Abstract
In order to build competence for sustainability analysis and assessment of urban systems, it is seen as essential to build on models representing urban form, landuse and transportation, urban metabolism, as well as ecological processes. This type of analysis of interacting sub-systems requires an advanced model integration platform, yet open for learning and for further development. Moreover, since the aim is to increase urban experience with ecosystem management in the wide sense, the platform needs to be open and easily available, with high visualisation capacity. For this purpose, the LEAM model was applied to the Stockholm Region and two potential future scenarios were developed, resulting from alternative policies. The scenarios differed widely and the dense urban development of Scenario Compact could be visualised, destroying much of the Greenstructure of Stockholm, while Scenario Urban Nature steered the development more to outer suburbs and some sprawl. For demonstration of the need for further development of biodiversity assessment models, a network model tied to a prioritised ecological profile was applied and altered by the scenarios. It could be shown that the Greenstructure did not support this profile very well. Thus, there is a need for dynamic models for negotiations, finding alternative solutions and interacting with other models. The LEAM Stockholm case study is planned to be further developed, to interact with more advanced transport and land use models, as well as analysing energy systems and urban water issues. This will enable integrated sustainability analysis and assessment of complex urban systems, for integration in the planning process in Stockholm as well as for comparative sustainability studies between different cities, with the goal to build more sustainable urban systems and to increase urban experiences in ecosystem management.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/674e9/674e9454a56510371de7bce719f84c87949319c8" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/816cf/816cfe3949f99007a2de528ef06e1a5e50f96264" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/aa28a/aa28a1abb15f3de19e25c9cfea27a626570c7912" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/225a8/225a8b4be4dce977476f913790d6b3aa36faf249" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/82877/828770f1d64532439c86e47a15395355774e5b02" alt=""
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alberti M (2008) Urban patterns and ecosystem function. Ch 3. In: Alberti M (ed) Advances in urban ecology—integrating humans and ecological processes in urban ecosystems. Springer US, New York, pp 61–92
Alberti M (2010) Maintaining ecological integrity and sustaining ecosystem function in urban areas. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 2:178–184
Alberti M, Booth D, Hill K, Coburn B, Avolio C, Coe S, Spirandelli D (2007) The impact of urban patterns on aquatic ecosystems: an empirical analysis in Puget lowland sub-basins. Landsc Urban Plann 80:345–361
Balfors B, Mörtberg U, Gontier M, Brokking P (2005) Impacts of region-wide urban development on biodiversity in strategic environmental assessment. J Environ Assess Pol Manag 7:229–246
Batty M (2008) The size, scale, and shape of cities. Science 319:769–771
Bazilian M, Rogner H, Howells M, Hermann S, Arent D, Gielen D, Steduto P, Mueller A, Komor P, Tol RSJ, Yumkella KK (2011) Considering the energy, water and food nexus: towards an integrated modelling approach. Energ Pol 39:7896–7906
Beser M, Algers S (2002) SAMPERS—The New Swedish National Travel Demand Forecasting Tool. Ch. In. Lundqvist L, Mattsson L-G (eds) National transport models: recent developments and prospects: Springer
Bodin Ö, Zetterberg A (2010) MatrixGreen v 1.6.4 User's Manual: Landscape Ecological Network Analysis Tool (www.matrixgreen.org). Stockholm Resilience Centre and KTH Royal Institute of Technology: Stockholm
