Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Does demolition improve biodiversity? Linking urban green space and socioeconomic characteristics to avian richness in a shrinking city

  • Published:
Urban Ecosystems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Anthropogenic change, specifically urbanization, has lasting impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Past work has linked green space variables and socioeconomic characteristics with biodiversity in urban areas. Shrinking cities present an interesting case for studying biodiversity because many of these places have implemented demolition policies to remove vacant buildings from the landscape, which returns previously urbanized land back into a “natural” state. The objective of this study is to investigate the multifaceted relationship among urban green space, socioeconomic characteristics, demolition activities, and avian species richness in the shrinking city of Buffalo, NY. We first establish a baseline understanding of how social and ecological factors are related to avian species richness through generalized linear models (GLM) and then incorporate a variable characterizing demolition to understand how the process of demolition may be impacting species richness relative to other factors. Second, since our analysis relies on “citizen science” data from eBird, we aim to better understand the factors driving eBird participation in Buffalo through zero-inflated negative binomial (ZINB) regression models to test how social and ecological characteristics and demolition affect checklists submission across the city. Our findings suggested that demolition activities do not increase species richness in Buffalo, indicating these sites may not be returning to a natural state that is usable by birds. We also found that areas that have undergone considerable demolition may be a potential deterrent to eBird participation, and eBird users may create bias by sampling areas with greater green space connectivity, and thus higher richness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson D (2001) Model based inference in the life sciences: a primer on evidence. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnfield A (2003) Two decades of urban climate research: a review of turbulence, exchanges of energy and water, and the urban heat island. Int J Climatol 23:1–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker L, Brazel A, Selover N, Martin C, McIntyre N, Steiner F, Nelson A, Musacchio L (2002) Urbanization and warming of Phoenix (Arizona, USA): impacts, feedbacks, and mitigation. Urban Ecosyst 6:183–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Battisti C, Fanelli G (2016) Applying indicators of disturbance from plant ecology to vertebrates: the hemeroby of bird species. Ecol Indic 61:799–805

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein L, Jin X, Gregor B, Adler-Golden S (2012) Quick atmospheric correction code: algorithm description and recent upgrades. Opt Eng 51:111719

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beveridge C (2002) Olmsted - his essential theory. Nineteenth Cent 20:32–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Bischof H, Shneider W, Pinz A (1992) Multispectral classification of Landsat-images using neural networks. IEEE T Geosci Remote 30:482–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blair R (1996) Land use and avian species diversity along an urban gradient. Ecol Appl 6:506–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boakes E, McGowan P, Fuller R, Chang-qing D, Clark N, O’Connor K, Mace G (2010) Distorted views of biodiversity: spatial and temporal bias in species occurrence data. PLoS Biol 8:e1000385

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Boakes E, Gliozzo G, Seymour V, Harvey M, Smith C, Roy D, Haklay M (2016) Patterns of contribution to citizen science biodiversity projects increase understanding of volunteers’ behaviour. Sci Rep 6:33051

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Bolker B (2014) bbmle: tools for maximum likelihood estimation. R package version 1.0.17. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=bbmle. Accessed 18 April 2016

  • Brooks T, Mittermeier R, Mittermeier C, da Fonseca G, Rylands A, Konstant W, Flick P, Pilgrim J, Oldfield S, Magin G, Hilton-Taylor C (2002) Habitat loss and extinction in the hotspots of biodiversity. Conserv Biol 16:909–923

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buffalo Olmsted Parks Conservancy (2016) Your Olmsted Parks. https://www.bfloparks.org/. Accessed 11 April 2016

  • Burkholder S (2012) The new ecology of vacancy: rethinking land use in shrinking cities. Sustainability 4:1154–1172

