AN ASSESSMENT OF URBAN ECOLOGICAL INFRASTRUCTURE IN

THE FEDERAL CAPITAL CITY

BY

NAME

MATRIC

i
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the Study

Our planet is increasingly urban: over half of world’s population now lives in cities, and by
2050 that fraction will have increased to 66% according to United Nations prospects (UN,
2015). These prospects estimate that continuing population growth and urbanization will add
2.5 billion people to world’s urban population by 2050, an increase mostly concentrated in
Asia and Africa. Causes and effects of urbanization are manifold. Generally, cities are major
hubs for economic and job opportunities and centralize many basic services such as
healthcare or education. Although urban areas still cover a relatively small proportion of the
terrestrial land surface of the planet (estimates range from 0.2% to 2.4% Circa 2000,
according to Potere and Schneider, 2007), they have disproportionate environmental impacts
well beyond their borders, affecting ecosystems at the local, regional, and global scales
(Grimm et al., 2008; Seto et al., 2012). For example, 60% of residential water use has been
attributed to cities (Grimm et al., 2008) and likely 60-70% of total anthropogenic greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions could be assigned to urban-related activities (Satterthwaite, 2008).
Consequently, cities and their surrounding metropolitan areas often require vast areas of
functioning ecosystems in order to fulfill their consumption (e.g., food, fresh water or
construction materials) and waste assimilation needs. This ‘ecosystem appropriation’ by
cities is often assessed through the ‘ecological footprint’ concept (Rees, 1992; Folke et al.,
1997) or the ‘ecology of cities’ framework (Jansson, 2013). These approaches acknowledge
the major dependence of cities on their hinterland (and beyond) and the links between urban
and rural, viewing the city as an ecosystem itself (Grimm et al., 2008).
Concurrently, urban areas are also facing pressing challenges within their borders.
Many cities worldwide are increasingly vulnerable to environmental extremes such as
droughts, (coastal and inland) flooding or heatwaves because their frequency and magnitude
is rising due to climate change (Revi et al., 2014). Pollution and other disturbances (e.g.,
noise) generated in cities have also direct and sometimes dramatic health impacts on the
urban population (e.g., Brunekreef and Holgate, 2002; WHO, 2014). Many urban dwellers
also suffer the manifold negative effects of sedentary lifestyles, social exclusion and
increasing disconnection with the biosphere’s ecological dynamics (Andersson et al., 2014).
Improving sustainability, resilience and livability in cities should therefore be a major goal
on any government’s agenda, from local to global authorities. At a global scale, for example,
1
one of the seventeen United Nations Sustainable Development Goals is to “make cities
inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable”. In this context, policy -makers, practitioners and
scientists are paying growing attention to the sustainable planning and management of urban
and peri-urban green spaces as a way to address many of these growing threats affecting
urban areas (see some examples in McDonnell and MacGregor-Fors, 2016). In the European
Union (EU), these strategies relying on urban ecosystems and their processes are mostly built
on the concepts of “Urban ecological Infrastructure” or “green infrastructure” (UEI, GI, see
EC, 2013) and, more recently, ‘nature-based solutions’ (NbS, see EC, 2015). Both terms are
very much related as reflected in the EU GI strategy, which defines GI as “a successfully
tested tool for providing ecological, economic and social benefits through natural solutions”
and states that GI is based on the principle that “the many benefits human society gets from
nature, are consciously integrated into spatial planning and territorial development” (EC,
2013:2; see also Section 1.3.2).”