Boone C, Cook E, Hall S, Nation M, Grimm N, Raish C, Finch D, York A (2012) A comparative gradient approach as a tool for understanding and managing urban ecosystems. Urban Ecosystems: 1–13
Breuste J, Haase D, Elmqvist T (2011) Urban landscapes and ecosystem services. In: Sandhu H, Wratten S, Cullen R, Costanza R (eds) ES2: ecosystem services in engineered systems. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford
Bunn AG, Urban DL, Keitt TH (2000) Landscape connectivity: a conservation application of graph theory. J Environ Manag 59:265–278
Dale MRT, Fortin MJ (2010) From graphs to spatial graphs. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 41:21–38
Deal B, Pallathucheril V (2008) Simulating regional futures: the land-use evolution and impact assessment model (LEAM). Ch. In: Braill R (ed) Planning support systems for cities and regions. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA, pp 61–84
Deal B, Pallathucheril V (2009) Sustainability and urban dynamics: assessing future impacts on ecosystem services. Sustain 1:346–362
Deal B, Pallathucheril V, Sun Z, Terstriep J, Hartel W (2005) LEAM Technical Document: Overview of the LEAM Approach. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 76 pp
Deal B, Schunk D (2004) Spatial dynamic modeling to urban land use transformation: a simulation approach to assessing the costs of urban sprawl. Ecol Econ 51:79–95
Dearborn D, Kark S (2010) The motivation for conserving urban biodiversity. Conserv Biol 24:432–440
Doerr VAJ, Barrett T, Doerr ED (2011) Connectivity, dispersal behaviour and conservation under climate change: a response to Hodgson et al. J Appl Ecol 48:143–147
El-Sayed Mohamed Mahgoub M, van der Steen NP, Abu-Zeid K, Vairavamoorthy K (2010) Towards sustainability in urban water: a life cycle analysis of the urban water system of Alexandria City, Egypt. J Clean Prod 18:1100–1106
ESRI (2009) ArcGIS Version 10 [GIS Application], Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc., Redlands, CA
European Environment Agency (2006) Urban sprawl in Europe: The ignored challenge. EEA Report. No 10/2006. Copenhagen 60 pp
Forman RTT, Godron M (1986) Landscape ecology. John Wiley & Sons, New York
Freeman L (1977) A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry 40:35–41
Galpern P, Manseau M, Fall A (2011) Patch-based graphs of landscape connectivity: a guide to construction, analysis and application for conservation. Biol Conserv 144:44–55
Grimm NB, Faeth SH, Golubiewski NE, Redman CL, Wu J, Bai X, Briggs JM (2008) Global change and the ecology of cities. Science 319:756–760
Heaps C (2008) LEAP User Guide. Stockholm Environment Institute. Stockholm
Hepinstall-Cymerman H, Coe S, Alberti M (2009) Using urban landscape trajectories to develop a multi-temporal land cover database to support ecological modeling. Rem Sens 1:1373–1379
Hepinstall J, Alberti M, Marzluff J (2008) Predicting land cover change and avian community responses in rapidly urbanizing environments. Landsc Ecol 23:1257–1276
Hostetler M, Allen W, Meurk C (2011) Conserving urban biodiversity? Creating green infrastructure is only the first step. Landsc Urban Plann 100:369–371
Hunt JD, Simmonds DC (1992) Theory and application of an integrated land-use and transport modeling framework. Environ Plann Plann Des 20:221–244
International Energy Agency (2008) World Energy Outlook 2008: Technical Report, International Energy Agency/OECD, pp 578
Johst K, Drechsler M, van Teeffelen AJA, Hartig F, Vos CC, Wissel S, Wätzold F, Opdam P (2011) Biodiversity conservation in dynamic landscapes: trade-offs between number, connectivity and turnover of habitat patches. J Appl Ecol 48:1227–1235
Jongman RHG, Külvik M, Kristiansen I (2004) European ecological networks and greenways. Landsc Urban Plann 68:305–319
