Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Review Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp5 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

Ornamental plants as nature-based solution for urban ecosystem services

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.14147
Submitted
17 February 2026
Published
10-09-2026

Abstract

Rapid urbanisation, economic development and population growth have increased pollution levels and reduced available space for vegetation in urban areas. Currently, urban pollution has become a global threat to human beings and needs a nature-based solution. As a nature-based solution, ornamental plants are an important biotic component of urban ecosystems. When appropriate species are selected, they make a substantial contribution to ecosystem services. The relationship between ecosystems and green infrastructure has been studied over a long period, but the contribution of ornamental traits has not been recognised equally. This review analyses the contribution of ornamental plants to ecosystem services, including food production, air and water purification, rainwater management, nutrient cycling, microclimate regulation, pollination support and cultural and recreational services, to identify the most suitable ornamental traits for enhanced ecosystem functioning. This review also discusses and analyses the superior ideotype ornamental plant species that have the capability for air and water purification, climate change adaptation and mitigation, as well as human well-being and health. The available evidence indicates that ornamental plants have become an indispensable component of sustainable urban planning.

References

  1. 1. United Nations. World urbanization prospects: the 2018 revision. New York (NY): United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division; 2018. p. 1–126.
  2. 2. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Part A: global and sectoral aspects. Working Group II contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2014. p. 535–612.
  3. 3. World Health Organization, UN-Habitat. Global report on urban health: equitable healthier cities for sustainable development. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2016. p. 1–239. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/204715
  4. 4. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and human well-being: a framework for assessment. Report of the Conceptual Framework Working Group of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Washington (DC): Island Press; 2003. p. 266. http://pdf.wri.org/ecosystems_human_well-being.pdf
  5. 5. Haines-Young R, Potschin-Young M. Revision of the common international classification for ecosystem services (CICES V5.1): a policy brief. One Ecosyst. 2018;3:e27108. https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.3.e27108
  6. 6. Elmqvist T, Setälä H, Handel SN, Van Der Ploeg S, Aronson J, Blignaut JN, et al. Benefits of restoring ecosystem services in urban areas. Curr Opin Environ Sustain. 2015;14:101–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.05.001
  7. 7. Nawrath M, Elsey H, Dallimer M. Why cultural ecosystem services matter most: Exploring the pathways linking greenspaces and mental health in a low-income country. Sci Total Environ. 2022;806:150551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150551
  8. 8. Schwela D. Air pollution and health in urban areas. Rev Environ Health. 2000;15:13–42.
  9. 9. Li C, Du D, Gan Y, Ji S, Wang L, Chang M, et al. Foliar dust as a reliable environmental monitor of heavy metal pollution in comparison to plant leaves and soil in urban areas. Chemosphere. 2022;287:132341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132341
  10. 10. Capotorti G, Ortí MMA, Copiz R, Fusaro L, Mollo B, Salvatori E, et al. Biodiversity and ecosystem services in urban green infrastructure planning: A case study from the metropolitan area of Rome (Italy). Urban For Urban Green. 2019;37:87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.12.014
  11. 11. Ciftcioglu GC, Ebedi S, Abak K. Evaluation of the relationship between ornamental plants-based ecosystem services and human well-being: A case study from Lefke Region of North Cyprus. Ecol Indic. 2019;102:278–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.02.048
  12. 12. Wang HF, Qureshi S, Knapp S, Friedman CR, Hubacek K. A basic assessment of residential plant diversity and its ecosystem services and disservices in Beijing, China. Appl Geogr. 2015;64:121–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.08.006
  13. 13. Hernández M, Morales A, Saurí D. Ornamental plants and the production of nature(s) in the Spanish real estate boom and bust: The case of Alicante. Urban Geogr. 2014;35:71–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2013.871813
  14. 14. Kendal D, Williams NS, Williams KJ. A cultivated environment: Exploring the global distribution of plants in gardens, parks and streetscapes. Urban Ecosyst. 2012;15:637–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-011-0215-2
  15. 15. Francini A, Romano D, Toscano S, Ferrante A. The contribution of ornamental plants to urban ecosystem services. Earth. 2022;3:1258–74. https://doi.org/10.3390/earth3040071
  16. 16. Rocha CS, Rocha DC, Kochi LY, Carneiro DNM, Dos Reis MV, Gomes MP. Phytoremediation by ornamental plants: A beautiful and ecological alternative. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2022;29:3336–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17307-7
  17. 17. Wilson A, Kendal D, Moore JL. Humans and ornamental plants: A mutualism? Ecopsychology. 2016;8:257–63. https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2015.0077
  18. 18. Benvenuti S, Mazzoncini M. The biodiversity of edible flowers: Discovering new tastes and new health benefits. Front Plant Sci. 2021;11:569499. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.569499
  19. 19. Fetouh MI. Edible landscaping in urban horticulture. In: Nandwani D, editor. Urban horticulture. Sustainable development and biodiversity. Vol. 18. Cham: Springer; 2018. p. 141–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67017-1_7
  20. 20. Savé R. What is stress and how to deal with it in ornamental plants? Acta Hortic. 2009;813:241–54. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2009.813.31
  21. 21. Toscano S, Ferrante A, Romano D. Response of Mediterranean ornamental plants to drought stress. Horticulturae. 2019;5:6. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae5010006
  22. 22. Gopal D, Nagendra H. Vegetation in Bangalore's slums: Boosting livelihoods, well-being and social capital. Sustainability. 2014;6:2459–73. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6052459
  23. 23. Maller C, Townsend M, St Leger L, Henderson-Wilson C, Pryor A, Prosser L, et al. Healthy parks, healthy people: The health benefits of contact with nature in a park context. Georg Wright Forum. 2009;26:51–83.
  24. 24. Baiyewu RA, Amusa NA, Olayiwola O. Survey on the use of ornamental plants for environmental management in southwestern Nigeria. RJABS. 2005;1:237–40.
  25. 25. Hall CR, Hodges AW. Economic, environmental and well-being benefits of lifestyle horticulture. Chron Horticult. 2011;51:5–8.
  26. 26. Summers JK, Smith LM, Case JL, Linthurst RA. A review of the elements of human well-being with an emphasis on the contribution of ecosystem services. Ambio. 2012;41:327–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-012-0256-7
  27. 27. Ciftcioglu GC. Assessment of the relationship between ecosystem services and human well-being in the social-ecological landscapes of Lefke Region in North Cyprus. Landsc Ecol. 2017;32:897–913. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-017-0494-y
  28. 28. Yu P, Zhang S, Yung EH, Chan EH, Luan B, Chen Y. On the urban compactness to ecosystem services in a rapidly urbanising metropolitan area: Highlighting scale effects and spatial non-stationarity. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 2023;98:106975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2022.106975
  29. 29. Evans DL, Falagán N, Hardman CA, Kourmpetli S, Liu L, Mead BR, et al. Ecosystem service delivery by urban agriculture and green infrastructure: A systematic review. Ecosyst Serv. 2022;54:101405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2022.101405
  30. 30. Ungaro F, Maienza A, Ugolini F, Lanini GM, Baronti S, Calzolari C. Assessment of joint soil ecosystem services supply in urban green spaces: A case study in Northern Italy. Urban For Urban Green. 2022;67:127455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127455
  31. 31. McPhearson T, Cook EM, Berbés-Blázquez M, Cheng C, Grimm NB, Andersson E, et al. A social-ecological-technological systems framework for urban ecosystem services. One Earth. 2022;5:505–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2022.04.007
  32. 32. Bulgari R, Petrini A, Cocetta G, Nicoletto C, Ertani A, Sambo P, et al. The impact of COVID-19 on horticulture: Critical issues and opportunities derived from an unexpected occurrence. Horticulturae. 2021;7:124. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae7060124
  33. 33. Giro A, Ciappellano S, Ferrante A. Vegetable production using a simplified hydroponics system inside City of Dead (Cairo). Adv Hortic Sci. 2016;30:23–29. https://doi.org/10.13128/ahs-18698
  34. 34. Appolloni E, Orsini F, Specht K, Thomaier S, Sanye-Mengual E, Pennisi G, et al. The global rise of urban rooftop agriculture: A review of worldwide cases. J Clean Prod. 2021;296:126556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.126556
  35. 35. Demasi S, Caser M, Donno D, Enri S, Lonati M, Scariot V. Exploring wild edible flowers as a source of bioactive compounds: New perspectives in horticulture. Folia Hortic. 2021;33:27–48. https://doi.org/10.2478/fhort-2021-0004
  36. 36. Scariot V, Ferrante A, Romano D. Edible flowers: Understanding the effect of genotype, preharvest and postharvest on quality, safety and consumption. Front Plant Sci. 2022;13:1025196. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.1025196
  37. 37. Falla NM, Contu S, Demasi S, Caser M, Scariot V. Environmental impact of edible flower production: A case study. Agronomy. 2020;10:579. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10040579
  38. 38. Durazzo A, Lucarini M, Novellino E, Daliu P, Santini A. Fruit-based juices: Focus on antioxidant properties—study approach and update. Phytother Res. 2019;33:1754–69. https://doi.org/10.1002/ptr.6380
  39. 39. Romano D, La Fornara G, Toscano S. The edible ornamental plants: A resource for urban Mediterranean horticulture. Acta Hortic. 2022;1345:57–64. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2022.1345.8
  40. 40. Davanzo F, Miaglia S, Perego S, Assisi F, Bissoli M, Borghini R, et al. Plant poisoning: Increasing relevance, a problem of public health and education. North-western Italy, Piedmont region. J Pharm Sci Res. 2011;3:1338.
