Evaluation of the Role of Sponge City as a Green-Blue City in Improving the Level of Ecosystem Services of Shiraz City

Document Type : Research article

Authors

1 Department of Geography, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran

2 Department of Watershed Sciences and Engineering Water and Soil Conservation, Yazd, Iran

10.22059/jurbangeo.2024.369561.1892

Abstract

ABSTRACT
Today, with the development of urbanization, the green-blue space in urban areas has received wide attention and has become an important symbol of the health of the urban ecosystem. In this context, it is very important to pay attention to ecosystem services in the planning of the sponge city provided by green-blue infrastructure. In this regard, the current research was conducted with the aim of evaluating the role of the sponge city as a green-blue city in improving the ecosystem services of Shiraz city. The results of the content analysis showed that out of the 35 identified components related to the four most important categories of the green-blue infrastructure ecosystem services of the sponge city by the expert team, after ranking it was determined that the component of sustainable water supply (A1) from the subcategory of production services, the component of effective control of runoff Urbanization and reduction of road flooding (D15) and risk management and flood risk (D3) from the sub-group of regulatory services were ranked first to third with acquired scores of 26.25, 25.55 and 24.78, respectively. Also, in the field of green-blue infrastructure support services of Sponge City, the components of preserving, revitalizing and strengthening vegetation (B4) and restoring natural ecosystems (B3) were ranked tenth and eleventh respectively with scores of 19.77 and 19.63. After social-cultural services, the component of communication and better access to nature (C4) was ranked thirteenth with a score of 19.22
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Economic development, rapid growth of urbanization, and climate change have caused the formation and expansion of gray cities all over the world. The innovative response to these challenges is the development of green-blue cities. In this connection, the sponge city has recently attracted the attention of many urban planners as a plan for a successful green-blue city. The sponge city is based on low-impact development thinking by creating a series of green-blue infrastructures such as green roofs, green walls, gardens, planted strips, permeable canals and ponds, restoration and creation of wetlands, squares, passages, and permeable sidewalks seek to improve the process of absorbing water, storing and reducing the volume of runoff so that cities can hydrological and environmental conditions should be closer before development. In general, taking into account the important role of ecosystem services in the resilience of urban systems, recently, this category has received more serious attention in the world literature, which covers different aspects of urban ecosystem services concerning landscape management, spatial planning, and urban development practices. In this regard, the current research aims to investigate, identify, and prioritize the services of the sponge city ecosystem, which has a green-blue infrastructure. In the case of implementation, it was done in Shiraz as a study area.
 
Methodology
The current research is applied in terms of its purpose and in terms of its nature; it is among the descriptive-analytical studies that were conducted with a mixed method (quantitative and qualitative). Data collection was done using library and survey methods. In the field part, the statistical community of the research consists of experts and professors in the fields of urban planning and management, crisis management, natural resources, and urban environment. The sample size was 30 people and was determined by judgmental and snowball sampling. The theme analysis method was used to analyze the data. In this section, research data was coded and analyzed using MAXQDA software.
 
