The contrast between ecology in cities and ecology of cities has emphasized the increasing scope of urban ecosystem research.Ecology in focuses on terrestrial and aquatic patches within cities,suburbs,and exurbs as an...The contrast between ecology in cities and ecology of cities has emphasized the increasing scope of urban ecosystem research.Ecology in focuses on terrestrial and aquatic patches within cities,suburbs,and exurbs as analogs of non-urban habitats.Urban fabric outside analog patches is considered to be inhospi-table matrix.Ecology of the city differs from ecology in by treating entire urban mosaics as social-ecolog-ical systems.Ecology of urban ecosystems incorporates biological,social,and built components.Originally posed as a metaphor to visualize disciplinary evolution,this paper suggests that the contrast has conceptual,empirical,and methodological contents.That is,the contrast constitutes a disciplinary or“local”paradigm shift.The paradigm change between ecology in and ecology of represents increased complexity,moving from focus on biotic communities to holistic social-ecological systems.A third paradigm,ecology for the city,has emerged due to concern for urban sustainability.While ecology for includes the knowledge generated by both ecology in and ecology of,it considers researchers as a part of the system,and acknowledges that they may help envision and advance the social goals of urban sustainability.Using urban heterogeneity as a key urban feature,the three paradigms are shown to contrast in five important ways:disciplinary focus,the relevant theory of spatial heterogeneity,the technology for representing spatial structure,the resulting classification of urban mosaics,and the nature of application to sustainability.Ecology for the city encourages ecologists to engage with other specialists and urban dwellers to shape a more sustainable urban future.展开更多
Urban areas are now highly interconnected with each other and with other landscapes through the global exchange of materials,resources,and people.These urban land teleconnections mean that the interrelationships betwe...Urban areas are now highly interconnected with each other and with other landscapes through the global exchange of materials,resources,and people.These urban land teleconnections mean that the interrelationships between urbanization and land-cover change are no longer tightly linked in geographic space(Seto et al.2012).Actions at one or multiple urban centers can have concentrated or dispersed impacts on more distant landscapes;and these impacts are likely to increase over time.By 2030,Fragkias et al.(2013)predict that two thirds of the urban landscapes will have been built in the preceding 30 years.Accommodating the rise in human urban populations in the face of glob-al climate change without compromising ecosystem sustainability and resilience presents an enormous challenge.Finding solutions requires a concerted shift in our thinking,not the least of which is the frameworks we use to con-ceptualize an urban world.展开更多
基金Support was provided by the National Science Foundation through the Urban Sustainability Research Coordination Network (Grant No. 1140070), the Central Arizona- Phoenix Long- Term Ecological Research Program (Grant No. 1026865), and the Baltimore Ecosystem Study Long- Term Ecological Research Program (Grant No. 1027188). MJM was supported by the Baker Foundation. STAP thanks the Chinese Academy of Sciences for a Visiting Professorship for International Scientists in 2014, and a Visiting Guest Professorship at the Research Center for Eco- Environmental Sciences, during which the key por-tions of this paper were developed. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
文摘The contrast between ecology in cities and ecology of cities has emphasized the increasing scope of urban ecosystem research.Ecology in focuses on terrestrial and aquatic patches within cities,suburbs,and exurbs as analogs of non-urban habitats.Urban fabric outside analog patches is considered to be inhospi-table matrix.Ecology of the city differs from ecology in by treating entire urban mosaics as social-ecolog-ical systems.Ecology of urban ecosystems incorporates biological,social,and built components.Originally posed as a metaphor to visualize disciplinary evolution,this paper suggests that the contrast has conceptual,empirical,and methodological contents.That is,the contrast constitutes a disciplinary or“local”paradigm shift.The paradigm change between ecology in and ecology of represents increased complexity,moving from focus on biotic communities to holistic social-ecological systems.A third paradigm,ecology for the city,has emerged due to concern for urban sustainability.While ecology for includes the knowledge generated by both ecology in and ecology of,it considers researchers as a part of the system,and acknowledges that they may help envision and advance the social goals of urban sustainability.Using urban heterogeneity as a key urban feature,the three paradigms are shown to contrast in five important ways:disciplinary focus,the relevant theory of spatial heterogeneity,the technology for representing spatial structure,the resulting classification of urban mosaics,and the nature of application to sustainability.Ecology for the city encourages ecologists to engage with other specialists and urban dwellers to shape a more sustainable urban future.
文摘Urban areas are now highly interconnected with each other and with other landscapes through the global exchange of materials,resources,and people.These urban land teleconnections mean that the interrelationships between urbanization and land-cover change are no longer tightly linked in geographic space(Seto et al.2012).Actions at one or multiple urban centers can have concentrated or dispersed impacts on more distant landscapes;and these impacts are likely to increase over time.By 2030,Fragkias et al.(2013)predict that two thirds of the urban landscapes will have been built in the preceding 30 years.Accommodating the rise in human urban populations in the face of glob-al climate change without compromising ecosystem sustainability and resilience presents an enormous challenge.Finding solutions requires a concerted shift in our thinking,not the least of which is the frameworks we use to con-ceptualize an urban world.
