Värdering / Referenser

Värdering av taksystem

Ekosystemtjänst / Systemtyp	Sedumtak 50-80mm	Sedum- Ört > 80mm	Biotoptak > 100mm	Odlingstak > 300mm	Parktak > 400mm	Blågrönt tak
Biologisk mångfald	3	3	4	4	4	4
Naturliga kretslopp	3	3	3	4	4	3
Jordmånsbildning	3	3	3	4	4	3
Mikroklimat	3	3	4	4	4	4
Kolinlagring	3	3	4	4	4	3
Extremväder	3	3	4	4	4	4
Luftrening	3	3	4	4	4	3
Bullerreducering	3	3	4	4	4	3
Vattenrening	3	3	3	3	3	3
Vattenfördröjning	3	3	4	4	4	4
Vattenreducering	3	3	4	4	5	4
Pollinering	3	3	4	4	4	4
Fysisk hälsa	3	3	3	3	3	3
Mental hälsa	3	4	4	4	4	4
Kunskap & Inspiration	4	4	4	4	4	4
Social interaktion	4	4	4	4	4	4
Matproduktion	1	2	2	3	3	2

Referenser på taksystem

Referenslista finns längst ner på sidan.

Ekosystemtjänst / Systemtyp	Sedumtak 50-80mm	Sedum- Ört > 80mm	Biotoptak > 100mm	Odlingstak > 300mm	Parktak > 400mm	Blågrönt tak
Biologisk mångfald	4, 76	4, 76	4, 76	4, 76	4, 76	4, 76
Naturliga kretslopp	10	10	10	10	10	10
Jordmånsbildning	9	9	9	9	9	9
Mikroklimat	2, 4	2, 4	2, 4	2, 4	2, 4	2, 4
Kolinlagring	1, 80	1, 80	1, 80	1, 80	1, 80	1, 80
Extremväder	2, 4	2, 4	2, 4	2, 4	2, 4	2, 4
Luftrening	2	2	2	2	2	2
Bullerreducering	6, 7	6, 7	6, 7	6, 7	6, 7	6, 7
Vattenrening	8	8	8	8	8	8
Vattenfördröjning	3	3, 4	3, 4	3, 4	3, 4	3, 4
Vattenreducering	3, 4	3, 4	3	3	3	3
Pollinering	4, 77	4	4	4	4	4
Fysisk hälsa	5	5	5	5	5	5
Mental hälsa	45	45	45	45	45	45
Kunskap & Inspiration	46	46	46	46	46	46
Social interaktion	45	45	45	45	45	45
Matproduktion	–	–	–	–	–	–

Värdering av väggsystem

Ekosystemtjänst / Systemtyp	Levande väggar	Gröna fasader
Biologisk mångfald	4	3
Naturliga kretslopp	2	2
Jordmånsbildning	1	1
Mikroklimat	3	3
Kolinlagring	3	3
Extremväder	3	3
Luftrening	4	3
Bullerreducering	4	3
Vattenrening	3	3
Vattenfördröjning	4	3
Vattenreducering	4	3
Pollinering	4	3
Fysisk hälsa	3	3
Mental hälsa	4	4
Kunskap & Inspiration	4	4
Social interaktion	4	4
Matproduktion	–	–

Referenser på väggsystem

Referenslista finns längst ner på sidan.

Ekosystemtjänst / Systemtyp	Levande väggar	Gröna fasader
Biologisk mångfald	55, 56	55, 56
Naturliga kretslopp	55, 56	55, 56
Jordmånsbildning	55, 56	55, 56
Mikroklimat	–	–
Kolinlagring	65, 66	67, 68
Extremväder	–	–
Luftrening	14, 15	–
Bullerreducering	13	–
Vattenrening	11, 12	–
Vattenfördröjning	–	–
Vattenreducering	11, 12	–
Pollinering	55, 56	55, 56
Fysisk hälsa	5	5
Mental hälsa	5	5
Kunskap & Inspiration	5	5
Social interaktion	5	5
Matproduktion	–	–