Results and discussion
The findings showed that among the 35 examined components, the component of sustainable water supply (A1), with an acquired score of 26.25 from the subcategory of production services, has the first rank according to the expert team. The components of effective control of urban runoff and reduction of road flooding (D15) and Risk management and flood risk (D3) were ranked second and third, respectively, with an acquired score of 25.55 and 24.78 from the sub-set of regulatory services. On the other hand, concerning support services, it should be mentioned that the components of preserving, revitalizing, and strengthening vegetation (B4) and restoring natural ecosystems (B3) were ranked tenth and eleventh with scores of 19.77 and 19.63, respectively. Cultural-social services, the component of communication and better access to nature (C4), was ranked thirteenth with a score of 19.22. Due to the fact that in most areas of Shiraz city, residential, commercial, public spaces, etc., have been created using impermeable materials and materials by changing a large part of soft, permeable, and permeable natural surfaces to hard, impermeable, and impermeable artificial surfaces, the ability to absorb water in place has reduced, so it cannot absorb rainwater. Through drainage systems on the way to different water areas, water flows to the streets and sidewalks. This, without control, causes floods and flooding of roads. Therefore, by changing the impervious surfaces in Shiraz city to green-blue spongy infrastructures, the runoff is directed to the subsoil, preventing the flow of rainwater in Shiraz city. Through the proper management of this stored water through the infrastructures, green-blue can become a sustainable water source. Also, green-blue sponge infrastructures can preserve, revive, and strengthen vegetation and thus restore natural ecosystems in the city because, in the sponge city, significant spaces are dedicated to vegetation, green spaces, wetlands, and lake restoration. In it, Importance has been given to the environment, air conditioning, ecosystems, and life cycles of other organisms, which, in addition to maintaining cleanliness, also adds to the beauty and freshness of the city's atmosphere and provides a living environment for all kinds of environmental organisms in the city. In such a situation, the green-blue sponge infrastructure with a nature-oriented approach provides the ground for more communication between humans and nature.
 
Conclusion
In general, most of the urban ecosystem services in the green-blue city can be classified into the improvement of the urban microclimate, the availability of local recreational areas, and the creation of urban habitats. These green-blue infrastructures in the Sponge city can bring positive effects such as increasing the quality of life, improving accommodation and tourism conditions, and improving the well-being of urban residents. So, the effect of green-blue infrastructure on controlling and reducing floods in the Sponge city is clearly seen. Also, the green-blue elements in the sponge city provide more services, such as improving the local climate and providing a space for the recreation of urban residents and urban habitats, so the sponge city should be called a water collector, storer, and donor.
 
Funding
There is no funding support.
 
Authors’ Contribution
All of the authors approved thecontent of the manuscript and agreed on all aspects of the work.
 
Conflict of Interest
Authors declared no conflict of interest.
 
Acknowledgments
This work is part of the doctoral dissertation and was jointly supported by the Department of Geography of Yazd University.
 