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham K, Anderson D (2001) Kullback-Leibler information as a basis for strong inference in ecological studies. Wildl Res 28:111–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham K, Anderson D, Huyvaert K (2011) AIC model selection and multimodel inference in behavioral ecology: some background, observations, and comparisons. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 65:23–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caliman A, Carneiro L, Leal J, Farjalla V, Bozelli R, Esteves F (2013) Biodiversity effects of ecosystem engineers are stronger on more complex ecosystem processes. Ecology 94:1977–1985

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Callaghan C, Gawlik D (2015) Efficacy of eBird data as an aid in conservation planning and monitoring. J Field Ornithol 86:298–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapin F, Schylze E, Mooney H (1992) Biodiversity and ecosystem processes. Trends Ecol Evol 7:107–108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Collier C (2006) The impact of urban areas on weather. Q J R Meteorol Soc 132:1–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper C, Dickinson J, Phillips T, Bonney R (2007) Citizen science as a tool for conservation in residential ecosystems. Ecol Soc 12:11–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R, d’Arge R, deGroot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K, Naeem S, ONeill R, Paruelo J, Raskin G, Sutton P, van den Belt M (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387:235–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cumming G, Buerkert A, Hoffmann E, Schlecht E, von Cramon-Taubadel S, Tscharntke T (2014) Implications of agricultural transitions and urbanization for ecosystem services. Nature 515:50–75

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DAFPU: Department of Administration, Finance, Policy and Urban Affairs, City of Buffalo, Janet Penksa Commissioner (2007) Moving Buffalo forward: policy briefs from the Brown administration 1:1–4 ​https://www.ci.buffalo.ny.us/files/1_2_1/Mayor/PublicPolicyPublication/5in5_DemoPlan.pdf. Accessed 12, April 2017

  • Dallimer M, Irvine K, Skinner A, Davies Z, Rouquette J, Maltby L, Warren P, Armsworth P, Gaston K (2012) Biodiversity and the feel-good factor: understanding associations between self-reported human well-being and species richness. Bioscience 62:47–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis A, Belaire A, Farfan M, Milz D, Sweeney E, Loss S, Minor E (2012) Green infrastructure and bird diversity across an urban socioeconomic gradient. Ecosphere 3:A105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delmelle E (2015) Five decades of neighborhood classifications and their transitions: a comparison of four US cities, 1970-2010. Appl Geogr 57:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • eBird Basic Dataset (2015) Version: EBD_relNOV-2015. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca

    Google Scholar 

  • Eigenbrod F, Bell V, Davies H, Heinemeyer A, Armsworth P, Gaston K (2011) The impact of projected increases in urbanization on ecosystem services. Proc R Soc Lond B 278:3201–3208

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Erlich P, Wilson E (1991) Biodiversity studies: science and policy. Science 253:758–762

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ESRI (2014) ArcGIS desktop: release 10.2. Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Estoque R, Murayama Y (2014) Measuring sustainability based upon various perspectives: a case study of a hill station in Southeast Asia. Ambio 43:943–956

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Evans C, Abrams E, Reitsma R, Roux K, Salmonsen L, Marra P (2005) The neighborhood Nestwatch program: participant outcomes of a citizen-science ecological research project. Conserv Biol 19:589–594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez-Juricic E (2000a) Density dependent habitat selection of corridors in a fragmented landscape. Ibis 143:278–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez-Juricic E (2000b) Bird community composition patterns in urban parks of Madrid: the role of age, size, and isolation. Ecol Res 15:373–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez-Juricic E (2001) Avian spatial segregation at edges and interiors of urban parks in Madrid, Spain. Biodivers Conserv 10:1303–1316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frazier A, Bagchi-Sen S (2015) Developing open space networks in shrinking cities. Appl Geogr 59:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frazier A, Bagchi-Sen S, Knight J (2013) The spatio-temporal impacts of demolition land use policy and crime in a shrinking city. Appl Geogr 41:55–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaston K (1995) Biodiversity: loss. Prog Phys Geogr 19:255–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaston K, Blackburn T, Goldewijk K (2002) Habitat conversion and global avian biodiversity loss. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:1293–1300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gould W (2000) Remote sensing of vegetation, plant species richness, and regional biodiversity hotspots. Ecol Appl 10:1861–1870