Ecological Infrastructure or green infrastructure is defined as “an interconnected network of

waterways, wetlands, woodlands, wildlife habitats, and other natural areas: greenways, parks
and other conservation lands; working farms, ranches and forests; and wilderness and other
open spaces that support native species, maintain natural ecological processes, sustain air and
water resources and contribute to the health and quality of life for communities and people”
(Benedict and McMahon, 2002). The United States Environmental Protection Agency’s
(EPA) definition includes engineered systems that mimic natural processes (Greening EPA
Glossary, 2010).
Urban green spaces, which are urban land use designated for all kinds of urban green
infrastructures, including urban forests, parks, gardens, agriculture, cemeteries, and street
greeneries (Kwartnik-Pruc & Trembecka, 2021) contribute to urban environmental
sustainability (Zhang et al., 2022; Stan 2022; Cheshmehzangi et al., 2021; Kuklina et al.,
2021;
Puchol-Salort et al., 2021; Gelan & Girma, 2021; Russo & Cirella, 2020; Narh et al., 2020;
Meijering et al., 2018). In this context, urban environmental sustainability can be regarded as
a condition that allows the current and future generations to utilize the services or benefits
provided by urban green spaces without jeopardizing the healthy state of urban green
ecosystems. Urban green spaces provide environmental benefits, including cooling urban heat
(Zhang et al., 2022; Shah et al., 2021; Masoudi et al., 2021), regulating air quality and
reducing

2
noise pollution (Misiune et al., 2021; Park et al., 2021; Song et al., 2020; Emechebe & Eze
2019), storm runoff mitigation (Li et al., 2021; Abass et al., 2020; Song et al., 2020; Vargas-
Hernández et al., 2018), and climate change mitigation (Nassary et al., 2022; Cheng et al.,
2021; Vargas-Hernández et al., 2018). Besides the environmental benefits, urban green
spaces provide socio-psychological benefits such as relaxation and alleviation of negative
emotions (Dipeolu et al., 2021; Zhu et al., 2021; Park et al., 2021; Sulistyo et al., 2020;
Vargas-Hernández et al., 2018). Additionally, they provide economic benefits such as food
and fiber availability from urban agriculture and forestry (Zhang et al., 2022; Nassary et al.,
2022; Park et al., 2021; Kingsley et al., 2021; Vannozzi Brito & Borelli 2020), Furthermore,
they provide cultural benefits such as urban landscape design (Wang, 2022; Park et al., 2021;
Puchol-Salort et al., 2021; Sulistyo et al., 2020; Vargas-Hernández et al., 2018) and ethno-
cultural identities and values attached to community parks and gardens (Egerer et al., 2019).
The services and benefits provided by urban green spaces can be improved and maintained
through effective protection of the green infrastructures using urban strategic actions such as
urban policies, planning, and programs.
The rapid socio-economic development of the Federal Capital City arising from urbanization
increased the city’s physical size at the expense of its green spaces, from 1991. The need to
halt this trend and promote the liveability of the city, informed this study. A comprehensive
study into the availability, magnitude and changes in the pattern of urban green
infrastructures is important to Nigerian Cities and FCC for many reasons. Firstly, for most
Nigerian cities, and many cities in the developing world, meeting the World Health
Organization’s (2016) minimum 9m2 per capita green space benchmark constitutes a major
challenge. This is due to the dearth of systematic studies into the structure of urban green
spaces in these countries. Secondly, the inadequacy of green spaces in many cities of the
developing world could place city residents at great health risks from non-communicable
diseases, such as hypertension and diabetes, and from urban heat stress arising from
urbanization and global warming. The third, relates to the necessity for enlisting Nigerian
cities as one of the global cities, which constitute important centres for international politics,
commerce, and prestige.
1.2 Statement of Problem

The impact of unplanned urbanization and the limited availability of urban ecological
infrastructures in many cities of the developing world, including Nigeria, have prevented the
cities from meeting international best practice standards. The FCT, suffers from this

3
deteriorating condition. The forces of urbanization exert undue pressure on land particularly
at the FCC. The pressure from the government also reduced urban green spaces in the city. In
spite of the Land Use Act of 1978, which vests all (urban) lands in the government, yet the
problem still persists. In the FCC urban development expands to the detriment of urban
ecological infrastructures and this expansion may continue into land designated for protected
environmentally sensitive areas and productive forestry if the problem is not put to check.
Available studies on urban problems in the country, for example, urban flood crises
(Fadamiro and Adedeji, 2016), urban heat wave (Aderoju et al., 2013), land use changes and
degradation of environmentally-sensitive areas (Balogun et al., 2011; Olajuyigbe et al., 2015;
Owoeye and Ibitoye, 2016), urban expansion and urban sprawl (Balogu et al., 2011; Eke et
al., 2017), and parks provision and management (Aribigbola and Fatusin, 2016; Ijatuyi and
Ajenifujah-Abubakar, 2014), failed to specifically address the dynamics of urban ecological
infrastructures change patterns in the country, especially the FCC. This arises from the low
priority attention to urban ecological infrastructure issues, and the lack of awareness of the
citizens, too, of the inherent benefits of urban ecological infrastructures for enhanced
wellbeing. Nevertheless, a few studies remotely connected to urban ecological infrastructure
exist, such as those of Balogun et. Al., (2011), Olajuyigbe et al., (2015), Oriye and Fakere
(2015) and Oyinola et al., (2013). The studies concentrated attention on land use/land cover
changes, and the impact of urban expansion on city size. They relied only on remote sensing
change detection analysis, but failed to elicit the resident’s perceptual experience on the city’s
urban ecological infrastructure change patterns. This highlights a major research gap. This
research updates and elongates the previous studies, by combining multiple approaches such
as historical narratives, survey questionnaires, remote sensing imaging, accuracy
assessments, and the normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI), to unravel the causes
and impact of the changes.
1.3 Research Questions

The research intends to answer the following questions:

i. What was the pattern of the FCC Urban Ecological Infrastructure like before
1986?
ii. What changes occurred in the pattern of UEI between 1986-2022?
iii. What factors accounted for changes in the pattern of UEI in the FCC between
1986 and 2022?
iv. What is the magnitude of the changes, or how big are the changes?

4
 v. What implications do the changes have on the city and the residents?

1.4 Aim and Objectives of the Study

The aim of the study is to investigate the changes in the pattern of Urban ecological
infrastructures towards the preservation of Green spaces in the FCC, Abuja, Nigeria.

The specific objectives of the study are:

i. To explore the changes in the pattern of Urban ecological infrastructures between

1986-2022 in the FCC.
ii. To evaluate the magnitude of changes that have occurred in the pattern of UEI
between 1986 and 2022 in the study area.
iii. To identify factors that influenced changes in the pattern of UEI between 1986
and 2022 in the FCC.
iv. To determine the implications of changes in the pattern of UEI on the city and its
residents between 1986 and 2022.

1.5 Significance of the Study

All physical development activities must have clear goals and objectives. These constitute the
main driving forces. The goal of this research is on the preservation of urban ecological
infrastructures in the FCC. Understanding the pattern of UEI changes at the city level
provides the mechanisms for controlling them. We need to understand how, where and why
the pattern of UEI change, before the impact and control measures can be effected. The study
intends to investigate the factors responsible for the city’s UEI change patterns and reveal the
existing status of the UEI in terms of size, distance, nearness, and per capita availability.
Identifying these indicators could assist the planning and provision of UEI in the city.

Furthermore, the research proposes to highlight the role of attitudinal factors in the changing
pattern of UEI in the FCC. Understanding the pattern language in urban and regional
planning provides a good assessment of the spatial configuration of Urban green spaces. The
depletion of the former areas of green vegetation in a city reveals the kind of pressure and
impact that need to be addressed, and their control measures. This calls for pro-active
measures to replace green spaces as soon as these are depleted for physical development.
Previous studies on environmental problems in the city had concentrated on urbanization, and
undermined the role of attitudinal factors in the process. This could assist researchers and
policy makers to discern better outlines for urban green space interventions. The

5
identification and focus on attitudinal factors in particular could also crystallise into a solid
research domain in future.

The study intends to contribute towards the eradication of multiple plan-approving agencies
through an e-enabled land administration framework proposed for the city. The effective
operations of the land agencies could also generate accurate and up-to-date data for the city.
Building a spatial urban green space geo-database provides a basis for further studies of
urban ecological infrastructures.