Keywords

References

  1. Abbas, Z., & Jaber, H. S. (2020). Accuracy assessment of supervised classification methods for extraction land use maps using remote sensing and GIS techniques. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 745(1), 159-166. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/745/1/012166.
  2. Ahern, J., Cilliers, S., & Niemelä, J. (2014). The concept of ecosystem services inadaptive urban planning and design: A framework for supporting innovation. Landscape and Urban Planning 125, 254-259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.01.020.
  3. Artmann, M., Bastian, O., & Grunewald, K. (2017). Using the concepts of green infrastructure and ecosystem services to specify Leitbilder for compact and green cities - The Example of the Landscape Plan of Dresden (Germany). Sustainability, 9(2), 198. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9020198.
  4. Asgari, E., Talebi, A., Kiani-Harchegani, M., & Amanian, N. (2024). The effect of Vetiver plant on runoff reduction and soil loss in parallel-convex and concave hillslopes in laboratory conditions. Iranian Journal of Watershed Management Science and Engineering, 17(63), 12-24. https://doi.org/10.22034/17.63.12. [In Persian].
  5. Bacchin, T., Ashley, R., Blecken, G. T., Viklander, M., & Gersonius, B. (2021). Green-blue infrastructure for sustainable cities: innovative socio-technical solutions bringing multifunctional value. International Low Impact Development Conference, 1-4. B2n.ir/f79332.
  6. Banzhaf, S., & Boyd, J. (2007). What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecological Economics, 63(2-3), 616-626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.01.002
  7. Bierwagen, B. G. 2007. Connectivity in urbanizing landscapes: The importance of habitat configuration, urban area size, and dispersal. Urban Ecosystem, 10, 29-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-006-0011-6.
  8. Brzoska, P., & Spage, A. (2020). From city- to site-dimension: Assessing the urban ecosystem services of different types of green infrastructure. Land, 9(5), 150. https://doi.org/10.3390/land9050150.
  9. Calderon-Contreras, R., & Quiroz-Rosas, L.E. (2017). Analysing scale, quality and diversity of green infrastructure and the provision of Urban Ecosystem Services: A case from Mexico City. Ecosystem Services, 23, 127-137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.12.004.
  10. Chan, F.K.Sh., Griffiths, J.A., Higgitt, D., Xu, Sh., Zhu, F., Tang, Y.T., Xu, Y., & Thorne, C. (2018). “Sponge City” in China-A breakthrough of planning and flood risk management in the urban context. Land Use Policy, 76, 772-778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.03.005.
  11. Chan, K.M., & Vu, T.T. (2017). A landscape ecological perspective of the impacts of urbanization on urban green spaces in the Klang Valley. Applied Geography, 85, 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2017.06.002.
  12. Chang, N. B., Lu, J. W., Chui, T. F. M., & Hartshorn, N. (2018). Global policy analysis of low impact development for stormwater management in urban regions. Land Use Policy, 70, 368-383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.11.024.
  13. Chen, S., Liu, X., Yang, L., & Zhu, Z. (2023). Variations in Ecosystem Service Value and Its Driving Factors in the Nanjing Metropolitan Area of China. Forests, 14, 113. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14010113.
  14. Chen, S., Wang, Y., Ni, Zh., Zhang, X., & Xia, B. (2020). Benefits of the ecosystem services provided by urban green infrastructures: Differences between perception and measurements. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 54, 126774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126774.
  15. Cohen-Shacham, E., Walters, G., Janzen, C., & Maginnis, S. (2016). Nature-Based Solutions to Address Global Societal Challenges; IUCN: Gland, Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2016.13.en.
  16. Cortinovis, C., & Geneletti, D. (2019). A framework to explore the effects of urban planning decisions on regulating ecosystem services in cities. Ecosystem Services, 38, 100946. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100946.
  17. Costanza, R. (2020). Valuing natural capital and ecosystem services toward the goals of efficiency, fairness, and sustainability. Ecosystem Services, 43, 101096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101096.
  18. Costanza, R., De Groot, R., Braat, L., Kubiszewski, I., Fioramonti, L., Sutton, P., Farber, S., & Grasso, M. (2017). Twenty years of ecosystem services: how far have we come and how far do we still need to go? Ecosystem Services, 28, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.008.
  19. Cowan, R. (2007). The dictionary of urbanism. Streetwise Press, 468 p. B2n.ir/h25290.
