; Jenks et al., 1996a; De Roo, 2000; Jenks
dealing with these challenges and problems? and Jones, 2010a). Rapid urbanisation in e.g., South-East Asia has
762 C. Haaland, C.K. van den Bosch / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 14 (2015) 760–771

led to a wider interest in compact city development (e.g., Jim, 2004; 1% 1%

Dave, 2010) which presently can be considered a globally applied
planning concept with three main characteristics (OECD, 2012, p. 9%
27): Asia
Europe
• dense and proximate development patterns; 39%
• urban areas linked by public transport system; and 19% Australia and New
Zealand
• accessibility of local services and jobs.
North America
Dense and proximate development patterns can refer to a vari-
South America
ety of building patterns, depending on the context considered.
Densification in suburbs can mean enlarging existing buildings or Africa
establishing new ones on previous gardens (also called infill devel- 31%
opment, Brunner and Cozens, 2013). In more central city areas,
densification (also named compaction or intensification; Williams,
2000) can be achieved either by establishing new buildings in areas Fig. 1. Origin of studies on urban green space and densification. (For interpretation
of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web
not built-up previously (infill), in built-up areas previously having version of this article.)
other purposes (industrial sites, not used for production any-
more), or in areas with lower-density buildings which are replaced
by high-rise buildings. Densification is also termed consolidation By far the most Asian publications derive from China (63% of Asian
when referring to the compaction of inner city and peripheral areas publications); in Europe one third were performed in the U.K. Num-
(Bunker et al., 2002). Densification can thus mean different building bers of publications per year increased until 2013; two thirds of all
forms and processes, depending on the context (e.g., an Australian studies were published between 2011 and 2014.
suburb or an inner-city of Hong Kong). Fifteen different topics were distinguished (Table 2). Major
Compact city development is meant to counteract the nega- themes of publication were green issues related to green space
tive effects of urban expansion and sprawl, but its own negative planning under densification (22%) and green space change (19%).
effects have been identified (Williams, 2000; Searle, 2004; Neuman, Social factors in relation to densification (resident perception, social
2005; Jenks and Jones, 2010b; Dempsey et al., 2012; Westerink equity/social sustainability, recreation, compensation hypothesis)
et al., 2013). The debate on urban sprawl and compaction is only comprised one fourth of the publications (25%). Biodiversity and
the most recent episode in a discussion of urban form and devel- landscape ecology issues were studied in about 10% of the publica-
opment between ‘centrists’ and ‘decentrists’ which started more tions. A case study approach at local, city part or city-wide scale was
than 200 years ago (Breheny, 1996). Boyko and Cooper (2011) have dominant (86% of all studies); 8% of the studies were on national
explored the complexity of the density concept in city planning, its scale (based on case studies distributed over the respective coun-
definitions and a large range of density measures. They highlight try) and 2% at continent scale. One study used a theoretical model,
the importance of understanding density not only as a quantita- 13% used more general conceptual approaches (e.g., on sustaina-
tive measure, but as also including other dimension as qualities bility, urban form, planning strategies, policies).
of the environment and perceptions and needs of for example resi- Publications were published in 52 different journals, which
dents. Challenges of density concepts were emphasised by Bamford underlines the wide spread of publishing within the topic. Land-
(2009) who showed both Copenhagen and Stockholm as past scape and Urban Planning (17% of all publications), Urban Forestry
examples of compact city development and garden city tradition. & Urban Greening (9%) and Urban Ecosystems (5%) were the leading
Westerink et al. (2013) provided an overview of both advantages journals.
and disadvantages of urban sprawl and compact city development
related to environmental, social, economic and resilience factors. Urban green space change
Critics of the compact city concept question certain assumptions
made on traffic reduction or energy use reduction (e.g., Gray et al., There is growing evidence for loss of urban green space due to
2010; Melia et al., 2011), how the concept is implemented (Hofstad, densification processes worldwide, especially for Asian and Aus-
2012), or even whether there is any relationship between sustaina- tralian cities and to a lesser degree in Europe and North America.
bility and urban form (Neuman, 2005; Jenks and Jones, 2010b). Several authors have expressed a need for more knowledge on
Despite the ongoing research debate on advantages and disadvan-
tages of the compact city concept, it has had considerable impact in Table 2
planning practice (Burton, 2000; McCrea and Walters, 2012; OECD, Major topics of literature on urban green space and densification (n = 102).
2012; Brunner and Cozens, 2013). Topic Number of publications

Planning 22
Analysis of the quantitative literature search Change 19
Resident perspective 10
Social equity/social sustainability 7
Literature searches generated 102 publications (see Appendix).
Biodiversity 6
Of these, 69 were selected from 233 titles in Scopus. Through the Trees 6
search in Web of Knowledge three additional publications were Greening buildings 6
identified that did not appear in the Scopus search. Also, 30 pub- Sustainability 5
lications were added by snowballing from citations in published Urban form 5
Recreation 4
papers; many being publications dealing with green space change. Compensation hypothesis 4
Studies are dominated by authors based in China, Europe and Landscape ecology 3
Australia (Fig. 1). The country of affiliation is in most cases also the Gardens 3
host country of the study with few exceptions, especially work that Land use 1
Policy 1
had an international approach in the choice of case study location.
 C. Haaland, C.K. van den Bosch / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 14 (2015) 760–771 763

changes in the quantity of urban green space (e.g., Hall, 2010; a lack of regulations to prevent its removal (Brunner and Cozens,
Brunner and Cozens, 2013; Kabisch and Haase, 2013). Existing stud- 2013).
ies revealed different trends: Kabisch and Haase (2013) studied changes in urban green space
in 202 European cities between the years 1990 and 2006. The
authors found an overall increase of urban green areas in Western
• rapid loss and fragmentation of urban green space in Asian devel-
European cities between 2000 and 2006, but a decline in Eastern
oping countries, e.g., in Hanoi (Vietnam), Mashad (Iran), Karachi
Europe. Interestingly, they also discovered that residential areas
(Pakistan), Dhaka (Bangladesh);
increase independently of population increase or decrease. This is
• decrease of urban green space particular due to infill develop-
probably due to the numbers of households increasing even when
ment also in suburban areas (Australia, Europe);
the population declines (Kabisch and Haase, 2013). Urban green
• increase of urban green space related to increase of urban area,
space area was found to be positively related to city size, but no
but loss of undeveloped open areas at the city edge as for example
relationship was found between population density and per capita
in rapidly growing Chinese cities or Europe;
urban green spaces. However, Fuller and Gaston (2009) – analysing
• increase of urban green space due to strategic plans to enhance
the same database as Kabisch and Haase (2013) – found that com-
urban green space as reported form Singapore and China;
pact cities have low per capita green space.
• different trends in different decades as reported for the U.K. (first
Increase of urban green space can be related to increase of city
increase then loss);
area, but also to greening measures (Zhou and Wang, 2011; Tan
• different trends within the same city, but in different areas
et al., 2013). In China several studies have documented landscape
depending on population density, building time of residential
changes around urban areas (Xu et al., 2011) as well as green space
area or social-economic status of inhabitants (examples from the
dynamics within cities (Kong and Nakagoshi, 2006; Zhou and Wang,
USA or Australia).
2011; Zhao et al., 2013). Due to rapid urbanisation, open space in
city surroundings, especially agricultural areas, decreases (Xu et al.,
In these studies green space was defined differently; some work 2011), while built-up areas and also urban green space increase
included private gardens while others did not. Scale also varies, (Zhou and Wang, 2011; Zhao et al., 2013). Zhao et al. (2013) ana-
from continents and national level to city and part of a suburb level lysed data from 286 Chinese cities and found that cities which
(which influences the level of detail). Thus not all studies gave infor- historically had a high percentage of green space also kept this
mation of where (centre, periphery) in the cities green space was during recent development. Cities of the same geographical region
lost and what kind of green space (e.g., private, public). showed similar trends in green space change and per capita GDP
Immense exploitation pressure on green space exists in rapidly (gross domestic product) was the most important factor explaining
expanding cities, especially in industrialising countries. Rapid loss green space cover (positive correlation).
of urban green spaces has been reported in Asian case studies, pro- While studies on quantitative change of green spaces have
viding evidence of changes in green space pattern over time (e.g., increased, little work has been done on the quality changes of urban
fragmentation; Hanoi, Vietnam: Uy and Nakagoshi, 2007; Mashad, green space (Kabisch and Haase, 2013). One exception is the work
Iran: Rafiee et al., 2009; Karachi, Pakistan: Qureshi et al., 2010) and by Wilson and Huges (2011) who analysed effects of urban green
dramatic decline also in inner city areas, due to building develop- space policies by the New Labour government in England between
ment (Hong Kong, China: Jim, 2005; Mashad, Iran: Rafiee et al., 1997 and 2010. Green space quality was perceived to decline due to
2009; Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Nor Akmar et al., 2011; Dhaka, lack of management until the middle of the 1990s. A series of poli-
Bangladesh: Byomkesh et al., 2012). Losses can be explained by cies tried to reverse this process, attempting to raise awareness and
removal of green space such as parks and street trees to make way involve a larger number of stakeholders in improving urban green
for housing, industrial areas and grey infrastructure without other space quality. Green space quality was not defined in important
greening measures. policy documents.