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grove J (1997) A social ecology approach and applications of urban ecosystem and landscape analyses: a case study of Baltimore, Maryland. Urban Ecosyst 1:259–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grove J, Troy A, O’Neil-Dunne J, Burch W, Cadenasso M, Pickett S (2006) Characterization of households and its implications for the vegetation of urban ecosystems. Ecosystems 9:578–597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haase D (2008) Urban ecology of shrinking cities: an unrecognized opportunity? Nature Cult 3:1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hand L, Shepherd J (2009) An investigation of warm-season spatial rainfall variability in Oklahoma City: possible linkages to urbanization and prevailing wind. J Appl Meteorol Climatol 48:251–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilborn R, Mangel M (1997) The ecological detective: confronting models with data. Princeton University Press, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollander J, Cahill B (2011) Confronting population decline in the Buffalo, New York, region: a close reading of the “Erie-Niagara framework for regional growth”. J of Archit Plan Res 28:252–267

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollander J, Nemeth J (2011) The bounds of smart decline: a foundational theory for planning shrinking cities. House Policy Debate 21:349–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollander J, Pallagst K, Schwarz T, Popper F (2009) Planning shrinking cities. Prog Plan 72:223–232

    Google Scholar 

  • Hope D, Gries C, Zhu W, Fagan W, Redman C, Grimm N, Nelson A, Martin C, Kinzig A (2003) Socioeconomics drive urban plant diversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100:8788–8792

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Huang Y, Zhao Y, Li S, von Gadow K (2015) The effect of habitat area, vegetation structure and insect richness on breeding bird populations in Beijing urban parks. Urban For Urban Gree 14:1027–1039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iverson L, Cook E (2000) Urban forest cover of the Chicago region and its relation to household density and income. Urban Ecosyst 4:105–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson S (2015) Pscl: classes and methods for R developed in the political science computational laboratory, Stanford University. Department of Political Science, Stanford University, Stanford. R package version 1.4.9. http://pscl.stanford.edu/. Accessed 18 April 2016

  • Jenerette G, Harlan S, Brazel A, Jones N, Larsen L, Stefanov W (2007) Regional relationships between surface temperature, vegetation, and human settlement in a rapidly urbanizing ecosystem. Landsc Ecol 22:353–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenerette G, Harlan S, Stefanoc W, Martin C (2011) Ecosystem services and urban heat riskscape moderation: water, green spaces, and social inequality in Phoenix, USA. Ecol Appl 21:2637–2651

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jim C, Chen S (2003) Comprehensive greenspace planning based on landscape ecology principles in compact Nanjing city, China. Landsc Urban Plan 65:95–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jokimaki J, Kaisanlahti-Jokimaki M (2003) Spatial similarity of urban bird communities: a multiscale approach. J Biogeogr 30:1183–1193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones H, Vaughan R (2010) Remote sensing of vegetation: principles, techniques, and applications. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang W, Minor E, Park C, Lee D (2015) Effects of habitat structure, human disturbance, and habitat connectivity on urban forest bird communities. Urban Ecosyst 18:857–870

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelling S, Johnston A, Hochachka W, Iliff M, Fink D, Gerbracht J, Lagonze C, La Sorte F, Moore T, Wiggins A, Wong W, Wood C, Yu J (2015) Can observation skills of citizen scientists be estimated using species accumulation curves? PLoS One 10:e0139600

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kinzig A, Warren P, Martin C, Hope D, Katti M (2005) The effects of human socioeconomic status and cultural characteristics on urban patterns of biodiversity. Ecol Soc 10:23–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleiber C, Zeileis A (2008) Applied economics with R. Springer-Verlag, New York. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=AER. Accessed 18 April 2016

