바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

ISSN : 2287-8327

Article Contents

Prev Next
e-Submission

Vol.35 No.2
Citation Share

Green network analysis in coastal cities using least-cost path analysis: a study of Jakarta, Indonesia

Journal of Ecology and Environment / Journal of Ecology and Environment, (P)2287-8327; (E)2288-1220
2012, v.35 no.2, pp.141-147

(2012). Green network analysis in coastal cities using least-cost path analysis: a study of Jakarta, Indonesia. Journal of Ecology and Environment, 35(2), 141-147.
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed
PDF Download

Abstract

The rapid urbanization in developing countries is accelerating both the depletion and fragmentation of urban green space, despite the known positive effects of green spaces on the environmental conditions in cities and the quality of life of residents. Consequently, there is a need for practical tools that can support the development of networks of urban green spaces. This article presents a study that used a GIS-based least cost path (LCP) analysis to identify the best alternative for developing an urban green space network in the coastal city of Jakarta, Indonesia, which was based on the evaluation of topography and land use characteristics. Pair-wise analysis was used to reduce the sensitivity in the LCP model. The results showed that the coastal wetlands in the northern part of Jakarta and the agricultural fields in the suburban areas of Jakarta play an important role in connecting the green space network. On the other hand, some green spaces in the central part of Jakarta could not be connected by the LCP model. The method used in this study can serve as a tool to support the identification of networks of potential urban green spaces. It can also provide useful information for sustainable urban landscape planning and management in urban ecosystems. However, the inclusion of socio-economic criteria would further improve the model.

keywords
coastal city, ecosystem services, Jakarta, landscape planning, least cost path (LCP), urban green space

Reference

1.

Adriaensen F, Chardon JP, De Blust G, Swinnen E, Villalba S, Gulinck H, Matthysen E. 2003. The application of ‘least-cost’ modelling as a functional landscape model. Landsc Urban Plann 64: 233-247.

2.

Bagli S, Geneletti D, Orsi F. 2011. Routing of power lines through least-cost path analysis and multicriteria evaluation to minimise environmental impacts. Environ Impact Assess Rev 31: 234-239.

3.

Ban YU, Jeong JH, Woo HM, Baek JI. 2009. Strategies to build ecological networks in consideration of life-zones in Cheongju City using GIS. J Korean Environ Res Technol 12: 1-10.

4.

Bantayan NC, Bishop ID. 1998. Linking objective and subjective modelling for landuse decision-making. Landsc Urban Plann 43: 35-48.

5.

Basnet BB, Apan AA, Raine SR. 2001. Selecting suitable sites for animal waste application using a raster GIS. Environ Manage 28: 519-531.

6.

Beier P, Majka DR, Newell SL. 2009. Uncertainty analysis of least-cost modeling for designing wildlife linkages. Ecol Appl 19: 2067-2077.

7.

Douglas DH. 1994. Least-cost path in GIS using an accumulated cost surface and slope lines. Cartographica 31: 37-51.

8.

Firman T. 1998. The restructuring of Jakarta Metropolitan Area: a “global city” in Asia. Cities 15: 229-243.

9.

Firman T. 2009. The continuity and change in mega-urbanization in Indonesia: a survey of Jakarta-Bandung Region (JBR) development. Habitat Int 2009: 327-339.

10.

Goldblum C, Wong TC. 2000. Growth, crisis and spatial change: a study of haphazard urbanization in Jakarta, Indonesia. Land Use Policy 17: 29-37.

11.

Han SS, Basuki A. 2001. The spatial pattern of land values in Jakarta. Urban Stud 38: 1841-1857.

12.

Kim JE, Watanabe S, Hakim L, Nakagoshi N. 2006. Urban green spaces and soil microbial diversity in Jakarta, Indonesia. Hikobia 14: 459-468.

13.

Kong F, Nakagoshi N. 2006. Spatial-temporal gradient analysis of urban green spaces in Jinan, China. Landsc Urban Plann 78: 147-164.

14.

Mardle S, Pascoe S, Herrero I. 2004. Management objective importance in fisheries: an evaluation using the analytic hierarchy process. Environ Manage 33: 1-11.

15.

Pinto N, Keitt TH. 2009. Beyond the least-cost path: evaluating corridor redundancy using a graph-theoretic approach. Landsc Ecol 24: 253-266.

16.

Pullinger MG, Johnson CJ. 2010. Maintaining or restoring connectivity of modified landscapes: evaluating the least-cost path model with multiple sources of ecological information. Landsc Ecol 25: 1547-1560.

17.

Rayfield B, Fortin MJ, Fall A. 2010. The sensitivity of least-cost habitat graphs to relative cost surface values. Landsc Ecol 25: 519-532.

18.

Saaty TL. 1977. A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J Math Psychol 15: 234-281.

19.

Saaty TL. 1992. Multicriteria Decision Making. The Analytical Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, PA.

20.

Svoray T, Barkutiel P, Bannet T. 2005. Urban land-use allocation in a Mediterranean ecotone: habitat heterogeneity model incorporated in a GIS using a multi-criteria mechanism. Landsc Urban Plann 72: 337-351.

21.

The Jakarta Post. 2011. Jakarta green areas lost at an alarming rate. The Jakarta Post, 17 January 2011. http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2011/01/17/jakarta-green-areas-lost-alarming-rate.html. Accessed 9 April 2012.

22.

Theobald DM. 2006. Exploring the functional connectivity of landscapes using landscape networks. In: Connectivity Conservation (Kevin R, Crooks R, Sanjayan M, eds). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 416-443.

23.

Yokohari M, Takeuchi K, Watanabe T, Yokota S. 2000. Beyond greenbelts and zoning: a new planning concept for the environment of Asian mega-cities. Landsc Urban Plann 47: 159-171.

Journal of Ecology and Environment

e-Submission OA Policy