Compact development minimizes the impacts of urban growth on native mammals

1. Unprecedented global human population growth and rapid urbanization of rural and natural lands highlight the urgent need to integrate biodiversity conservation into planning for urban growth. A challenging question for applied ecologists to answer is: What pattern of urban growth meets future hou...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of applied ecology 2017-06, Vol.54 (3), p.794-804
Hauptverfasser: Villaseñor, Nélida R., Tulloch, Ayesha I. T., Driscoll, Don A., Gibbons, Philip, Lindenmayer, David B.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 804
container_issue 3
container_start_page 794
container_title The Journal of applied ecology
container_volume 54
creator Villaseñor, Nélida R.
Tulloch, Ayesha I. T.
Driscoll, Don A.
Gibbons, Philip
Lindenmayer, David B.
description 1. Unprecedented global human population growth and rapid urbanization of rural and natural lands highlight the urgent need to integrate biodiversity conservation into planning for urban growth. A challenging question for applied ecologists to answer is: What pattern of urban growth meets future housing demand whilst minimizing impacts on biodiversity? 2. We quantified the consequences for mammals of meeting future housing demand under different patterns of compact and dispersed urban growth in an urbanizing forested landscape in south-eastern Australia. Using empirical data, we predicted impacts on mammals of urban growth scenarios that varied in housing density (compact versus dispersed) and location of development for four target numbers of new dwellings. 3. We predicted that compact developments (i.e. high-density housing) reduced up to 6% of the area of occupancy or abundance of five of the six mammal species examined. In contrast, dispersed developments (i.e. low-density housing) led to increased mammal abundance overall, although results varied between species: as dwellings increased, the abundance or occurrence of two species increased (up to ~100%), one species showed no change, and three species declined (up to ~39%). 4. Two ground-dwelling mammal species (Antechinus stuartii and Rattus fuscipes) and a treedwelling species (Petaurus australis) were predicted to decline considerably under dispersed rather than compact development. The strongest negative effect of dispersed development was for Petaurus australis (a species more abundant in forested interiors) which exhibited up to a 39% reduction in abundance due to forest loss and an extended negative edge effect from urban settlements into adjacent forests. 5. Synthesis and applications. Our findings demonstrate that, when aiming to meet demand for housing, any form of compact development (i.e. high-density housing) has fewer detrimental impacts on forest-dwelling mammals than dispersed development (i.e. low-density housing). This is because compact development concentrates the negative effects of housing into a small area whilst at the same time preserving large expanses of forests and the fauna they sustain. Landscape planning and urban growth policies must consider the trade-off between the intensity of the threat and area of sprawl when aiming to reduce urbanization impacts.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/1365-2664.12800
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1897653473</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>44337941</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>44337941</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3780-d59d9f3b63c3d49419f9563c646a084ec25e26e41afe098703bc96414e14e5fb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE1PwzAMhiMEEmNw5oQUiXO3pPloc0TT-JwEBzhHaeuyTktTkm7T-PVkG-yKZcmy9T62_CJ0TcmIxhhTJkWSSslHNM0JOUGD4-QUDQhJaZIrQs_RRQgLQogSjA3Qy8TZzpQ9rmANS9dZaHtsm7axzTcE3M8BN3tBwK7GK1-YFn96t-nn2LW4NX2zBmyNtWYZLtFZHQtc_dYh-rifvk8ek9nrw9PkbpaULMtJUglVqZoVkpWs4opTVSsRG8mlITmHMhWQSuDU1EBUnhFWlEpyyiGmqAs2RLeHvZ13XysIvV64lW_jSU1zlUnBeMaianxQld6F4KHWnW-s8VtNid45pnf-6J0_eu9YJMSB2DRL2P4n189v0z_u5sAtQu_8keOcsSy-x34AxpF2Gw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1897653473</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Compact development minimizes the impacts of urban growth on native mammals</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Wiley Free Content</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Villaseñor, Nélida R. ; Tulloch, Ayesha I. T. ; Driscoll, Don A. ; Gibbons, Philip ; Lindenmayer, David B.</creator><contributor>Collen, Ben</contributor><creatorcontrib>Villaseñor, Nélida R. ; Tulloch, Ayesha I. T. ; Driscoll, Don A. ; Gibbons, Philip ; Lindenmayer, David B. ; Collen, Ben</creatorcontrib><description>1. Unprecedented global human population growth and rapid urbanization of rural and natural lands highlight the urgent need to integrate biodiversity conservation into planning for urban growth. A challenging question for applied ecologists to answer is: What pattern of urban growth meets future housing demand whilst minimizing impacts on biodiversity? 