  • Landry S, Chakraborty J (2009) Street trees and equity: evaluating the spatial distribution of an urban amenity. Environ Plann A 41:2651–2670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaPoint S, Balkenol N, Hale J, Sadler J, van der Ree R (2015) Ecological connectivity research in urban areas. Funct Ecol 29:868–878

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerman S, Warren P (2011) The conservation value of residential yards: linking birds and people. Ecol Appl 21:1327–1339

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Li G, Weng Q (2007) Measuring the quality of life in city of Indianapolis by integration of remote sensing and census data. Int J Remote Sens 28:249–267

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Li X, Zhang C, Li W, Kuzovkina Y, Weiner D (2015) Who lives in greener neighborhoods? The distribution of street greenery and its association with residents’ socioeconomic conditions in Hartford, Connecticut, USA. Urban For Urban Gree 14:751–759

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loss S, Ruiz M, Brawn J (2009) Relationships between avian diversity, neighborhood age, income, and environmental characteristics of an urban landscape. Biol Conserv 142:2578–2585

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luck G (2007) A review of the relationships between human population density and biodiversity. Biol Rev 82:607–645

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mallach A (2011) Demolition and preservation in shrinking US industrial cities. Build Res Inf 39:380–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathey J, Robler S, Banse J, Lehmann I, Brauer A (2015) Brownfields as an element of green infrastructure for implementing ecosystem services into urban areas. J Urban Plan D-ASCE 141:A4015001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClintock B, Bailey L, Pollock K, Simons T (2010) Unmodeled observation error induces bias when inferring patterns and dynamics of species occurrence via aural detections. Ecology 91:2446–2454

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McFarlane B, Boxall P (1997) Participation in wildlife conservation by birdwatchers. Hum Dimens Wildl 1:1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGarigal K, Cushman S, Ene E (2012) FRAGSTATS v4: spatial pattern analysis program for categorical and continuous maps. Computer software program produced by the authors at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. http://www.umass.edu/landeco/research/fragstats/fragstats.html. Accessed 18 April 2016

  • Melles S (2005) Urban bird diversity as an indicator of social diversity and economic inequality in Vancouver, British Columbia. Urban Habitat 3:25–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogneva-Himmelberger Y, Rakshit R, Pearsall H (2013) Examining the impact of environmental factors on quality of life across Massachusetts. Prof Geogr 65:187–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olmstead, F (1997) Civilizing American cities: writings on city landscapes. In: Sutton S (ed). Da Capo Press, New York

  • Pellissier V, Cohen M, Boulay A, Clergeau P (2012) Birds are also sensitive to landscape composition and configuration within the city centre. Landsc Urban Plan 104:181–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team (2015) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. https://www.R-project.org/. Accessed 18 April 2016

  • Rebele F (1994) Urban ecology and special features of urban ecosystems. Glob Ecol Biogeogr Lett 4:173–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redman C, Grove J, Kuby L (2004) Integrating social science into the long-term ecological research (LTER) network: social dimensions of ecological change and ecological dimensions of social change. Ecosystems 7:161–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards J, Jia X (1999) Remote sensing digital image analysis, 3rd edn. Springer-Verlag, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rieniets T (2006) Atlas of shrinking cities. In: Oswalt P, Rieniets T (eds) Urban shrinkage. Hatje Cantz, Ostildern

