Articles
Potential human well-being benefits from ecological infrastructure: a case study from Chiang Mai, Thailand
Article number
1356_51
Pages
417 – 426
Language
English
Abstract
Background and objectives: currently, researchers have limited knowledge about the relationships between ecological infrastructure and human well-being from non-western countries.
This is true especially for Southeast Asia, which differs greatly from the western countries in geography, climate, and cultures.
Applying knowledge learned from the western contexts into the region may limit its effectiveness.
Thus, the study within the socio-ecological contexts of the places in this region must be further explored.
Methods: this study investigated and classified the benefits of the ecological infrastructure in Southeast Asian cities via a case study on a semi-public urban space: the Mae Hia Agricultural Research, Demonstration, and Training Center (Rai Mae Hia), Chiang Mai, Thailand.
The site was selected because it offered large open spaces for people to exercise, public pesticide-free market, and examples of urban agriculture in addition to the research station.
The researchers conducted interviews, focus groups, questionnaires, and site analyses on the site visitors and stakeholders from the communities surrounding the site.
Results: the results suggested that Rai Mae Hia offered several potential benefits toward human health and well-being.
Four dimensions of ecosystem services: provision (such as food security), regulation (such as flood mitigation), support (such as biodiversity), and culture (such as mental restoration) were explored.
However, future systematic planning of the ecological infrastructure must be done to fulfill the sites potential, both for human and environmental health.
Perspective: this study contributed to the field of planning for ecosystem services at the landscape level.
It is novel because it included the contexts of agricultural and recreational land in a Southeast Asian city.
This research could supplement the design and planning of similar sites and can be used as an example for systematic exploration of ecosystem services in ecological infrastructure and urban agriculture.
This is true especially for Southeast Asia, which differs greatly from the western countries in geography, climate, and cultures.
Applying knowledge learned from the western contexts into the region may limit its effectiveness.
Thus, the study within the socio-ecological contexts of the places in this region must be further explored.
Methods: this study investigated and classified the benefits of the ecological infrastructure in Southeast Asian cities via a case study on a semi-public urban space: the Mae Hia Agricultural Research, Demonstration, and Training Center (Rai Mae Hia), Chiang Mai, Thailand.
The site was selected because it offered large open spaces for people to exercise, public pesticide-free market, and examples of urban agriculture in addition to the research station.
The researchers conducted interviews, focus groups, questionnaires, and site analyses on the site visitors and stakeholders from the communities surrounding the site.
Results: the results suggested that Rai Mae Hia offered several potential benefits toward human health and well-being.
Four dimensions of ecosystem services: provision (such as food security), regulation (such as flood mitigation), support (such as biodiversity), and culture (such as mental restoration) were explored.
However, future systematic planning of the ecological infrastructure must be done to fulfill the sites potential, both for human and environmental health.
Perspective: this study contributed to the field of planning for ecosystem services at the landscape level.
It is novel because it included the contexts of agricultural and recreational land in a Southeast Asian city.
This research could supplement the design and planning of similar sites and can be used as an example for systematic exploration of ecosystem services in ecological infrastructure and urban agriculture.
Authors
E. Yaipimol, T. Vaiseesang, V. Surinseng, N. Charoenlertthanakit, C. Wanitchayapaisit, P. Suppakittpaisarn
Keywords
green infrastructure, urban agriculture, human health and well-being, ecosystem services
Groups involved
- Division Landscape and Urban Horticulture
- Division Horticulture for Human Health
- Division Greenhouse and Indoor Production Horticulture
- Division Horticulture for Development
- Division Precision Horticulture and Engineering
- Division Vegetables, Roots and Tubers
- Commission Agroecology and Organic Farming Systems
- Working Group Urban Horticulture
- Working Group Landscape Horticulture
Online Articles (56)