Ecosystem services mapping for green infrastructure planning–The case of Tehran

Journal Pre-proof Ecosystem services mapping planning–The case of Tehran

for

green

infrastructure

Reza Ramyar, Saeed Saeedi, Margaret Bryant, Amirhossein Davatgar, Golandam Mortaz Hedjri PII:

S0048-9697(19)35459-2

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135466

Reference:

STOTEN 135466

To appear in:

Science of the Total Environment

Received date:

22 August 2019

Revised date:

19 October 2019

Accepted date:

8 November 2019

Please cite this article as: R. Ramyar, S. Saeedi, M. Bryant, et al., Ecosystem services mapping for green infrastructure planning–The case of Tehran, Science of the Total Environment (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135466

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

© 2018 Published by Elsevier.

Journal Pre-proof

Ecosystem Services Mapping for Green Infrastructure Planning- The Case of Tehran Reza Ramyar*1, Saeed Saeedi2, Margaret Bryant1, Amirhossein Davatgar3, Golandam Mortaz Hedjri1

f

1. SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry 2. Shahid Beheshti University 3. Tabriz Branch Islamic Azad University *. Email: [email protected]. Tell: 3152479865

oo

Abstract:

Jo u

rn

al

Pr

e-

pr

Cities are responsible for the more than seventy percent of carbon-related energy emission. In order to cope with the widespread effects of these emissions, in addition to improving technology and the use of green energy, it is necessary to reduce the volume of emissions with the help of green spaces at the point of origin. Green spaces provide extensive ecosystem services that have a great impact on the quality of life and the livability of urban environments. Due to the expansion of cities, the volume of green spaces has declined and scattered. Reducing these ecological spaces makes their management and planning a critical necessity. This paper does some analysis as the first step in urban green spaces ecological planning to assess the ecosystem services (ES) provided by the green spaces (supply analyses) and social-ecological needs to these spaces (needs analyses). This assessment is used to find the parts with the highest needs and lowest supply providing a reliable basis for the multi-functional planning of green spaces. It is used to analyze the status of services provided in the environment and services needed to respond to the people’s cultural and ecological needs. Keywords: ecosystem services; urban green planning; multi-functionality; green infrastructure; Tehran.

1

Journal Pre-proof

Ecosystem Services Mapping for Green Infrastructure Planning—The Case of Tehran

Abstract: Cities are responsible for more than seventy percent of carbon-related energy emissions. In order to cope

f

with the widespread effects of these emissions—in addition to improving technology and the use of green

oo

energy—it is necessary to reduce the volume of emissions with the help of green spaces at the point of origin. Green spaces provide extensive ecosystem services that improve the quality of life and urban ecosystem

pr

livability. Due to the expansion of urban areas, the volume of ecological resources has declined and these

e-

resources have become more disconnected. The ongoing reduction of these ecological resources makes their management and planning a critical necessity. We need to evaluate the multiple benefits of urban ecosystem

Pr

services for appropriate ecosystem management and integrate those ecological benefits with the social characteristics of neighborhoods. This paper provides some analysis, as the first step, to assess the ecosystem

al

services (ES) provided by the green spaces (supply analyses) and the social-ecological needs in these spaces

rn

(needs analyses). Next, these assessments are used to find the urban areas with the highest social-ecological needs and with the lowest supply of green spaces in order to provide a reliable basis for the multi-functional

Jo u

planning of green spaces. These assessments are also used to analyze the status of services provided in the environment and the services needed to respond to the people’s cultural and ecological needs. Keywords: ecosystem services; urban green planning; multi-functionality; green infrastructure; Tehran.

2

Journal Pre-proof

1. Introduction The world has been affected by great waves of population growth and urban development over the course of history. This population growth has increased along with the increase in urbanization, so that today more than 20 percent of the world’s populations live in cities with more than 100,000 people (www.un.org). Towns have transformed into large cities, and large cities have been replaced by even larger and more metropolitan cities. As an example,

oo

f

25 percent of Europe’s population, 70 percent of the people in the U.S. ((Piorr, 2011), 55) and 75 percent of Iran’s population live in urban situations (Statistical Centre of Iran, 2019).

pr

The spread of urbanization and urbanism have led to profound changes in ecosystems and

e-

their services, and it is expected that these harmful trends will be amplified in the future as

Pr

ecosystems get more fragile. Urban areas, while occupying less than three percent of Earth’s total area, have created severe impacts on environment ecosystem services in both populated

al

and remote areas.

rn

Cities are heterogeneous and composed of diverse social, economic, and ecological

Jo u

spaces; they are systems with mutual dependences between social communities and ecological processes. Cities, as human ecosystems, include the integration of

natural

resources; institutional, social, and ecological processes; and spatial patterns (EEA, 2011). The dynamic heterogeneity of urban systems, derived from interactions between various drivers, and the mutual influences of social, economic, and ecological factors have made it difficult to study urban ecosystems. Limited natural resources along with population growth, make fair distribution of green spaces (Wolch et al., 2014) and ecosystem service delivery (Schröter et al., 2014, Geijzendorffer et al., 2015) an urgent field of study in ecological planning. Urban ecological planning has become more complicated due to the need to analyze urban ecosystems as damaged environments, to cultivate awareness of that damage, to find

3

Journal Pre-proof

solutions to restore readiness to face climate change and future risks, and to develop strategies to mitigate and adapt to these changes. To address these concerns, many attempts have been made to control human activities. In recent years, with the development of the concepts of ecology and ecosystems in sustainable development literature, Green Infrastructure (GI) has become a popular basis for ecological planning, for using land in a sustainable way, and for providing ecosystem services in urban areas (Benedict and

oo

f

McMahon, 2006, Weber et al., 2006, Kwak, 2016, Ramyar and Zarghami, 2017). The widespread use of GI has resulted in the maturation of this planning method (and as a multi-

pr

function strategy) by adopting theories and methods borrowed from other areas.

e-

GI is a multi-functional approach to integrate and improve the interaction between the benefits and services of ecological resources (Davies et al., 2006, EEA, 2011). GI is a

Pr

concept that refers to the connection of ecosystems, their conservation, and the provision of

al

ecosystem services (Li et al., 2017). The benefits that ecological resources provide are defined as ecosystem services. They include water infiltration, air or noise pollution

rn

reduction, carbon sequestration and storage, soil production, food production, wood and

Jo u

fiber production, and many other ecological, economic, and social benefits. The main challenges in urban GI planning are the integration of services in urban plans and managing the fair distribution of ecosystem services (Ramyar, 2019). Infrastructure is related to essential ecological elements of a given landscape in this approach. Ecological resources have the same priority as other infrastructure like roads, sanitation and communication (Benedict and McMahon, 2006). To put ecological infrastructure at the heart of planning, we need to spatially map the ecological supply and demand and spatially study the interaction between the social and ecological components of cities (McPhearson et al., 2013). We need a broader analysis of the distribution of these services in the city and the relationship between the needs (in terms

4

Journal Pre-proof

of geographical conditions, land use, population, and the social characteristics of the ecosystem) and the ecological supply (in term of which ecological resources are available). We need to have a spatial analysis of socio-ecological systems related not only to ecological and natural characteristics but also to the social and geographical conditions of green areas. Ecosystem services (ES) can provide a basis for assessment, targeting and prioritizing measures, and improving biological conditions in ecological theories. Ecosystem services in

oo

f

this view can be a powerful unit of measurement to guide decision-makers as they assess the social and ecological characteristics of a site and integrate ecological decisions with social

pr

considerations.

e-

A variety of tools, such as Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), Landscape Planning and Assessment Tool (MLAT) (Lovell, 2015), Multifunctional Landscape Evaluation Tool

Pr

(Rodríguez-Loinaz et al., 2015), and The Urban Forest Effects (UFORE) Model (Nowak and

al

Crane, 2000) have been developed to assess landscape design and urban planning and delivering ecosystem services; each of them has a distinct purpose. Mostly these tools did

rn

not integrate cultural values in their assessments, which is known as their main weakness

