Skip to Main Content
Ecosystem services in managing residential landscapes: priorities, value dimensions, and cross-regional patternsAuthor(s): K.L. Larson; K.C. Nelson; S.R. Samples; S.J. Hall; N. Bettez; J. Cavender-Bares; P.M. Groffman; M. Grove; J.B. Heffernan; S.E. Hobbie; J. Learned; J.L. Morse; C. Neill; L.A. Ogden; Jarlath O'Neil-Dunne; D.E. Pataki; C. Polsky; R. Roy Chowdhury; M. Steele; T.L.E. Trammell
Source: Urban Ecosystems.
Publication Series: Scientific Journal (JRNL)
Station: Northern Research Station
Download Publication (514.0 KB)
DescriptionAlthough 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.
- Check the Northern Research Station web site to request a printed copy of this publication.
- Our on-line publications are scanned and captured using Adobe Acrobat.
- During the capture process some typographical errors may occur.
- Please contact Sharon Hobrla, email@example.com if you notice any errors which make this publication unusable.
CitationLarson, K.L.; Nelson, K.C.; Samples, S.R.; Hall, S.J.; Bettez, N.; Cavender-Bares, J.; 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. Roy; Steele, M.; Trammell, T.L.E. 2016. Ecosystem services in managing residential landscapes: priorities, value dimensions, and cross-regional patterns. Urban Ecosystems. 19: 95-113.
KeywordsLawns, Residential landscapes, Land management, Human values, Ecosystem services, Urban sustainability
- Who is abuzz about bees? Explaining residents' attitudes in Phoenix, Arizona
- Social aspects of urban forestry and metro nature
- Urban residents' perceptions of birds in the neighborhood: Biodiversity, cultural ecosystem services, and disservices
XML: View XML