  41. 41. Bowerbank SL, Gallidabino MD, Dean JR. Plant poisons in the garden: A human risk assessment. Separations. 2022;9:308. https://doi.org/10.3390/separations9100308
  42. 42. Janeček V, Rada P, Rom J, Horák J. Rural agroforestry artifacts in a city: Determinants of spatiotemporally continuous fruit orchards in an urban area. Urban For Urban Green. 2019;41:33–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2019.03.004
  43. 43. Scholz T, Hof A, Schmitt T. Cooling effects and regulating ecosystem services provided by urban trees—novel analysis approaches using urban tree cadastre data. Sustainability. 2018;10:712. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10030712
  44. 44. Lopes HS, Remoaldo PC, Ribeiro V, Martín-Vide J. Pathways for adapting tourism to climate change in an urban destination: Evidences based on thermal conditions for the Porto Metropolitan Area (Portugal). J Environ Manag. 2022;315:115161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115161
  45. 45. Dela Cruz M, Christensen JH, Thomsen JD, Müller R. Can ornamental potted plants remove volatile organic compounds from indoor air? A review. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2014;21:13909–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3240-x
  46. 46. Pellegrini E, Cioni PL, Francini A, Lorenzini G, Nali C, Flamini G. Volatile emission patterns in poplar clones varying in response to ozone. J Chem Ecol. 2012;38:924–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-012-0162-2
  47. 47. Calderón-Contreras R, Quiroz-Rosas LE. Analysing scale, quality and diversity of green infrastructure and the provision of urban ecosystem services: A case from Mexico City. Ecosyst Serv. 2017;23:127–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.12.004
  48. 48. Hunt WF, Lord B, Loh B, Sia A. Plant selection for bioretention systems and stormwater treatment practices. Singapore: Springer Nature; 2015. p. 59. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-245-6
  49. 49. Takaijudin H, Ghani A, Zakaria NA. Challenges and developments of bioretention facilities in treating urban stormwater runoff: A review. Pollution. 2016;2:489–508. https://doi.org/10.7508/pj.2016.04.010
  50. 50. Bortolini L, Zanin G. Reprint of: Hydrological behaviour of rain gardens and plant suitability: A study in the Veneto Plain (north-eastern Italy) conditions. Urban For Urban Green. 2019;37:74–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2018.07.003
  51. 51. Funai JT, Kupec P. Evaluation of three soil blends to improve ornamental plant performance and maintain engineering metrics in bioremediating rain gardens. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2019;230:3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-018-4049-x
  52. 52. Yuan J, Dunnett N. Plant selection for rain gardens: Response to simulated cyclical flooding of 15 perennial species. Urban For Urban Green. 2018;35:57–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2018.08.005
  53. 53. Bolques A, Cherrier J, Abazinge M, Matungwa G. Installation of a bioretention/rain garden to mitigate agricultural irrigation runoff from a container plant nursery. Proc Fla State Hort Soc. 2010;123:326–29.
  54. 54. Ma X, Shu Y, Shi Y, Bao Z. Analysis of plant selection and landscaping design for rain garden: A case study of Gongkang Rainwater Garden in Shanghai. Acta Agric Zhejiangensis. 2018;30:1526–33.
  55. 55. Kapoor M. Managing ambient air quality using ornamental plants—an alternative approach. Univers J Plant Sci. 2017;5:1–9.
  56. 56. Wang C, Wang ZH, Yang J. Cooling effect of urban trees on the built environment of contiguous United States. Earth's Future. 2018;6:1066–81. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018EF000891
  57. 57. Buta E, Cantor M, Singureanu V, Husti A, Hort D, Buta M. Ornamental plants used for improvement of living, working and studying spaces microclimate. ProEnviron. 2013;6:562–65.
