Search results

The assessment of ecosystem services (ES) in urban areas can be an important policy instrument for both strategic directives at national and regional levels and concrete actions at municipality level. A unifying underpinning framework that combines different administrative levels through a common, consistent basis would greatly facilitate the mainstreaming of such an instrument. Three key concepts underpin this framework: urban ecosystems, nature-based solutions (NBS), and ES. First, NBS are acknowledged as the ecological assets that in the urban context can provide ES, meant as complex processes made possible through the existence of natural and seminatural systems at various scales. Second, the classification of urban ecosystems needs to be consistent with the treatment of urban areas in ecosystem accounting and with NBS levels of intervention and primary objectives. Third, by serving societal challenges, it is important to clearly frame the strategic drivers of change: whether it concerns management practices of current land use or radical conversions in land use. Finally, once such a framework will be in place, it can facilitate sustainability assessment in urban ecosystems by quantifying the presence of NBS, whose creation/maintenance assure the delivery of ES. The purpose of this chapter is to theoretically frame an ES-based approach, but this is only a first step. Many more steps are required on to concretely put this framework in practice at different administrative levels, such as strategic planning and policy setting (at national level), and urban, peri-urban, and coastal development (at municipal level).

The unsustainable management of ecosystem services often arises as a result of the non-recognition of the multiple benefits or under-valuation of ecosystem services. The chapter looks at economic valuation as an essential tool in ecosystem management decision-making and policy. It discusses the economics of ecosystem services, explains the motivations for economic valuation, describes economic valuation methods, and examines the limitations of economic valuation. It emphasizes that economic valuation can be a powerful and convincing tool for placing ecosystems on the agenda of planners and decision-makers.

Purpose – The purpose of this essay is to explore further the concept of value cocreation from a service-ecosystems view, by considering the importance of networks and the configuration of relationships and resources in markets.

Methodology/approach – We use a conceptual approach to extend a service-dominant (S-D) logic, ecosystems view of value cocreation by drawing on the literature regarding networks in marketing and related research.

Findings – A service-ecosystems approach to cocreating value-in-context is proposed, which points toward networks as mediating factors in value cocreation because they influence the ability to access, adapt, and integrate resources by establishing exchange relationships and shaping the social contexts through which value is experienced.

Research implications – This research suggests that value cocreation is a complex and multidimensional process that is best studied in the context of dynamic networks or ecosystems of service exchange.

Practical implications – This research suggests that networks mediate value cocreation, and thus, firms should consider the configurations of relationships and resources to develop more compelling value propositions.

Social implications – This research draws on the idea that exchange relationships are embedded within society and suggests that processes of value cocreation not only draw on but also contribute to the social contexts that frame market exchange.

Originality/value of essay – This research extends the value cocreation and S-D logic literature by exploring the role of networks in service ecosystems. In this framework, networks are mediators of value cocreation because they enable access to resources and help to (re)shape social contexts through which value is derived.

Human beings are inseparable from the environment because of their dependence on ecosystems and their services (Schroter, 2009). The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) identifies ecosystem services as vital links between humans and ecosystems because these services are essential for human well-being, especially in terms of security, basic materials for a good life, health, good social relations, and freedom of choice and action. Ecosystem services include flows of materials, energy, and information from natural resources that combined with manufactured and human resources contribute to human well-being (Costanza et al., 1997). These include provisioning services (e.g., food, fresh water, wood and fiber, fuel), regulating services (e.g., climate, flood and disease regulation, water purification), supporting services (e.g., nutrient cycling, soil formation, primary production), and cultural services (e.g., aesthetic, spiritual, educational, and recreational value). The regulating services provided by ecosystems, in particular, are critical for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation. Ecosystems primarily affect both the probability and the severity of events and modulate the effects of extreme events. For example, soils store large amounts of water, facilitate transfer of surface water to groundwater, and prevent or reduce flooding, and natural buffers reduce hazards by absorbing runoff peaks and storm surges.

Ecosystem services are essential for human well-being. The chapter explores the linkages between ecosystems and ecosystem services, biodiversity, and the Millennium Development Goals. Specifically, it focuses on the discussions in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, the ecosystem approach within the framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity, and ecosystems’ role in the achievement of specific targets of the Millennium Development Goals. It highlights the need for ecosystem-based approaches to ecosystem management, biodiversity conservation, and attainment of human well-being.

Ports and port cities play a pivotal role toward the sustainable development of coastal ecosystems. These ecosystems provide their natural capital by offering favorable locations for industry and accessibility to world markets. While port industrial activities have been reactive to pressure from stakeholders, in more recent years ports have adapted inclusive strategies and seek to align their strategic intentions with stakeholders. Around the world, port authorities are aligning their ambitions toward their contribution to the sustainable development goals (SDGs), such as the World Port Sustainability Program (WPSP) for port authorities and AIVP2030 for port cities. The aim of this chapter is to assess to what extent ports have contributed to the implementation of the SDGs. The analysis is based on a content analysis on a portfolio of 212 projects in which port authorities demonstrate leadership in sustainable development. The results indicate that the contributions of port and port city authorities are generally motivated to “do no harm.” Port authorities also have “do good” intentions for their ecosystems, which are mainly focused on reenforcing connections with communities and less to restore their impact on the biosphere. Furthermore, the findings show that linkages between WPSP projects with the SDGs are rather ambiguous. Directions are given toward a methodology for port authorities (PAs) to establish a stronger link between (monitoring) business strategies with the implementation of inclusive port development strategies to prevent using SDG reporting for greenwashing purposes.

Cities evolved into quite complex urban systems. The rigid management process must reflect the complexity of the current political, social, and economic environment. With the vast city growth, citizens experience new difficulties – traffic congestion, pollution, immigration, overcrowding, and inadequate services.

In our research, we analyze problems and benefits that occur with the growing complexity and offer a new concept considering every city as a live and constantly developing complex adaptive system of many participants and actors that operate in an uncertain environment. These actors (residents, businesses, transport, energy, water supply providers, entertainment, and others) are the main elements of city life.

The new concept of “Smart City 5.0” is based on a previously developed model of Smart City 4.0 (compared with Industry 4.0) and implements the Urban Digital Ecosystem, where every element can be represented by a smart agent operating on its behalf. It is shown that smart services can interact vertically and horizontally in the proposed ecosystem, supporting competition and cooperation behavior based on specialized network protocols for balancing the conflicting interests of different city actors.

The chapter describes the design principles and the general architecture of the Urban Digital Ecosystem, including the basic agent of smart service, protocols of the agent’s negotiation, the architecture, and basic principles Smart City knowledge base.

The developed evolutionary methodology of implementation will ensure a minimum of disruptions to city services during its transformation into an urban ecosystem to harmoniously balance all spheres of life and the contradictory interests of different city actors.