Resilient Urbanisms
From Landscape Urbanism to Green Infrastructure to Infrastructural Urbanism, each framework regards ecology as a primary tenet.

An ecological system's resilience is build up over time, yet can be undone in a brief moment.

This blog intends to share diverse perspectives on these evolving frameworks and to explore solutions to sustaining resilient urbanisms.

An Introduction to Resilient Urbanisms Archive  Subscribe  Likes  Submit  Ask me anything 
FOLLOWING eca-scape
Landscape Heterogeneity

The heterogeneity of landscapes – as a parameter of landscape structure – is connoted as the “quality or state of consisting of dissimilar elements, as with mixed habitats or cover types occurring on a landscape”. It is the “opposite of homogeneity, in which elements are the same”

(Turner et al. , 2003 , 3).


‘Knowledge is necessary but not sufficient for successful thinking’

Yinger 1980, p. 17

‘When serious contradictions in

knowledge are encountered, it is necessary to return

to creative perception and free play (exchange of

ideas), which act to transform existing knowledge.

Knowledge apart from this cycle of activity has no

meaning’ (Bohm and Peat 1987, p. 56). As knowledge

changes, one must also change the skills and

strategies for manipulating and processing that information

(Yinger 1980).

The goal of landscape ecology is to understand

the landscape in order to treat it in a thoughtful and

creative manner by evaluating plans concerning its

use, non-use, or reuse. Our perception of landscape

issues is clearly tied to the cognitive structures of

our various disciplines with respect to their theory,

language, knowledge, and values. ‘Not until the

basic cognitive scaffolding is set up does information

begin to make sense’ (Yinger 1980, p. 18).

Consequently, a paradigm is necessary in landscape

ecology for the purposes of manipulating and

processing information. Language is essential to

the development of that paradigm.


Landscape Spatial Pattern Structure and Land Use Spatial Pattern

Landscape Spatial Pattern Structure and Land Use Spatial Pattern

Landscape Spatial Structure = horizontal and vertical (concentric, liner, boxy like ag. fields = basin based per topography).

Horizontal is alternating patterns -water, fields/cultivated land, roads, fields, water, mountains - repeat…

Vertical is topographic based - distribution of land use.

Land Use Pattern is show in the land use ratios.

Landscape Differentiation is caused by human change upon the land… this is known.  It is these human activities which cause the landscape pattern structure and spatial patterns. SO - we look for harmony in human landscape interventions …


Coexistent Urbanism

Coexistent Urbanism is a new proposed approach that deals with informal areas in different way. Rather than dealing with informal areas locally and through focused intervention, it seeks to gradually assimilate the community with its surrounding urban area socially, economically and physically by integrating its street fabric first until they become totally dissolved with the surrounded urban areas and become a harmonious part of the surrounded urban social and economic structure. On the long run, such assimilation combined with directing growth along a development axis could even spare away from strategic agricultural land.

 Ayman M Ismail, Hussam Bakr, and Salma Anas


How link fragmentation to these ‘socio-cultural human well being values’?

Are my indicators specific to fragmentation - YES

I haven’t dealt with fragmentation systematically but just indirectly, in terms of how it enables/disables the accessibility of peri-urban green spaces

ME - fragmentation/connectivity related to Q of L and Cultural Landscape Services

++++ Correlate each indicator to fragmented landscape and value …


Biodiversity

Generally it is the diversity, extent and connectivity of habitats which appears most directly related to biodiversity within an urban setting, rather than counting species from one group.  However the species themselves are fascinating and I suspect that it would be possible to rank biodiversity based upon species.  It would however require sites to be viewed in context with one another.  The Botanical Society of Scotland is currently carrying out an urban plant survey across Scotland. Perhaps the results might highlight urban areas that are particularly rich in species?  BSS can be contacted at the following web page:  http://www.botanical-society-scotland.org.uk/contact


GIS as a data collection tool

Data Collection Methodology

The primary data collection tool for the green space characteristics will be within a GIS database:

  • Sophisticated technique for green spaces and larger network analysis, 
  • Reveals more realistic picture of green space characteristics.

GIS was selected as the tool to conduct this methodology as it provides a more sophisticated technique to analysing the green spaces and, importantly, the larger green space network or system, when compared with typical mapping techniques or ranking strategies.  GIS reveals a more realistic picture of GS characteristics for the selected catchment zones when supported by detailed data within this sophisticated methodology.


Fragmentation - Good or Bad?

IS FRAGMENTED GS BAD IN PU CONTEXT?

Currently offer GS benefits/Q of L

Good places for/where type fragmentation is positive ….

urban growth Optimize access to GS

People may like fragmented GS because access to many types of land uses are there …

Sprawl and low density may be bad for ecology, but good for people …

Low density vs Hi density

What is sustainable …

Range of Solutions for Peri Urban Areas

Connectivity = x  (ideal)

Urban Core = y  (ides..)

CONCLUSIONS FROM THIS …

 


GIS Indices

Analyses of landscape structure by means of

calculations of landscape ecology indexes.

The def ned method of calculations of landscape

ecology indexes within landscape structure analysis

was performed for LU/LC classes in identifi ed

categories, spatial and compositional relations of

landscape elements – patches, corridors, matrixes.

The analyses were done in ArcGIS environment

using standard tools and tools that were specifi cally

developed for the analysis of landscape structure.

These are Vector Based Landscape Analysis

Extension for ArcGIS (V-LATE) and Patch Analyst.

Calculated coeffi cients (indexes) can be classifi ed

according to the type of evaluated characteristic

into categories of indexes: of shape, size, diversity,

proximity, edges and statistical indicators.

Nearest neighbour analysis (index) – belongs among

distance analyses that are used to determine the

proximity of objects of a given category. In this

case it is the proximity of objects of the same LU/

LC category determined by the nearest neighbour

method. Map representation of the calculated values

of nearest neighbour analysis provides an overview

of the distribution of particular LU/LC categories

and of the mode (type) of their distribution in the

territory.

Area analysis (index) belongs among the basic

spatial analyses. Using the patch area analysis it is

possible to describe landscape graininess on a scale

from very fi ne (patch area less than 0.05 ha), fi ne

(patch area 0.05–0.9 ha), medium (patch area 0.9–35

ha) to coarse graininess > 35 ha). Besides, patch area

is a very important variable infl uencing diversity

and land cover.

Shape analysis (index) belongs among further metric

analyses of landscape space describing landscape

changes over time in the best way. These indicators

are calculated for the particular categories: patch

number, average patch shape, patch perimeter to

area ratio, average fractal dimension. Shape indexes

are signifi cant from the aspect of dissection or, on

the contrary, of geometrization of spatial structures.

The higher the values of shape index, the more

complicated the patch shape while their borders

get longer. On the other hand, the lower the value

of this index, the simpler the shape that can be

described by basic geometric shapes, expressing

the simplifi cation of particular shapes of patches.

Intervals of the patch shape index: 1.00–1.12 –

almost circular shape, 1.12–1.16 – almost square

shape, 1.16–1.90 – almost rectangular shape, > 1.90

distinctly elongated and irregular shape. The shape

characteristics are also important from the aspect of

edge eff ect, i.e. mutual interaction of two adjacent

areas with diff erent mode of use (e.g. arable land and

PGL, arable land and forest, etc.).

Diversity analysis (index) is aimed at the evaluation of

diversity and heterogeneity of analysed patches. In

the particular categories the computation generates

the total number of patches in each category, their

total area and the index Proportion – ratio of areas

of a given category to total area (or the percentage

proportion of a given category in relation to the

whole studied territory). Determination of these

indexes is important for the evaluation of landscape

heterogeneity and contrasts.


In its variability, landscape structure is related to the dynamics of natural and anthropogenic processes conditioning it, and at the same time, they are presented in landscape through its mediation.

The understanding of spatial configuration and its

development in the context of anthropic activities

provides better conditions and prerequisites for

interpretation and prediction of the functional

potential of landscape with all consequences

infl uencing these activities retroactively. Based

on the evaluation of trends, a “middle-course”

version of the proposal of the new arrangement and

functional use of landscape in the given territory

can be chosen and by approximation of landscape

structure characteristics it is possible to defi ne an

optimum landscape structure with regard to nonproduction functions of landscape.