A Conceptual Framework for Choosing Target Species for Wildlife-Inclusive Urban Design

Beate Apfelbeck, Christine Jakoby, Maximilian Hanusch, Emanuel Boas Steffani, Thomas E. Hauck and Wolfgang W. Weisser
Additional contact information
Beate Apfelbeck: Terrestrial Ecology Research Group, Department of Ecology and Ecosystem Management, School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technische Universität München, D-85354 Freising, Germany
Christine Jakoby: Department for Open Space Planning, University of Kassel, 34127 Kassel, Germany
Maximilian Hanusch: Terrestrial Ecology Research Group, Department of Ecology and Ecosystem Management, School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technische Universität München, D-85354 Freising, Germany
Emanuel Boas Steffani: Terrestrial Ecology Research Group, Department of Ecology and Ecosystem Management, School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technische Universität München, D-85354 Freising, Germany
Thomas E. Hauck: Department for Open Space Planning, University of Kassel, 34127 Kassel, Germany
Wolfgang W. Weisser: Terrestrial Ecology Research Group, Department of Ecology and Ecosystem Management, School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technische Universität München, D-85354 Freising, Germany

Sustainability, 2019, vol. 11, issue 24, 1-20

Abstract: Recent research has highlighted the significance of cities for biodiversity, making them important places for conservation in their own right. Current conservation approaches in cities are mostly defensive. Thus, they focus on remnant pockets of natural areas or try to protect particular species that occur in the built environment. These approaches are vulnerable to further urban development and do not create habitats. An alternative strategy is to make wildlife an integral part of urban development and thereby create a new habitat in the built-up area. Here we address the challenge of choosing target species for such wildlife-inclusive urban design. The starting point of our conceptual framework is the regional species pool , which can be obtained from geo-referenced species data. The existing habitat types on and around the development site and dispersal barriers limit the species numbers to the local species potential . In the next step, the site’s potential for each species is analyzed—how can it be upgraded to host species given the planned development and the life-cycle of the species? For the final choice of target species, traits related to the human–animal interaction are considered. We suggest that stakeholders will be involved in the final species selection. Our approach differs from existing practice, such as expert choice of priority species, by (1) representing an open process where many species are potential targets of conservation, (2) the involvement of stakeholders in a participatory way. Our approach can also be used at larger spatial scales such as quarters or entire cities.

Keywords: urban planning; wildlife-inclusive urban design; human-wildlife interactions; biodiversity; urban design; stakeholder participation; geo-referenced species data; GIS (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/24/6972/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/24/6972/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:24:p:6972-:d:295046

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().