What question did this study set out to answer?

To evaluate whether compact or sprawling urban growth strategies better minimize the negative impacts of urbanization on city-wide bird biodiversity.

October 9, 2012Global Change Biology

How should we grow cities to minimize their biodiversity impacts?

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

JSJessica R. Sushinsky JRJonathan R. Rhodes HPHugh P. Possingham

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Ecological modeling study reveals compact urban growth minimizes bird distribution losses relative to urban sprawl, suggesting high-density designs better preserve overall biodiversity.

Key Points

To evaluate whether compact or sprawling urban growth strategies better minimize the negative impacts of urbanization on city-wide bird biodiversity.
Applied statistical models of bird distributions across Brisbane, Australia, to simulate the addition of 84,642 houses under either compact or sprawling development scenarios.
Assessed population distribution changes across both urban-sensitive and nonnative bird species alongside metrics of human access to green spaces.
Urban expansion reduced bird distributions overall under both scenarios, but compact development substantially slowed city-scale declines relative to urban sprawl.
Compact growth preserved large interstitial green spaces that protected urban-sensitive species, whereas sprawling expansion enlarged distributions of nonnative species.
Compact planning maintained access to large public green spaces at the cost of smaller residential backyards, highlighting a trade-off between city-wide diversity and immediate nature access at home.

Cite This Study

Sushinsky et al. (2012) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69ffa9ea4716aad0cc856dff https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12055

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

October 9, 2012Global Change Biology

How should we grow cities to minimize their biodiversity impacts?

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

JSJessica R. Sushinsky JRJonathan R. Rhodes HPHugh P. Possingham

Discussion

Member takes

Overview

Ecological modeling study reveals compact urban growth minimizes bird distribution losses relative to urban sprawl, suggesting high-density designs better preserve overall biodiversity.

Key Points

To evaluate whether compact or sprawling urban growth strategies better minimize the negative impacts of urbanization on city-wide bird biodiversity.
Applied statistical models of bird distributions across Brisbane, Australia, to simulate the addition of 84,642 houses under either compact or sprawling development scenarios.
Assessed population distribution changes across both urban-sensitive and nonnative bird species alongside metrics of human access to green spaces.
Urban expansion reduced bird distributions overall under both scenarios, but compact development substantially slowed city-scale declines relative to urban sprawl.
Compact growth preserved large interstitial green spaces that protected urban-sensitive species, whereas sprawling expansion enlarged distributions of nonnative species.
Compact planning maintained access to large public green spaces at the cost of smaller residential backyards, highlighting a trade-off between city-wide diversity and immediate nature access at home.

Cite This Study

Sushinsky et al. (2012) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69ffa9ea4716aad0cc856dff https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12055

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark