Explore the vast range of titles available.

Urban parks became critical for maintaining the well-being of urban residents during the COVID-19 global pandemic. To examine the impact of COVID-19 on urban park usage, we selected New York City (NYC) and used SafeGraph mobility data, which was collected from a large sample of mobile phone users, to assess the change in park visits and travel distance to a park based on 1) park type, 2) the income level of the visitor census block group (visitor CBG) and 3) that of the park census block group (park CBG). All analyses were adjusted for the impact of temperature on park visitation, and we focused primarily on visits made by NYC residents. Overall, for the eight most popular park types in NYC, visits dropped by 49.2% from 2019 to 2020. The peak reduction in visits occurred in April 2020. Visits to all park types, excluding Nature Areas, decreased from March to December 2020 as compared to 2019. Parks located in higher-income CBGs tended to have lower reductions in visits, with this pattern being primarily driven by large parks, including Flagship Parks, Community Parks and Nature Areas. All types of parks saw significant decreases in distance traveled to visit them, with the exception of the Jointly Operated Playground, Playground, and Nature Area park types. Visitors originating from lower-income CBGs traveled shorter distances to parks and had less reduction in travel distances compared to those from higher-income CBGs. Furthermore, both before and during the pandemic, people tended to travel a greater distance to parks located in high-income CBGs compared to those in low-income CBGs. Finally, multiple types of parks proved crucial destinations for NYC residents during the pandemic. This included Nature Areas to which the visits remained stable, along with Recreation Field/Courts which had relatively small decreases in visits, especially for lower-income communities. Results from this study can support future park planning by shedding light on the different uses of certain park types before and during a global crisis, when access to these facilities can help alleviate the human well-being consequences of “lockdown” policies.

Urban street trees offer cities critical environmental and social benefits. In New York City (NYC), a decadal census of every street tree is conducted to help understand and manage the urban forest. However, it has previously been impossible to analyze growth of an individual tree because of uncertainty in tree location. This study overcomes this limitation using a three-step alignment process for identifying individual trees with ZIP Codes, address, and species instead of map coordinates. We estimated individual growth rates for 126,362 street trees (59 species and 19% of 2015 trees) using the difference between diameter at breast height (DBH) from the 2005 and 2015 tree censuses. The tree identification method was verified by locating and measuring the DBH of select trees and measuring a set of trees annually for over 5 years. We examined determinants of tree growth rates and explored their spatial distribution. In our newly created NYC tree growth database, fourteen species have over 1000 unique trees. The three most abundant tree species vary in growth rates; London Planetree (n = 32,056, 0.163 in/yr) grew the slowest compared to Honeylocust (n = 15,967, 0.356 in/yr), and Callery Pear (n = 15,902, 0.334 in/yr). Overall, Silver Linden was the fastest growing species (n = 1,149, 0.510 in/yr). Ordinary least squares regression that incorporated biological factors including size and the local urban form indicated that species was the major factor controlling growth rates, and tree stewardship had only a small effect. Furthermore, tree measurements by volunteer community scientists were as accurate as those made by NYC staff. Examining city wide patterns of tree growth indicates that areas with a higher Social Vulnerability Index have higher than expected growth rates. Continued efforts in street tree planting should utilize known growth rates while incorporating community voices to better provide long-term ecosystem services across NYC.

Our urban systems and their underlying sub-systems are designed to deliver only a narrow set of human-centered services, with little or no accounting or understanding of how actions undercut the resilience of social-ecological-technological systems (SETS). Embracing a SETS resilience perspective creates opportunities for novel approaches to adaptation and transformation in complex environments. We: i) frame urban systems through a perspective shift from control to entanglement, ii) position SETS thinking as novel sensemaking to create repertoires of responses commensurate with environmental complexity (i.e., requisite complexity), and iii) describe modes of SETS sensemaking for urban system structures and functions as basic tenets to build requisite complexity. SETS sensemaking is an undertaking to reflexively bring sustained adaptation, anticipatory futures, loose-fit design, and co-governance into organizational decision-making and to help reimagine institutional structures and processes as entangled SETS.