  58. 58. Gratani L, Varone L. Carbon sequestration by Quercus ilex L. and Quercus pubescens Willd. and their contribution to decreasing air temperature in Rome. Urban Ecosyst. 2006;9:27–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-006-5527-2
  59. 59. Richards DR, Fung TK, Belcher RN, Edwards PJ. Differential air temperature cooling performance of urban vegetation types in the tropics. Urban For Urban Green. 2020;50:126651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126651
  60. 60. Toscano S, Scuderi D, Giuffrida F, Romano D. Responses of Mediterranean ornamental shrubs to drought stress and recovery. Sci Hortic. 2014;178:145–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2014.08.014
  61. 61. Carey RO, Hochmuth GJ, Martinez CJ, Boyer TH, Nair VD, Dukes MD, et al. A review of turfgrass fertilizer management practices: Implications for urban water quality. HortTechnology. 2012;22:280–91. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTTECH.22.3.280
  62. 62. Perrone S, Grossman J, Liebman A, Sooksa-nguan T, Gutknecht J. Nitrogen fixation and productivity of winter annual legume cover crops in Upper Midwest organic cropping systems. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst. 2020;117:61–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-020-10055-z
  63. 63. Francini A, Toscano S, Romano D, Ferrini F, Ferrante A. Biological contribution of ornamental plants for improving slope stability along urban and suburban areas. Horticulturae. 2021;7:310. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae7090310
  64. 64. Khan AHA, Kiyani A, Mirza CR, Butt TA, Barros R, Ali B, et al. Ornamental plants for the phytoremediation of heavy metals: Present knowledge and future perspectives. Environ Res. 2021;195:110780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.110780
  65. 65. Liu Z, Chen B, Wang LA, Urbanovich O, Nagorskaya L, Li X, et al. A review on phytoremediation of mercury contaminated soils. J Hazard Mater. 2020;400:123138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.123138
  66. 66. Bortoloti GA, Baron D. Phytoremediation of toxic heavy metals by Brassica plants: A biochemical and physiological approach. Environ Adv. 2022;8:100204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envadv.2022.100204
  67. 67. Evans CS, Asher CJ, Johnson CM. Isolation of dimethyl diselenide and other volatile selenium compounds from Astragalus racemosus (Pursh.). Aust J Biol Sci. 1968;21:13–20. https://doi.org/10.1071/BI9680013
  68. 68. Khandare RV, Desai SB, Bhujbal SS, Watharkar AD, Biradar SP, Pawar PK, et al. Phytoremediation of fluoride with garden ornamentals Nerium oleander, Portulaca oleracea and Pogonatherum crinitum. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2017;24:6833–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-8424-8
  69. 69. Pierattini EC, Francini A, Raffaelli A, Sebastiani L. Surfactant and heavy metal interaction in poplar: A focus on SDS and Zn uptake. Tree Physiol. 2018;38:109–18. https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpx155
  70. 70. Sebastiani L, Francini A, Romeo S, Ariani A, Minnocci A. Heavy metals stress on poplar: Molecular and anatomical modifications. In: Approaches to plant stress and their management. New Delhi: Springer; 2014. p. 267–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-1620-9_15
  71. 71. Romeo S, Francini A, Sebastiani L, Morabito D. High Zn concentration does not impair biomass, cutting radial growth and photosynthetic activity traits in Populus alba L. J Soils Sediments. 2017;17:1394–402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-015-1251-y
  72. 72. Agudelo-Castañeda DM, Teixeira EC, Schneider IL, Lara SR, Silva LF. Exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in atmospheric PM1.0 of urban environments: Carcinogenic and mutagenic respiratory health risk by age groups. Environ Pollut. 2017;224:158–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.01.075
  73. 73. Azimi S, Rocher V, Muller M, Moilleron R, Thevenot DR. Sources, distribution and variability of hydrocarbons and metals in atmospheric deposition in an urban area (Paris, France). Sci Total Environ. 2005;337:223–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2004.06.020
  74. 74. Collivignarelli MC, Abbà A, Bertanza G, Pedrazzani R, Ricciardi P, Miino MC. Lockdown for COVID-2019 in Milan: What are the effects on air quality? Sci Total Environ. 2020;732:139280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139280
  75. 75. Xiao N, Liu R, Jin C, Dai Y. Efficiency of five ornamental plant species in the phytoremediation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH)-contaminated soil. Ecol Eng. 2015;75:384–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2014.12.008