  20. Czucz, B., Arany, I., Young, M., Bereczki, K., Kertész, M., Kiss, M., Aszalós, R., & Haines-Young, R. (2018). Where concepts meet the real world: A systematic review of ecosystem service indicators and their classification using CICES. Ecosystem Services, 29, 145-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.11.018.
  21. Danny, B., Fu, D., & Singh, R.P. (2018). Feasibility and adaptability of Sponge City concepts: A Case study of Lusaka, Zambia. National Natural Science Foundation of China, 1-11. B2n.ir/a48751.
  22. De Groot, R., Brander, L., Ploeg, S., Costanza, R., Bernard, F., Braat, L., Christie, M., Crossman, N., Ghermandi, A., Hein, L., Hussain, S., Kumar, P., McVittie, A., Portela, R., C. Rodriguez, L., ten Brink, P., & van Beukering, P. (2012). Global Estimates of the Value of Ecosystems and Their Services in Monetary Units. Ecosystem Services, 1, 50-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.005.
  23. Delibas, M., Tezer, A., & Bacchin, T.K. (2021). Towards embedding soil ecosystem services in spatial planning. Cities, 113, 103150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103150.
  24. European Commission. 2019. EU Guidance on Integrating Ecosystems and Their Services into Decision-Making. B2n.ir/j31837.
  25. Faggian, R., Romeijin, H. & Sposito, V. (2012). Soil data to support broad scale land suitability assessment in the Gippsland Region. Melbourne: Agricultural Victoria Services. Report to the Victorian Government. B2n.ir/y48603.
  26. Fallmann, J., & Emeis, S. (2020). How to bring urban and global climate studies together with urban planning and architecture?. Developments in the Built Environment, 4, 100023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dibe.2020.100023.
  27. Fang, X., Li, J., & Ma, Q. (2023). Integrating green infrastructure, ecosystem services and nature-based solutions for urban sustainability: A comprehensive literature review. Sustainable Cities and Society, 98, 104843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2023.104843.
  28. Fisher, B., Turner, R.K. & Morling, P. (2009). Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecological Economics, 68(3), 643-653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.09.014.
  29. Gascon, M., Zijlema, W., Vert, C., White, M.P., & Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J. (2017). Outdoor blue spaces, human health and well-being: A systematic review of quantitative studies. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 220(8), 1207-1221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheh.2017.08.004.
  30. Guan, X.L., Wei, H.K., Lu, S.S., Dai, Q., & Su, H.J. (2018). Assessment on the urbanization strategy in China: achievements: challenges and reflections. Habitat International, 71, 97-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2017.11.009.
  31. Hakimian, P., & Lak, A. (2017). Green infrastructure: Finding a common language in urban design and landscape architecture education. Soffeh, 27(3), 45-60. [In Persian]. http://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.1683870.1396.27.3.3.7.
  32. Hamidi, A., Ramavandi, B., & Sorial, G.A. (2021). Sponge City - An emerging concept in sustainable water resource management: A scientometric analysis. Resources, Environment and Sustainability, 5 (2021) 100028. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resenv.2021.100028.
  33. Hou, X., Guo, H., Wang, F., Li, M., Xue, X., Liu, X., & Zeng, S. (2020). Is the sponge city construction sufficiently adaptable for the future stormwater management under climate change? Journal of Hydrology, 588, S. 125055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125055.
  34. Hu, M., Zhang, X., Li, Y., Yang, H., & Tanaka, K. (2019). Flood mitigation performance of low impact development technologies under different storms for retrofitting an urbanized area. Journal of Cleaner Production, 222, 373-380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.044.
  35. Johannessen, Å., & Wamsler, C. (2017). What does resilience mean for urban water services? Ecology and Society, 22(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08870-220101.
  36. Jurczak, T., Wagner, I., Kaczkowski, Z., Szklarek, S., & Zalewski, M. (2018). Hybrid system for the purification of street stormwater runoff supplying urban recreation reservoirs. Ecological Engineering, 110, 67-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2017.09.019.
  37. Kabisch, N., Korn, H., Stadler, J. & Bonn, A. (2017). Naturebased solutions to climate change adaptation in urban areas: Linkages between science, policy and practice Switzerland. Ecology and Society, 21(2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56091-5_1.
  38. Koster, S. (2021). How the Sponge City becomes a supplementary water supply infrastructure. Water-Energy Nexus, 4, 35-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wen.2021.02.002.
  39. Kremen, C., & Ostfeld, R. (2005). A call to ecologists: measuring, analyzing, and managing ecosystem services. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 3, 540-548. https://doi.org/10.2307/3868610.
  40. Kronenberg, J. (2015). Why not to green a city? Institutional barriers to preserving urban ecosystem. services. Ecosystem Services, 12, 218-227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.07.002.
  41. Kumar, P. (2010). The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: ecological and economic foundations. UNEP/Earthprint. B2n.ir/t94239.
  42. Lancia, M., Zheng, Ch., He, X., Lerner, D. N., Andrews, Ch., & Tian, Y. (2020). Hydrogeological constraints and opportunities for “Sponge City” development: Shenzhen, southern China. Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies, 28, S. 100679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrh.2020.100679.
  43. Lashford, C., Rubinato, M., Cai, Y., Hou, J., Abolfathi, S., Coupe, S., Charlesworth, S., & Tait, S. (2019). SuDS & Sponge Cities: a comparative analysis of the implementation of pluvial flood management in the UK and China. Sustainability, 11, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010213.
  44. Li, C., Zong, Z., Qie, H., Fang, Y., & Liu, Q. (2023). CiteSpace and bibliometric analysis of published research on forest ecosystem services for the period 2018-2022. Land, 12, 845. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12040845.
  45. Liu, H., Wu, J., & Liao, M. (2019). Ecosystem service trade-offs upstream and downstream of a dam: A case study of the Danjiangkou dam, China. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 12, 17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-018-4145-7.
  46. Liu, H., Zheng, L., Wu, J., & Liao, Y. (2020). Past and future ecosystem service trade-offs in Poyang Lake Basin under different land use policy scenarios. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 13, 46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-019-5004-x.
  47. Lucas, P. L., Kok, M. T. J., Nillson, M., & Alkemade, R. (2014). Integrating biodiversity and ecosystem services in the post-2015 development agenda: Goal structure, target areas and means of implementation. Sustainability, 6(1), 193-216. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6010193.
  48. Ma, X., Zhu, J., Zhang, H., Yan, W., & Zhao, C. (2020). Trade-offs and synergies in ecosystem service values of inland lake wetlands in Central Asia under land use/cover change: A case study on Ebinur Lake, China. Global Ecology and Conservation, 24, e01253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e01253.
  49. Ma, Y., Jiang, Y. (2023). Mainstreaming the framework of ecosystem services to enhance China's policy implementation for sponge city development. Sustainable Development, 31(4), 2291-2306. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2506.
  50. Masoudi, M. (2015). Green and blue infrastructure. 3th International Congress on Civil Engineering, Architecture and Urban Development. 29-31 December 2015, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran, 1-9. [In Persian]. B2n.ir/r75686.
  51. Mell, I. C. (2008). Green infrastructure: concepts and planning. FORUM Ejournal, 69-80. B2n.ir/t02843.
  52. Ministry of Housing and Urban Rural Development (MHURD). (2014). MHURD Announcement on Publishing Preliminary Technical Guidance for Sponge City Construction – Low Impact Development Rainwater System Construction. MHURD [2014]275. MHURD, Beijing.
  53. Nahlik, A. M., Kentula, M. E., Fennessy, M. S., & Landers, D. H., (2012). Where is the consensus? A proposed foundation for moving ecosystem service concepts into practice. Ecological Economics, 77, 27-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.01.001.
  54. Newman, P. (2010). Green urbanism and its application to Singapore. Enviroment and Urbanization Asia, 1(2), 149-170. https://doi.org/10.1177/097542531000100204.
  55. Noori, M., & Rezaei, M. (2023). Explaining the function of the sponge city as a nature-based approach in the sustainable management of urban water resources (case study: Shiraz city). (in press). https://doi.org/10.30495/jupm.2023.32001.4357. [In Persian].
  56. Noori, M., & Rezaei, M. R. (2024). Application of Environmental Technologies in the Creation of the Pavement of the Sponge Eco-City (Case Study: Shiraz City). Spatial Planning, 13(4), 97-114. https://doi.org/10.22108/sppl.2024.139409.1752. [In Persian].
  57. Noori, M., Rezaei, M. R., Hosseini, S. M., & Mansourian, H. (2023). Explaining the necessity of using modern methods in the management of urban runoff with the approach of increasing resilience against floods (case study: Shiraz city). Geographical Urban Planning Research (GUPR), 11(1), 27-49. https://doi.org/22059/jurbangeo.2023.354605.1788. [In Persian].