Jo u

(Čuček et al., 2012). Along with developed tools, current research in ecosystem services studies mostly focus on quantification (e.g., (Willemen et al., 2008, Gómez-Baggethun and Barton, 2013)), and valuation (e.g., (Boyd and Banzhaf, 2007, Johnston and Russell, 2011)) of services. Most of them have been done at the regional and national scales, and only a small number have been conducted on the urban scale (Gómez-Baggethun and Barton, 2013, Hubacek et al., 2013). However, planning and management of green spaces in cities can meet regional needs (Kremer et al., 2016). Another problem is the different methods of ecosystem services analyses, which limits their comparability (Grêt-Regamey et al., 2015). Several methods for studying and quantifying ecosystem services have been developed. Martinez-Harms and Balvanera

5

Journal Pre-proof

(Martínez-Harms and Balvanera, 2012) generally recognized five approaches to the evaluation of ecosystem services. In the first approach, findings from past research and experiences are used to assess the current situation. The main reason for using this method is unavailability of information (as in Iran, data is collected and produced from separate and independent institutes, which rarely are available for independent researchers as they rarely share information). In the second approach, various research studies on every ecosystem

f

service are used to define a measuring or valuing method for ecosystem services (Chan et al.,

oo

2006, Egoh et al., 2008, Naidoo et al., 2008). The third method uses experts’ opinions

pr

(Kienast et al., 2009, Grêt-Regamey et al., 2015), the fourth method uses local surveys

e-

(Raudsepp-Hearne et al., 2010), and the fifth method uses regression models (Lavorel et al., 2011) to analyze the relationships between biophysical data for measuring services. Despite

Pr

the current interest in studying ES and the tools that have been developed to aid the

al

evaluation of ES, these tools and research suffer from both the lack of integration in planning and the lack of detailed modeling, hindering their usage.

rn

Studying and mapping urban ecosystems services can provide the basis for making

Jo u

practical, integrated decisions that simultaneously meet the different ecological, social, and economic needs of urban communities. In addition, spatial-social patterns of ecosystem services would highlight potential areas for design or plan interventions. In this paper, to provide a basis for multifunctional and multi-scale planning, a framework for assessing ecosystem services and structure of green infrastructure is developed and applied to the case of Tehran. The paper presents social-ecological analyses of Tehran green areas that have the potential to transition to a multifunction ecological (green) infrastructure that can meet social needs. For this purpose, the various ecosystem services of urban green spaces have been analyzed with ArcGIS. This study offers an empirical example of how mapping the spatial

6

Journal Pre-proof

patterns of urban green areas according to social needs in a context with limited urban ecological information can be integrated into urban planning.

2. Urban social–ecological systems Ecosystem services provided by urban green spaces are very dependent on numerous factors such as location and geographical conditions of the region. In addition, various urban areas have different needs based on social, demographic, and physical conditions that make

oo

f

it necessary to analyze the city's social and environmental conditions. Therefore, the spatial evaluation of ecosystem services is done in relation to the geographical and social

pr

characteristics of resources. At first, according to McPhearson’s multi-stage approach

e-

(McPhearson et al., 2013), data on green infrastructure and their social-economic

Pr

characteristics are gathered to evaluate the characteristics of effective and important ecosystem services. Our analysis focuses on urban green areas within the boundaries of the

al

city (including urban and neighborhood parks, gardens, and urban farms). According to the

rn

findings of our assessment, multiple social and ecological indicators are stacked by scaling.

Jo u

The characterizations are scaled equally and aggregated in a social, economic, and ecological network in terms of the interests, distribution, and needs of a population. For these analyses, Tehran GIS files are used, which were provided in 2002 for the first time and have been updated every ten years since. From the files, the typology of buildings, the percentage of land cover, type of coverage, coverage rates, and water bodies were found. According to ES literature, ecological services of the city are divided into three distinct types and seven categories: A) Supporting services: biodiversity, reducing temperature, flood reduction and water infiltration (to feed aquifers), air pollutant removal, and carbon sequestration and storage. B) Provisioning services: food production.

7

Journal Pre-proof

C) Cultural-social: recreational usage and access to green spaces (Table .1).

Table. 1. Classification of ecosystem services based on the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (derived from (Elmqvist et al., 2013, Ramyar, 2019)).

Type of ecosystem services Ecological functions underlaying the production of ecosystem services. Goods obtained from ecosystems. Benefits obtained from ecosystem processes. Intangible benefits from ecosystems.

● Provisioning ● Regulating ● Cultural

Ecological Services storage

f

● Supporting

Slow the accumulation of atmospheric carbon in urban areas.

●Noise

Reflect, refract, and disperse the sound energy by branches and trees.

oo

●Carbon

Depending on type of vegetation, soil type, and environmental conditions.

pollution mitigation

Depending on types of trees and leaves and their distance from and position in relation to the source of the noise.

Reduce temperature through shading and evapotranspiration.

pr

● Cooling

Depending on trees’ position, their canopy size, the volume of irrigation (Pataki et al., 2011), their position in the streets (Ramyar et al., 2019b), and their density (Xie et al., 2013). ● Air

purification

Improve air quality by removing pollutants from the atmosphere.

● Runoff

infiltration

e-

Depending on plants’ characteristics, their position relative to the source of pollution, and the concentration of pollution (Derkzen et al., 2015).

Reduce runoff and increase underground water supplies through infiltration

● Food

Pr

Depending on tree types, canopy types (including seasonal variations), the slope of the land, and soil types.

production

Provide food security, especially during crises. Depending on types of trees, agricultural lands, and gardens.

● Habitat

provision

Provide habitat for species affected by urban land-use changes.

● Accessibility

and recreation

Provide manifold possibilities for recreation, and enhance human health and wellbeing.

rn

Social-cultural Services

al

Depending on the health of the trees, patch sizes and the connections between patches (Naumann et al., 2011).

Jo u

Broad analyses need to incorporate the different evaluation methods developed for each of the above categories as well as available local data under one framework. However, since the field of ecological research in this city does not have a long history, limited methods for a detailed and comprehensive review of the available ecological services. Therefore, in areas where the calculation of data of the services used was not possible, an indicator representing these services was used. The importance of each type of service on different scales may have different intensities. Most of the services provide benefits to the immediate area and also to the city overall. However, the unbalanced distribution of some of these ecological resources, such as the cooling benefits and cultural services of green areas, concerns decision makers in regards to environmental justice. Thus, reviews of local ES clarify the weak points of urban

8

Journal Pre-proof

management that can be remedied by urban infrastructure resilience planning. A great deal of information about species diversity and the use of green spaces by city residents along with the qualitative interests of these spaces in people’s lives are ignored in this study due to the current lack of accurate and reliable data. Therefore, in this study, the focus is on conditions of providing ecosystem services, rather than focusing on the interests of diverse

Pr

e-

pr

oo

f

services.

Fig .1. Left: Tehran province and the site of the city in the province; Right: Urban land use of Tehran; pink patches are green areas (Tehran municipality, 2018)

rn

3.1. Study area

al

3. Method

Jo u

Tehran metropolis, with an area of approximately 574 square kilometers, has an arid and mountainous climate (Ahadnejad et al., 2016). The topographical situation of the city has resulted in a moderate climate at high altitudes. However, the climate in the lower parts of the city is dry. Around 11 million people live in the city (Tehran municipality, 2018), which is higher during the day (Ramyar et al., 2019a). It is predicted that the city’s population will continue to grow (Arsanjani et al., 2013) (Table .2.). The city has about 72,400,000 m2 of green area of which 42,174,870 m2 is urban forests and parks; these green areas comprise only about 10 percent of the total area of the city (Municipality of Tehran, 2015). Tehran is a large city sited on a sloping mountainside, and it has different microclimates based on differences in altitude (Sodoudi et al., 2014). Tehran has tremendous water and biological resources from the northern mountains (Aminzadeh and Khansefid, 2010). The upper parts 9

Journal Pre-proof

of the city experience substantial rainfall in cold seasons, which creates seasonal streams flowing to the lower plain. In recent decades, however, most of the streams dried up in the hot season and their water volume has become very low (Figure .1).