In developed countries loss of urban green space is in particular Gupta et al. (2012) have highlighted the importance of analysing
documented for the U.K. and Australia. Pauleit et al. (2005) showed the quality of urban green space in addition to quantitative aspects,
that infill development has led to a decrease in both private and suggesting an “Urban Neighbourhood Green Index” comprising
public green space by 5% in an English town area. Gardens and tree both quantitative and qualitative measures, yielding information
cover were lost, while other open space in already more densely- on a more relevant spatial level and including attention for proxim-
built areas was lost due to redevelopment. Additionally, sealed area ity to green space. Thus, distinct differences in green space quality
increased by paving front gardens. At the national level, one study and quantity were shown for different neighbourhoods with vary-
found an overall increase in green space in 13 English between 1991 ing densities in Delhi, India (Gupta et al., 2012). Neighbourhoods
and 2001, while after 2001 green space declined (Dallimer et al., are the most suitable spatial unit to analyse green space as this unit
2011). Green space decline was in this study related to densification matters most to residents’ living quality. Neighbourhood is defined
policies. Infill development on gardens has also been shown to take as an urban unit which is homogenous in terms of housing and
place at significant levels in certain parts of the U.K. (Sayce et al., development (e.g., low-rise, high-rise, high density, low density).
2012). Potential loss of important urban green space sites classified
as brown fields has also been mentioned (Lewis, 2005).
Challenges in current planning and implementation
Loss of private open space in older residential areas was
practice in the context of densification
observed in Australian suburbs (Hall, 2010; Sivam et al., 2012;
Brunner and Cozens, 2013), which is problematic since these areas
The literature on green space planning in urban areas undergo-
have comparatively little public green space. Hall (2010) points out
ing densification identifies a number of challenges:
that small backyards of new developed areas might not only be
negative from an individual perspective, but also result in a loss of
several ecosystem services provided by private gardens (air qual- • green space provision in areas undergoing densification
ity, temperature regulation, biodiversity). Infill development often • counteracting social inequalities
causes clearance of all vegetation on exploited sites (Brunner and • consideration of resident perspectives
Cozens, 2013). This development seems rooted in a lack of interest • avoidance of deteriorating recreation experience and compensa-
or economic incentive for developers to preserve green space and tion travels
764 C. Haaland, C.K. van den Bosch / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 14 (2015) 760–771

• prevention of biodiversity loss Johannesburg, South Africa: Schäffler and Swilling, 2013; Berlin,
• institutional constraints related to e.g., planning and regulations. Germany: Kabisch and Haase, 2014; Santiago, Chile: Aquino and
Gainza, 2014). This is seen as a general challenge for future green
Green space provision space planning, as a more even distribution and thus more equal
accessibility of urban green space is desirable (e.g., Dai, 2011; Cohen
An overall problem in already dense city environments is the et al., 2012; Dempsey et al., 2012; Romero et al., 2012; Tian et al.,
development of new green space (Jim, 2004). How lack of space 2012; Schäffler and Swilling, 2013; Senanayake et al., 2013).
in already compact cities can challenge green space planning is Distribution of green space can often be related to geographical
well illustrated by for example Ng et al. (2012) in Hong Kong who position, where the most central parts have less green space than
describe narrow footpaths, high pedestrian flow, traffic constraints areas nearer the periphery (Tian et al., 2012; Aquino and Gainza,
and the lack of sunlight (shade) caused by high buildings as diffi- 2014). These differences in geographical location often overlap
culties in the path of green space enhancement in streets. Tian et al. with socio–economic status; in Berlin, certain inner-city parts with
(2012) concur, also emphasising problems below ground, such as low percentage of green space are inhabited predominantly by
poor and heavily compacted soils, as well as cables and pipes. These immigrants (Kabisch and Haase, 2014). Also time of development
factors are also constraints for cities in general, but for compact influences green space distribution. The oldest parts of Singapore
cities in particular. have the least green space even when redeveloped (Tan et al., 2013)
Provision of new green space seems to be a genuine prob- and also here an observed link between the social status of inhabi-
lem also in less dense urban environments. For example, Sivam tants and the amount of green space in city quarters.
et al. (2012), studying infill development in suburbs in Adelaide One challenge to balancing these inequalities by greening dis-
(Australia), found a considerable loss of private green space, while advantaged areas is the risk that increasing green space area in
no new public green space was provided. The authors argue that neighbourhoods can lead to higher housing prices and thus a shift
infill development without planning for more public green space to residents with higher income (Wolch et al., 2014). Dale and
can decrease living standards in an entire neighbourhood. Smith Newman (2009) confirm this in their study from Toronto, Vancou-
et al. (2009) note the almost total absence of tree plantings in ver and Victoria (Canada), where densification projects on brown
green space and monotonous, poorly diversified other plantings field sites with green neighbourhoods led to less affordable housing
on redeveloped sites in England, and ask for better quality in the for lower income groups.
green space provided. Reasons for poor quality greening were low The complex social challenges faced regarding urban green
maintenance efforts, fear of or experienced vandalism by tenants space preservation in rapidly growing towns like Mumbai in India
or providing what was expected by tenants. Also in a European con- have been analysed in the context of social equality in the case of
text new high-rise schemes have been described as having little or the Sanjay Gandhi National Park by Zérah (2007). While the forest in
no green space, and then of low quality (Beer et al., 2003). the national park is continuously threatened by development and
Byrne et al. (2010) are amongst the few who discuss the chal- policy decisions on the one hand, residents in slum settlements are
lenges of green space planning in cities under densification in moved from the park to the city periphery without any possibility
depth, highlighting integration of existing green space in the new of compensation or better future living standards.
built environment, provision of green space to different user groups
and guaranteed access to green space of high quality. The authors Resident perspectives
also stress the importance of using open space standards, argu-
ing that applying quantitative criteria without quality criteria has Only recently closer attention has been paid to the way in which
been shown to lead to green space of poor quality that is not used. residents perceive living in compact city environments also in
Nevertheless, even quantitative open space standards are often not regard to green space access (e.g., Howley, 2009; Howley et al.,
reached. For the Brisbane case study it was observed that even the 2009; Kyttä et al., 2011; Buys and Miller, 2012; Dempsey et al.,
low standard of 1 ha public green space per 1000 residents had not 2012). The quality of children’s lives in dense city environments has
been achieved for certain consolidation areas (Byrne et al., 2010). been related to provision of outdoor space in general (Easthope and
Since private green space is lost in certain forms of densification Tice, 2011, Sydney, Australia; Carroll et al., 2011, Auckland, New
processes (e.g., infill), questions arise about the different functions Zealand). There is evidence of lack of outdoor space provision espe-
of private and public green space and if and how the loss of pri- cially for children in new developed dense urban areas, traditionally
vate green space can be compensated. Loss of private green space associated with young or elderly people living in apartments in
might be a problem at both individual level and neighbourhood these areas (Easthope and Tice, 2011). However, the number of
level, if certain ecosystem services as for example water retention families with children from lower income classes is increasing in
or temperature regulation are not provided anymore (Hall, 2010). apartments with needs regarding outdoor space, needs which have
According to Coolen and Meesters (2012) private and public green been little considered in certain consolidation projects (Easthope
space have different functions and meanings and thus public green and Tice, 2011). The authors emphasise the importance of acknowl-
space cannot substitute private green space in general. The authors edging the needs of this resident group in all planning stages. The
see a discrepancy between government policies for compact liv- perceived lack of green space provision has also been reported by
ing and consumers’ preference for dwellings providing green space McCrea and Walters (2012), who interviewed 70 residents in Bris-
in the Netherlands. A need to acknowledge the difference would bane (Australia) about their experiences of urban consolidation in
be necessary to address challenges in green space planning under two areas. The two study areas were representing an inner and an
densification processes. outer suburb, which had experienced densification. One intervie-
wee pointed out that the consolidation project did not have any
Social equity plans for more public green space or other services, which would
be needed.