  76. 76. McArdell CS, Molnar E, Suter MJF, Giger W. Occurrence and fate of macrolide antibiotics in wastewater treatment plants and in the Glatt Valley watershed, Switzerland. Environ Sci Technol. 2003;37:5479–86. https://doi.org/10.1021/es034368i
  77. 77. Luo Y, Guo W, Ngo HH, Nghiem LD, Hai FI, Zhang J, et al. A review on the occurrence of micropollutants in the aquatic environment and their fate and removal during wastewater treatment. Sci Total Environ. 2014;473–474:619–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.12.065
  78. 78. Pierattini EC, Francini A, Raffaelli A, Sebastiani L. Morpho-physiological response of Populus alba to erythromycin: A timeline of the health status of the plant. Sci Total Environ. 2016;569–570:540–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.06.152
  79. 79. Goddard MA, Dougill AJ, Benton TG. Scaling up from gardens: Biodiversity conservation in urban environments. Trends Ecol Evol. 2010;25:90–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2009.07.016
  80. 80. Spotswood EN, Beller EE, Grossinger R, Grenier JL, Heller NE, Aronson MFJ. The biological deserts fallacy: Cities in their landscapes contribute more than we think to regional biodiversity. BioScience. 2021;71:148–60. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biaa155
  81. 81. Hausmann SL, Petermann JS, Rolff J. Wild bees as pollinators of city trees. Insect Conserv Divers. 2016;9:97–107. https://doi.org/10.1111/icad.12145
  82. 82. Wenzel A, Grass I, Belavadi VV, Tscharntke T. How urbanisation is driving pollinator diversity and pollination-A systematic review. Biol Conserv. 2020;241:108321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108321
  83. 83. Noe SM, Peñuelas J, Niinemets Ü. Monoterpene emissions from ornamental trees in urban areas: A case study of Barcelona, Spain. Plant Biol. 2008;10:163–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1438-8677.2007.00014.x
  84. 84. Qian S, Qi M, Huang L, Zhao L, Lin D, Yang Y. Biotic homogenization of China's urban greening: A meta-analysis on woody species. Urban For Urban Green. 2016;18:25–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2016.05.002
  85. 85. Niinemets Ü, Peñuelas J. Gardening and urban landscaping: Significant players in global change. Trends Plant Sci. 2008;13:60–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2007.11.009
  86. 86. Graves RA, Pearson SM, Turner MG. Species richness alone does not predict cultural ecosystem service value. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017;114:3774–79. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1701370114
  87. 87. Khoshbakht K, Hammer K. Threatened and rare ornamental plants. J Agric Rural Dev Trop Subtrop. 2007;108:19–39.
  88. 88. Farinati S, Betto A, Palumbo F, Scariolo F, Vannozzi A, Barcaccia G. The new green challenge in urban planning: The right genetics in the right place. Horticulturae. 2022;8:761. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae8090761
  89. 89. Blundo Canto GM. Exploring the links between agricultural biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being: Evidence from the Yucatan, Mexico [PhD thesis]. Roma: Università degli Studi Roma; 2014.
  90. 90. Husti AM, Contiu I, Radu M, Neacsu I, Cantor M. Psychological benefits of ornamental plants used in office environments. Bull UASVM Hortic. 2015;72:101–07. https://doi.org/10.15835/buasvmcn-hort:10625
  91. 91. Dijkstra K, Pieterse ME, Pruyn A. Stress-reducing effects of indoor plants in the built healthcare environment: The mediating role of perceived attractiveness. Prev Med. 2008;47:279–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2008.01.013
  92. 92. Thomsen JD, Sønderstrup-Andersen HK, Müller R. People–plant relationships in an office workplace: Perceived benefits for the workplace and employees. HortScience. 2011;46:744–52. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.46.5.744
  93. 93. La Rosa D, Spyra M, Inostroza L. Indicators of cultural ecosystem services for urban planning: A review. Ecol Indic. 2016;61:74–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.04.028
  94. 94. Helliwell R. Putting a value on visual amenity. Arboric J. 2014;36:129–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/03071375.2014.929812
  95. 95. Lindemann-Matthies P, Bose E. Species richness, structural diversity and species composition in meadows created by visitors of a botanical garden in Switzerland. Landsc Urban Plan. 2007;79:298–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.03.007
  96. 96. Qin J, Sun C, Zhou X, Leng H, Lian Z. The effect of indoor plants on human comfort. Indoor Built Environ. 2014;23:709–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/1420326X13481372
  97. 97. World Health Organization. Urban green spaces and health. Copenhagen: World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe; 2016. p. 1–80.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.