6,257,713 7,024,295 8,154,691 9,047,827 9,940,964 11,553,771

44,772 53,056 59,095 66,178 72,711 84,508

oo

1986 1996 2006 2011 2016 2026

f

Table. 2. Statistical extrapolation of Tehran population and construction per capita index for 2026 according to past development trends and agent-based modeling (Arsanjani et al., 2013). Year Residents population Occupied area (i.e., built-up) (ha) Construction per capita (person/ha) (person)

139.77 132.39 137.99 136.72 136.72 136.72

pr

The city ecosystem depends on these streams and, of course, in the past they had made the ecosystem much richer than the surrounding deserts (Ghobadian et al., 2008). In the city

e-

masterplan, protecting these streams was highly valued. However, due to mismanagement

Pr

and unawareness among urban decision makers, some of these river valleys have dried up. Some other still-flowing rivers in valleys have been turned into water canals in rapid urban

al

development (Azizi and Fatemi, 2016). Thus, destructive development has had a profound

rn

and tragic influence on the ecological resources of the city. In addition, according to the

Jo u

city’s master plan, it was proposed that a wide green belt interconnect the city from east to west, but in the last two decades, this vision was undercut by short-sighted land development and planning and is now only fragmented green areas, not an interconnected green belt (Madanipour, 2006). This has led to a reduction in ecological diversity and, in addition, most spaces are now used for urban parks; as a result, their ecological richness and biological diversity have been drastically reduced. Dividing lands into small parcels for development has led to dense urban development. Under the detailed urban plan and the municipal regulations in Tehran, in the development of individual parcels, building is allowed only in the northern 60 percent of each plot. Although the remaining 40 percent initially is left open, the city takes over much of this open area in order to widen the streets (Municipality of Tehran, 2015, Zarghami et al., 2019). 10

Journal Pre-proof

Obviously, this limited open space, which was intended to be green space, is mostly used for parking lots and building access. Table .3. Tehran district divisions; their populations, current green areas, expected needs for more green areas and deficiencies of green areas. Current District Expected green areas Green space per District green areas population (m2) according to the capita (m2) 2 (m ) in 2016 comprehensive plan 4.7 7.7 8.1 2.5 22.3 4.9 0.6 1.1 13 0.7 2.4 2.3 1 1.4 9.6 0.7 1.7 21.3 4.2 0.5 1.6 30.4 Mean per capita=6.4

f

pr

oo

5016000 8038800 3841200 10824000 8962800 3128400 4092000 5002800 2191200 4171200 3630000 3273600 3247200 6375600 8487600 385200 3379200 4184400 3273600 4435200 2112000 1425600 99477600

e-

418000 669900 320100 902000 746900 260700 341000 416900 182600 347600 302500 272800 270600 531300 707300 321000 281600 348700 272800 369600 176000 118800 8578700

Pr

3799479 6790296 3858071 7729876 7576449 2756013 809517 1469337 733747 548095 1401316 1285239 1226202 2099761 6185560 3680624 902277 6983778 4225556 4871406 1685980 1760286 72378865

-4598000 -7368900 -3521100 -9922000 -8215900 -2867700 -3751000 -4585900 -2008600 -3823600 -3327500 -3000800 -2976600 -5844300 -7780300 -64200 -3097600 -3835700 -3000800 -4065600 -1936000 -1306800 -90898900

al

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Total

Deficiency of green areas (m2)

rn

The need for green areas in the comprehensive plan for Tehran is defined according to the population. Other factors are ignored and green areas are defined only as areas that are not

Jo u

built environments. There is not enough consideration given to the quality or ecological value of a green area. No specific characteristics are defined and no connections between the green patches in the city are planned for future ecological remediation of the city. Table 2 presents the 22 districts of the city and their population, the needed defined green area according to the comprehensive plan, and the current green area (Zayyari et al., 2012). It presents how urban landscape planning is simplified to only green areas. Moreover, no regulation or program for species’ selection and planting in the city is provided; mostly nonnative species with high water needs are used for planting, which puts enormous pressure on the city’s limited water resources. Moreover, ecological resource distribution in the city is not fair according to the population of districts (Figure. 2).

11

Journal Pre-proof

Fig .2. Left: Tehran cityscape; Right: Tehran urban green spaces in different municipal districts (Tehran municipality, 2018)

oo

f

In the case of Tehran, few and scattered studies have been done on green space ecological network analysis. For example, Aminzadeh & Khansefid (Aminzadeh and Khansefid, 2010)

pr

have done a study on Tehran green infrastructure and the ecological network in which green

e-

corridors and patches are mentioned simply as urban networks of green spaces; their

Pr

ecological services and the ability to serve the city are ignored. Also, Chamanara and Kazemeini (Chamanara and Kazemeini, 2016) provided a plan based on river valleys and

al

green belts, defined in the master plan of green space planning, but green structures based on

rn

the ecological services are not considered. Tehran, with a population of over ten million, is

Jo u

the largest metropolis and the capital of Iran, which, due to uneven development, is faced with severe environmental problems, including extreme urban heat islands. The climate trend data show that Tehran is suffering from temperature rise (Diagram .1) and it is anticipated the temperature will continue to rise in the future due to climate change and overdevelopment (Mohammadi, 2007). Water scarcity also threatens the city (Ghasemi et al., 2018).

Diagram .1. Left: Number of days that the maximum temperature is below zero for a period over 52 years from 1951to 2003. Right: Number of days that the maximum temperature is above 25 ˚C for a period over 52 years from 1951 to 2003 (Mohammadi, 2007).

12

Journal Pre-proof

Urban heat, global temperature rise, drought, and reduction in precipitation over the last few years has caused water shortages in the city of Tehran. Predictions show the annual precipitation will decline (Ravanshadnia et al., 2015) which deepens the concern over the city’s water management. A study shows that only a 2 degree increase in the city’s average temperature will result in tremendous changes in water consumption—an increase from 1,000 MCMPY to 1718 MCMPY (Saemian, 2013, Yekom Consulting Engineers Co, 2010).

oo

f

Alongside the challenge of these water supply reductions, population growth and temperature rise will increase water consumption. In recent studies, it has been found that,

pr

due to low wind speed, planting trees is the main solution for reducing urban heat islands

e-

(Ramyar et al., 2019c). Thus, the city desperately needs development and multifunction

Jo u

rn

al

Pr

management of green infrastructure to gain more benefits from ES.

Diagram 2. Left: Tehran annual water consumption by 2026 (Yekom Consulting Engineers Co, 2010). Right: Prediction of the amount of the annual precipitation in Tehran by 2040 (Ravanshadnia et al., 2015).

3.2. Ecological services production of urban green spaces 3.2.1. Carbon storage Plants and soil are a source of carbon storage in the environment and their absorption level is related to the particular characteristics of soil and plant types. In Tehran, Varamesh performed research based on the amount of carbon stored in the city's green spaces (Varamesh et al., 2015). Based on his research, wasteland and bare land in Tehran store around 1.08 KgC/year/m2 carbon, and various trees in the urban park store 0.75 KgC/year /m2 carbon. The value of carbon sequestration is dependent on several factors, but due to the 13

Journal Pre-proof

unavailability of information, it is not possible to estimate these services accurately; therefore, we must rely on this estimation. In addition, since we do not have access to the amount of carbon sequestration in grasslands and seasonal plants, these landscape features are ignored in the study. In this analysis, the area of coarse vegetation has been multiplied by the average sequestration rate of Tehran and canopy size calculated by NDVI (Normalized Difference Vegetation Index) multiplied by the sequestration rate of trees. Finally, they are

oo

f

added together and classified from one to ten (Figure. 3). 3.2.2. Noise pollution mitigation

pr

Trees reduce sound waves by absorption, dispersal, and destruction. Most research on

e-

ambient noise in urban environments has surveyed traffic noise, which is the most annoying for urban residents. According to the research of Fang & Ling (Fang and Ling, 2003), 50-

Pr

meter buffers are needed to influence the conditions of street noise. Of course, a row of

al

green cover including trees can have a positive effect. The closer the green areas are to the roads, the more effectively they mitigate noise pollution. For this analysis, distance from the

rn

roads and vegetation intensity are used to classify the capacity of urban green areas to reduce

Jo u

noise pollution (Figure. 3). 3.2.3. Cooling

About 80 percent of trees’ cooling effects are caused by their shade (Shashua-Bar and Hoffman, 2000). Calculating this factor of ecological services is influenced by various factors such as trees’ type, height, canopy, density, and location in the urban structure. A recent study has shown that the mass of green coverage on different sides of the street has a variety of effects on decreasing temperature (Ramyar et al., 2019b). In the dry climate of Tehran, shade has a positive effect—significantly reducing air temperature. In a study of Tehran (Bokaie et al., 2016), it is revealed that the cooling effects of vegetation are different in different parts of the city. Bokaie et al. (2016) found that Tehran urban parks’

14

Journal Pre-proof

temperature, on average, is five degrees lower than the surrounding environment (Bokaie et al., 2016). The amount depends on the canopy size, wind, environmental conditions, and climate of the area. Shade has direct local impact, but evapotranspiration has regional impact (Armson et al., 2012). Small scattered vegetation has a local cooling effect; however, due to the scale of this study, their effects are ignored. In this study, canopy density (estimated by NDVI), and the size of the green area, are used for classification of the cooling effect of

oo

f

urban ecological structures. 3.2.4. Air purification

pr

No precise and reliable data is available on urban green space’s effect in terms of air

e-

pollution in Tehran. Therefore, we measure this indicator based only on the area and density

Pr

of green spaces. This service does not only provide benefits to the city at the urban scale, but also has a significant local effect. Yet, sometimes, at a small scale, the trees may create a

al

barrier causing pollution to remain in some parts of the city (Vos et al., 2013). PM10 is the

rn

main pollution type in cities that the leaves could absorb, thus tall trees with wide canopies

Jo u

are more efficient in the creation of this service. Wind, land slope and type of trees and the length of time in leaf are among the factors ignored in this analysis since their measurement at this scale is next to impossible. In this analysis, green areas are classified by the canopy coverage of trees as a factor of pollution reduction influenced by distance from streets (Figure. 3). 3.2.5. Runoff infiltration and mitigation Green spaces, bare land, and trees have great ability to improve the infiltration of water runoff. Historically, Tehran has rarely faced flooding. In fact, the main problem for the city is water scarcity. Since the city is severely at risk of water shortages, wherever possible, surface water should infiltrate the soil in order to feed aquifers. Unfortunately, the city sewage system is old and includes channels for collecting water, which direct sewage into

15

Journal Pre-proof

the city's downtown. This also causes the contamination of waters along the way. Increased infiltration due to improved ecological resources could serve each part of the city locally and reduce or eliminate the need to collect runoff water in the sewage system. For the case study of this research, features and hydrological groups of soil and land slopes are two factors that, along with the area of green spaces, are defined by permeability levels of green areas. The city has a long history and some of the sites had been landfills,

oo

f

which have contaminated soil, but we do not have knowledge about their situation. Therefore, this important issue has not been considered in this analysis. Since hard surfaces

pr

in the city are mainly constructed in such a way that they are impermeable, open areas with

e-

hard surfaces are removed in our analysis. Urban green spaces can reduce the flow of runoff by increasing the permeability of soil. Tree types, seasons and their canopy are very effective

Pr

in water infiltration, but unfortunately are not part of this analysis due to lack of accurate

al

data. This analysis used the Curve Number method, based on combinations of land cover and hydrological soil group, to calculate the runoff mitigation and infiltration. We assigned SCS

rn

CN to different combinations of cover/soil hydrologic features, from which surface flow and

Jo u

amount of water preservation could be calculated. The Curve Number developed in USDATR-55 (USDA, 1986) that is widely used to predict runoff from rainfall (Figure. 3). 3.2.6. Habitat resource provision for biodiversity Biodiversity in green infrastructure planning is often analyzed according to the interconnectivity between patches and the environmental characteristics that support biodiversity. Three indicators of habitat, including the habitability of environment, connectivity, and form were used to assess the quality of habitats for biodiversity. Urban green spaces, due to plantings and land, are habitable land; however, in these small ecosystems, only a limited number of species can be supported, and this is related to environmental characteristics, such as shape, size, water availability, and land topography.

16

Journal Pre-proof

Most urban ecological resources are influenced by urban pollution and human activities, which limits their ability to support biodiversity. Therefore, the viability of landscape in terms of size, coverage and accessibility of water should be taken into consideration in relation to biodiversity. Therefore, in this study, to evaluate the viability of habitats, the total planting area, interconnectedness, and shape are considered. Green roofs, as they are less accessible to humans, are a good habitat, especially for birds.

oo

f

Unfortunately, in Tehran the dry climate, as well as the need to install air-conditioning equipment on the roof, makes using green roofs on residential apartments very rare. Also,

pr

since the soil of these roofs erodes very quickly due to wind and dry weather, green roofs are

e-

rarely used. Because no recorded information about green roofs is available, we do not address them in this research. Moreover, because of excessive use of pesticides in gardens in

Pr

Tehran, gardens have also been removed from this evaluation of biodiversity.

al

To compute connections, “Near” tools in GIS were used, and the size of the buffer zone for patches was established at 500 meters. Patches that overlap with other patches in their

rn

buffer zone are defined as connected patches. The closer and more connected the green

Jo u

patches are, the better they can support biodiversity. The land shape based on compaction degree was defined; the ArcGIS tool, Shape Metrics Tool (Parent et al., 2011), was used for this analysis, which showed it was likely to be a circular shape. A circle is defined as the ideal shape (Angel et al., 2010). Another factor that has an effect on biodiversity is "nativeness" (Smith et al., 1998); because accurate information is not available on the type of vegetation, this factor has not been used in the analysis. For analysis we need an overall weight or score for every factor, and since the final output is relative, all four factors were given equal weight (Figure. 3).

17

Journal Pre-proof

Noise pollution mitigation

e-

pr

oo

f

Carbon storage

Air purification

Jo u

rn

al

Pr

Cooling

Runoff infiltration and mitigation Habitat Resource Provision for Biodiversity Fig .3. Spatial map of indicators of social need for ecological services

3.3. Social-cultural services To study socio-ecological aspects of the city, at first step four indices were selected to simplify social factors defining the needs to ecological resources: density (showing the number of people who potentially benefit from ecological resources), access to green spaces, residents’ income, and land value. The availability of green spaces is one of the most important factors in using them. It is possible that an urban neighborhood is close to a park, but the existence of a highway between the neighborhood and green space make access to it

18

Journal Pre-proof

almost impossible. Thus, the analysis of access to green spaces can be indicative of the spatial distribution of green spaces. To calculate the need for green space, the standard proposed by the Greater London Authority (Greater London Authority, 2004) has been used in this study Typically, pedestrians tend to use green spaces in a 300 to 1000 meters walking distance, and neighborhood parks should be at least 0.4 hectares (Talen, 2010). Network analysis is done according to the urban roads as access routes. Following this analysis, it was

oo

f

determined which parts of the city have appropriate access to green spaces and which parts of the city do not have access (Figure. 4).

pr

For the next step of our analysis, we selected socioeconomic indicators that reflect the

e-

need for the ES, and then we analyze the neighborhood the current supply of ES alongside their needs for the ES. The classification of the need for each ecosystem service is defined in

Pr

terms of the specific influential factors (related to socioeconomic and geographical

al

conditions of the neighborhoods), and is ultimately ranked from one to ten—one shows the

Jo u

rn

greatest need for green spaces and ten shows the lowest need for green spaces:

Income

Density

19

Journal Pre-proof

Access

Value

Fig. 4. Social indicators used in needs analysis of ecological services

oo

f

1) Need for carbon storage and sequestration: it is distinct from air purification. Classifying the need for carbon storage is defined according the neighborhood population

pr

and the ability of neighborhoods to store carbon—based on soil type and rainfall. In fact, the

Pr

better provide this ecosystem service.

e-

areas with better soil, more rainfall and greater population should be supported in order to

2) Need for air purification: traffic, demographics, and land use are the main indicators of

al

pollutants. Hence, the need for air purification is defined based on the amount of traffic,

rn

land use, and population. In addition, land uses are classified based on their creation of

Jo u

pollution. In fact, this means that areas with more traffic and industry need more green spaces to reduce pollution, and they have the highest need (Figure. 5). Another factor worth considering is how the topography of the city also influences the accumulation of pollution. In the foothills of Tehran, due to air stagnation in the valleys and low wind velocity, the intensity of air pollution is greater. However, there is not any available data about the effect of topography on air pollution stagnation, so we did not consider it in our analysis. 3) Need to reduce noise pollution: traffic and land use are the main indicators of noise pollution in the city. These two factors are used to define the needs for this service in the neighborhoods. 4) Need for rainfall infiltration: the need for this service is defined according to precipitation amounts. Moreover, infiltration rates are affected by soil type and the slope of 20

Journal Pre-proof

the land. Usually the land around streams has a better infiltration rate, and so these areas are given greater weight in the evaluation of their ability to provide this service. Therefore, areas with less steep topography, more annual rainfall, and more permeable soil are given the most priority for rainfall infiltration. 5) Need for biodiversity: this service must be concentrated on conserving native species or providing an environment to attract them. Therefore, the need for biodiversity should be

oo

f

measured in terms of spatial requirements and their location. This requires extensive local research. With a lack of local, specific studies, we instead use ecological green network

pr

analysis in our biodiversity investigation. The first step is recognizing patches and

e-

investigating their possible connections. By surveying recent comprehensive urban plans for Tehran (including planning for urban green spaces that lie in green belts) and comparing the

Pr

actual current situation with the hoped-for creation of green spaces in comprehensive plans,

al

the needs of this service were measured.