The uneven distribution of urban green space over cities has Lo and Jim (2010a) found different attitudes to green space pro-
been acknowledged and urban areas with low green space cover vision in different residential communities in Hong Kong. Urban
have been related to residents with lower socio–economic sta- green in old core area quarters has an important function for
tus (e.g., Milwaukee, USA: Heynen et al., 2006; five cities in socialising and are highly appreciated by residents. In new devel-
the U.K.: Dempsey et al., 2012; Delhi, India: Gupta et al., 2012; oped areas at the periphery, green space cover is much larger,
 C. Haaland, C.K. van den Bosch / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 14 (2015) 760–771 765

but less used and valued. The authors explain these differences Biodiversity
amongst others by the difference in age structure of residents in the
different residential areas (young people living in the new devel- Studies investigating the effect of densification on biodiversity
oped areas using green space less), weak social cohesion and low found everything from negative to positive impacts of densifica-
integration of immigrants. Highly valued aspects were microcli- tion. Increasing residential numbers reduced the number of bird
mate and amenity (Lo and Jim, 2012). Residents expressed wishes species in pocket parks in a compact city environment in Can-
regarding more greenery, tree plantings, but also sport facilities. berra, Australia (Ikin et al., 2013). The amount of green space in the
The importance of green space for residents has been also inves- neighbourhood influenced bird species numbers and abundances
tigated in economic terms in form of residential prices for dwellings positively, while green space configuration was less important (Ikin
near green space. Higher housing prices for flats with views of water et al., 2013). Higher housing density and reduced garden complex-
bodies or green space and which are situated in the vicinity of ity was found to influence density of native bird species in gardens
accessible green space have been documented from e.g., China (Jim negatively (van Heezik and Adams, in press). Additionally, left over
and Chen, 2006a, 2007, 2010) and for property values in Adelaide, spaces caused considerable spill-over into gardens, which could
Australia (Mahmoudi et al., 2013). not have taken place when these green spaces were removed due
to densification.
In Rennes, France, Varet et al. (2014) could not relate species
Recreation
composition of carabid beetles and spiders to urban form
(compact–conventional/not compact). However, newly developed
Three different aspects were emphasised in studies on recre-
housing areas had a higher percentage of public green space
ation in compact city green space: provision of high quality green
(private green space was not mentioned) and the difference in land-
space (Jim and Chen, 2006b; Lo and Jim, 2010b), importance of small
scape factors between compact and conventional urban form was
pocket parks (Peschardt et al., 2012) and the problem of crowd-
not as distinct as one could have expected. The effect of densifica-
ing (Arnberger and Eder, 2012). Jim and Chen (2006b) found that
tion on biodiversity thus depends on the species group and type and
there is a high willingness to pay for use of high quality green space
quality of green space studied, at which scale the study is carried
in compact Guangzhou, China. Here entrance fees to certain parks
out and how much green space is in the surroundings.
already have to be paid, but willingness to pay is strongly corre-
The importance of scale in studies on biodiversity in the con-
lated to a person’s income. Residents would also be willing to pay
text of urban densification is underlined by Sushinsky et al. (2013)
to recover losses of urban green space (Hong Kong, Lo and Jim,
who applied bird surveys in Brisbane, Australia, to two different
2010b). However, to pay for access to urban green space might not
urban development scenarios, compact and sprawl development.
be seen as acceptable in those parts of the world where access is
Compact development was pronounced better for conservation
expected to be free.
of species compared with sprawl development. In both scenarios
But not only high quality large green spaces are important in
development took place within the city boundaries, in the compact
compact cities, also small pocket parks have important functions
development through division of single-dwelling properties, in the
according to Peschardt et al. (2012), who studied the use of these
sprawl development on developable urban green space (not parks,
parks in Copenhagen. The parks were an important asset in every-
gardens, nature reserves). The authors point out the importance of
day life for the users, who mostly come for resting or socializing
city wide/regional analysis of urban development forms on biodi-
and primarily visited when passing by. Where the city environ-
versity since local effects (often negative effects of compaction) are
ment is densified, people can also be expected to use attractive
different from effects at city level (often positive effect of compact
green spaces, thus increasing higher pressure on these recreation
building due to land preservation at the fringe). The negative effects
areas. Arnberger and Eder (2012) investigated the Wienerberg
of densification at local level are often due to habitat loss (loss of
area in southern Vienna, Austria, and found that visitors perceived
green space including private gardens), and dense building forms
crowding of urban green space due to housing densification in the
have been found to be related to negative biodiversity potential
surrounding areas as a problem.
(Tratalos et al., 2007). The urgent need for studies of biodiversity in
relation to urban growth at the city scale is shared by other authors
Compensation hypothesis (e.g., Lin and Fuller, 2013).

The risk of increased numbers of leisure travels according to Institutional constraints

the compensation hypothesis has also been discussed (Byrne et al.,
2010). This hypothesis implicates that residents living in dense Institutional constraints impeding the development of urban
built environments to a larger extend travel to visit green space green space are widely acknowledged and often mentioned as
further from home (Maat and de Vries, 2006). This has also been one major challenge to green space planning. Crucial is the fact
studied in the context of second home establishment. Different that green space provision is non-statutory in many countries. The
results have been obtained, for example, for Spain where Módenes lack of comprehensive green space planning that takes a strategic,
and Lópes-Colás (2007) found a greater tendency towards second longer-term perspective on urban green spaces and their develop-
home establishment in Spain among people living in denser urban ments, is seen as a major problem (Byomkesh et al., 2012; Tian et al.,
environments, while Muñiz et al. (2013) could not prove any such 2012). Not implementing existing green space plans is another (Nor
relationship for Barcelona. In Finland, second homes were used Akmar et al., 2011; Byomkesh et al., 2012). Additionally problem-
the more the denser the city environment of the primary home atic is illegal building on green space, which is not always prevented
was (Strandell and Hall, 2015). In Oslo the access to private gar- (Byomkesh et al., 2012). Schäffler and Swilling (2013) mention the
dens reduced the number of leisure trips (Holden and Norland, lack of available data and knowledge on existing green space (e.g.,
2003). The possibility for compensation travelling is certainly influ- how much green space of different types exists? In what state
enced by economic means and regarding second homes also by is it? How is it used?) because it makes well-informed decision
tradition; with for example Scandinavia having a strong second making and prioritisation of goals and resources difficult. This can
home tradition. Thus there is evidence that living in compact urban result from a lack of interest (Tian et al., 2012) or of policy, or be
environment can favour compensation travelling depending on fac- due to low political motivation in addition to limited resources
tors as traditions and economic means. (Byomkesh et al., 2012). The way in which green space planning is
766 C. Haaland, C.K. van den Bosch / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 14 (2015) 760–771

organised within the administration also influences its outcome, as systems for surface water retaining, which varies the design of
illustrated by Baycan-Levent and Nijkamp (2009) who showed that yards in inner city housing blocks (for example Copenhagen). Also
European cities where green space responsibilities were divided the use of various shrub species planted at door steps improves
between different units had less successful green space planning the greenery of city streets even when using very little space and
than cities with only one unit responsible. The lack of participation causing low maintenance costs (example from Berlin). Although
of stakeholders and the public is another challenge to successful many suggested solutions for sufficient green space provision seem
green space planning (Nor Akmar et al., 2011). For example, lack of obvious, realising these seems less clear.
green space planning in Hong Kong partly resulted in lack of public
awareness of the important values of urban green space (Tian et al., Using standards
2012).
The application of green space standards has been discussed as
one strategy to ensure sufficient green space in cities. However
Strategies for green space provision in compact city
standards seem to be controversial and difficult to apply (Byrne
environments
et al., 2010). Critics argue that it would be more important to focus
on green space quality and accessibility than on quantity standards
Saving and providing green space of high quality
(e.g., Ståhle, 2008). To provide high accessibility of public urban
green space is already a principal goal in urban green space plan-
Suggestions how to facilitate green space provision in compact
ning and also in compact cities (Ståhle, 2008; Jim, 2013; Tan et al.,
city environments include:
2013), but as demonstrated, is far from being reached. A key ques-
tion is whether the application of urban green space standards
• Preserving green space; that comprise quantitative, qualitative and access aspects could
• enhancing quality of existing green space; improve high quality green space provision. Recommendations for
• providing green space on redeveloped sites; standards for natural green space access and size exist already in
• greening difficult sites lacking green space (narrow streets); for example the U.K. (Accessible Natural Greenspace Standards;
• smart allocation to increase visibility and visual quality. Natural England, 2010) and could be used as a model. Gupta’s et al.
