Evaluating the Aesthetics and Ecology of Urban Green Spaces: A Case Study of Latvia

Abstract

The current situation of planning and managing urban green spaces in Latvia suggests that there is a necessity for new concepts for improving the aesthetic and ecological quality of public green spaces developed in the Soviet era. Urban green spaces with high qualities in both characteristics are assumed to be more attractive for local residents and to provide better conditions for ecological processes. Thus, there is much discussion on how to balance aesthetics and ecology in the urban environment- A nd whether both can be optimised or whether there are trade-offs. The aim of this research was to consult experts from different scientific fields and to clarify and rank criteria used for assessing the aesthetics and ecology of urban green spaces. Twelve criteria were selected for the landscape assessment from different theories of aesthetics and ecology: Compositional unity, uniqueness, coherence with architecture, condition of constructed elements, decorative quality of plants, maintenance and upkeep, naturalness, landscape typicality, wilderness, the presence of wildlife, vegetation structure and the use of local plants. These were assessed and analysed through a combination of a Delphi study and in-depth expert interviews of twelve Latvian and foreign experts from different fields (architecture, landscape architecture, biology, environmental science). The data obtained from the research were processed with mathematical statistics methods such as determination of descriptive statistics and Mann-Whitney U test. The results include a summary of expert statements of definitions, assessment methods and characteristics of selected criteria. The correlation of criteria showed differences in the experts' opinions. Naturalness was one of the most important criterions according to both, Latvian and foreign experts. Foreign experts more likely ranked Presence of wildlife as important compared to the Latvian experts. The results also showed differences on how experts could express criteria related to their research field. The final assessment of criteria confirmed the interconnections between the selected 12 criteria. Results of the criteria ranking discovered that all the experts got consensus on the most important criteria, while on not so important criteria experts shared different views. This research prepared criteria for the assessment of aesthetical and ecological values of green spaces according to definitions and rankings given by different experts.