Kates RW, Clark WC, Corell R, Hall JM, Jaeger CC, Lowe I, McCarthy JJ, Schellnhuber HJ, Bolin B, Dickson NM, Faucheux S, Gallopin GC, Grübler A, Huntley B, Jäger J, Jodha NS, Kasperson RE, Mabogunje A, Matson P, Mooney H, Moore B III, O'Riordan T, Svedin U (2001) Environment and development: sustainability science. Science 292:641–642
Keirstead J, Schulz NB (2010) London and beyond: taking a closer look at urban energy policy. Energ Pol 38:4870–4879
Kennedy CA, Cuddihy J, Engel Yan J (2007) The changing metabolism of cities. J Ind Ecol 11:43–59
Klosterman RE (2012) Simple and complex models. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 39:1–6
Länsstyrelsen (2011) Länsstyrelsernas GIS-tjänster. http://www.gis.lst.se/. Accessed 30 May 2011
Lantmäteriet (2011) GSD Landcover Data, Lantmäteriet
Luck GW (2007) A review of the relationships between human population density and biodiversity. Biol Rev 82:607–645
McGarigal K, Cushman SA (2002) Comparative evaluation of experimental approaches to the study of habitat fragmentation effects. Ecol Appl 12:335–345
McKinney ML (2002) Urbanization, biodiversity, and conservation. BioScience 52:883–890
McKinney ML (2008) Effects of urbanization on species richness: a review of plants and animals. Urban Ecosyst 11:161–176
Minor ES, Urban DL (2007) Graph theory as a proxy for spatially explicit population models in conservation planning. Ecol Appl 17:1771–1782
Mörtberg UM, Balfors B, Knol WC (2007) Landscape ecological assessment: a tool for integrating biodiversity issues in strategic environmental assessment and planning. J Environ Manag 82:457–470
Mörtberg UM, Zetterberg A, Brokking Balfors B (2012) Urban landscapes in transition: lessons from integrating biodiversity and habitat modelling in planning. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management: 1250002, 31 pp
Nissing C, von Blottnitz H (2010) An economic model for energisation and its integration into the urban energy planning process. Energ Pol 38:2370–2378
Office of Regional Planning 2001. Regional utvecklingsplan 2001 för Stockholmsregionen—RUFS 2001. Stockholm County Council. Stockholm, 152 pp [In Swedish]
Office of Regional Planning 2010. Förslag till regional utvecklingsplan för Stockholmsregionen—RUFS 2010. Så blir vi Europas mest attraktiva storstadsregion. Stockholm County Council. Stockholm, pp 262. [In Swedish]
Opdam P, Steingrover E (2008) Designing metropolitan landscapes for biodiversity: deriving guidelines from metapopulation ecology. Landsc J 27:69–80
Opdam P, Steingröver E, van Rooij S (2006) Ecological networks: a spatial concept for multi-actor planning of sustainable landscapes. Landsc Urban Plann 75:322–332
Ortúzar JdD, Willumsen LG (2001) Modelling Transport: Wiley, 586 pp
Pataki DE, Carreiro MM, Cherrier J, Grulke NE, Jennings V, Pincetl S, Pouyat RV, Whitlow TH, Zipperer WC (2011) Coupling biogeochemical cycles in urban environments: ecosystem services, green solutions, and misconceptions. Front Ecol Environ 9:27–36
Patterson Z, Bierlaire M (2010) Development of prototype UrbanSim models. Environ Plann Plann Des 37:344–366
Pickett STA, Cadenasso ML, Grove JM, Nilon CH, Poyat RV, Zipperer WC, Constanza R (2001) Urban ecological systems: linking terrestrial ecological, physical, and socioeconomic components of metropolitan areas. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 32:122–157
Qureshi S, Hasan Kazmi SJ, Breuste JH (2010) Ecological disturbances due to high cutback in the green infrastructure of Karachi: analyses of public perception about associated health problems. Urban Forest Urban Greening 9:187–198
Ricketts T, Imhoff M (2003) Biodiversity, urban areas, and agriculture: locating priority ecoregions for conservation. Conserv Ecol 8:1
Rosenzweig ML (2003) Win-win ecology: how earth species can survive in the midst of human enterprise. Oxford University Press, New York
Rui Y, Ban Y (2011) Urban growth modeling with road network expansion and land use development. Advances in cartography and GIScience, vol 2. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 399–412
