| Title |
Urban Ecosystem Services for Resilience Planning and Management in New York City
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Ambio, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13280-014-0509-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Timon McPhearson, Zoé A. Hamstead, Peleg Kremer |
| Abstract |
We review the current state of knowledge about urban ecosystem services in New York City (NYC) and how these services are regulated, planned for, and managed. Focusing on ecosystem services that have presented challenges in NYC-including stormwater quality enhancement and flood control, drinking water quality, food provisioning and recreation-we find that mismatches between the scale of production and scale of management occur where service provision is insufficient. Adequate production of locally produced services and services which are more accessible when produced locally is challenging in the context of dense urban development that is characteristic of NYC. Management approaches are needed to address scale mismatches in the production and consumption of ecosystem services. By coordinating along multiple scales of management and promoting best management practices, urban leaders have an opportunity to ensure that nature and ecosystem processes are protected in cities to support the delivery of fundamental urban ecosystem services. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 478 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 8 | 2% |
| Sweden | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Latvia | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Singapore | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 2 | <1% |
| Unknown | 458 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 91 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 90 | 19% |
| Researcher | 58 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 36 | 8% |
| Professor | 25 | 5% |
| Other | 91 | 19% |
| Unknown | 87 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 167 | 35% |
| Social Sciences | 51 | 11% |
| Engineering | 29 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 25 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 19 | 4% |
| Other | 72 | 15% |
| Unknown | 115 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 September 2015.
All research outputs
#8,039,454
of 24,167,226 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#1,081
of 1,728 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,061
of 230,260 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#24
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,167,226 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,728 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 230,260 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.