Greenbelt implementation

Classification I II III No. Service Function/

Project series

Arts and Device Public activities Marks Round Routes EducationProgram Old Airfield Parks andcemeteries The orchardmeadow Naturereservation In total

R10 Noise regulation ○ ● ● 2● 1○

H1 Habitat for species ○ ● ○ ● ● 3● 2○

H2 maintenance of

genetic diversity ○ ● ○ ● ● 3● 2○

C1a Aesthetic values ● ○ ● ● ● ● 5● 1○

C1b Inspiration ● ● ○ ● ● ● ○ 5● 2○

C2a Recreation/

ecotourism ○ ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ○ 7● 2○

C2b Health ● ● ● ○ ○ ● ○ ○ 4● 4○

C4a Scientific research ○ ● ● 2● 1○

C4b Educational value ○ ○ ○ ● ● ● ○ 3● 4○

C5a Cultural heritage ○ ● ○ ○ ○ ○ ● ○ 2● 6○

C5b Cultural diversity ○ ○ ○ ● ○ ○ ○ 1● 6○

In total 1●

3○ 2●

2○ 4●

2○ 3●

5○ 4●

6○ 9●

8○ 7●

7○ 7●

8○ 13●

7○

● represents for a clear target and ○ refers to a potential benefit in the analysed documents.

In the table, two total numbers were calculated on the right column and bottom row, represent the total attention paid on each ES and the range of targeted ES in each project series, respectively. Though these 9 chosen objects are not all the projects done in the period, they had been most frequently talked in Greenbelt publications and many are considered main achievements. However, the distinctions between different types of ES are amplified comparing with that in urban level. Only three project series involved provisioning services but none ignored the cultural services which in general reached a 76%

referring rate, though they are subdivided into smaller types. 54% of the mentioned regulating services and habitat functions are co-benefited from certain moves, while explicit targets could only rely on specific natural reservation projects which are a small part of the Greenbelt work.

Considering from single ES, the targets of projects, same as in urban planning document analysis, didn’t always means the capacity to meet the demands, especially in cultural services. C2a and C1a received highest focus but were considered dissatisfied by users. Especially the C2a which are directly targeted in seven out of the nine projects, but 62% of the interviewee ask for more frequent cleaning job and more than half believe there need to be more control on the safety in use and more quiet environment for sitting and resting (Projektbüro 2010). By contract, C4b was not the top priority and only appeared in certain projects but received high appraises. Nevertheless, direct and explicit targets are necessary condition for the better performance of ES in other categories. R1 and R3 could be beneficiated when green projects could bring with the increasing of the quality and quantity of green space. While R4, R5 and R6 rely greatly on specific ecological restorations.

Based on the number of referring ES categories, the 9 project series are classified into three groups.

Group I includes projects of “Arts and Devices” and “Public Activities” which only contribute to Cultural aspect. The successfulness and public awareness of such projects seems to rely mainly on the capacity of expressiveness of themselves. For instance, some art works like “My Monument” (Ich Denkmal) are highly appreciated as a result of artistic creation and popular location; some others like

“The Giant Baby Acorn” (Monsterkinder) can hardly be noticed, not to mention to be inspiring for visitors. “Public activities” refers to the publicities of the Greenbelt program, includes brochures for destinations, the Greenbelt Leisure Map, exhibitions and seasonal activities. They are the appendant of other projects but their functions in the intangible aspects are unneglectable.

Group II includes “Greenbelt Marks”, “Round Routes” and “Education Program”. This group aimed at bringing elements together and could combine targets of two aspects. The Greenbelt Marks tried using certain type of tree groups as an identification of the Greenbelt project. Most these tree groups can hardly be distinguished from other trees without the information sign, thus some experts consider this projects as failed ones. However, it did create more natural places for recreation and communication.

The Education Program is also a trans-disciplinary attempt, in which certain parts of the Greenbelt are set as permanent bases of nature education and activities center for children and families.

The third Group are projects that combined the majority types of the framework. They present a higher level of complexity in which different types of functions have potential interactions inside. The

“Old Airfield Reconstruction” is one of the most famous and favored site in Greenbelt and it combined 9 functions explicitly as well as benefited 8 others. The design concept of letting the nature taken over the artificial place was a key attribute factor. The process of achieving certain ecological purpose, like

“Erosion prevention and maintenance of soil fertility” (R7), “Habitat for species” (H1) and

“Maintenance of genetic diversity” (H2), were intentionally highlighted and present to the visitors. This presenting process also combines multiple ES, like C1a, C1b, C4a and C4b, as methods of conveying the philosophy of nature to human beings. Another case is the “Nature Reservation” projects which includes multiple projects from river restoration to typical landscape protection. In such specific projects which lead by ecologists, the cultural aspects are not in priority. However, a healthy, sustainable and well-protected local or traditional landscape combined with simple but creative artificial facility, could already form a good environment for the communication of human and nature.

Despite the classification of projects, there is no preference among them. In fact, the reality is more complicated and there is interdependency among different types. For instant, the “Education Program” make use of multiple other projects like the “Orchard Meadow” and Parks. They inter-related together on the level of the whole Greenbelt and form together the different levels of multifunctionality in green spaces. The complexity of referring ES in each project series could be more directly seen from the “Function Palette” (Fig 5.4.2). In each palette, the directions refer to the categories of ES and the

covered areas refer to a direct target or an indirect benefit. Single project will show fewer coverage in limited directions; while completed project series will present a balanced high coverage of the ring.

Fig.5.4. 2 The Function Palette for the 9 project series, draw by author