Ruth M, Coelho D (2007) Understanding and managing the complexity of urban systems under climate change. Clim Pol 7:317–336
Spatari S, Yu Z, Montalto FA (2011) Life cycle implications of urban green infrastructure. Environ Pollut 159:2174–2179
Statistics Sweden (2006) Population data. Statistics Sweden
Strohbach MW, Arnold E, Haase D (2012) The carbon footprint of urban green space—a life cycle approach. Landsc Urban Plann 104:220–229
Swedish Transport Agency (2011) The National Road Database. https://lastkajen.trafikverket.se. Accessed 30 May 2011
Tzoulas K, Korpela K, Venn S, Yli-Pelkonen V, Kaźmierczak A, Niemela J, James P (2007) Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using green infrastructure: a literature review. Landsc Urban Plann 81:167–178
UNEP (2007) Report of the Cities and Biodiversity: Achieving the 2010 Diversity Target. United Nations Environment Programme, 25 pp
United Nations (2009) Planning sustainable cities—Global report on human settlements. United Nations Human Settlements Programme, UN Habitat, 338 pp
Urban DL, Minor ES, Treml EA, Schick RS (2009) Graph models of habitat mosaics. Ecol Lett 12:260–273
van Bueren E, van Bohemen H, Itard L, Visscher H (eds) (2012) Sustainable urban environments, an ecosystem approach. Springer, Dordrecht, p 429
Von Thünen JH (1826) Der Isolirte Staat (The Isolated State)
Vos CC, Verboom J, Opdam PFM, ter Braak CJ (2001) Toward ecologically scaled landscape indices. Am Nat 157:24–41
Waddell P, Ulfarsson GF, Franklin JP, Lobb J (2007) Incorporating land use in metropolitan transportation planning. Transport Res Pol Pract 41:382–410
Wu J (2008) Making the case for landscape ecology: an effective approach to urban sustainability. Landsc J 27:41–50
Wu J, Buyantuyev A, Jenerette GD, Litteral J, Neil K, Shen W (2012) Quantifying spatiotemporal patterns and ecological efforts of urbanisation: a multiscale landscape approach. Ch 4 in Richter M, Weiland U (eds). Applied Urban Ecology: A Global Framework: Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Yates D, Sieber J, Purkey D, Huber Lee A (2005) WEAP21: a demand, priority, and preference driven water planning model: part 1, model characteristics. Water Int 30:487–500
Zetterberg A, Mörtberg U, Balfors B (2010) Making graph theory operational for landscape ecological assessments, planning, and design. Landsc Urban Plann 95:181–191
Zetterberg A, Mörtberg U, Bodin Ö, Saura S (2011) Sprawl or dense?: Assessing impacts of regional development plans on landscape network connectivity. In: Zetterberg, A. Connecting the dots: Network analysis, landscape ecology, and practical applications. Doctoral thesis, Dept of Land and Water Resources Engineering, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, TRITA-LWR PHD 1062
Zhang Y, Li S, Fath BD, Yang Z, Yang N (2011) Analysis of an urban energy metabolic system: comparison of simple and complex model results. Ecol Model 223:14–19
Online resources
Proximity (2012) TIGER/Line File Census Feature Class Codes (CFCC), http://proximityone.com/tgrcfcc.htm
US Environmental Protection Agency (2007) NLCD Classification Schemes (Level II) http://www.epa.gov/mrlc/classification.html
Acknowledgements
This international cooperation between KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden and University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaigne, USA, was supported by the ABE School Urban Research Cluster at KTH, lead by Professor Vladimir Cvetkovic, to whom we are much obliged. We are also grateful for comments on earlier versions of the manuscript by three anonymous reviewers.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mörtberg, U., Haas, J., Zetterberg, A. et al. Urban ecosystems and sustainable urban development—analysing and assessing interacting systems in the Stockholm region. Urban Ecosyst 16, 763–782 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-012-0270-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-012-0270-3