(2012) neighbourhood index is an another example. Pure quanti-
Saving existing urban green space is often suggested as the tative standards without consideration of access and quality are
first option for effective green space planning, especially in already not meaningful especially when applied at city scale, where green
compact cities (e.g., Jim, 2013). This is particularly true regarding space provision per inhabitant might be high overall masking local
remnant semi-natural vegetation, which is often more species-rich scale scarcity.
and varied than planted vegetation (Jim, 2013). Examples show
that careful planning of development sites (here forest) for compact Landscape ecological approach
building can keep 91% of the original carbon sequestration and 82%
of the carbon storage (Vaughn et al., 2014). Enhancing the quality Several authors advocate applying landscape ecological princi-
of existing green space, both from a recreational and a biodiver- pals when planning for, or establishing, green space in compact
sity perspective, is seen as another important aspect (Bolleter and cities (Jim and Chen, 2003; Li et al., 2005; Oh et al., 2011; Tian
Ramalho, 2014). Enhancing quality is particular important when no et al., 2011, 2012, 2014; Jim, 2013). Applying landscape ecological
further public green space can be provided (Byrne and Sipe, 2010). principals can mean optimising green space geometry for exam-
Jim (2013) recommends the application of ecological princi- ple by increasing connectivity (Jim, 2013) or network planning (Oh
ples when choosing vegetation type; for example a more natural et al., 2011). The latter includes working with core areas, buffer
species composition and efforts to augment biodiversity. Areas zones and connecting corridors – such as greenways – between
with low biodiversity and a simple design could be converted into green areas (Oh et al., 2011). The application of landscape ecolog-
more natural areas (Jim, 2004). Generally Jim (2013) calls for more ical principals considers content (patch structure and function),
innovative greening ideas, realised through an interdisciplinary context (patch location in relation to surrounding), connectivity
approach. These innovative greenings comprise especially sites that and dynamics of, for example, heterogeneity (Oh et al., 2011 citing
have been sub-optimal exploited as green roofs, green walls, street Zipper et al., 2000). One example is the preservation or planning
sites, river renaturation and sites needing amelioration for plant- of ‘green fingers’, which provide high connectivity of urban green
ings (Jim, 2013). Green space should be provided on redeveloped space from city centre to the periphery (Jim, 2004; Caspersen et al.,
sites, for example by green space plans for developments sites elab- 2006; Caspersen and Olafsson, 2010). Also older concepts as green
orated before the building plan (Jim, 2004). It also should be better belt strategies are discussed again in the context of city densifica-
handled during the construction phase, trees could be saved and if tion (Kühn, 2003; Hill et al., 2009; Shi et al., 2012). The green finger
no other option is possible should be transplanted (Jim, 2013). After concept comprises several advantages (accessibility, connectivity
redevelopment, green space in private residential areas often needs and linking central urban areas with peripheral/rural landscapes),
improvement in order to better fulfil various functions, aesthetics which should make it attractive especially to green space planning
among them (Smith et al., 2009). in compact city environment as it gives access to large connected
Sites without green space, such as narrow streets, can be green areas from the centre to the periphery.
greened if the necessary effort is taken (Ng et al., 2012). Visibil-
ity and visual quality of green space can be increased by smart Improving green space planning processes
allocation (Tan et al., 2013). Based on experiences from Singapore,
the authors report that it is not only the quantity of green space Several authors underline the crucial importance of effective
that influences the perception of a green city, but also how green green space planning, especially in already compact cities, due to
space is distributed and placed within the city. Thus Singapore is the many constraints and particularly the scarcity of space (e.g.,
perceived as a green city even with little space for greenery (Tan Nor Akmar et al., 2011; Schäffler and Swilling, 2013; Tan et al.,
et al., 2013). Smith et al. (2009) show several interesting European 2013), and the need for strategic and holistic plans that comprise
examples on how greenery can be qualitatively enhanced even on a the entire region (Jim, 2013). Legal frameworks to designate urban
small scale. This can be reached for example by housing integrating green space planning are essential for reaching this goal. Successes
 C. Haaland, C.K. van den Bosch / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 14 (2015) 760–771 767

with strategic green space plans have, for example, been described biodiversity conservation (Ishimatsu and Ito, 2013). Tan et al.
by Tan et al. (2013) for Singapore and by Zhou and Wang (2011) (2013) point out that so-called sky gardens can be very important
for Kunming, China. Both cases illustrate how greening strategies assets for residents by improving living quality and contribute to a
have resulted in significant increases in green space in large and at city’s greenery. However, these do not fulfil the functions of pub-
least partly very compact cities. Another example of greening plans lic open green space at ground level, e.g., in terms of public access
implemented and of further development recommended for them and cooling effects at ground level (Ng et al., 2012). Thus sky gar-
is given by Ng et al. (2012) for Hong Kong. As a basis for success- dens can fulfil important functions for certain user groups or can
ful green space planning, a good data base of existing green space provide important ecosystem services, but not necessarily the same
including gap sites etc., is seen as essential (Jim, 2004; Schäffler as ground level urban green space and not necessarily for the same
and Swilling, 2013). Important would also be to acknowledge the user-groups. According to Tian and Jim (2011, 2012) there is major
significant role of informal green space residents in green space potential for the development of a much larger amount sky gar-
planning (Rupprecht and Byrne, 2014). dens in a compact city as Hong Kong. Tsang and Jim (2011) suggest
How to counteract the loss of trees and other valuable vegeta- various tax-exemption schemes to enhance this. Besides economic
tion in private gardens due to infill development is an unanswered incentives, aesthetics and level of environmental knowledge influ-
question. Pauleit et al. (2005) call for more efficient green space ence the willingness to implement greening measures (for storm
policies that address the changes due to infill development in water control) on private properties in Syracuse, New York, USA
private gardens concerning individual, small-scale developments. (Baptiste et al., 2015).
Brunner and Cozens (2013) see the answer rather in informing
about benefits than implementing restrictions.
Discussion and conclusion
The growing influence of the ecosystem service approach, also
concerning urban planning issues, potentially facilitates better
Despite different contexts in different regions regarding urban
urban green space planning (Niemelä et al., 2010). It offers the con-
density, population growth, societal conditions and preconditions
sideration of multiple functions and their relation to human health
for urban green space planning, several recurring challenges and
and wellbeing, increasingly also translated into monetary valua-
problems resulting from the impact of the compact city approach
tion. In particular there is potential for better communication green
and densification processes are evident, including:
space benefits in a planning context (Kabisch, 2015). The ecosystem
service approach will likely have increased impact on the urban
• Loss of public and private urban green space due to densification
planning literature, but studies focusing particularly on compact
cities have so far been limited (e.g., Schäffler and Swilling, 2013; measures;
• risk for insufficient green space provision in areas under densifi-
Byrne et al., 2015; Kabisch, 2015; Hansen et al., 2015).
cation;
• risk for quality loss of existing green space and for provision of
Public participation
green space with low quality;
• risk for low priority of green space planning in the context of
Stakeholder involvement and encouraging public participation
are seen as crucial to the planning of green space according to exploitation;
• risk for cementing social inequalities even when greening mea-
user and resident needs (e.g., Tian et al., 2012; Hordijk, 2013; Jim,
2013). A needs-based approach – as distinct from green space sure are performed; and
• uncertainty on how to keep or improve green space quality on
provision according to quantitative standards – is elaborated in
Byrne and Sipe (2010) and involves extensive work on question- private properties.
ing residents on their preferences. Existing green space would
be changed to adapt to the needs identified by residents, such These can lead to lower living quality in consolidation areas,
as areas for youth, playgrounds, barbeque areas etc. Such need- worsened recreation possibilities, loss of biodiversity, lack of pro-
based approaches would have to be repeated when necessary. The vision of ecosystem services and lack of coherent green space.
importance of including residents in the process of densifying their While the importance of urban green space for human health
neighbourhood is underlined by Smith and Billig (2012) who found and wellbeing and biodiversity is uncontroversial, it is a major
that residents also became more supportive of compaction of their challenge to provide sufficient and well-functioning green space
neighbourhood when informed about regional sustainability goals. in areas under densification and to counteract the above described
Ruming (2014) came to similar conclusions studying attitudes to risks. Certain literature in favour of densification strategies and
urban densification beyond the own neighbourhood at city scale in urban consolidation does not address urban green space issues
Sydney, Australia. The analysis of an online survey with 721 respon- (Byrne et al., 2010).
dents showed lack of knowledge about densification strategies. Further analysis, evaluation and discussion are needed of the
With half of the respondents being reluctant to further densifica- effects of city compaction on urban green space and ways to deal
tion, Ruming (2014) sees important needs for resident information with these. By acknowledging the challenges to green space plan-
on policies and strategies and citizen involvement beyond ad hoc ning and development in compact cities and cities undergoing
information at a concrete planning level. densification, attempts can be made to solve rather than ignore
them, and rather than advocating the compact city as the solution
Greening strategies for buildings and private properties of sustainable city development especially in comparison to urban
sprawl. Such analysis would not only involve renewed discussion
When space is scarce to provide greens space on the ground of quantitative public green space standards, but also of qualitative
other greening strategies as green roofs and vertical green infra- objectives.
structure such as green façades are put forward as an option for Several authors identified the problem of loss of green space
greening compact city environments (Tian and Jim, 2012; Jim, quality on private land, both in private gardens and on land belong-
2013; Tan et al., 2013). Also spontaneous vegetation can con- ing to residential housing (e.g., Smith et al., 2009; Hall, 2010;
tribute to greening buildings (Jim and Chen, 2011). Green roofs and Brunner and Cozens, 2013). Measures are needed to prevent or
façades can fulfil different functions as cooling (Ng et al., 2012), minimise this type of degradation as a consequence of compaction.