Värdering av marksystem

Ekosystemtjänst / Systemtyp	Träd-plantering	Skelett-bädd	Regn-bädd	Svack-dike	Infiltrations-stråk	Över-svämningsyta	Damm	Urbana ängar	Avrinning till grönyta
Biologisk mångfald	4	–	4	3	3	3	4	5	–
Naturliga kretslopp	3	–	3	3	3	3	4	5	–
Jordmånsbildning	3	–	3	3	3	3	1	5	–
Mikroklimat	5	3	3	3	3	3	4	4	3
Kolinlagring	5	3	4	3	3	3	3	3	3
Extremväder	4	4	4	4	4	5	4	2	4
Luftrening	5	1	3	1	1	1	3	2	1
Bullerreducering	4	1	3	4	3	3	4	3	1
Vattenrening	4	4	5	4	5	3	5	4	3
Vattenfördröjning	4	4	5	4	4	5	5	4	4
Vattenreducering	4	4	5	4	4	5	5	4	4
Pollinering	4	–	4	3	3	3	3	5	–
Fysisk hälsa	4	–	3	–	3	4	3	4	4
Mental hälsa	4	3	4	–	3	3	5	4	3
Kunskap & Inspiration	4	4	4	–	4	3	4	4	3
Social interaktion	4	3	4	–	3	4	4	4	4
Matproduktion	–	1	1	1	1	–	1	1	1

Referenser för marksystem

Referenslista finns längst ner på sidan.

Ekosystemtjänst / Systemtyp	Träd-plantering	Skelett-bädd	Regn-bädd	Svack-dike	Infiltrations-stråk	Över-svämningsyta	Damm	Urbana ängar	Avrinning till grönyta
Biologisk mångfald	39, 40, 78	–	48	54, 79	69	74	59, 60	63, 64	72
Naturliga kretslopp	39, 40	–	48	54	69	–	59	63, 64	–
Jordmånsbildning	39, 40	–	48	54	69	–	59	64	–
Mikroklimat	16-20, 34	58	48	–	–	74	59	64	72
Kolinlagring	27-31, 41	–	53	53	–	74	–	64	72
Extremväder	16-20	58	48	–	69	74	59	64	72
Luftrening	21-24	–	–	–	–	–	–	64	–
Bullerreducering	35	–	–	–	–	–	62	64	–
Vattenrening	43, 44	58	48, 51, 52	54	–	74	59	64	57
Vattenfördröjning	25	58	48, 51, 52	54	70	74	59	64	57
Vattenreducering	25	58	48, 51, 52	54	70	74	59	64	57
Pollinering	42	–	–	–	–	–	–	64	–
Fysisk hälsa	32	61	73	–	–	75	59	64	72
Mental hälsa	33	61	73	–	69	75	59	64	72
Kunskap & Inspiration	33	61	73	–	69	75	59	64	72
Social interaktion	36-37	61	73	–	69	75	59	64	72
Matproduktion	38	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–