6) Need for cooling: traffic, population density (as a heat-producing factor), land use, and

rn

building density are the main factors that affect urban temperature rise and are thus used as

Jo u

the indicators to define the need for this service. In addition, rise in altitude reduces urban air temperature, which may reduce the need for this service. Urban center air temperature would increase due to a reduction in wind turbulence. Therefore, need for this service is classified based on population, traffic, urban density, and altitude.

4. Results and Discussion 4.1. Matrix of social need and ecological value Tehran defines the need for green space on a per capita basis. According to the comprehensive plan of the city, the need for green area is defined as 16 m2 per person. The corresponding need in developed countries is between 20 to 25 m2 (Veal, 2013). The city now has 6.5 m2 green area for every person. According to the current situation, some 21

Journal Pre-proof

districts, such as 7, 10, 11, and 17, have very low green areas per capita, yet some districts, such as 21 and 22, have large green spaces. 6.5 m2 green area for every person is inadequate for a high-density urban area with high levels of air pollution. Simplifying the analysis of required green space and the amount of available green space for the city's population has produced disastrous results, most notably the uneven distribution of green space in the city and the lack of attention to the need for different ecosystem services in urban spatial

oo

f

planning. The oversimplification resulting from the per capita analysis does not provide practical guidance for planning for sustainable development

pr

Analyzing green areas according to the multiple ecological services they provide would

e-

help the city to provide and plan for green areas according to the social needs for those services. For instance, to support biodiversity, the shape, area and connection of green areas

Pr

are critical. In this paper, firstly, by evaluating the ecological services provided in Tehran,

al

an assessment of the relative amount of services provided in green spaces of different urban

rn

areas is provided in GIS maps (Fig. 3.). These maps show the relative amount of ecosystem services provided in different districts, which facilitates their comparison and evaluation.

Jo u

One of the major problems of the city is the uneven distribution of urban green spaces. To increase urban green areas, the municipality has used bare areas around the city for urban forests, for example, in areas 21 and 22 under the urban forest extension program, bare land has been planted a limited number of plant species. Furthermore, plots of fast-growing evergreen species (which do not support biodiversity very well) are given priority because they provide the appearance of successful short-term results, but not because of the ecosystem services they provide according to longer-term social needs. In some heavily-populated districts, the distribution of green spaces is unbalanced: the green spaces are very small, and, moreover, are not very well planned according to current and future socioecological needs. Therefore, in this analysis, different districts were studied

22

Journal Pre-proof

separately in order to compare the status of the districts in relation to every ecosystem service. For this purpose, GIS data output is used to find the percentage of services provided in each district. For this purpose, we standardize the outputs by dividing the score of each district in services by the area of the district and converting those scores into percentages of the total area of the district. According to this table, it is determined how much each district provides relative to its area. Separating services and comparing them separately clearly

oo

f

shows differences between services provided in the districts (Table .4. & Diagram. 3.). For example, district 6 provides fewer ecosystem services than other districts, but in

pr

regards to rainfall infiltration service, it has the same value as other districts. Districts 1 and

e-

2 have a better supply of ecosystem services than other parts of the city. Districts 10 and 11 provide fewer cooling benefits due to the small size of the parks, and Districts 19, 15 and 18

Pr

have very low biodiversity services, which appear to be due to the shape, size, and location

al

of green spaces and/or lack of water resources such as seasonal rivers. District 8 green area

rn

has less impact on pollution, probably because of the distance between the ecological resources and the sources of pollution.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Jo u

Table 4. The ratio of ecosystem services scores to the total area of each of district. Total Carbon Noise pollution Air Runoff Districts Cooling Area (m2) Storage mitigation Purification Infiltration 9860000 6780000 8350000 17200000 3120000 7210000 1540000 7220000 410000 310000 420000 990000 600000 740000 200000 1480000 1750000 420000 4950000 2160000 990000 2270000

0.047 0.047 0.036 0.035 0.046 0.033 0.039 0.022 0.031 0.040 0.038 0.044 0.036 0.038 0.040 0.038 0.040 0.028 0.033 0.034 0.034 0.031

0.046 0.055 0.041 0.046 0.047 0.040 0.030 0.020 0.027 0.030 0.024 0.023 0.019 0.023 0.022 0.021 0.022 0.014 0.018 0.017 0.017 0.015

0.041 0.035 0.030 0.042 0.035 0.033 0.029 0.019 0.015 0.010 0.016 0.030 0.032 0.028 0.015 0.020 0.025 0.017 0.029 0.025 0.019 0.018

23

0.057 0.062 0.051 0.049 0.061 0.039 0.057 0.039 0.050 0.058 0.057 0.061 0.053 0.053 0.058 0.056 0.056 0.047 0.049 0.052 0.053 0.049

0.081 0.065 0.080 0.080 0.070 0.076 0.075 0.078 0.066 0.069 0.065 0.075 0.073 0.068 0.064 0.077 0.084 0.064 0.084 0.078 0.081 0.077

Habitat resource provision 0.028 0.028 0.020 0.015 0.020 0.035 0.017 0.044 0.025 0.023 0.020 0.015 0.013 0.024 0.012 0.015 0.013 0.010 0.013 0.018 0.012 0.020

oo

f

Journal Pre-proof

Diagram. 3. Radar diagram of the ratio of ecosystem services scores to the total area of each district. (Numbers 1-22 represent the 22 districts.)

pr

Recognizing ecological supply, and defining and evaluating social needs for these

e-

ecological services is an introduction to the final analysis of this paper. The needs and

Pr

supply are generally defined on the city scale according to assumptions of this research. Eventually, the supply of each ecological service was classified into 10 categories from the

al

lowest to the highest. This categorization provides a very good basis for comparison, as well

rn

as for planning according to the needs and supply simultaneously. Based on the provided

Jo u

data, the regions with less ecological supply and greater need (according to socioeconomic situation) could easily recognize and integrate ecological planning with the social conditions in their urban neighborhoods. For this purpose, four sets of pairs were defined in combination with the supply and demand map, with two possibilities for both: less and more. The supply-demand map not only provides a priority map for planning, but also leads planners to make the proper decision for each district according to their local and regional needs (Figure .5). For instance, in a district under threat of urban temperature rise or pollution, planners could introduce trees with the ability to absorb more pollution that also produce more shade.

24

Journal Pre-proof

Noise pollution mitigation

e-

pr

oo

f

Carbon storage

Air purification

Jo u

rn

al

Pr

Cooling

Runoff infiltration and mitigation Habitat Resource Provision for Biodiversity Fig .5. Spatial map of indicators of social need for ecological services (H-L means high needs and low supply, L-H means low needs and high supply, L-L means both need and supply is low and H-H means both supply and need is high).

In these maps (Figure .5), H-L presents the parts with high needs and low supply, which must be considered as the first priority in providing ecosystem services or investing in urban landscape planning. In the maps, these areas are shown in violet (Figure .5). L-L means the areas have low needs and low supply, which is defined as the second priority in providing the services. H-H means the parts have high needs and high supply, and they are the next priority in planning. L-H means the parts have low needs and high supply; these areas are in the last priority in providing ecological resources and ecological services. We must consider 25

Journal Pre-proof

every violet color on the map; even small ones show high need in the area. The south and the center of the city is densely populated area, therefore the H-L parts in these areas must have more priority in providing ecosystem services than other parts (Figure .6). The recently developed west districts of the city with enough ecological resources have fewer violet

e-

pr

oo

f

regions and have less priority in planning to provide ecological resources.

