The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning
Open accessAbstract
While technological progress has fostered the conception of an urban society that is increasingly decoupled from ecosystems, demands on natural capital and ecosystem services keep increasing steadily in our urbanized planet. Decoupling of cities from ecological systems can only occur locally and partially, thanks to the appropriation of vast areas of ecosystem services provision beyond the city boundaries. Conserving and restoring ecosystem services in urban areas can reduce the ecological footprints and the ecological debts of cities while enhancing resilience, health, and quality of life for their inhabitants. In this paper we synthesize knowledge and methods to classify and value ecosystem services for urban planning. First, we categorize important ecosystem services and disservices in urban areas. Second, we describe valuation languages (economic costs, socio‐cultural values, resilience) that capture distinct value dimensions of urban ecosystem services. Third, we identify analytical challenges for valuation to inform urban planning in the face of high heterogeneity and fragmentation characterizing urban ecosystems. The paper discusses various ways through which urban ecosystems services can enhance resilience and quality of life in cities and identifies a range of economic costs and socio‐cultural impacts that can derive from their loss. We conclude by identifying knowledge gaps and challenges for the research agenda on ecosystem services provided in urban areas.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
More Intense, More Frequent, and Longer Lasting Heat Waves in the 21st Century
Meehl, G. A., & Tebaldi, C. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1098704 · Cited by 4,322
Barthel, S., Folke, C., & Colding, J. (2010) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.01.001 · Cited by 557
Valuation of Ecosystem Services
van Wilgen, B. W., Cowling, R. M., & Burgers, C. J. (1996) · BioScience · doi:10.2307/1312739 · Cited by 179
Cited by
The Relationship between Social Cohesion and Urban Green Space: An Avenue for Health Promotion
Jennings, V., & Bamkole, O. (2019) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph16030452 · Cited by 1,028
Folke, C. (2016) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-09088-210444 · Cited by 982
Benefits of restoring ecosystem services in urban areas
Elmqvist, T., Setälä, H., Handel, S., van der Ploeg, S., Aronson, J., Blignaut, J., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Nowak, D., Kronenberg, J., & de Groot, R. (2015) · Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability · doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2015.05.001 · Cited by 895
Self-citationNatural climate solutions for the United States
Fargione, J. E., Bassett, S., Boucher, T., Bridgham, S. D., Conant, R. T., Cook-Patton, S. C., Ellis, P. W., Falcucci, A., Fourqurean, J. W., Gopalakrishna, T., et al. (2018) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aat1869 · Cited by 588
Assessing water ecosystem services for water resource management
Grizzetti, B., Lanzanova, D., Liquete, C., Reynaud, A., & Cardoso, A. C. (2016) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2016.04.008 · Cited by 580
Metadata
- Authors
- Gómez-Baggethun, E., & Barton, D. N.
- Venue
- Ecological Economics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-02
- Volume
- 86
- Pages
- 235-245
- ISSN
- 0921-8009 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1967360446
- Cited by
- 1,871
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 40.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.08.019
- The paper
- Gómez-Baggethun, E., & Barton, D. N. (2013). Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. Ecological Economics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.08.019
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.