Referenslista

1. Getter et al. 2009 Carbon Sequestration Potential of Extensive Green Roofs. doi: 10.1021/es901539x
2. Francis and Jensen 2017.  Marina Bergen Jensen. Benefits of green roofs: A systematic review of the evidence for three ecosystem services, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, Volume 28,p 167-176 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.10.015.
3. Nguyen, C.N.; Muttil, N.;Tariq, M.A.U.R.; Ng, A.W.M. Quantifying the Benefits and Ecosystem Services Provided by Green Roofs—A Review. Water 2022, 14, 68. https://doi.org/10.3390/ w14010068 
4. Oberndofer et al 2007. Green Roofs as Urban Ecosystems: Ecological Structures, Functions, and Services Bioscience, Vol. 57 No. 10 https://doi.org/10.1641/B571005
5. Ode Sang, Å., Thorpert, P., Fransson, A-M. (2022) Planning, Designing, and Managing Green Roofs and Green Walls for Public Health: An Ecosystem Services Approach Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 10: 804500 https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2022.804500
6. Yang and Jeon, 2020. Design strategies and elements of building envelope for urban acoustic environment, Building and Environment, Volume 182, 107121. 
7. Balderrama, A.; Kang, J.; Prieto, A.; Luna-Navarro, A.; Arztmann, D.; Knaack, U. Effects of Façades on Urban Acoustic Environment and Soundscape: A Systematic Review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 9670. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159670
8. Berndtsson JC. 2010. Green roof performance towards management of runoff water quantity and quality: A review. Ecological Engineering 36 (2010) 351–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2009.12.014
9. Schrader S, Böning M. 2006. Soil formation on green roofs and its contribution to urban biodiversity with emphasis on Collembolans, Pedobiologia 50,4, 347-356, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedobi.2006.06.003.
10. Buffam, I., Mitchell, M. (2015). Nutrient Cycling in Green Roof Ecosystems. In: Sutton, R. (eds) Green Roof Ecosystems. Ecological Studies, vol 223. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14983-7_5
11. Boano F et al. 2020. A review of nature-based solutions for greywater treatment: Applications, hydraulic design, and environmental benefits Sci. Total Environ., 711 (2020), pp. 1-26.
12. Prodanovic V. 2019. Designing green walls for greywater treatment: The role of plants and operational factors on nutrient removal, Ecological Engineering, 130, 184-195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2019.02.019.
13. Van Renterghem T. et al. 2013. The potential of building envelope greening to achieve quietness, Building and Environment, Volume 61, Pages 34-44, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.12.001.
14. Ottelé M et al. 2010. Quantifying the deposition of particulate matter on climber vegetation on living walls, Ecological Engineering, Volume 36, Issue 2, 154-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2009.02.007.
15. Sternberg T. et al. 2010.Dust particulate absorption by ivy (Hedera helix L) on historic walls in urban environments. Science of The Total Environment, Volume 409, Issue 1, 162-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.09.022.
16. Erik Gómez-Baggethun, David N. Barton Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning Ecol. Econ., 86 (2013), pp. 235-245
17. C. Dobbs, A.A. Eleuterio, J.D. Amaya, J. Montoya, D. Kendal. The benefits of urban and peri-urban forestry. Unasylva, 69 (250) (2018), pp. 22-29
18. L. Zardo, D. Geneletti, M. Pérez-Soba, M. Van Eupen Estimating the cooling capacity of green infrastructures to support urban planning Ecosyst. Serv., 26 A (2017), pp. 225-235, 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.06.016
19. R. Sun, L. Chen Effects of green space dynamics on urban heat islands: Mitigation and diversification Ecosyst. Serv., 23 (2017), pp. 38-46, 10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.11.011
20. P. Bolund, S. Hunhammar. Ecosystem services in urban areasEcol. Econ., 29 (2) (1999), pp. 293-301, 10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00013-0
21. Yang, J., McBride, J., Zhou, J. & Sun, Z. (2005). The urban forests in Beijing and its role in air pollution reduction. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 3, p. 65-78.
22. E.G. McPherson, D. Nowak, G. Heisler, S. Grimmond, C. Souch, R. Grant, R. Rowntre
    Quantifying urban forest structure, function, and value: the Chicago urban forest project
    Urban Ecosystems, 1 (1997), pp. 49-61, 10.1023/A:1014350822458
23. F. Baró, L. Chaparro, E. Gómez-Baggethun, J. Langemeyer, D.J. Nowak, J. Terradas Contribution of ecosystem services to air quality and climate change mitigation policies: The case of urban forests in Barcelona, Spain Ambio, 43 (4) (2014), pp. 466-479, 10.1007/s13280-014-0507-x
24. F. Baró, E. Gómez-Baggethun, D. Haase Ecosystem service bundles along the urban-rural gradient: Insights for landscape planning and management Ecosyst. Serv., 24 (2017), pp. 147-159, 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.02.021
25. V. Pappalrado, D. La Rosa, A. Campisano, P. La Greca The potential of green infrastructure application in urban runoff control for land use planning: A preliminary evaluation from a southern Italy case study Ecosyst. Serv., 26 B (2017), pp. 345-354, 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.04.015
26. D.J. Nowak, D.E. Crane Carbon sequestration and storage by urban trees in the USA Environ. Pollut., 116 (3) (2002), pp. 381-389
27. Mari Ariluoma, Juudit Ottelin, Ranja Hautamäki, Eeva-Maria Tuhkanen, Miia Mänttäri, Carbon sequestration and storage potential of urban green in residential yards: A case study from Helsinki, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, Volume 57, 2021, 126939, ISSN 1618-8667, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126939.
28. Leena Lindén, Anu Riikonen, Heikki Setälä, Vesa Yli-Pelkonen, Quantifying carbon stocks in urban parks under cold climate conditions, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, Volume 49, 2020, 126633, ISSN 1618-8667, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126633.
29. Lind E. 2020. Hur grönt är ett stadsträd? : ett stadsträds klimatavtryck ur ett livscykelperspektiv. Alnarp: SLU, Dept. of Landscape Architecture, Planning and Management
30. Råberg m.fl. 2022. Potentiella kolsänkor i Malmö stad. RISE och Miljöförvaltningen, Malmö stad.
31. Deak, J, och J. Österberg, 2020, iTree Sverige, för strategiskt arbete med ekosystemtjänster, SLU, https://www.tradforeningen.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Slutrapport-i-Tree-Sverige.pdf
32. Burt and Feng. Urban green space, tree canopy and prevention of cardiometabolic diseases: a multilevel longitudinal study of 46 786 Australians. Int J Epidemiol. 2020 Jun 1;49(3):926-933. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyz239.
33. Astell-Burt and Feng. Does sleep grow on trees? A longitudinal study to investigate potential prevention of insufficient sleep with different types of urban green space. SSM Popul Health. 2019 Oct 7;10:100497. doi: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2019.100497. 
34. Rahman, M.A., Moser, A., Rötzer, T. et al. Comparing the transpirational and shading effects of two contrasting urban tree species. Urban Ecosyst 22, 683–697 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-019-00853-x
35. De Carvalho, R.M.; Szlafsztein, C.F. Urban vegetation loss and ecosystem services: The influence on climate regulation and noise and air pollution. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 245, 844–852
36. Nesbitt, L., Hotte, N., Barron, S., Cowan, J., & Sheppard, S. R. J. (2017). The social and economic value of cultural ecosystem services pro‐ vided by urban forests in North America: A review and suggestions for future research. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 25, 103–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.05.005
37. Turner-Skoff, J. B., & Cavender, N. (2019). The benefits of trees for livable and sustainable communities. Plants, People, Planet, 1, 323–335. https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.39
38. Clark, K.H., Nicholas, K.A. Introducing urban food forestry: a multifunctional approach to increase food security and provide ecosystem services. Landscape Ecol 28, 1649–1669 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-013-9903-z
39. Nielsen, A.B., van den Bosch, M., Maruthaveeran, S., et al., 2013. Species richness in urban parks and its drivers: A review of empirical evidence. Urban Ecosystems 17: 305-327. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11252-0130316-1. 
40. Cornelis, J., Hermy, M., 2004. Biodiversity relationships in urban and suburban parks in Flanders. Landscape and Urban Planning 69(4): 385-401. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204603002779.
41. Erlandsson M m.fl. 2022. Negativa klimatutsläpp genom användning av biogena kolsänkor. IVL Rapport 689
42. Somme, L., Moquet, L., Quinet, M. et al. Food in a row: urban trees offer valuable floral resources to pollinating insects. Urban Ecosyst 19, 1149–1161 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-016-0555-z
43. Denman EC, May PB, Moore GM. The Potential Role of Urban Forests in Removing Nutrients from Stormwater. J Environ Qual. 2016 Jan;45(1):207-14. doi: 10.2134/jeq2015.01.0047. PMID: 26828176.
44. Janke BD, Finlay JC, Hobbie SE. Trees and Streets as Drivers of Urban Stormwater Nutrient Pollution. Environ Sci Technol. 2017 Sep 5;51(17):9569-9579. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.7b02225. Epub 2017 Aug 11. PMID: 28756675.
45. Mesimäki, M.; Hauru, K.; Kotze, D.J.; Lehvävirta, S. Neo-spaces for urban livability? Urbanites’ versatile mental images of green roofs in the Helsinki metropolitan area, Finland. Land Use Policy 2017, 61, 587–600
46. Loder, A. (2014). ’There’s a meadow outside my workplace’: a phenomenological exploration of aesthetics and green roofs in Chicago and Toronto. Landscape Urban Plann. 126, 94–106. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.01.008
47. Mesimäki, M., Hauru, K., and Lehvävirta, S. (2019). Do small green roofs have the possibility to offer recreational and experiential benefits in a dense urban area? a case study in Helsinki, Finland. Urban Forestry Urban Green. 40, 114–124. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2018.10.005
48. Kasprzyk M et al. 2022. Technical solutions and benefits of introducing rain gardens – Gdańsk case study. Science of The Total Environment Volume 835, 20 August 2022, 155487
49. Carlson, Björnfors, Persson. 2019. Omprojektering av parkeringsytor En väg mot multifunktionella gröna ytor. https://stud.epsilon.slu.se/14574/11/carlsson_l_et_al_190515.pdf
50. Prokop, G., Jobstmann, H. & Schönbauer, A. (2011). Report on best practices for limiting soil sealing and mitigating its effects. European commission – DG environment. (Technical report – 2011 – 050). http://ec.europa.eu/environment/soil/pdf/sealing/Soil%20sealing%20- %20Final%20Report.pdf 
51. Dunnet, N & Clayden, A. (2007). Rain gardens: sustainable rainwater manangement for the garden and the designed landscape. Timber Press, Inc. Portland 
52. Ishimatsu, K., Ito, K., Mitani, Y. et al. Use of rain gardens for stormwater management in urban design and planning. Landscape Ecol Eng 13, 205–212 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355-016-0309-3
53. Emad Kavehei, G.A. Jenkins, M.F. Adame, C. Lemckert, Carbon sequestration potential for mitigating the carbon footprint of green stormwater infrastructure, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 94, 2018, Pages 1179-1191, ISSN 1364-0321, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.07.002.
54. Sañudo-Fontaneda, L.A.; Roces-García, J.; Coupe, S.J.; Barrios-Crespo, E.; Rey-Mahía, C.; Álvarez-Rabanal, F.P.; Lashford, C. Descriptive Analysis of the Performance of a Vegetated Swale through Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring: A Case Study from Coventry, UK. Water 2020, 12, 2781. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12102781
55. Robert A. Francis, Jamie Lorimer, Urban reconciliation ecology: The potential of living roofs and walls, Journal of Environmental Management, Volume 92, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 1429-1437, ISSN 0301-4797, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2011.01.012.
56. Chiquet, C., Dover, J.W. & Mitchell, P. Birds and the urban environment: the value of green walls. Urban Ecosyst 16, 453–462 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-012-0277-9
57. L. Prudencio, S.E. Null Stormwater management and ecosystem services: a review Environ. Res. Lett., 13 (3) (2018), p. 033002, 10.1088/1748-9326/aaa81a
58. https://miljobarometern.stockholm.se/vatten/atgarder/skelettjord/
59. Krivtsov V, Forbes H, Birkinshaw S, Olive V, Chamberlain D, Buckman J, Yahr R, Arthur S, Christie D, Monteiro Y, Diekonigin C. 2022. Ecosystem services provided by urban ponds and green spaces: a detailed study of a semi-natural site with global importance for research. Blue-Green Syst. 4(1):1–23.
60. Hill M. J., Biggs J., Thornhill I., Briers R. A., Gledhill D. G., White J. C., Wood P. J. & Hassall C. 2017 Urban ponds as an aquatic biodiversity resource in modified landscapes. Global Change Biology 23, 986–999.
61. Higgins S. L., Thomas F., Goldsmith B., Brooks S. J., Hassall C., Harlow J., Stone D., Völker S. & White P. 2019 Urban freshwaters, biodiversity, and human health and well-being: setting an interdisciplinary research agenda. WIREs Water 6, e1339.