Fig .6. Population density of the city (Tehran municipality, 2018)

Fig .7. The topography and prevailing wind of the city

Pr

Due to high traffic volume and the industrial land-use in southern and central parts of

al

Tehran, the need for air purification is high; however, current green areas are not enough to

rn

address these needs. In northern parts of the city, there is a high density of violet patches, showing low supply and high need for air purification. Commercial land use of these parts

Jo u

has increased traffic volume there, which increases the need for more support for air purification. Eastern districts are located in a valley, which causes low wind velocity (Figure .7). Eastern parts, because of the topography of the city and prevailing wind direction (from west to east), need more support for cooling. Central parts of the city with narrow and crowded streets also need more green areas for cooling. The parts with highest need and lowest supply for noise pollution removal are scattered throughout the city. It is also similar in terms of carbon storage, with only a minor difference. Because there is more precipitation in northern parts of the city, there is more potential to provide carbon storage in these areas, so the need for this service is greater in northern parts than in other parts of the city.

26

Journal Pre-proof

River valleys have the best potential to support biodiversity. Therefore, buffers from river valleys are defined as the areas with the most potential to provide habitat resources and increase biodiversity. These areas need more consideration in order to provide for biodiversity. Western parts of the city are suitable areas to support biodiversity due to their large size and the relative proximity of green areas. Northern parts of the city have cooler weather with more precipitation than southern parts. These parts need more support for

oo

f

runoff infiltration, especially as the slope is high in the northern parts of the city. It is better to handle stormwater at its source rather than after it has entered a sewer system. Tehran is a

pr

mountainous city with a steep northern slope, and runoff happens readily there. It is better

e-

for water to infiltrate where precipitation happens and not allow it to convert to flow downslope. Therefore, the city needs more ecological resources to increase the infiltration of

Jo u

rn

al

Pr

rainwater in the northern part of the city.

Fig .8. Social–ecological matrix combining the need for ecological services and supply of green spaces in Tehran (H-L means high need and low supply, L-H means low need and high supply, L-L means both need and supply are low and H-H means both supply and need are high).

27

Journal Pre-proof

4.2.

Identifying districts with high need and low supply

The difficulty of integrating various ecological services was a huge obstacle in mapping them. Nevertheless, the method of recognizing supply and demand is one of the most practical methods for identifying relative need and supply in city-scale decision making. Combining different supply-demand maps for all the separate ecosystem services into one unique summary map (Figure. 8) results in a suitable guide to identify planning priorities. In

oo

f

the following map, H-H represents high need and high supply and H-L represents high need and low supply. As shown in the picture, the blue parts have high demand with low supply.

pr

Districts 2 and 5 in the west side of the city and districts 14 and 16 in the southeast region of

e-

the city have more blue neighborhoods. These districts are recently populated. The western

Pr

regions of Tehran (district 21 and 22), recently developed, have less need and are better

al

places to live; they have a lower need for ecological services.

Jo u

rn

Table. 5. Need-Supply analysis values for different districts. Need-Supply analysis values for different districts NeedSupply 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0.710 1.52 0.086 1.836 1.881 4.429 1.11 4.217 0.171 H-H 2.100 2.240 2.180 2.22 2.067 1.205 2.662 1.428 0.171 H-L 2.000 1.83 2.309 1.803 1.718 0.366 1.857 0.314 3.293 L-H 1.180 0.39 1.422 0.120 0.327 0.012 0.37 0.029 2.341 L-L 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 0.040 0.000 4.014 0.000 0.000 2.851 0.000 0.004 0.056 H-H 2.747 0.017 1.486 0.300 0.034 1.623 0.190 0.014 3.292 H-L 1.808 2.300 0.486 0.400 0.385 0.549 0.714 2.257 1.773 L-H 1.404 3.683 0.014 5.000 2.581 0.000 2.095 3.725 0.903 L-L

10 0.000 0.000 1.839 2.161 21 0.000 0.02 2.475 3.515

11 0.119 3.119 2.095 0.643 22 0.035 1.731 3.026 1.154

Table 5 is based on the relative values defined in the GIS evaluation output. The ratios indicate the proportion of need for ES to the supply of ES in different districts. The higher value in a division (H-H, H-L, L-H, or L-L) indicates the presence of a correspondingly greater area with that particular division in the district. For example, the high value in H-H indicates that the high areas in this districts have high need and high supply. Outputs indicate that district 22 has more need of support for pollution reduction. Although the area has a lot of green space, it is a region with many factories and high traffic, and the current

28

Journal Pre-proof

green area cannot support the high need of the area. The location of the green area is very important in supporting this service. Planting pollution-absorbing species in green areas adjacent to highways and factories will provide more ES to meet this need. Districts 10 and 15 have less need for this service, and districts 4, 6, 8 and 16 are at the next-lowest level of need after districts 10 and 15 (Table 5. & Diagram 4.). Districts 9, 11 and 22 have the highest potential for storing carbon, indicating high levels

oo

f

of emissions as well as favorable environmental properties for carbon sequestration. Districts 4, 6, and 14 are the areas where there is less potential and need for this service. In

pr

districts 13, 21 and 22, there is more potential for habitat provision. This potential is due to

e-

the shapes and sizes of green patches, the closer distances between them, and the availability of bio-resources, such as rivers, that have increased the potential to enhance biodiversity in

Pr

these areas. Districts 14, 15, 16, and 17 also show the least need for these services. In most

al

of these areas, green development conditions are limited and there are no viable ecological resources such as rivers. Districts 2 and 3, followed by districts 9, 21 and 22, need more

rn

buffer zones around the sources of noise pollution. Districts 2 and 3 are the administrative

Jo u

hub of the city and have lots of highways and many busy streets. Districts 9, 21, and 22 are the parts of the city with intercity highways and factories, so these districts have a high need for green buffers for noise reduction. The current supply and conditions of the green spaces do not meet the needs for this service, so these districts are in urgent need of ecological resources to reduce noise pollution (Table 5. & Diagram 4.).

29

oo

f

Journal Pre-proof

pr

Diagram .4. Combination of social need and ecological supply in the 22 districts of the city. The gray line shows that districts 11 and 20 and almost 7 are the three districts which have the highest need and lowest supply of ecosystem services. Districts 9 and 22 have the highest supply and lowest need for ecological services.

e-

To reduce the volume of runoff, districts 1 and 4 need more green space for stormwater

Pr

infiltration. This service can also be provided with the help of urban sustainable drainage systems. For example, district 1, where has relatively high green space and acceptable per

al

capita green spaces, could use urban sustainable drainage systems to reduce the volume of

rn

runoff, rather than allocating too much funding for land acquisition and greening. Regions 8,

Jo u

14 and 17 have less need for this service due to their geographical location, rainfall amount and available green space conditions.

5. Conclusion

Analysis tools like ArcGIS have made planners and decision-makers more powerful and capable in their analyses to make more accurate decisions. In recent years, many efforts have been made in green infrastructure planning to manage and plan green spaces in urban environments. Most of these efforts have taken place in developed countries where urban ecological studies have a longer history that has provided rich data resources and planning culture. But in developing countries such as Iran, urban ecological planning is a new field of study, and is not so rich due to a lack of financial resources to provide a geographic and

30

Journal Pre-proof

urban database. With these weak data resources and a young scientific background, the issue of ecological planning for green infrastructure has not been discussed. However, due to the excessive extraction of resources and severe environmental degradation in these countries, there is a great need to develop programs for multi-functional ecological management. This article, by posing these deficiencies, addresses the issue of ecological planning for Tehran—a city that is severely affected by air pollution and population density, that has a

f

high rate of population growth, and is severely affected by climate change (drought and

oo

water shortages). Because of fast-growing development, most of Tehran’s ecological

pr

resources have either destroyed or degraded. There are limited ecological data and,

e-

moreover, political issues can make access to information difficult. Despite these limitations, with the help of recent analytical technology and research methods, this paper

Pr

provides a city-scale analysis that identifies areas that need more support in terms of

al

establishing optimal planning priorities for ecosystem services in Tehran. The paper also calculates the demands for services according to social and demographic conditions. It uses

rn

the classified map to find the parts with high demand and low supply, presenting priorities