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouse J, Haas R, Schell J, Deering D (1974) Monitoring vegetation systems in the Great Plains with ERTS. Proceedings of the 3rd Earth Resource Technology Satellite (ERTS) symposium 1:48–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudd H, Vala J, Schaefer V (2002) Importance of backyard habitat in a comprehensive biodiversity conservation strategy: a connectivity analysis of urban green spaces. Restor Ecol 10:368–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savard J, Clergeau P, Mennechez G (2000) Biodiversity concepts and urban ecosystems. Landsc Urban Plan 659:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Schetke S, Haase D (2008) Multi-criteria assessment of socio-environmental aspects in shrinking cities. Experiences from eastern Germany. Environ Impact Asses 28:483–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schilling J, Logan J (2008) Greening the rust belt: a green infrastructure model for right sizing America’s shrinking cities. J Am Plan Assoc 74:451–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schilling J, Mallach A (2012) Cities in transition: a guide for practicing planners. American Planning Association, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Sekercioglu C, Daily G, Ehrlich P (2002) Ecosystem consequences of bird declines. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 101:18042–18047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd J (2005) A review of current investigations of urban induced rainfall and recommendations for the future. Earth Interact 9:1–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sileshi G (2008) The excess-zero problem in soil animal count data and choice of appropriate models for statistical inference. Pedobiologia 52:1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sol D, Gonzalez-Lagos C, Moreira D, Maspons J, Lapiedra O (2014) Urbanization tolerance and the loss of avian diversity. Ecol Lett 17:942–950

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss B, Biedermann R (2006) Urban brownfields as temporary habitats: driving forces for the diversity of phytophagous insects. Ecogeography 29:928–950

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strohbach M, Haase D, Kabisch N (2009) Birds and the city: urban biodiversity, land use and socioeconomics. Ecol Soc 14:31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan B, Wood C, Ilif M, Bonney R, Fink D, Kelling S (2009) eBird: a citizen-based bird observation network in the biological sciences. Biol Conserv 142:2282–2292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan B, Aycrigg J, Barry J, Bonney R, Bruns N et al (2014) The eBird enterprise: an integrated approach to development and application of citizen science. Biol Conserv 169:31–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tian Y, Jim C, Tao Y, Shi T (2011) Landscape ecological assessment of green space fragmentation in Hong Kong. Urban For Urban Gree 10:79–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tratalos J, Fuller R, Warren P, Davies R, Gaston K (2007) Urban form, biodiversity potential and ecosystem services. Landsc Urban Plan 83:308–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Troy A, Grove J, O’Neil-Dunne J, Pickett S, Cadenasso M (2007) Predicting opportunities for greening and patterns of vegetation on private urban lands. Environ Manag 40:394–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S Census Bureau (2010) Selected housing characteristics 2007-2011. American community survey 5 year estimates. https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/data.html. Accessed 15 March 2016

  • Weaver R, Bagchi-Sen S, Knight J, Frazier A (2016) Shrinking cities: understanding urban decline in the United States. Routledge, Abingdon

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiechman T, Pallagst K (2012) Urban shrinkage in Germany and the USA: a comparison of transformation patterns and local strategies. Int J Urban Regional 36:261–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witting R (2010) Biodiversity of urban-industrial areas and its evaluation-a critical review. In: Muller N, Werner P, Kerlcey J (eds) Urban biodiversity and design. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, pp 37–55

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeileis A, Hothorn T (2002) Diagnostic checking in regression relationships. R News 2:7–10. http://CRAN.R-project.org/doc/rnews. Accessed 18 April 2016

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Buffalo Police Department for providing the crime data used in this study. The imagery was obtained through a National Science Foundation award to A.E. Frazier (SBE #1303086).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Integrative Biology, Oklahoma State University, 501 Life Sciences West, Stillwater, OK, 74078, USA

    Cassondra M. Walker

  2. Department of Geography, Oklahoma State University, 337 Murray Hall, Stillwater, OK, 74078, USA

    K. Colton Flynn, Gustavo A. Ovando-Montejo, Emily A. Ellis & Amy E. Frazier

Authors
  1. Cassondra M. Walker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. Colton Flynn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gustavo A. Ovando-Montejo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Emily A. Ellis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Amy E. Frazier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cassondra M. Walker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Walker, C.M., Colton Flynn, K., Ovando-Montejo, G.A. et al. Does demolition improve biodiversity? Linking urban green space and socioeconomic characteristics to avian richness in a shrinking city. Urban Ecosyst 20, 1191–1202 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-017-0671-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-017-0671-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation