Green Infrastructures (GI) are considered a benefit, inter alia, for territorial development because they provide multiple functions on the same spatial area. The underlying principle of GI is that the same area of land can offer many environmental, social, cultural and economic benefits at the same time, provided its ecosystems are in a healthy condition. However, valuable European ecosystems are being degraded by land fragmentation, urban expansion and the building of transport and energy infrastructures. This affects habitats and species and reduces the spatial and functional coherence of the landscape. Degraded ecosystems have lower species richness and are unable to offer the same services as healthy ecosystems. Ecosystem services cover the benefits that can be derived from ecosystems, including among others the provision by nature of food, materials, clean water, clean air, climate regulation, flood prevention, pollination and recreation.
How do European regions and cities fare in offering access to GI and ecosystem services, and meeting the existing demand for regulating, provisioning and cultural services offered by GI and ecosystems? In case demands are not sufficiently met, what are the consequences?
What are the potential effects, both positive and negative ones, of GI and ecosystem services on the development of regions and cities? Which territories can benefit most of such potential?
How do European regions and cities look at the concept of GI and ecosystem services? What kind of knowledge do they need to anticipate and benefit from this opportunity?
To which degree is GI rewarding from an economic point of view, particularly in a long-term perspective? What could policy makers do to overcome the potential resistance of the private sector to GI investment?
How can GI be further integrated in spatial planning and territorial development? How can GI contribute to improve welfare in urban regions (e.g. by creating or restoring recreational and leisure parks, multiple-use forest parks and trekking networks)? How can national, regional and local authorities as well as the private sector be supported to develop GI in the most effective way and to invest in ecosystem services?
README.txt: This file
main-data/ind_1137_gi_sd_fl_csv.zip: Green Infrastructure balancing supply and demand for flood regulation (GI_SD_fl)
main-data/ind_1034_mfgi_ind_csv_bmzCum3.zip: Green infrastructure - multifunctionality (mfGI_ind)
main-data/ind_1050_gi_rel_csv.zip: Predominant relations in the Green Infrastructure network between ecosystem services (GI_rel)
main-data/ind_1025_spgi_ind_csv_0yYQqm9.zip: Green infrastructure - spatial distribution (spGI_ind)
main-data/ind_1023_chaguacc_csv.zip: Changes of Green Urban Areas (CHAGUACC)
Ratio between green urban areas inside the core city and the FUA
other-data/QGIS_Map11.zip: Ratio between green urban areas inside the core city and the FUA
Share of green urban areas (for core city, FUAs and FUAs without core city)
other-data/QGIS_Map2_Annex.zip: Share of green urban areas (for FUAs without core city)
other-data/QGIS_Map1_Annex.zip: Share of green urban areas (for FUAs)
other-data/QGIS_Map10.zip: Share of green urban areas (for core city)
Contribution of protected ‘hubs’ to the total area of potential GI network at landscape level