Social–ecological disruptions, such as changing climate, extreme weather‐related events and the COVID‐19 pandemic, can have cascading and long‐term consequences for people, ecosystems and multispecies relationships. As the early COVID‐19 pandemic disrupted people's lives through isolation and restricted human contact, more‐than‐human relationships played a heightened role in individuals' day‐to‐day lives with potential long‐term impacts on multispecies justice. We analysed 72 interviews conducted during the early (May–June 2020) COVID‐19 lockdown in the United States to investigate how social–ecological disruptions and spatial re‐orderings, exemplified by the pandemic, reassemble more‐than‐human relationships. We consider new relational values through a transformative multispecies justice framing, which contends that times of uncertainty can inspire meaningful connections with the more‐than‐human world, facilitating care and reciprocal relationships during times of disruption. Among interviewee accounts, we find that disorderings of daily life during the pandemic interweave with past and ongoing experiences of inequity to form mosaics of disruption. These mosaics of disruption created circumstances in which interviewees formed new connections with the more‐than‐human world. The more‐than‐human connections of interviewees sat along a spectrum and did not universally represent the same strength of relational values. The more‐than‐human connections were defined by individual's positionality and restricted geographies of the circumstances. However, the newly formed relationships seemed to be ephemeral, indicating that they would not necessarily endure outside of an early‐pandemic context. Thus, while individuals reported rearranged relationships out of pandemic precarity, their transitory qualities do not directly promise long‐term transformational multispecies connections. Our findings suggest that moments of disruption alone do not necessarily produce durable change and there is a need to go beyond merely recognizing relationality. Policy implications: Transformative multispecies justice requires long‐term, routine commitment to deepening relationships with the more‐than‐human world. While future social–ecological and spatial disturbances can be a window of opportunity to initiate multispecies relationships, future initiatives and policies must actively support and foster these relationships and strong relational values beyond the disturbances—recognizing the long‐term, non‐linear processes of transformation needed to address our future challenges. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Cities are increasingly adapting green interventions meant to enhance climate resilience, given their capacity to provide numerous ecosystem services (ES). Yet, little is known about ecological and social impacts of such interventions in the context of socio‐ecological framework and environmental justice. Here, we used a quantitative and spatial analytical approach to assess the changes of urban greenspace (UG) and examine the equity of changes in ES supply and demand across demographic and socioeconomic groups in Beijing and NYC between 2010 and 2017. Results showed that previously existing green space and its expansion were unevenly distributed across districts. High‐income districts in NYC had high green cover and experienced the highest increase of UG, in contrast to high green cover in areas with low population density and the greatest increase of UG in high‐income areas for Beijing, respectively. The inequitable distribution of UG resulted in a high level of mismatch in supply demand of ES, revealing a pattern of distributional ecological injustice within city. We also found more ecological supply was provided in the areas having less vulnerability, indicating that social vulnerability remained in a lower greenspace exposure after greening implementation in both cities. Our study contributes to a better understanding on how the dynamics of urban greenspace impact urban climate injustices, and provides new insights for critical urban adaptation interventions or practice on shaping ecological injustice. Plain Language Summary Climate change interacts with urban heat islands (UHI) to exacerbate the risk of heat‐related mortality and morbidity in cities. As urban health risks from heat and heat waves expand, cities are increasingly adapting urban greening as nature‐based solutions (NBS) to mitigate high urban temperature. While the benefits of urban greenspace are widely studied, how the implementation of greenery affects social vulnerability is poorly understood. We investigate the effects of the dynamics of urban greenspace on socio‐ecological justice to heat‐related climate exposure in two megacities‐Beijing, China and New York City, USA. The result show that urban greenspace was added in areas with high income and high ecological supply of urban cooling, but not with high social demand or vulnerability for urban cooling. And current greening in these two cities may exacerbate social vulnerablility and increase socio‐ecological injustice. This study provides new insights for critical urban adaptation interventions or practice on shaping ecological injustice. Key Points The high‐income areas had the highest increase of urban greenspace Greenspace was added in areas with high ecological supply but not with high social demand or vulnerability Social vulnerability remained in a lower greenspace exposure after greening implementation

This perspective presents a new framework to improve ecological contributions to understanding how urban, rural, and wild attributes can co-occur and mix within specific locations, producing configurations that cannot be understood through binary contrasts. We focus on mixed conditions and the processes that sustain dynamic mosaics of mixed urban-rural sites. This framework complements others that avoid the urban-rural binary, and supports integrated social and ecological research across landscapes of mixture.

Residential landscapes are a common setting of human-environment interactions. These ubiquitous ecosystems provide social and ecological services, and yard maintenance leads to intended and unintended ecological outcomes. The ecological characteristics of residential landscapes and the human drivers of landscape management have been the focus of disciplinary studies, often at a single scale of analysis. However, an interdisciplinary examination of residential landscapes is needed to understand the feedbacks and tradeoffs of these complex adaptive social-ecological systems as a whole. Our aim is to synthesize the diversity of perspectives, scales of analysis, and findings from the literature in order to 1) contribute to an interdisciplinary understanding of residential landscapes and 2) identify research needs while providing a robust conceptual approach for future studies. We synthesize 256 studies from the literature and develop an interdisciplinary, multi-scalar framework on residential landscape dynamics. Complex human drivers (attitudinal, structural, and institutional factors) at multiple scales influence management practices and the feedbacks with biophysical characteristics of residential landscapes. However, gaps exist in our interdisciplinary understanding of residential landscapes within four key but understudied areas: 1) the link between social drivers and ecological outcomes of management decisions, 2) the ecosystem services provided by these landscapes to residents, 3) the interactions of social drivers and ecological characteristics across scales, and 4) generalizations of patterns and processes across cities. Our systems perspective will help to guide future interdisciplinary collaborations to integrate theories and research methods across geographic locations and spatial scales.

Many ecologists are interested in communicating science to the public and addressing societal concerns about environmental issues. Individual ecologists need to consider whether, when, and how this should be done. We propose that public outreach activities can be beneficial for ecologists at all stages of their career. There are diverse opportunities for such involvement, and these can vary enormously in terms of time and expertise required. Trends within the science of ecology, especially research focused on social-ecological systems, are likely to promote increased interactions with stakeholders and policy makers. To be effective in these interactions, ecologists should consider new approaches to communication and be aware of the potential roles scientists can play in public policy debates. Professional ecologists need to engage with non-scientific audiences; a review of such activities should be included in considerations for promotion, recognition, and awards, while also acknowledging variations in the inclinations and abilities of individual scientists. There are, however, few current standards for how much time ecologists should commit to public outreach, how time allocation might change over a career, or how to evaluate the quality of such activities. We ask ecologists to consider ways to evaluate the quality of interactions with the public and how to reward these efforts appropriately.

Cities need to take swift action to deal with the impacts of extreme climate events. The co-production of positive visions offers the potential to not only imagine but also intervene in guiding change toward more desirable urban futures. While participatory visioning continues to be used as a tool for urban planning, there needs to be a way of comparing and evaluating future visions so that they can inform decision-making. Traditional tools for comparison tend to favor quantitative modeling, which is limited in its ability to capture nuances or normative elements of visions. In this paper, we offer a qualitative method to assess the resilience, equity, and sustainability of future urban visions and demonstrate its use by applying it to 11 visions from Phoenix, AZ. The visions were co-produced at two different governance scales: five visions were created at the village (or borough) scale, and six visions were created at the regional (or metropolitan) scale. Our analysis reveals different emphases in the mechanisms present in the visions to advance resilience, sustainability, and equity. In particular, we note that regional future visions align with a green sustainability agenda, whereas village visions focus on social issues and emphasize equity-driven approaches. The visions have implications for future trajectories, and the priorities that manifest at the two scales speak of the political nature of visioning and the need to explore how these processes may interact in complementary, synergistic, or antagonistic ways.

Transformational change is not always intentional. However, deliberate transformations are imperative to achieve the sustainable visions that future generations deserve. Small, unintentional tweaks will not be enough to overcome persistent and emergent urban challenges. Recent scholarship on sustainability transformations has evolved considerably, but there is no consensus on what qualifies transformational change. We describe variations in current discussions of intentional sustainability transformations in the literature and synthesize strategies from funding institutions’ recent requests for proposals for urban sustainability transformations. Research funding initiatives calling for transformational change are increasingly common and are an important driver of how transformational change is articulated in research-practice in cities. From this synthesis, we present seven criteria for transformational change that provide direction for framing and implementing transformational change initiatives.