After reading this article on urban ecosystems, I was surprised yet again by how much I didn’t know. For instance, we are taught that global warming is a global phenomenon, so to read that cities have higher climate changes than the countryside alarmed me a little. Even more surprising was the fact that vegetation helps remove some of this heat by absorbing energy to fuel the evaporation process and by providing shade. I really liked that this paper made it a point to highlight the recreational and cultural values that urban ecosystems have to offer. I’m a firm believer in the psychological benefits that the outdoors provides and it’s a shame to see that constantly get overlooked when people try to look for a means to cope with stress or other issues. As someone who’s interested in a future in medicine, I was particularly struck by the statistic that patients in hospitals with rooms facing a park needed 50% less strong pain-relieving medication compared to patients in rooms facing a building wall.
As I read, I was trying to keep reminding myself that the study was conducted in Stockholm, not New York, and I definitely remembered that was the case when I read that the citizens of Stockholm “highly value their green spaces.” 90% of Stockholm residents visit parks at least once a year, 45% of so weekly, and 17% more than three times a week. Citizens of New York are always too busy for everything so I wouldn’t be surprised if those statistics for New York were to be significantly lower.
Another thing I liked about this paper was that it gave both sides of the argument and mentioned the problems that ecosystems can contribute in addition to all the benefits. The problems listed like urban smog and bad odors seem minuscule in comparison to the problems we’re causing to the ecosystems. I found it ironic how it says that cities were built to protect humans from nature, when it appears that it’s nature that needs protection from us now.