Jo u

in ecological mapping. What is achieved not only provides a priority map for decisionmaking but also helps planners to find and analyze the distribution of ecological services around the city in order to better achieve environmental justice. According to the results of this analysis, it can be observed that there are differences in existing social needs and ecological supplies among the 22 urban districts of Tehran. For example, the highest needs for green infrastructure can be observed in districts 2 and 15 in the central and southeastern areas of Tehran City. Our results have demonstrated that the recently developed districts 2 and 5 demand the development of green areas to provide ES. There are also urgent social needs for green areas in districts 10 and 11 in the downtown area of the city, Bazaar Bozorg. Such demand can also be seen in district 15 in the

31

Journal Pre-proof

southeastern area of the city, Khavaran, which is mainly occupied by immigrants and poor families. Fortunately, in the central areas of district 3 around Modares Highway, the supply of ES is higher than the amount required by the people. The city must plan green infrastructure development according to the different needs of each district and the abilities of particular green areas to meet specific needs. The existing per capita calculation for designating appropriate green spaces is not only inadequate, but is

oo

f

unsustainable because the quantity, rather than the qualities, of green space is used to determine infrastructure priorities. The supply and demand maps provide a more reliable

pr

basis for city-scale analyses to determine the districts with the most urgent needs for ES.

e-

Acknowledgement

The authors are thankful to Dr. Nino Mohammad Ali Nezam Mahalleh for his help and

rn

6. References

al

Pr

feedback and to Jennifer Hok for his help in improving the language of the paper.

Jo u

AHADNEJAD, V., HIRT, A. M. & ALIZADEH, H. 2016. Geological constraints on sustainable urban growth and management of the metropolis of Tehran, Iran. Geological Society of America Special Papers, 520, 273-286. AMINZADEH, B. & KHANSEFID, M. 2010. A case study of urban ecological networks and a sustainable city: Tehran’s metropolitan area. Urban ecosystems, 13, 23-36. ANGEL, S., PARENT, J. & CIVCO, D. L. 2010. Ten compactness properties of circles: measuring shape in geography. The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe canadien, 54, 441-461. ARMSON, D., STRINGER, P. & ENNOS, A. 2012. The effect of tree shade and grass on surface and globe temperatures in an urban area. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 11, 245-255. ARSANJANI, J. J., HELBICH, M. & DE NORONHA VAZ, E. 2013. Spatiotemporal simulation of urban growth patterns using agent-based modeling: The case of Tehran. Cities, 32, 33-42. AZIZI, Z. & FATEMI, M. 2016. Tehran: A Call for Spatial Justice. Urban Change in Iran. Springer.

32

Journal Pre-proof

BENEDICT, M. A. & MCMAHON, E. T. 2006. Green infrastructure. Island, Washington, DC. BOKAIE, M., ZARKESH, M. K., ARASTEH, P. D. & HOSSEINI, A. 2016. Assessment of urban heat island based on the relationship between land surface temperature and land use/land cover in Tehran. Sustainable Cities and Society, 23, 94-104. BOYD, J. & BANZHAF, S. 2007. What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecological economics, 63, 616-626. CHAMANARA, S. & KAZEMEINI, A. 2016. Efficient multiscale approach for the integration of

Urban Sustainable Development, 8, 174-190.

oo

f

continuous multi-functional green infrastructure in Tehran city, Iran. International Journal of

pr

CHAN, K. M., SHAW, M. R., CAMERON, D. R., UNDERWOOD, E. C. & DAILY, G. C. 2006.

e-

Conservation planning for ecosystem services. PLoS biology, 4, e379. ČUČEK, L., KLEMEŠ, J. J. & KRAVANJA, Z. 2012. A review of footprint analysis tools for

Pr

monitoring impacts on sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 34, 9-20. DAVIES, C., MACFARLANE, R., MCGLOIN, C. & ROE, M. 2006. Green infrastructure planning

al

guide. Project: Final Report.

rn

DERKZEN, M. L., TEEFFELEN, A. J. & VERBURG, P. H. 2015. Quantifying urban ecosystem

Jo u

services based on high‐resolution data of urban green space: an assessment for Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Journal of Applied Ecology, 52, 1020-1032. EEA 2011. Green infrastructure and territorial cohesion: The concept of green infrastructure and its integration in to policies using monitoring systems. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union., Technical report. EGOH, B., REYERS, B., ROUGET, M., RICHARDSON, D. M., LE MAITRE, D. C. & VAN JAARSVELD, A. S. 2008. Mapping ecosystem services for planning and management. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 127, 135-140. ELMQVIST, T., FRAGKIAS, M., GOODNESS, J., GÜNERALP, B., MARCOTULLIO, P. J., MCDONALD, R. I., PARNELL, S., SCHEWENIUS, M., SENDSTAD, M. & SETO, K. C.

33

Journal Pre-proof

2013. Urbanization, biodiversity and ecosystem services: challenges and opportunities: a global assessment, Springer. FANG, C.-F. & LING, D.-L. 2003. Investigation of the noise reduction provided by tree belts. Landscape and urban planning, 63, 187-195. GEIJZENDORFFER, I. R., MARTÍN-LÓPEZ, B. & ROCHE, P. K. 2015. Improving the identification of mismatches in ecosystem services assessments. Ecological Indicators, 52, 320-331.

oo

f

GHASEMI, K., HAMZENEJAD, M. & MESHKINI, A. 2018. The spatial analysis of the livability of 22 districts of Tehran Metropolis using multi-criteria decision making approaches.

pr

Sustainable cities and society, 38, 382-404.

e-

GHOBADIAN, V., TAGHI, N. & GHODSI, M. 2008. Tehran: A hot arid climate. Bioclimatic Housing: Innovative designs for warm climates, 173-193.

Pr

GÓMEZ-BAGGETHUN, E. & BARTON, D. N. 2013. Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. Ecological Economics, 86, 235-245.

al

GREATER LONDON AUTHORITY 2004. Development Plan Policies for Biodiversity; the London

rn

Plan (Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London) Draft Best Practice Guidance. .

Jo u

Greater London Authority.

GRÊT-REGAMEY, A., WEIBEL, B., KIENAST, F., RABE, S.-E. & ZULIAN, G. 2015. A tiered approach for mapping ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services, 13, 16-27. HUBACEK, K., KRONENBERG, J., GRÊT-REGAMEY, A., CELIO, E., KLEIN, T. M., HAYEK, U. W., BENDT, P., BARTHEL, S. & COLDING, J. 2013. Marine ecosystem services (MES) condition the development of coastal urban areas, but their benefits are often taken for granted. The purpose of this study is to test how MES are perceived in the practice of urban planning and long-term management. We searched for MES recognition in 63 strategic documents of the 10 largest Polish seaside towns and cities. The criteria we used in analyzing the documents. Landscape and Urban Planning, 109, 107-116.

34

Journal Pre-proof

JOHNSTON, R. J. & RUSSELL, M. 2011. An operational structure for clarity in ecosystem service values. Ecological Economics, 70, 2243-2249. KIENAST, F., BOLLIGER, J., POTSCHIN, M., DE GROOT, R. S., VERBURG, P. H., HELLER, I., WASCHER, D. & HAINES-YOUNG, R. 2009. Assessing landscape functions with broadscale environmental data: insights gained from a prototype development for Europe. Environmental management, 44, 1099-1120. KREMER, P., HAMSTEAD, Z., HAASE, D., MCPHEARSON, T., FRANTZESKAKI, N.,

oo

f

ANDERSSON, E., KABISCH, N., LARONDELLE, N., RALL, E. L. & VOIGT, A. 2016. Key insights for the future of urban ecosystem services research. Ecology and Society, 21.

pr

KWAK, Y. 2016. GIS-Based Suitability Analysis and Planning of Green Infrastructure: A Case of

e-

the PPCOD, Capitol Hill.

LAVOREL, S., GRIGULIS, K., LAMARQUE, P., COLACE, M. P., GARDEN, D., GIREL, J.,

Pr

PELLET, G. & DOUZET, R. 2011. Using plant functional traits to understand the landscape distribution of multiple ecosystem services. Journal of Ecology, 99, 135-147.

al

LI, F., LIU, X., ZHANG, X., ZHAO, D., LIU, H., ZHOU, C. & WANG, R. 2017. Urban ecological

rn

infrastructure: An integrated network for ecosystem services and sustainable urban systems.

Jo u

Journal of Cleaner Production, 163, S12-S18. LOVELL, S. 2015. Multifunctional urban agriculture for sustainable land use planning in the United States. Urban ecology, 251-83. MADANIPOUR, A. 2006. Urban planning and development in Tehran. Cities, 23, 433-438. MARTÍNEZ-HARMS, M. J. & BALVANERA, P. 2012. Methods for mapping ecosystem service supply: a review. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management, 8, 17-25. MCPHEARSON, T., KREMER, P. & HAMSTEAD, Z. A. 2013. Mapping ecosystem services in New York City: Applying a social–ecological approach in urban vacant land. Ecosystem Services, 5, 11-26.

35

Journal Pre-proof

MOHAMMADI, H. F. T. 2007. Trend temperature and precipitation parameters in Tehran. GEOGRAPHICAL RESEARCH QUARTERLY, 38, 14. MUNICIPALITY OF TEHRAN 2015. About Tehran Parks & Green Space Organization. https://web.archive.org/web/20160401041052/http://parks.tehran.ir/Default.aspx?tabid=196 . NAIDOO, R., BALMFORD, A., COSTANZA, R., FISHER, B., GREEN, R. E., LEHNER, B., MALCOLM, T. & RICKETTS, T. H. 2008. Global mapping of ecosystem services and

oo

f

conservation priorities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. NOWAK, D. J. & CRANE, D. E. 2000. The Urban Forest Effects (UFORE) Model: quantifying

pr

urban forest structure and functions. In: Hansen, Mark; Burk, Tom, eds. Integrated tools for

e-

natural resources inventories in the 21st century. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-212. St. Paul, MN: US Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station. 714-720.,

Pr

212.

PARENT, J., CIVCO, D. & ANGEL, S. 2011. Shape metrics. ArcGIS Resource Center.

al

PATAKI, D. E., CARREIRO, M. M., CHERRIER, J., GRULKE, N. E., JENNINGS, V., PINCETL,

rn

S., POUYAT, R. V., WHITLOW, T. H. & ZIPPERER, W. C. 2011. Coupling

Jo u

biogeochemical cycles in urban environments: ecosystem services, green solutions, and misconceptions. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 9, 27-36. PIORR, A. 2011. Peri-urbanisation in Europe: towards European policies to sustain urban-rural futures; synthesis report; PLUREL [sixth framework programme], Forest & Landscape, University of Copenhagen. RAMYAR, R. 2019. Social–ecological mapping of urban landscapes: Challenges and perspectives on ecosystem services in Mashhad, Iran. Habitat International, 102043. RAMYAR, R., HAYATI, Z., SAEEDI, S. & TAJ, M. M. 2019a. Evidence of Poor Environments in Shared Outdoor Spaces of Residential Complexes in Iran. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 28.

36

Journal Pre-proof

RAMYAR, R., RAMYAR, A., KIALASHAKI, Y., BRYANT, M. & RAMYAR, H. 2019b. Exploring Reconfiguration Scenarios of High-Density Urban Neighborhoods on Urban Temperature–the Case of Tehran (Iran). Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 126398. RAMYAR, R. & ZARGHAMI, E. 2017. Green infrastructure contribution for climate change adaptation in urban landscape context. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, 15, 1193-1209. RAMYAR, R., ZARGHAMI, E. & BRYANT, M. 2019c. Spatio-temporal planning of urban

oo

f

neighborhoods in the context of global climate change: Lessons for urban form design in Tehran, Iran. Sustainable Cities and Society, 101554.

pr

RAUDSEPP-HEARNE, C., PETERSON, G. D. & BENNETT, E. 2010. Ecosystem service bundles

e-

for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 5242-5247.

Pr

RAVANSHADNIA, M., GHANBARI, M. & FARDANI, M. H. 2015. Planning crisis management of water resources in Tehran in the next twenty five years. J Appl Environ Biol Sci, 5, 50-59.

al

RODRÍGUEZ-LOINAZ, G., ALDAY, J. G. & ONAINDIA, M. 2015. Multiple ecosystem services

rn

landscape index: a tool for multifunctional landscapes conservation. Journal of

Jo u

environmental management, 147, 152-163. SAEMIAN, S. 2013. Adaptation strategies to impacts of climate change and variability on tehran water supply in 2021: an application of a decision support system (DSS) to compare adaptation strategies.

SCHRÖTER, M., BARTON, D. N., REMME, R. P. & HEIN, L. 2014. Accounting for capacity and flow of ecosystem services: A conceptual model and a case study for Telemark, Norway. Ecological Indicators, 36, 539-551. SHASHUA-BAR, L. & HOFFMAN, M. E. 2000. Vegetation as a climatic component in the design of an urban street: An empirical model for predicting the cooling effect of urban green areas with trees. Energy and buildings, 31, 221-235. SMITH, R. L., SMITH, T. M., HICKMAN, G. C. & HICKMAN, S. M. 1998. Elements of ecology.

37

Journal Pre-proof

SODOUDI, S., SHAHMOHAMADI, P., VOLLACK, K., CUBASCH, U. & CHE-ANI, A. 2014. Mitigating the urban heat island effect in megacity Tehran. Advances in Meteorology, 2014. STATISTICAL

CENTRE

OF

IRAN

2019.

Macro

results

of

statistical

survey.

http://www.amar.org.ir, Accessed 2019. TALEN, E. 2010. The Spatial Logic of Parks. Journal of Urban Design, 15, 473-491. TEHRAN MUNICIPALITY 2018. Tehran, http://en.tehran.ir/default.aspx?tabid=104, Public & International Relations Department.

oo

f

USDA, S. 1986. Urban hydrology for small watersheds. Technical release, 55, 2-6. VARAMESH, S., HOSSEINI, S. M., ABDI, N. & KIYOMARS, S. 2015. Assessment of Carbon

pr

Sequestration Content in Biomass, Robinia pseudoacacia and Cupressus arizonica Stands

e-

around Tehran. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (JEST) 16, 396-404 VEAL, A. 2013. Open space planning standards in Australia: in search of origins. Australian

Pr

Planner, 50, 224-232.

VOS, P. E., MAIHEU, B., VANKERKOM, J. & JANSSEN, S. 2013. Improving local air quality in

al

cities: to tree or not to tree? Environmental pollution, 183, 113-122.

rn

WEBER, T., SLOAN, A. & WOLF, J. 2006. Maryland's Green Infrastructure Assessment:

Jo u

Development of a comprehensive approach to land conservation. Landscape and urban planning, 77, 94-110.

WILLEMEN, L., VERBURG, P. H., HEIN, L. & VAN MENSVOORT, M. E. 2008. Spatial characterization of landscape functions. Landscape and urban planning, 88, 34-43. WOLCH, J. R., BYRNE, J. & NEWELL, J. P. 2014. Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: The challenge of making cities ‘just green enough’. Landscape and urban planning, 125, 234-244. YEKOM CONSULTING ENGINEERS CO 2010. Report on Tehran water resources and consumption.

38

Journal Pre-proof

ZARGHAMI, E., KARIMIMOSHAVER, M., GHANBARAN, A. & SAADATIVAGHAR, P. 2019. Assessing the oppressive impact of the form of tall buildings on citizens: Height, width, and height-to-width ratio. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 79, 106287. ZAYYARI, K., VAHEDIAN BEIKY, L. & PARNOON, Z. 2012. The Study of Environmental Crisis and Local Distribution of Green Space in Tehran City. Urban Regional Studies and

Jo u

rn

al

Pr

e-

pr

oo

f

Research, 4, 101-114.

39

Journal Pre-proof

Highlights

 Strategic spatial planning for ecological development is urgently required in areas with fast urban growth and limited green infrastructure.  Ecosystem services—the ecological benefits of ecological resources—is a useful concept in assessing and planning for the multiple uses of urban green infrastructure.

Jo u

rn

al

Pr

e-

pr

oo

f

 The mapping of social conditions alongside multiple ecosystem services establishes useful supply/demand relationships and clarifies priorities for the development of urban green areas.

40

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Figure 10

Figure 11