62. You, J., Lee, P. J., & Jeon, J. Y. (2010). Evaluating water sounds to improve the soundscape of urban areas affected by traffic noise. Noise Control Engineering Journal, 58(5), 477– 483
63. Norton, B.A.; Bending, G.D.; Clark, R.; Corstanje, R.; Dunnett, N.; Evans, K.L.; Grafius, D.R.; Gravestock, E.; Grice, S.M.;
    Harris, J.A.; et al. Urban meadows as an alternative to short mown grassland: Effects of composition and height on biodiversity. Ecol. Appl. 2019, 29, e01946
64. Paudel S and States SL. 2023 Urban green spaces and sustainability: Exploring the ecosystem services and disservices of grassy lawns versus floral meadows, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening,Volume 84,2023, 127932, ISSN 1618-8667, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2023.127932.
65. Pulselli,R.M., Saladini,F., Neri,E., Bastianoni, S.,2014. A comprehensive lifecycle evaluation of vertical greenery systems based on systemic indicators. WITTrans. Ecol. Envir. 191,1017–1024.
66. Pan,L.,Chu, L.M.,2016. Energy saving potential and lifecycle environmental impacts of a vertical greenery system in HongKong: a case study. Build.Environ. 96,293–300.
67. Browning, B., Garvin, C., Fox, B., Cook, R., Labruto, L., Kallianpurkar, N., Ryan, C., Watson, S &  Knop, T (2012).  The economics of biophilia: Why designing  with nature in mind makes  financial sense.  Terrapin.  http://www.lmla.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/The-Economics-of-Biophilia_Terrapin-  Bright-Green-2012e.pdf  [
68. Larcher, F., Battisti, L., Bianco, L., Giordano, R., Montacchini, E., Serra, V. & Tedesco, S. (2018).  Sustainability of Living Wall Systems Through An Ecosystem Services Lens.  Urban  Horticulture  . Cham: Springer International Publishing,  31–51.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67017-1_2 
69. https://www.stockholmvattenochavfall.se/globalassets/dagvatten/pdf/infistrak_h.pdf
70. Qin, Y. Urban Flooding Mitigation Techniques: A Systematic Review and Future Studies. Water 2020, 12, 3579. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12123579
71. Jennifer A. P. Drake, Andrea Bradford, Jiri Marsalek; Review of environmental performance of permeable pavement systems: state of the knowledge. Water Quality Research Journal 1 August 2013; 48 (3): 203–222. doi: https://doi.org/10.2166/wqrjc.2013.055
72. Individual Natural Water Retention Measures. Infiltration basins. http://nwrm.eu/sites/default/files/nwrm_ressources/u12_-_infiltration_basins.pdf
73. Bąk, J.; Barjenbruch, M. Benefits, Inconveniences, and Facilities of the Application of Rain Gardens in Urban Spaces from the Perspective of Climate Change—A Review. Water 2022, 14, 1153. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14071153
74. Natarajan, P.; Davis, A. P. (2016a). Ecological Assessment of a Transitioned Stormwater Infiltration Basin. Ecol. Eng., 90, 261-267.  
75. Med plats för dagvattnet – Ett gestaltningsförslag för Eriksbergsparken och Västertorg i Uppsala. https://stud.epsilon.slu.se/15777/1/thorsell_p_200817.pdf
76. Wang, L., Wang, H., Wang, Y. et al. The relationship between green roofs and urban biodiversity: a systematic review. Biodivers Conserv 31, 1771–1796 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-022-02436-3
77. Jacobs, J., Beenaerts, N. & Artois, T. Green roofs and pollinators, useful green spots for some wild bee species (Hymenoptera: Anthophila), but not so much for hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae). Sci Rep 13, 1449 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-28698-7
78. Matthew J. Lundquist, Madison R. Weisend, Hope H. Kenmore, Insect biodiversity in urban tree pit habitats, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, Volume 78, 2022, 127788, ISSN 1618-8667, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2022.127788.
79. Fatemeh Kazemi, Simon Beecham, Joan Gibbs, Streetscape biodiversity and the role of bioretention swales in an Australian urban environment, Landscape and Urban Planning, Volume 101, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 139-148, ISSN 0169-2046, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.02.006.
80. Mark E. Mitchell, Tobias Emilsson, Ishi Buffam, Carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus variation along a green roof chronosequence: Implications for green roof ecosystem development, Ecological Engineering, Volume 164, 2021, 106211, ISSN 0925-8574, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2021.106211.