Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Aug 15;14(8):e0220750.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220750. eCollection 2019.

An improved method for assessing mismatches between supply and demand in urban regulating ecosystem services: A case study in Tabriz, Iran

Affiliations

An improved method for assessing mismatches between supply and demand in urban regulating ecosystem services: A case study in Tabriz, Iran

Vahid Amini Parsa et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Regulating ecosystem services provided by urban forests are of great importance for the quality of life among city dwellers. To reach a maximum contribution to well-being in cities, the urban regulating ecosystem services (URES) must match with the demands in terms of space and time. If we understand the matches or mismatches between the current urban dwellers' desired quality conditions (demand) and the supply of URES by urban forests (UF) in the cities, this will facilitate integrating the concepts of ecosystem services in urban planning and management, but such an assessment has suffered from major knowledge limitations. Since it is complex and problematic to identify the direct demands for URES and the spatiotemporal patterns therein, improving the demand indicators can help to determine the actual requirements. In this paper, a methodological approach based on indicators is presented and demonstrated for two important URES: air quality improvement and global climate change mitigation provided by urban trees and shrubs. Four air quality standards and greenhouse gas reduction targets were used and compared to supplies of the URES in Tabriz, Iran. Our results show that the mean contribution of the URES supply to air quality standards and greenhouse gas reduction targets is modest. Hence, in Tabriz, there is a strong mismatch between demand and supply. Mismatches at the city scale will have to be reduced by both a reduction in pollutant emissions and an increased provisioning of URES supply through urban greenery. The presented assessment approach and the results for Tabriz make it explicit how different the demands and supplies of the two studied URES are, and we expect similar mismatches in many other cities. Therefore, our approach, relatively simple but still realistic and easy-to-apply, can raise awareness about, and the utility of, the ecosystem services concepts for urban planning and policymaking.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Location of Tabriz municipality, land use classes, and sample points.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Historical trends in annual mean temperature and precipitation in Tabriz (1951–2017)—(Data source: [73]).
Fig 3
Fig 3. Dynamic trends in the annual mean concentration of air pollutants in Tabriz (2004–2104)—(Data source: [80]).
Fig 4
Fig 4. The methodological steps to quantify URES supply through i-Tree Eco model.
Fig 5
Fig 5. Flowchart for identifying and assessing matches and mismatches between the supply and demand of urban regulating ecosystem services (URES).
Fig 6
Fig 6. Average percentage of air quality improvement by urban trees and shrubs at the city scale.
Fig 7
Fig 7. Results for air purification supply and demand (the value of CO in supply diagram is based on thousands) indicators for the case study.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Geijzendorffer IR, Martín-López B, Roche PK. Improving the identification of mismatches in ecosystem services assessments. Ecol Indic. Elsevier Ltd; 2015;52: 320–331. 10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.12.016 - DOI
    1. Schröter M, Barton DN, Remme RP, Hein L. Accounting for capacity and flow of ecosystem services: A conceptual model and a case study for Telemark, Norway. Ecol Indic. Elsevier Ltd; 2014;36: 539–551. 10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.09.018 - DOI
    1. Carpenter SR, Mooney H a, Agard J, Capistrano D, Defries RS, Diaz S, et al. Science for managing ecosystem services: Beyond the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009;106: 1305–1312. Available: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2635788&tool=p...http://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id... 10.1073/pnas.0808772106 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Daily GC, Polasky S, Goldstein J, Kareiva PM, Mooney HA, Pejchar L, et al. Ecosystem services in decision making: Time to deliver. Front Ecol Environ. 2009;7: 21–28. 10.1890/080025 - DOI
    1. Bastian O, Haase D, Grunewald K. Ecosystem properties, potentials and services—The EPPS conceptual framework and an urban application example. Ecol Indic. Elsevier Ltd; 2012;21: 7–16. 10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.03.014 - DOI