2. We quantified the consequences for mammals of meeting future housing demand under different patterns of compact and dispersed urban growth in an urbanizing forested landscape in south-eastern Australia. Using empirical data, we predicted impacts on mammals of urban growth scenarios that varied in housing density (compact versus dispersed) and location of development for four target numbers of new dwellings. 3. We predicted that compact developments (i.e. high-density housing) reduced up to 6% of the area of occupancy or abundance of five of the six mammal species examined. In contrast, dispersed developments (i.e. low-density housing) led to increased mammal abundance overall, although results varied between species: as dwellings increased, the abundance or occurrence of two species increased (up to ~100%), one species showed no change, and three species declined (up to ~39%). 4. Two ground-dwelling mammal species (Antechinus stuartii and Rattus fuscipes) and a treedwelling species (Petaurus australis) were predicted to decline considerably under dispersed rather than compact development. The strongest negative effect of dispersed development was for Petaurus australis (a species more abundant in forested interiors) which exhibited up to a 39% reduction in abundance due to forest loss and an extended negative edge effect from urban settlements into adjacent forests. 5. Synthesis and applications. Our findings demonstrate that, when aiming to meet demand for housing, any form of compact development (i.e. high-density housing) has fewer detrimental impacts on forest-dwelling mammals than dispersed development (i.e. low-density housing). This is because compact development concentrates the negative effects of housing into a small area whilst at the same time preserving large expanses of forests and the fauna they sustain. Landscape planning and urban growth policies must consider the trade-off between the intensity of the threat and area of sprawl when aiming to reduce urbanization impacts.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-8901</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1365-2664</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/1365-2664.12800</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd</publisher><subject>Abundance ; arboreal marsupials ; Biodiversity ; Demand ; Dispersion ; Dwellings ; Edge effect ; forest ; Forest management ; Forests ; ground‐dwelling mammals ; High density ; Housing ; Human populations ; Human-impacted systems ; Impact prediction ; land sharing ; land sparing ; Landscape architecture ; Mammals ; Policies ; Population decline ; Population growth ; Residential density ; residential development ; spatially explicit scenarios ; Species ; Tradeoffs ; Urban areas ; Urban development ; urban infill ; urban planning ; Urbanization ; Wildlife conservation</subject><ispartof>The Journal of applied ecology, 2017-06, Vol.54 (3), p.794-804</ispartof><rights>2017 British Ecological Society</rights><rights>2016 The Authors. Journal of Applied Ecology © 2016 British Ecological Society</rights><rights>Journal of Applied Ecology © 2017 British Ecological Society</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3780-d59d9f3b63c3d49419f9563c646a084ec25e26e41afe098703bc96414e14e5fb3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3780-d59d9f3b63c3d49419f9563c646a084ec25e26e41afe098703bc96414e14e5fb3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8624-4484</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/44337941$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/44337941$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,1411,1427,27903,27904,45553,45554,46388,46812,57996,58229</link.rule.ids></links><search><contributor>Collen, Ben</contributor><creatorcontrib>Villaseñor, Nélida R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tulloch, Ayesha I. T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Driscoll, Don A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gibbons, Philip</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lindenmayer, David B.</creatorcontrib><title>Compact development minimizes the impacts of urban growth on native mammals</title><title>The Journal of applied ecology</title><description>1. Unprecedented global human population growth and rapid urbanization of rural and natural lands highlight the urgent need to integrate biodiversity conservation into planning for urban growth. A challenging question for applied ecologists to answer is: What pattern of urban growth meets future housing demand whilst minimizing impacts on biodiversity? 2. We quantified the consequences for mammals of meeting future housing demand under different patterns of compact and dispersed urban growth in an urbanizing forested landscape in south-eastern Australia. Using empirical data, we predicted impacts on mammals of urban growth scenarios that varied in housing density (compact versus dispersed) and location of development for four target numbers of new dwellings. 3. We predicted that compact developments (i.e. high-density housing) reduced up to 6% of the area of occupancy or abundance of five of the six mammal species examined. In contrast, dispersed developments (i.e. low-density housing) led to increased mammal abundance overall, although results varied between species: as dwellings increased, the abundance or occurrence of two species increased (up to ~100%), one species showed no change, and three species declined (up to ~39%). 4. Two ground-dwelling mammal species (Antechinus stuartii and Rattus fuscipes) and a treedwelling species (Petaurus australis) were predicted to decline considerably under dispersed rather than compact development. The strongest negative effect of dispersed development was for Petaurus australis (a species more abundant in forested interiors) which exhibited up to a 39% reduction in abundance due to forest loss and an extended negative edge effect from urban settlements into adjacent forests. 5. Synthesis and applications. Our findings demonstrate that, when aiming to meet demand for housing, any form of compact development (i.e. high-density housing) has fewer detrimental impacts on forest-dwelling mammals than dispersed development (i.e. low-density housing). This is because compact development concentrates the negative effects of housing into a small area whilst at the same time preserving large expanses of forests and the fauna they sustain. Landscape planning and urban growth policies must consider the trade-off between the intensity of the threat and area of sprawl when aiming to reduce urbanization impacts.</description><subject>Abundance</subject><subject>arboreal marsupials</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Demand</subject><subject>Dispersion</subject><subject>Dwellings</subject><subject>Edge effect</subject><subject>forest</subject><subject>Forest management</subject><subject>Forests</subject><subject>ground‐dwelling mammals</subject><subject>High density</subject><subject>Housing</subject><subject>Human populations</subject><subject>Human-impacted systems</subject><subject>Impact prediction</subject><subject>land sharing</subject><subject>land sparing</subject><subject>Landscape architecture</subject><subject>Mammals</subject><subject>Policies</subject><subject>Population decline</subject><subject>Population growth</subject><subject>Residential density</subject><subject>residential development</subject><subject>spatially explicit scenarios</subject><subject>Species</subject><subject>Tradeoffs</subject><subject>Urban areas</subject><subject>Urban development</subject><subject>urban infill</subject><subject>urban planning</subject><subject>Urbanization</subject><subject>Wildlife conservation</subject><issn>0021-8901</issn><issn>1365-2664</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkE1PwzAMhiMEEmNw5oQUiXO3pPloc0TT-JwEBzhHaeuyTktTkm7T-PVkG-yKZcmy9T62_CJ0TcmIxhhTJkWSSslHNM0JOUGD4-QUDQhJaZIrQs_RRQgLQogSjA3Qy8TZzpQ9rmANS9dZaHtsm7axzTcE3M8BN3tBwK7GK1-YFn96t-nn2LW4NX2zBmyNtWYZLtFZHQtc_dYh-rifvk8ek9nrw9PkbpaULMtJUglVqZoVkpWs4opTVSsRG8mlITmHMhWQSuDU1EBUnhFWlEpyyiGmqAs2RLeHvZ13XysIvV64lW_jSU1zlUnBeMaianxQld6F4KHWnW-s8VtNid45pnf-6J0_eu9YJMSB2DRL2P4n189v0z_u5sAtQu_8keOcsSy-x34AxpF2Gw</recordid><startdate>20170601</startdate><enddate>20170601</enddate><creator>Villaseñor, Nélida R.</creator><creator>Tulloch, Ayesha I. T.</creator><creator>Driscoll, Don A.</creator><creator>Gibbons, Philip</creator><creator>Lindenmayer, David B.</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd</general><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8624-4484</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20170601</creationdate><title>Compact development minimizes the impacts of urban growth on native mammals</title><author>Villaseñor, Nélida R. ; Tulloch, Ayesha I. T. ; Driscoll, Don A. ; Gibbons, Philip ; Lindenmayer, David B.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3780-d59d9f3b63c3d49419f9563c646a084ec25e26e41afe098703bc96414e14e5fb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Abundance</topic><topic>arboreal marsupials</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Demand</topic><topic>Dispersion</topic><topic>Dwellings</topic><topic>Edge effect</topic><topic>forest</topic><topic>Forest management</topic><topic>Forests</topic><topic>ground‐dwelling mammals</topic><topic>High density</topic><topic>Housing</topic><topic>Human populations</topic><topic>Human-impacted systems</topic><topic>Impact prediction</topic><topic>land sharing</topic><topic>land sparing</topic><topic>Landscape architecture</topic><topic>Mammals</topic><topic>Policies</topic><topic>Population decline</topic><topic>Population growth</topic><topic>Residential density</topic><topic>residential development</topic><topic>spatially explicit scenarios</topic><topic>Species</topic><topic>Tradeoffs</topic><topic>Urban areas</topic><topic>Urban development</topic><topic>urban infill</topic><topic>urban planning</topic><topic>Urbanization</topic><topic>Wildlife conservation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Villaseñor, Nélida R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tulloch, Ayesha I. T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Driscoll, Don A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gibbons, Philip</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lindenmayer, David B.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><jtitle>The Journal of applied ecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Villaseñor, Nélida R.</au><au>Tulloch, Ayesha I. T.</au><au>Driscoll, Don A.</au><au>Gibbons, Philip</au><au>Lindenmayer, David B.</au><au>Collen, Ben</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Compact development minimizes the impacts of urban growth on native mammals</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of applied ecology</jtitle><date>2017-06-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>54</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>794</spage><epage>804</epage><pages>794-804</pages><issn>0021-8901</issn><eissn>1365-2664</eissn><abstract>1. Unprecedented global human population growth and rapid urbanization of rural and natural lands highlight the urgent need to integrate biodiversity conservation into planning for urban growth. A challenging question for applied ecologists to answer is: What pattern of urban growth meets future housing demand whilst minimizing impacts on biodiversity? 2. We quantified the consequences for mammals of meeting future housing demand under different patterns of compact and dispersed urban growth in an urbanizing forested landscape in south-eastern Australia. Using empirical data, we predicted impacts on mammals of urban growth scenarios that varied in housing density (compact versus dispersed) and location of development for four target numbers of new dwellings. 3. We predicted that compact developments (i.e. high-density housing) reduced up to 6% of the area of occupancy or abundance of five of the six mammal species examined. In contrast, dispersed developments (i.e. low-density housing) led to increased mammal abundance overall, although results varied between species: as dwellings increased, the abundance or occurrence of two species increased (up to ~100%), one species showed no change, and three species declined (up to ~39%). 4. Two ground-dwelling mammal species (Antechinus stuartii and Rattus fuscipes) and a treedwelling species (Petaurus australis) were predicted to decline considerably under dispersed rather than compact development. The strongest negative effect of dispersed development was for Petaurus australis (a species more abundant in forested interiors) which exhibited up to a 39% reduction in abundance due to forest loss and an extended negative edge effect from urban settlements into adjacent forests. 5. Synthesis and applications. Our findings demonstrate that, when aiming to meet demand for housing, any form of compact development (i.e. high-density housing) has fewer detrimental impacts on forest-dwelling mammals than dispersed development (i.e. low-density housing). This is because compact development concentrates the negative effects of housing into a small area whilst at the same time preserving large expanses of forests and the fauna they sustain. Landscape planning and urban growth policies must consider the trade-off between the intensity of the threat and area of sprawl when aiming to reduce urbanization impacts.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/1365-2664.12800</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8624-4484</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0021-8901
ispartof The Journal of applied ecology, 2017-06, Vol.54 (3), p.794-804
issn 0021-8901
1365-2664
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1897653473
source Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete; Jstor Complete Legacy; Wiley Free Content; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Abundance
arboreal marsupials
Biodiversity
Demand
Dispersion
Dwellings
Edge effect
forest
Forest management
Forests
ground‐dwelling mammals
High density
Housing
Human populations
Human-impacted systems
Impact prediction
land sharing
land sparing
Landscape architecture
Mammals
Policies
Population decline
Population growth
Residential density
residential development
spatially explicit scenarios
Species
Tradeoffs
Urban areas
Urban development
urban infill
urban planning
Urbanization
Wildlife conservation
title Compact development minimizes the impacts of urban growth on native mammals
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-21T15%3A05%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Compact%20development%20minimizes%20the%20impacts%20of%20urban%20growth%20on%20native%20mammals&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20applied%20ecology&rft.au=Villase%C3%B1or,%20N%C3%A9lida%20R.&rft.date=2017-06-01&rft.volume=54&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=794&rft.epage=804&rft.pages=794-804&rft.issn=0021-8901&rft.eissn=1365-2664&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/1365-2664.12800&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E44337941%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1897653473&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=44337941&rfr_iscdi=true