The relational shift in urban ecology: From place and structures to multiple modes of coproduction for positive urban futures.

This perspective emerged from ongoing dialogue among ecologists initiated by a virtual workshop in 2021. A transdisciplinary group of researchers and practitioners conclude that urban ecology as a science can better contribute to positive futures by focusing on relationships, rather than prioritizing urban structures. Insights from other relational disciplines, such as political ecology, governance, urban design, and conservation also contribute. Relationality is especially powerful given the need to rapidly adapt to the changing social and biophysical drivers of global urban systems. These unprecedented dynamics are better understood through a relational lens than traditional structural questions. We use three kinds of coproduction-of the social-ecological world, of science, and of actionable knowledge-to identify key processes of coproduction within urban places. Connectivity is crucial to relational urban ecology. Eight themes emerge from the joint explorations of the paper and point toward social action for improving life and environment in urban futures.

A transformative shift in urban ecology toward a more active and relevant future for the field and for cities.

This paper builds on the expansion of urban ecology from a biologically based discipline-ecology in the city-to an increasingly interdisciplinary field-ecology of the city-to a transdisciplinary, knowledge to action endeavor-an ecology for and with the city. We build on this "prepositional journey" by proposing a transformative shift in urban ecology, and we present a framework for how the field may continue this shift. We conceptualize that urban ecology is in a state of flux, and that this shift is needed to transform urban ecology into a more engaged and action based field, and one that includes a diversity of actors willing to participate in the future of their cities. In this transformative shift, these actors will engage, collaborate, and participate in a continuous spiral of knowledge → action → knowledge spiral and back to knowledge loop, with the goal of co producing sustainable and resilient solutions to myriad urban challenges. Our framework for this transformative shift includes three pathways: (1) a repeating knowledge → action → knowledge spiral of ideas, information, and solutions produced by a diverse community of agents of urban change working together in an "urban sandbox"; (2) incorporation of a social-ecological-technological systems framework in this spiral and expanding the spiral temporally to include the "deep future," where future scenarios are based on a visioning of seemingly unimaginable or plausible future states of cities that are sustainable and resilient; and (3) the expansion of the spiral in space, to include rural areas and places that are not yet cities. The three interrelated pathways that define the transformative shift demonstrate the power of an urban ecology that has moved beyond urban systems science and into a realm where collaborations among diverse knowledges and voices are working together to understand cities and what is urban while producing sustainable solutions to contemporary challenges and envisioning futures of socially, ecologically, and technologically resilient cities. We present case study examples of each of the three pathways that make up this transformative shift in urban ecology and discuss both limitations and opportunities for future research and action with this transdisciplinary broadening of the field.

Forging just ecologies: 25 years of urban long-term ecological research collaboration.

We ask how environmental justice and urban ecology have influenced one another over the past 25 years in the context of the US Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) program and Baltimore Ecosystem Study (BES) project. BES began after environmental justice emerged through activism and scholarship in the 1980s but spans a period of increasing awareness among ecologists and environmental practitioners. The work in Baltimore provides a detailed example of how ecological research has been affected by a growing understanding of environmental justice. The shift shows how unjust environmental outcomes emerge and are reinforced over time by systemic discrimination and exclusion. We do not comprehensively review the literature on environmental justice in urban ecology but do present four brief cases from the Caribbean, Africa, and Asia, to illustrate the global relevance of the topic. The example cases demonstrate the necessity for continuous engagement with communities in addressing environmental problem solving.

Vegetation cover in relation to socioeconomic factors in a tropical city assessed from sub-meter resolution imagery.

Fine-scale information about urban vegetation and social-ecological relationships is crucial to inform both urban planning and ecological research, and high spatial resolution imagery is a valuable tool for assessing urban areas. However, urban ecology and remote sensing have largely focused on cities in temperate zones. Our goal was to characterize urban vegetation cover with sub-meter (<1 m) resolution aerial imagery, and identify social-ecological relationships of urban vegetation patterns in a tropical city, the San Juan Metropolitan Area, Puerto Rico. Our specific objectives were to (1) map vegetation cover using sub-meter spatial resolution (0.3-m) imagery, (2) quantify the amount of residential and non-residential vegetation, and (3) investigate the relationship between patterns of urban vegetation vs. socioeconomic and environmental factors. We found that 61% of the San Juan Metropolitan Area was green and that our combination of high spatial resolution imagery and object-based classification was highly successful for extracting vegetation cover in a moist tropical city (97% accuracy). In addition, simple spatial pattern analysis allowed us to separate residential from non-residential vegetation with 76% accuracy, and patterns of residential and non-residential vegetation varied greatly across the city. Both socioeconomic (e.g., population density, building age, detached homes) and environmental variables (e.g., topography) were important in explaining variations in vegetation cover in our spatial regression models. However, important socioeconomic drivers found in cities in temperate zones, such as income and home value, were not important in San Juan. Climatic and cultural differences between tropical and temperate cities may result in different social-ecological relationships. Our study provides novel information for local land use planners, highlights the value of high spatial resolution remote sensing data to advance ecological research and urban planning in tropical cities, and emphasizes the need for more studies in tropical cities.

Framework to evaluate ecological and social outcomes of collaborative management: lessons from implementation with a northern Arizona collaborative group.

As collaborative groups gain popularity as an alternative means for addressing conflict over management of public lands, the need for methods to evaluate their effectiveness in achieving ecological and social goals increases. However, frameworks that examine both effectiveness of the collaborative process and its outcomes are poorly developed or altogether lacking. This paper presents and evaluates the utility of the holistic ecosystem health indicator (HEHI), a framework that integrates multiple ecological and socioeconomic criteria to evaluate management effectiveness of collaborative processes. Through the development and application of the HEHI to a collaborative in northern Arizona, the Diablo Trust, we present the opportunities and challenges in using this framework to evaluate the ecological and social outcomes of collaborative adaptive management. Baseline results from the first application of the HEHI are presented as an illustration of its potential as a co-adaptive management tool. We discuss lessons learned from the process of selecting indicators and potential issues to their long-term implementation. Finally, we provide recommendations for applying this framework to monitoring and adaptive management in the context of collaborative management.