amenity (Tan et al., 2013), food production (Bayley et al., 2011) and Moreover, analysis is needed of which legislative frameworks or
768 C. Haaland, C.K. van den Bosch / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 14 (2015) 760–771

policies exist to counteract this negative development. The existing types seem not to be under the same pressure to handle space more
literature pays limited attention to the success or failure of legis- efficiently.
lation which forbids owners of private gardens to pave large parts In the light of rapid urbanisation and major environmental chal-
of their front garden or to remove trees of a certain size without lenges, sustainable urban development is needed more than ever.
permission of the authorities. The compact city concept addresses some important aspects of this,
The influential concept of ecosystem services might offer new but far from all. Other concepts should also be considered, espe-
analytic and evaluation tools which can help to plan, develop and cially in relation to urban green space. To green the compact city
manage urban green space (Niemelä et al., 2010; Kabisch, 2015), is possible to a certain degree, but requires careful planning and a
also in compact cities. Since many crucial ecosystem services are sound knowledge base on how essential ecosystem services can be
provided by urban green space, these will have to be better con- provided within the compact city’s limited green space area. The
sidered and planned for to ensure a high living standard in urban creation of unsustainable city areas that lack green space is diffi-
areas. In regard to urban green space management, the concept cult to reverse. Therefore compaction must be done together with
offers several advantages, e.g., that of comprising both natural and high-quality green space planning and implementation.
cultural aspects and requiring far greater consideration of quali-
tative aspects with respect to multiple functions. The shift from
Acknowledgements
seeing green space as a measure of city beautification to seeing it
as an essential part of the urban infrastructure (Nor Akmar et al.,
This study was financed by the research programme FUSE
2011) has partly taken place already. However, Beer et al. (2003)
(Future Urban Sustainable Environment) of the Swedish University
criticised green space planning and management for still far too
of Agricultural Sciences (SLU) and the Department of Landscape
often being based on aesthetic and economic reasons and lacking
Architecture, Planning and Management (also SLU). Roger Tanner
an understanding of its multiple functions and services.
is thanked for his language improvements. We also want to thank
The crucial importance of green space development plans for
three anonymous reviewers for their comprehensive and construc-
the entire urban region (Jim, 2013; Lin and Fuller, 2013) should be
tive comments.
emphasised. On this scale the spatial organisation of green space
elements, for example from a landscape ecological perspective, can
be considered. The concepts of green fingers, parkways, greenways Appendix A. Supplementary data
and networks can be implemented to allow for better green space
access, meaning not only access to the nearest parks but also provi- Supplementary data associated with this article can be found,
sion of a green network for recreation. Where there is a need of city in the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2015.07.
wide planning recognition of the importance of the neighbourhood 009.
or local scale could help address issues regarding social equity and
access to green space (Gupta et al., 2012). This is especially impor- References
tant as certain urban development beneficial at city scale can have
negative impact at the local scale, e.g., traffic-based emission (gen- Aquino, F.L., Gainza, X., 2014. Understanding density in an uneven city, Santiago de
erally higher in urban sprawl cities, but individual exposures are Chile: implications for social and environmental sustainability. Sustainability
6, 5876–5897.
highest in compact areas; Schindler and Caruso, 2014). Arnberger, A., Eder, R., 2012. The influence of green space on community
Research regarding urban green space planning in cities under attachment of urban and suburban residents. Urban For. Urban Greening 11,
densification will need to include (partly based on Brunner and 41–49.
Bamford, G., 2009. Urban form and housing density, Australian cities and European
Cozens, 2013): models: Copenhagen and Stockholm reconsidered. Urban Policy Res. 27,
337–356.
Baptiste, A.K., Foley, C., Smard, R., 2015. Understanding urban neighborhood
• Analysis of effects on urban green space (private and public) in differences in willingness to implement green infrastructure measures: a case
quantitative and qualitative terms. Need of cases studies from study of Syracuse, NY. Landscape Urban Plann. 136, 1–12.
Barbosa, O., Tratalos, J.A., Armsworth, P.R., Davies, R.G., Fuller, R.A., Johnson, P.,
local to city scale in areas less researched so far.
Gaston, K.J., 2007. Who benefits from access to green space? A case study from
• Analysis of synergies and trade-offs of densification processes in Sheffield, UK. Landscape Urban Plann.V 83, 187–195.
relation to urban green space at different scales. Baycan-Levent, T., Vreeker, R., Nijkamp, P., 2009. A multi-criteria evaluation of
• Studies on the quantitative and qualitative requirements for mul- green spaces in European cities. Eur. Urban Reg. Stud. 16, 193–213.
Baycan-Levent, T., Nijkamp, P., 2009. Planning and management of urban green
tiple ecosystem service provision of urban green space in compact spaces in Europe: comparative analysis. J. Urban Plann. Dev. 135, 1–12.
cities/cities under densification. Bayley, J.E., Yu, M., Frediani, K., 2011. Sustainable food production using high
• Identification of successful policies, legislation and practices that density vertical growing (VertiCropTM ). Acta Hortic. 921, 95–104.
Beer, A.R., Delshammar, T., Schildwacht, P., 2003. A changing understanding of the
prevent green space degradation during compaction and enable role of greenspace in high-density housing: a European perspective. Built
development of well-functioning urban green space. Environ. 29, 132–143.
• Frameworks and tools that enable successful public participation Bell, M.L., Morgenstern, R.D., Harrington, W., 2011. Quantifying the human health
benefits of air pollution policies: review of recent studies and new directions
and resident perspective in cases of densification. in accountability research. Environ. Sci. Policy 14, 357–368.
• Research on how to develop highly functional green space under Bolleter, J., Ramalho, C.E., 2014. The potential of ecologically enhanced urban parks
compact conditions, e.g., using technical innovation such as roof to encourage and catalyze densification in greyfield suburbs. J. Landscape
Archit. 9, 54–65.
and vertical greening including their implementation on private Bowler, D.E., Buyung-Ali, L., Knight, T.M., Pullin, A.S., 2010. Urban greening to cool
properties. towns and cities: a systematic review of the empirical evidence. Landscape
Urban Plann. 97, 147–155.
Boyko, C.T., Cooper, R., 2011. Clarifying and re-conceptualising density. Prog. Plann.
Compact city form is often justified as a way to save land on 76, 1–61.
Breheny, M., 1996. Centrists, decentrists and compromisers: views on the future of
the city periphery from exploitation. How much land is actually
urban form. In: Jenks, M., Burton, E., Williams, K. (Eds.), The Compact City—A
saved by densification and compaction has been little explored. sustainable Form? Spon Press, London, pp. 13–35 (reprint from 2002).
Almost all studies that deal with city compaction deal with residen- Brunner, J., Cozens, P., 2013. ’Where have all the trees gone?’ Urban consolidation
tial areas, while industrial and commercial areas seem to sprawl on and the demise of urban vegetation: a case study from Western Australia.
Plann. Pract. Res. 28, 231–255.
the periphery, apparently without any limitations of space. So why Burton, E., 2000. The compact city: just or just compact: a preliminary analysis.
are mainly residential areas compacted, whereas other building Urban Stud. 37, 1969–2001.
 C. Haaland, C.K. van den Bosch / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 14 (2015) 760–771 769

Bunker, R., Gleeson, B., Holloway, D., Randolph, B., 2002. The local impacts of urban concept in planning discourses of European and American cities. Ecosyst. Serv.
consolidation in Sydney. Urban Policy Res. 20, 143–167. 12, 228–246.
Buys, L., Miller, E., 2012. Residential satisfaction in inner urban higher-density Heynen, N., Perkins, H.A., Roy, P., 2006. The political ecology of uneven urban green
Brisbane, Australia: role of dwelling design, neighbourhood and neighbours. J. space, the impact of political economy on race and ethnicity in producing
Environ. Plann. Manage. 55, 319–338. environmental inequality in Milwaukee. Urban Aff. Rev. 42, 3–25.
Byomkesh, T., Nakagoshi, N., Dewan, A.M., 2012. Urbanization and green space Hill, M., Fitzsimons, J., Pearson, C., 2009. Creating land use scenarios for city
dynamics in Greater Dhaka, Bangladesh. Landscape Ecol. Eng. 8, 45–58. greenbelts using a spatial multi-criteria analysis shell: two case studies. Phys.
Byrne, J., Sipe, N., 2010. Green and open space planning for urban consolidation—a Geogr. 30, 353–382.
review of literature and best practice. In: Urban Research Program, Issues Hillsdon, M., Panter, J., Foster, C., Jones, A., 2006. The relationship between access
Paper 11. Griffith University, Brisbane, pp. 60. and quality of urban green space with population physical activity. Public
Byrne, J., Sipe, N., Searle, G., 2010. Green around the gills? The challenge of density Health 120, 1127–1132.
for urban greenspace planning in SEQ. Aust. Planner 47, 162–177. Hofstad, H., 2012. Compact city development: high ideals and emerging practices.
Byrne, J.A., Lo, A.Y., Jianjun, Y., 2015. Resident’s understanding of the role of green Eur. J. Spatial Dev., 1–23 (refereed article no 49).
infrastructure for climate change adaption in Hangzhou, China. Landscape Holden, E., Norland, I.T., 2003. Three challenges for the compact city as a
Urban Plann. 138, 132–143. sustainable urban form: household consumption of energy and transport in
Carroll, P., Witten, K., Kearns, R., 2011. Housing intensification in Auckland, New eight residential areas in the greater Oslo region. Urban Stud. 42, 2145–2166.
Zealand: implications for children and families. Hous. Stud. 26, 353–367. Holland, L., 2004. Diversity and connections in community gardens: a contribution
Caspersen, O.H., Konijnendijk, C.C., Olafsson, A.S., 2006. Green space planning and to local sustainability. Local Environ. 9, 285–305.
land use: an assessment of urban regional and green structure planning in Hordijk, M., 2013. Being young and urban: changing patterns of youth involvement
Greater Copenhagen. Geografisk Tidsskrift Dan. J. Geogr. 106, 7–20. in local environmental action in Lima, Peru. Local Environ. 18, 396–412.
Caspersen, O., Olafsson, A., 2010. Recreational mapping and planning for Howley, P., 2009. Attitudes towards compact city living: towards a greater
enlargement of the green structure in greater Copenhagen. Urban For. Urban understanding of residential behavior. Land Use Policy 26, 792–798.
Greening 9, 101–112. Howley, P., Scott, M., Redmond, D., 2009. Sustainability versus liveability: an
Chiesura, A., 2004. The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landscape investigation of neighbourhood satisfaction. J. Environ. Plann. Manage. 52,
Urban Plann. 68, 129–138. 847–864.
Cohen, M., Baudoin, R., Palibrk, M., Persyn, N., Rhein, C., 2012. Urban biodiversity Ikin, K., Beaty, R.M., Lindenmayer, D.B., Knight, E., Fischer, J., Manning, A.D., 2013.
and social inequalities in built-up cities: new evidences, next questions. The Pocket parks in a compact city: how do birds respond to increasing residential
example of Paris, France. Landscape Urban Plann. 106, 277–287. density? Landscape Ecol. 28, 45–56.
Coolen, H., Meesters, J., 2012. Private and public green spaces: meaningful but Ishimatsu, K., Ito, K., 2013. Brown/biodiverse roofs: a conservation action for
different settings. J. Hous. Built Environ. 27, 49–67. threatened brownfields to support urban biodiversity. Landscape Ecol. Eng. 9,
Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., 299–304.
Naeem, S., O’Neill, R.V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R.G., Sutton, P., van den Belt, M., Jabareen, Y.R., 2006. Sustainable urban forms: their typologies, models, and
1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature concepts. J. Plann. Educ. Res. 26, 38–52.
387, 253–260. Jacobs, J., 1961. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Random House,
Couch, C., Karecha, J., Nuissl, H., Rink, D., 2005. Decline and sprawl: an evolving Pimlico, London, pp. 474, 2000.
type of urban development—observed in Liverpool and Leipzig. Eur. Plann. James, P., Tzoulas, K., Adams, M.D., Barber, A., Box, J., Breuste, J., Elmqvist, T., Frith,
Stud. 13, 117–136. M., Gordon, C., Greening, K.L., Handley, J., Haworth, S., Kazmierczak, A.E.,
Dai, D., 2011. Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in urban green space Johnston, M., Korpela, K., Moretti, M., Niemela, J., Pauleit, S., Roe, M.H., Sadler,
accessibility: where to intervene? Landscape Urban Plann. 102, 234–244. J.P., Ward Thompson, C., 2009. Towards an integrated understanding of green
Dale, A., Newman, L.L., 2009. Sustainable development for some: green urban space in the European built environment. Urban For. Urban Greening 8,
development and affordability. Local Environ. 14, 669–681. 65–75.
Dallimer, M., Tang, Z., Bibby, P.R., Brindley, P., Gaston, K.J., Davies, Z.G., 2011. Jenks, M., Jones, C. (Eds.), 2010a. Dimensions of the Sustainable City. Springer,
Temporal changes in greenspace in a highly urbanized region. Biol. Lett. 7, Dordrecht.
763–766. Jenks, M., Jones, C., 2010b. Issues and concepts. In: Jenks, M., Jones, C. (Eds.),
Dave, S., 2010. High urban densities in developing countries: a sustainable Dimensions of the Sustainable City. Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 1–19.
solution? Built Environ. 36, 9–27. Jenks, M., Burton, E., Williams, K. (Eds.), 1996a. The Compact City: A Sustainable
Davies, Z.G., Edmondson, J.L., Heinemeyer, A., Leake, J.R., Gaston, K.J., 2011. Urban Form? Spon Press, London, p. 350 (reprint 2002).
Mapping an urban ecosystem service: quantifying above-ground carbon Jenks, M., Burton, E., Williams, K., 1996b. Compact cities and sustainability: an
storage at a city-wide scale. J. Appl. Ecol. 48, 1125–1134. introduction. In: Jenks, M., Burton, E., Williams, K. (Eds.), The Compact City: A
Dean, J., van Dooren, K., Weinstein, P., 2011. Does biodiversity improve mental Sustainable Urban Form? Spon Press, London, pp. 3–8 (reprint 2002).
health in urban settings? Med. Hypothesis 76, 877–880. Jim, C.Y., 2004. Green-space preservation and allocation for sustainable greening of
De Bon, H., Parrot, L., Moustier, P., 2009. Sustainable urban agriculture in compact cities. Cities 21, 311–320.
developing countries. A review. Agron. Sustainable Dev. 30, 21–32. Jim, C.Y., 2005. Monitoring the performance and decline of heritage trees in urban
Dempsey, N., Brown, C., Bramley, G., 2012. The key to sustainable urban Hong Kong. J. Environ. Manage. 74, 161–172.
development in UK cities? The influence of density on social sustainability. Jim, C.Y., 2013. Sustainable urban greening strategies for compact cities in
Prog. Plann. 77, 89–141. developing and developed economies. Urban Ecosyst. 16, 741–761.
Depietri, Y., Renaud, F.G., Kallis, G., 2012. Heat waves and floods in urban areas: a Jim, C.Y., Chen, S.S., 2003. Comprehensive greenspace planning based on landscape
policy-oriented review of ecosystem services. Sustainable Sci. 7, 95–107. ecology principles in compact Nanjing city, China. Landscape Urban Plann. 65,
De Roo, G., 2000. Environmental conflicts in compact cities: complexity, decision 95–116.
making, and policy approaches. Environ. Plann. B: Plann. Des. 27, 151–162. Jim, C.Y., Chen, W.Y., 2006a. Impacts of urban environmental elements on
Ernstson, H., Sörlin, S., Elmqvist, T., 2008. Social movements and ecosystem residential housing prices in Guangzhou (China). Landscape Urban Plann. 78,
services—the role of social network structure in protecting and managing 422–434.
urban green areas in Stockholm. Ecol. Soc. 13, 39. Jim, C.Y., Chen, W.Y., 2006b. Recreation-amenity use and contingent valuation of
Easthope, H., Tice, A., 2011. Children in apartments: implications for the compact urban greenspaces in Guangzhou, China. Landscape Urban Plann. 75, 81–96.
city. Urban Policy Res. 29, 415–434. Jim, C.Y., Chen, W.Y., 2007. Consumption preferences and environmental
Fuller, R.A., Gaston, K.J., 2009. The scaling of green space coverage in European externalities: a hedonic analysis of the housing market in Guangzhou.
cities. Biol. Lett. 5, 352–355. Geoforum 38, 414–431.
Fuller, R.A., Irvine, K.N., Devine-Wright, P., Warren, P.H., Gaston, K.J., 2007. Jim, C.Y., Chen, W.Y., 2010. External effects of neighbourhood parks and landscape
Psychological benefits of greenspace increase with biodiversity. Biol. Lett. 3, elements on high-rise residential value. Land Use Policy 27, 662–670.
390–394. Jim, C.Y., Chen, W.Y., 2011. Bioreceptivity of buildings for spontaneous arboreal
Gardsjord, H.S., Tveit, M.S., Nordh, H., 2014. Promoting youth’s physical activity flora in compact city environment. Urban For. Urban Greening 10, 19–28.
through park design: linking theory and practice in a public health perspective. Johnson, M.P., 2001. Environmental impacts of urban sprawl: a survey of the
Landscape Res. 39, 70–81. literature and proposed research agenda. Environ. Plann. A 33, 717–735.
Gray, R., Gleeson, B., Burke, M., 2010. Urban consolidation, household greenhouse Jorgensen, A., Gobster, P.H., 2010. Shades of green: measuring the ecology of urban
emission and the role of planning. Urban Policy Res. 28, 335–346. green space in the context of human health and well-being. Nat. Cult. 5,
Goddard, M.A., Dougill, A.J., Benton, T.G., 2010. Scaling up from gardens: 338–363.
biodiversity conservation in urban environments. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25, 90–98. Kabisch, N., 2015. Ecosystem services implementation and governance challenges
Guitart, D., Pickering, C., Byrne, J., 2012. Past results and future directions in urban in urban green space planning—the case of Berlin, Germany. Land Use Policy
community gardens research. Urban For. Urban Greening 11, 364–373. 42, 557–567.
Gupta, K., Kumar, P., Pathan, S.K., Sharma, K.P., 2012. Urban neighborhood green Kabisch, N., Haase, D., 2013. Green spaces of European cities revisited for
index—a measure of green spaces in urban areas. Landscape Urban Plann. 105, 1990–2006. Landscape Urban Plann. 110, 113–122.
325–335. Kabisch, N., Haase, D., 2014. Green justice or just green provision of urban green
Hall, T., 2010. Goodbye to the backyard?—The minimisation of private open space spaces in Berlin. Landscape Urban Plann. 122, 129–139.
in the Australian outer-suburban estate. Urban Policy Res. 28, 411–433. Kabisch, N., Quereshi, S., Haase, D., 2015. Human–environment interactions in
Hansen, R., Frantzeskaki, N., McPhearson, T., Rall, E., Kabisch, N., Kaczorowska, A., urban green spaces—a systematic review of contemporary issues and
Kain, J.-H., Artmann, M., Pauleit, S., 2015. The uptake of the ecosystem services prospects for future research. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 50, 25–34.
770 C. Haaland, C.K. van den Bosch / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 14 (2015) 760–771

Kaźmierczak, A., 2013. The contribution of local parks to neighbourhood social ties. Rafiee, R., Mahiny, A.S., Khorasani, N., 2009. Assessment of changes in urban green
Landscape Urban Plann. 109, 31–44. spaces of Mashad city using satellite data. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 11,
Kong, F., Nakagoshi, N., 2006. Spatial–temporal gradient analysis of urban green 431–438.
spaces in Jinan, China. Landscape Urban Plann. 78, 147–164. Randolph, B., 2006. Delivering the compact city in Australia: current trends and
Kühn, M., 2003. Greenbelt and green heart: separating and integrating landscapes future implications. Urban Policy Res. 24, 473–490.
in European city regions. Landscape Urban Plann. 64, 19–27. Romero, H., Vásquez, A., Fuentes, C., Salgado, M., Schmidt, A., Banzhaf, E., 2012.
Kyttä, M., Kahila, M., Broberg, A., 2011. Perceived environmental quality as an Assessing urban environmental segregation (UES). The case of Santiago de
input to urban infill policy-making. Urban Des. Int. 16, 19–35. Chile. Ecol. Indic. 23, 76–87.
Lewis, J., 2005. The potential fate of left over green space areas in Roy, S., Byrne, J.A., Pickering, C., 2012. A systematic quantitative review of urban
Loughborough-Garendon. Arboricult. J.: Int. J. Urban For. 29, 43–54. tree benefits, costs, and assessment methods across cities in different climatic
Li, F., Wang, R., Paulussen, J., Liu, X., 2005. Comprehensive concept planning of zones. Urban For. Urban Greening 11, 351–363.
urban greening based on ecological principles: a case study in Beijing, China. Ruming, K.J., 2014. Urban consolidation, strategic planning and community
Landscape Urban Plann. 72, 325–336. opposition in Sydney, Australia: unpacking policy knowledge and public
Lin, B.B., Fuller, R.A., 2013. FORUM: sharing or sparing? How should we grow the perceptions. Land Use Policy 39, 254–265.
world’s cities? J. Appl. Ecol. 50, 1161–1168. Rupprecht, C.D.D., Byrne, J.A., 2014. Informal urban greenspace: a typology and
Lo, A.Y.H., Jim, C.Y., 2010a. Differential community effects on perception and use of trilingual systematic review of its role for urban residents and trends in the
urban greenspaces. Cities 27, 430–442. literature. Urban For. Urban Greening 13, 597–611.
Lo, A.Y.H., Jim, C.Y., 2010b. Willingness of residents to pay and motives for Saebo, A., Popek, R., Hanslin, H.M., Gawronska, H., Gawronsk, S.W., 2012. Plant
conservation of urban green spaces in the compact city of Hong Kong. Urban species differences in particulate matter accumulation on leaf surfaces. Sci.
For. Urban Greening 9, 113–120. Total Environ. 427–428, 347–354.
Lo, A.Y.H., Jim, C.Y., 2012. Citizen attitude and expectation towards greenspace Sayce, S., Walford, N., Garside, P., 2012. Residential development on gardens in
provision in compact urban milieu. Land Use Policy 29, 577–586. England: their role in providing sustainable housing supply. Land Use Policy
Maat, K., de Vries, P., 2006. The influence of the residential environment on 29, 771–780.
green-space travel: testing the compensation hypothesis. Environ. Plann. A 38, Schäffler, A., Swilling, M., 2013. Valuing green infrastructure in an urban
2111–2127. environment under pressure—the Johannesburg case. Ecol. Econ. 86, 246–257.
Mahmoudi, P., Hatton Macdonald, D., Crossman, N.D., Summers, D.M., van der Schindler, M., Caruso, G., 2014. Urban compactness and the trade-off between air
Hoek, J., 2013. Space matters: the importance of amenity in planning pollution emission and exposure: lessons from a spatially explicit theoretical
metropolitan growth. Aust. J. Agricult. Resour. Econ. 57, 38–59. model. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 45, 13–23.
McCrea, R., Walters, P., 2012. Impacts of urban consolidation on urban liveability: Searle, G., 2004. The limits to urban consolidation. Aust. Planner 41, 42–48.
comparing an inner and outer suburb in Brisbane, Australia. Hous. Theory Soc. Seeland, K., Dübendorfer, S., Hansmann, R., 2009. Making friends in Zurich’s urban
29, 190–206. forests and parks: the role of public green space for social inclusion of youths
Melia, S., Barton, H., Parkhurst, G., 2011. The paradox of intensification. Transp. from different cultures. Forest Policy Econ. 11, 10–17.
Policy 18, 46–52. Senanayake, I.P., Welivitiya, W.D.D.P., Nadeeka, P.M., 2013. Urban green spaces
Mell, C., 2009. Can green infrastructure promote urban sustainability? Eng. analysis for development planning in Colombo, Sri Lanka, utilizing THEOS
Sustainability 162, 23–34. satellite imagery—a remote sensing and GIS approach. Urban For. Urban
Millenium Ecosystem Assessment, 2003. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being. A Greening 12, 307–314.
Framework for Assessment. Island Press, Washington. Shi, Y., Sun, X., Zhu, X., Li, Y., Mei, L., 2012. Characterizing growth types and
Módenes, J.A., Lópes-Colás, J., 2007. Second homes and compact cities in Spain: analyzing growth density distribution in response to urban growth patterns in
two elements of the same system? Tijdschr. Econ. Soc. Geogr. 98, peri-urban areas of Lianyungang city. Landscape Urban Plann. 105, 425–433.
325–335. Shmelev, S.E., Shmeleva, I.A., 2009. Sustainable cities: problems of integrated
Muñiz, I., Calatayud, D., Dobaño, R., 2013. The compensation hypothesis in interdisciplinary research. Int. J. Sustainable Dev. 12, 4–23.
Barcelona measured through the ecological footprint of mobility and housing. Sivam, A., Karuppannan, S., Mobbs, M., 2012. How “open” are open spaces:
Landscape Urban Plann. 113, 113–119. evaluating transformation of open space at residential level in Adelaide—a case
Natural England, 2010. ‘Nature Nearby’ Accessible Natural Greenspace Standards. study. Local Environ. 17, 815–836.
Natural England, http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/40004 Smith, C., Clayden, A., Dunnett, N., 2009. An exploration of the effect of housing
Neuman, M., 2005. The compact city fallacy. J. Plann. Educ. Res. 25, 11–26. unit density on aspects of residential landscape sustainability in England. J.
Newman, P., 1992. The compact city: an Australian perspective. Built Environ. 18, Urban Des. 14, 163–187.
285–300. Smith, C.A., Billig, N.S., 2012. Public perceptions of compact suburbia in
Nielsen, A.B., Van den Bosch, M., Maruthaveeran, S., Konijnendijk Van den Bosch, progressive, burgeoning communities. J. Urban Des. 17, 313–335.
C., 2014. Species richness in urban parks and its drivers: a review of empirical Sonne, W., 2009. Dwelling in the metropolis: reformed urban blocks 1890–1940 as
evidence. Urban Ecosyst. 17, 305–327. a model for the sustainable compact city. Prog. Plann. 72, 53–149.
Niemelä, J., Saarela, S.-R., Tarja Söderman, T., Kopperoinen, L., Yli-Pelkonen, V., Ståhle, A., 2008. Compact Sprawl: Exploring Public Open Space and Contradictions
Väre, S., Kotze, D.J., 2010. Using the ecosystem services approach for better in Urban Density, vol. 6. KTH, Stockholm, Sweden, pp. 242 (PhD Dissertation,
planning and conservation of urban green spaces: a Finland case study. TRITA—ARK Akademisk avhandling 2008).
Biodivers. Conserv. 19, 3225–3243. Standish, R.J., Hobbs, R.J., Miller, J.R., 2013. Improving city life: options for
Ng, E., Chen, L., Wang, Y., Yuan, C., 2012. A study on the cooling effects of greening ecological restoration in urban landscapes and how these might influence
in a high-density city: an experience from Hong Kong. Build. Environ. 47, interactions between people and nature. Landscape Ecol. 28, 1213–1221.
256–271. Strandell, A., Hall, C.M., 2015. Impact of the residential environment on second
Nor Akmar, A.A., Konijnendijk, C.C., Sreetheran, M., Nilsson, K., 2011. Greenspace home use in Finland—testing the compensation hypothesis. Landscape Urban
planning and management in Klang valley, Peninsular Malaysia. Arboricult. Plann. 133, 12–23.
Urban For. 37, 99–107. Strohbach, M.W., Arnold, E., Haase, D., 2012. The carbon footprint of urban green
Nordh, H., Hartig, T., Hagerhall, C.M., Fry, G., 2009. Components of small urban space—a life cycle approach. Landscape Urban Plann. 104, 220–229.
parks that predict the possibility for restoration. Urban For. Urban Greening 8, Sushinsky, J.R., Rhodes, J.R., Possingham, H.P., Gill, T.K., Fuller, R.A., 2013. How
225–235. should we grow cities to minimize their biodiversity impacts? Global Change
OECD, 2012. Compact City Policies: A Comparative Assessment, OECD Green Biol. 19, 401–410.
Growth Studies. OECD Publishing, Paris. Tallis, M., Taylora, G., Sinnet, D., Freer-Smith, P., 2011. Estimating the removal of
Oh, K., Lee, D., Park, C., 2011. Urban ecological network planning for sustainable atmospheric particulate pollution by the urban tree canopy of London, under
landscape management. J. Urban Technol. 18, 39–59. current and future environments. Landscape Urban Plann. 103, 129–138.
Pauleit, S., 2003. Perspectives on urban green space in Europe. Built Environ. 29, Tan, P.Y., Wang, J., Sia, A., 2013. Perspectives on five decades of the urban greening
89–93. of Singapore. Cities 32, 24–32.
Pauleit, S., Ennos, R., Golding, Y., 2005. Modelling the environmental impacts of Tian, Y., Jim, C.Y., 2011. Factors influencing the spatial pattern of sky gardens in the
urban land use and land cover change—a study in Merseyside, UK. Landscape compact city of Hong Kong. Landscape Urban Plann. 101, 299–309.
Urban Plann. 71, 295–310. Tian, Y., Jim, C.Y., 2012. Development of potential of sky gardens in the compact
Peschardt, K.K., Schipperijn, J., Stigsdotter, U.K., 2012. Use of Small Public Urban city of Hong Kong. Urban For. Urban Greening 11, 223–233.
Green Spaces (SPUGS). Urban For. Urban Greening 11, 235–244. Tian, Y., Jim, C.Y., Tao, Y., Shi, T., 2011. Landscape ecological assessment of green
Petticrew, M., 2001. Systematic reviews from astronomy to zoology; myths and space fragmentation in Hong Kong. Urban For. Urban Greening 10, 79–86.
misconceptions. Br. Med. J. 322, 98–101. Tian, Y., Jim, C.Y., Tao, Y., 2012. Challenges and strategies for greening the compact
Power, A., 2001. Social exclusion and urban sprawl: is the rescue of cities possible? city of Hong Kong. J. Urban Plann. Dev. 138, 101–109.
Reg. Stud. 35, 731–742. Tian, Y., Jim, C.Y., Wang, H., 2014. Assessing the landscape and ecological quality of
Priemus, H., Rodenburg, C.A., Nijkamp, P., 2004. Multifunctional urban land use: a urban green spaces in a compact city. Landscape Urban Plann. 121, 97–108.
new phenomenon? A new planning challenge? Built Environ. 30, 269–273. Tratalos, J., Fuller, R.A., Warren, P.H., Davies, R.G., Gaston, K.J., 2007. Urban form,
Qureshi, S., Hasan Kazmi, S.J., Breuste, J.H., 2010. Ecological disturbances due to biodiversity potential and ecosystem services. Landscape Urban Plann. 83,
high cutback in the green infrastructure of Karachi: analyses of public 308–317.
perception about associated health problems. Urban For. Urban Greening 9, Tsang, S.W., Jim, C.Y., 2011. Game-theory approach for resident coalitions to
187–198. allocate green-roof benefits. Environ. Plann. A 43, 363–377.
 C. Haaland, C.K. van den Bosch / Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 14 (2015) 760–771 771

Tzoulas, K., Korpela, K., Venn, S., Yli-Pelkonen, V., Kazmierczak, A., Niemelä, J., Wilson, O., Huges, O., 2011. Urban green space policy and discourse in England
James, P., 2007. Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using under New Labour from 1997 to 2010. Plann. Pract. Res. 26, 207–228.
green infrastructure: a literature review. Landscape Urban Plann. 81, 167–178. Wolch, J.R., Byrne, J., Newell, J.P., 2014. Urban green space, public health, and
United Nations (UN), 2013. Sustainable Development Changes. World Economic environmental justice: the challenge of making cities ‘just green enough’.
and Social Survey 2013. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Landscape Urban Plann. 125, 234–244.
Nations Publication, http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/ Young, R.F., 2010. Managing municipal green space for ecosystem services. Urban
wess/wess current/wess2013/WESS2013.pdf. For. Urban Greening 9, 313–321.
Uy, P.D., Nakagoshi, N., 2007. Analyzing urban green space pattern and Xu, X., Duan, X., Sun, H., Sun, Q., 2011. Green space changes and planning in the
eco-network in Hanoi, Vietnam. Landscape Ecol. Eng. 3, 143–157. capital region of China. Environ. Manage. 47, 456–467.
van Heezik, Y., Adams, A.L., in press. Vulnerability of native and exotic urban birds Zérah, M.-.H., 2007. Conflict between green space preservation and housing needs:
to housing densification and changing gardening and landscaping trends. the case of the Sanjay Gandhi National Park in Mumbai. Cities 24,
Urban Ecosyst., Article in Press. 122–132.
Varet, M., Burel, F., Pétillon, J., 2014. Can urban consolidation limit local Zhang, B., Xie, G., Zhang, C., Zhang, J., 2012. The economic benefits of
biodiversity erosion? Responses from carabid beetle and spider assemblages in rainwater-runoff reduction by urban green spaces: a case study in Beijing,
Western France. Urban Ecosyst. 17, 123–137. China. J. Environ. Manage. 100, 65–71.
Vaughn, R.M., Hostetler, M., Escobedo, F.J., Jones, P., 2014. The influence of Zhao, J., Chen, S., Jiang, B., Ren, Y., Wang, H., Vause, J., Yu, H., 2013. Temporal trend
subdivision design and conservation of open space on carbon storage and of green space coverage in China and its relationship with urbanization over
sequestration. Landscape Urban Plann. 131, 64–73. the last two decades. Sci. Total Environ. 442, 455–465.
Westerink, J., Haase, D., Bauer, A., Ravetz, J., Jarrige, F., Aalbers, C.B.E.M., 2013. Zhou, X., Wang, Y.-C., 2011. Spatial–temporal dynamics of urban green space in
Dealing with sustainability trade-offs of the compact city in peri-urban response to rapid urbanization and greening policies. Landscape Urban Plann.
planning across European city regions. Eur. Plann. Stud. 21, 473–497. 100, 268–277.
Williams, K., 2000. Does intensifying cities make them more sustainable? In: Zipper, W.C., Wu, J., Pouyat, R.V., Pickett, S.T.A., 2000. The application of ecological
Williams, K., Burton, E., Jenks, M. (Eds.), Achieving Sustainable Urban Form. principles to urban and urbanizing landscapes. Ecol. Appl. 10, 685–688 (cited
Spon Press, London and New York, pp. 30–45. in Oh et al., 2011).