  58. Oates, L., Dai, L., Sudmant, A., & Gouldson, A. (2020). Building climate resilience and water security in cities: Lessons from the Sponge City of Wuhan, China. Coalition for Urban Transitions. London, UK, and Washington, DC: https://urbantransitions.global/publications, 1-29. https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/415096.
  59. Oral, H.V., Carvalho, P., Gajewska, M., Ursino, N., Masi, F., Hullebusch, E.D.V., & Zimmermann, M., (2020). A review of nature-based solutions for urban water management in European circular cities: a critical assessment based on case studies and literature. Blue-Green Systems, 2(1), 112-136. https://doi.org/10.2166/bgs.2020.932.
  60. Pereira, P., Yin, C., & Hua, T. (2023). Nature-based solutions, ecosystem services, disservices, and impacts on well-being in urban environments. Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health, 33, 100465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coesh.2023.100465.
  61. Rostamizad G, khanbabaei Z, & Tahmoreth M. (2022). Assessing the accuracy of supervised classification algorithms for land use map extraction (study area: Taham watershed). Environmental Erosion Research, 12(4),141-157. http://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.22517812.1401.12.4.7.8 [In Persian].
  62. Shafique, M., Kim, R., & Lee, D. (2016). The Potential of Green-Blue Roof to Manage Storm Water in Urban Areas. Nature Environment and Pollution Technology, 15(2), 715-718. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030584.
  63. Shao, W., Zhang, H., Liu, J., Yang, G., Chen, X., Yang, Z., & Huang, H. (2016). Data integration and its application in the Sponge City construction of China. Procedia Engineering, 154, 779-786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.07.583.
  64. Statistical Centre of Iran. (2020a). Fars province annual report (1- land and climate), 55-145. https://www.amar.org.ir/english?portalid=1. [In Persian].
  65. Statistical Centre of Iran. (2020b). Fars province annual report (3- population), 185-239. https://www.amar.org.ir/english?portalid=1. [In Persian].
  66. Tang, Y.T., Chan, F.K.S., O'Donnell, E.C., Griffiths, J., Lau, L., Higgitt, D.L., & Thorne, C.R. (2018). Aligning ancient and modern approaches to sustainable urbanwater management in China: Ningbo as a “Blue-Green City”in the “Sponge City” campaign. Journal of Flood Risk Management, 11, e12451. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfr3.12451.
  67. TEEB. (2010). The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature: A Synthesis of the Approach, Conclusions and Recommendations of TEEB. (www.TEEBweb.org). B2n.ir/j44717.
  68. Tong, P., Yin, H., Wang, Z., Trivers, I. (2022). Combining stormwater management and park services to mitigate climate change and improve human well-being: A case study of sponge city parks in Shanghai. Land, 11(9), 1589. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11091589.
  69. Veerkamp, C.J., Schipper, A.M., Hedlund, K., Lazarova, T., Nordin, A., & Hanson, H.I. (2021). A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure. Ecosystem Services, 52, 101367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101367.
  70. Wang, R., Wu, H., & Chiles, R. (2022). Ecosystem Benefits Provision of Green Stormwater Infrastructure in Chinese Sponge Cities. Environmental Management, 69, 558-575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-021-01565-9.
  71. Xu, X., Tan, Y., Chen, S., & Yang, G. (2014). Changing patterns and determinants of natural capital in the Yangtze River Delta of China 2000-2010. Science of The Total Environment, 466-467, 326-337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.07.043.
  72. Yang, L., Zhang, L., Li, Y., & Wu, S. (2015). Water -related ecosystem services provided by urban green space: A case study in Yixing City (China). Landscape and Urban Planning, 136, 40-51.
  73. Yeung, Y.M., (2010). The further integration of the Pearl River Delta. Enviroment and Urbanization Asia, 1(1), 13-26. https://doi.org/10.1177/097542530900100103.
  74. Zhou, M., Koster, S., Zuo, J., Che, W., & Wang, X. (2019). Cross-boundary evolution of urban planning and urban drainage towards the water sensitive “Sponge City”. Urban water management for future cities, technical and institutional aspects from Chinese and German perspective. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 303-329. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01488-9.
Geographical Urban Planning Research (GUPR)
Volume 11, Issue 4
January 2024
Pages 133-153

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics