as roadside plantings that become wetlands and support wildlife. Certifications, such
as LEED or SITES, serve to encourage and publicly recognize replicable innovations and support professional networks for innovation diffusion.
8.3.2 Human Health and Wellness
Of first order for most green infrastructure and sustainability design is a biophysical
focus. Soils, vegetation, natural waterways, and open spaces are used to mitigate
environmental impacts from site to regional landscape scales (McPherson et al.
1997; Chen and Jim 2008; Jim and Chen 2009). The benefit/cost implications of
applied biotechnologies can be substantial (McPherson et al. 2005; Nowak et al.
2006), including human health costs (Nowak et al. 2014).
Using metaphors of the triple bottom line or the three pillars, sustainability
includes environmental, social, and economic goals. Social dimensions are often
not equally represented in practical projects. Environmental functions are often
addressed (and measured), accompanied by some degree of economic assessment.
Social benefits are then assumed to accompany resolution of environmental issues.
This section takes a more direct and purposeful outlook on social benefits. A wideranging scientific literature shows how environmental conditions do indeed generate
social benefits and that certain conditions of place, people, and plantings generate
specific outcomes.
“Metro nature” is used here as an inclusive term for all ecological, cultural, and
engineered green spaces governed by diverse entities and landowners, both public
and private, that provide collective opportunities for human nature experiences and
improved urban livability (Wolf 2008). The concept includes endemic ecosystems,
such as urban forests, greenbelts, conserved open spaces, and riparian corridors that
may be patch, relic, or feral expressions of native ecological associations. It also
includes culturally constructed nature such as parks, streetscapes, community gardens, pocket parks, and recreation paths. Finally, metro nature includes structural
innovations that are integrated within built form to serve specific functions, such as
green roofs, green walls, or green infrastructure facilities.
For centuries, insightful observers have noted the aesthetic and amenity experiences of nature in the city, such as beauty and respite. Early urban analysts regarded
the reported benefits of health, happiness, social functioning, and spirit as important
but not quantifiable. However, in recent decades, researchers have applied the
systematic, critical approaches of science, revealing greater texture and dimension
concerning the human relationship with nature in cities.
The evidence of nearby nature benefits spans about 40 years. It includes the
contributions of many disciplines and recognizes both consistencies and variabilities
in measurable response across place, time, and human groups (Wolf 2012, 2015). In
most cities, metro nature is a limited resource and should be “multitasking” to
optimize land use, functions, and benefits. Communities and infrastructure professionals are increasingly interested in a co-benefits approach. Health-oriented
8 From Sanitary to Sustainable to Sacred: Metro Nature Experiences and. . .
139
as LEED or SITES, serve to encourage and publicly recognize replicable innovations and support professional networks for innovation diffusion.
8.3.2 Human Health and Wellness
Of first order for most green infrastructure and sustainability design is a biophysical
focus. Soils, vegetation, natural waterways, and open spaces are used to mitigate
environmental impacts from site to regional landscape scales (McPherson et al.
1997; Chen and Jim 2008; Jim and Chen 2009). The benefit/cost implications of
applied biotechnologies can be substantial (McPherson et al. 2005; Nowak et al.
2006), including human health costs (Nowak et al. 2014).
Using metaphors of the triple bottom line or the three pillars, sustainability
includes environmental, social, and economic goals. Social dimensions are often
not equally represented in practical projects. Environmental functions are often
addressed (and measured), accompanied by some degree of economic assessment.
Social benefits are then assumed to accompany resolution of environmental issues.
This section takes a more direct and purposeful outlook on social benefits. A wideranging scientific literature shows how environmental conditions do indeed generate
social benefits and that certain conditions of place, people, and plantings generate
specific outcomes.
“Metro nature” is used here as an inclusive term for all ecological, cultural, and
engineered green spaces governed by diverse entities and landowners, both public
and private, that provide collective opportunities for human nature experiences and
improved urban livability (Wolf 2008). The concept includes endemic ecosystems,
such as urban forests, greenbelts, conserved open spaces, and riparian corridors that
may be patch, relic, or feral expressions of native ecological associations. It also
includes culturally constructed nature such as parks, streetscapes, community gardens, pocket parks, and recreation paths. Finally, metro nature includes structural
innovations that are integrated within built form to serve specific functions, such as
green roofs, green walls, or green infrastructure facilities.
For centuries, insightful observers have noted the aesthetic and amenity experiences of nature in the city, such as beauty and respite. Early urban analysts regarded
the reported benefits of health, happiness, social functioning, and spirit as important
but not quantifiable. However, in recent decades, researchers have applied the
systematic, critical approaches of science, revealing greater texture and dimension
concerning the human relationship with nature in cities.
The evidence of nearby nature benefits spans about 40 years. It includes the
contributions of many disciplines and recognizes both consistencies and variabilities
in measurable response across place, time, and human groups (Wolf 2012, 2015). In
most cities, metro nature is a limited resource and should be “multitasking” to
optimize land use, functions, and benefits. Communities and infrastructure professionals are increasingly interested in a co-benefits approach. Health-oriented
8 From Sanitary to Sustainable to Sacred: Metro Nature Experiences and. . .
139