1.6 Scope of the Study

Spatial Scope: Spatially this study covers the urban development phase I-II (covering about
171.66km2) of the Federal Capital City (FCC). It was chosen for this study because urban
planning has been implemented in the area (Enoguanbhor et al., 2022).
Temporal Scope: This study covers the period between 1986 and 2022.
Contextual Scope: The study attempts to provide an insight on the changes in the pattern of
urban ecological infrastructures in the study area.

6
 CHAPTER TWO

STUDY AREA

2.1 Study Area

2.1.1 Location and Size
Abuja is found on latitude 8° 25” and 9° 25” North of the Equator and longitude 6° 45” and
7° 45” East of the Greenwich. It is bordered to the North by Kaduna state, to the east by
Nassarawa state, to the west by Niger state and to the south by Kogi state (Figure 2.1). The
Federal Capital City (FCC) is located on the north-eastern part of the FCT. According to
Mabogunje et al. (1976), the area is considered the most ideal and conducive for human
habitation and settlement development within the FCT.

Figure 2.1: Map of FCT showing FCC

7
Figure 2.2: Map of the FCC, Abuja

8
2.1.2 Climate and Vegetation
Abuja’s climate is influenced by its position in the middle belt of Nigeria. It lies in the zone
of transition between the wet south and the dry north.

The highest temperatures in F.C.T. of about 37°C are recorded in the dry season. This is
between the months of November and March. A contributory factor to this phenomenon is
the fact that at this time in the year, the skies over the F.C.T. are cloudless and in-coming
sunlight is unobstructed. The lowest temperatures of about 17°C are recorded in the wet
season between the months of July and October when the cloudy skies help to shut out most
of the in-coming sunlight (Adakayi 2000).

The humidity of Abuja rises to 50% in the rainy season and reduces to about 2% in the dry
season. This fluctuation is due to the fact that the humidity of Abuja and the entire country is
highly influenced by the activities of the north east and south west trade winds. The humidity
generally increases when the moisture laden southwest trade winds prevail and reduces
considerably when the dry northeast trade winds begin to blow over the country. The F.C.T.
has an annual rainfall of about 1632mm the rains are usually heavy often accompanied by
lightning and thunder (Adakayi 2000).

The vegetation of Abuja is described as guinea and is made up of moderately tall and
scattered trees, shrubs and grasses. The most common trees found here are Parkia biglobosa
(Locust bean), Olneya tesota (Ironwood), Vitellaria paradoxa (Shea butter) and Ceiba
pentandra (Silk Cotton). The vegetation reflects the location of the F.C.T. which is mid-way
between the heavily forest south of Nigeria and dry — grassy savannah of northern Nigeria.
The two major types of vegetation found in the country are also present in the FCT despite its
location within the northern boundary of the Guinea savanna. Rain forest and riparian
vegetation complex are the two types of forest found in the FCT and they both have aerial
extent coverage of twenty one percent of its land area. On the other hand, three types of
savanna, namely woodlands, parks savanna and shrub savanna, cover seventy-nine percent of
the FCT land mass (Balogun, 2001). Riverine depression is typically skirted by fringes of
thickets and high trees. There are occasional patches of forest or heavily wooded area
(FCDA, 2000).

9
2.1.3 Geology and Topology

Generally, the FCT is underlain to the north by basement complex rocks and to the south by
metamorphic rocks, all of pre-Cambrian age. Specifically, Kogbe (1998) classified the rocks
of the study area into four, viz;

 Metamorphosed supra-crustal (exogenetic) rocks (e.g., mica schist, marble,

amphibolite and amohibole schist, fine to medium grained gnesis).
 Migmatic complex (e.g., migmatite, migmatic gnesis granite gnesis, porphyroblastic
granite gnesis, leucoratic granite gnesis, intrusive granite, coarse grained granite).
 Mino intrusions (e.g., rhyolites, quartz feldspar porphyry, dacatitea and andesites,
dolerites and Basalts).
 Other formations (e.g., quartzite, pegmatile, quartz vien). These rock formations
found within the study area do not present the possibility of any significant
contamination by iron ore from underlying rocks (Alhassan, 2012).

There is a marked difference between the highest and lowest elevation within AMAC. The
highest elevation is 213.2m to the north (which is largely urbanized) and 142.2m to the south
(which is largely rural) of the FCT. Within AMAC is located the famous Aso Rock, Katempe
Hill and Asokoro rock outcrops (Balogun, 2001).

2.1.4 Soil and Drainage

Due to the types of parent materials that underlay the FCT, it generally has the following
types of soils; Gleysols (very fertile and found in Abaji), combsols, Lithsols (in wooded
lands), Luvisols of loamy nature (very fertile), Sandy and sandy-loam soils (Alhassan, 2000).
Drainage is the means by which water in an area drains or flows away. It includes both
artificial and natural channels through which water flows. Abuja Municipal Area Council is
drained by six rivers namely river Jabi, river Gurara, river Layi, river Rudu, river Kwohu,
river Tapa and by many other streams which are tributaries of the Gurara River that flows
north – south dropping gently from the Kukku hill (Okunlola et al, 2014).

2.1.5 Population and the People

The FCC is a home to a number of indigenous peoples including the Habe, Gbagyi,
Gwandara, Gade, Basa, Hausa, and Fulani. These were heterogeneous groups that originally
inhabited the present day F.C.T. They mostly engaged in farming, trade and livestock

10
rearing. however, today the population of the F.C.T. is made up of Nigerians from all parts
of the country, engaging in numerous economic ventures within the territory (Adekayi 2000).
The Population of the FCC as projected by FCT economic planning 2010 stood at 2,440,200
in 2015 The projection of population for development stood at 3,166,506 by 2017. Then
population census 2006 stood at 776,298. then projection 2011 stood at 1,235,880. While
density: 698,6 inch/km (2011) –change+9.75per/year (2006-2011). Abuja: capital city of
Nigeria-inception 182.8-elevation+840m.official website, (FCT economic planning,2010).

2.1.6 Agriculture, Industries and Commercial Activities of the F.C.T.

Agricultural activities in the F.C.T. are greatly influenced by the climatic condition of the
area and the fact that it is found within the guinea savannah belt. There is however an
abundance of fertile soils in the F.C.T. which supports the cultivation of such crops as maize,
Guinea corn, Millet, Rice, Yam, cassava and a variety of vegetables and fruits.

Besides crop cultivation of crops, there is also livestock rearing in the F.C.T. This includes
cattle rearing by the Fulani, small scale rearing of goats, sheep and chicken by the
households. In recent times, there has been a rise in the establishment of poultry and fish
farms. This is encouraged by the growing market for fish and poultry products due to the
increasing population of middle and upper class in Abuja.

Besides local craft industries such as pottery, cloth weaving and food processing, the
construction industry has stood out as the most prominent industry in the F.C.T. This is due
to the predominance of construction activities presently taking place in the F.C.T. Popular
construction companies in the F.C.T. include Julius Berger, Cappa and D’Albereto, G.
Cappa, Arab Contractors, P.W., Setraco etc.

As a center of attraction for business, commercial activities have also been on the increase in
Abuja. Common businesses in the F.C.T. include sales of building and construction materials,
provision of hotel and accommodation services, shopping complexes that provide household
items, fashion shops, pharmacies, foodstuff markets, furniture markets as well as the sale of
electronics and communication equipment. In recent times, there has been an increase in
transport services, fast foods outlets and recreational centres. This is due to the continuous
influx of people into the F.C.T.

11
The rapid increase in population and the multiplicity of commercial activities in the F.C.T.
are placing huge pressure on the F.C.T’s infrastructures and social amenities including
housing, electricity, water supply and also urban ecological infrastructures.

CHAPTER THREE

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter sought to review relevant literature on urban areas and urban green space. The
chapter focused on green space and green infrastructure/ecological infrastructure. The
literature review sought to give an in-depth knowledge into issues arising from urbanization
on urban green space.

3.1 Urban Areas

The word “urban” was derived from the Latin word urbanus meaning characteristic of, or
pertaining to, the city (Macionis and Parrillo, 2007). The interpretation of urban statistics
should always be done with caution because measurement of urban growth rests on a
definition of urban area which is not standard throughout the world and differs even within
the same country depending upon the nature of local jurisdictions and how they might have
changed over time (Brockerhoff, 2000; Ioannides and Rossi-Hansberg, 2005). There is no
universally accepted definition for an urban population.
About half of the 228 countries for which the United Nations (UN) compiles data, use
administrative considerations, such as residing in the capital of the country or of a province,
to describe people as urban dwellers. Out of the remainder, 51 distinguish urban and rural
populations based on the size or density of locales, 39 depend on functional characteristics
such as the main economic activity of an area, 22 have no definition of “urban”, and eight
countries define all or none of their populations as living in urban areas. Each country’s
definition is accepted by the UN when it calculates urban estimates and projections. This
practice appreciates that various governments know best what features differentiate urban
from rural places in their respective countries. However, this approach undermines
comparison of urban population data across countries because no standard definition exists
(Brockerhoff, 2000).

12
Although, there is no categorical definition of what comprises “urbanity” there are
nonetheless some basic characteristics that are agreed. Basically, an urban setting is defined
in relation to, or as forming a core characteristic of, a city or town. Again, urban areas include
demarcated geographic zones of dense human habitation and a degree of physical separation
from rural areas. Notwithstanding these features: administrative demarcation, dense
populations, separation from rural areas – definitions of what comprises urban vary
significantly from country to country and city to city. Indeed, most states apply a core set of
variables in their definition which often includes a demographic threshold and an index of
urban functions which are typically linked to the absence of agricultural land and rural
employment (Muggah, 2012). For instance, in Ghana, the minimum population for an urban
area is five thousand. However, in the United States of America and Kenya, settlements with
population of two thousand five hundred and above are considered urban (Tamakloe, 1997 in
Asamoah, 2010). Depending on all of these criteria, then, countries can be described as either
majority urban or rural (Muggah, 2012).
“Urban” is a place–based characteristic that incorporates elements of population density,
social and economic organization, and the transformation of the natural environment into a
built environment. Thus, an urban place is a spatial concentration of people whose lives are
organized around non-agricultural activities. The crucial feature here is that urban means
non-agricultural; whereas rural means any place that is not urban. Admittedly, ―urban‖ is a
fairly complex concept. It is a function of sheer population size, space (land area), the ratio of
population to space (density or concentration) and economic and social organization. The
transformations occurring throughout the world might well call into question this definition,
because urban characteristics of place, especially those related to infrastructure are
increasingly and deliberately showing up in places that used to be strictly agricultural in
nature (Rashed and Jurgens, 2010).
The terms “urban” and “rural” are still often used colloquially, as if they were clearly
different and even mutually exclusive, and most people have clear mental conceptions of
some ideal landscape corresponding to each. However, this simple dichotomy has long
ceased to have much meaning, either in practice or for policy-making purposes in many parts
of the South, not least sub-Saharan Africa. This is because rapid urban population growth and
an expansion of the built-up area, technological change, global economic restructuring and
the impact of externally-driven macro-economic adjustment policies have combined to alter
the interface between ―urban‖ and ―rural‖ quite profoundly in many places. Nowhere is
there a neat dividing line where the city meets the savannah, bushveld, forest or desert

13
(Simon et al., 2004). Thus, the urban-rural divide is becoming very subtle as the world
population grows, as the fraction of humans living in cities increases, and as technology
continues to transform human society (Rashed and Jurgens, 2010).
Urban places are now home to virtually one of every two human beings and, by the middle of
the twenty-first century, nearly two out of every three people will be urban dwellers (Rashed
and Jurgens, 2010). This is a truly remarkable transformation considering the fact that in
1850 only 2 percent of the entire population of the world lived in cities of 100,000 or more
people. By 1900 that figure had edged up to 6 percent and it had risen to 16 percent by 1950
(Davis, 1972 in Rashed and Jurgens, 2010). Today the world is dotted by places with 100,000
or more people, and it is so commonplace that a city of that size is considered to be very
small (Rashed and Jurgens, 2010).

A dominant feature of the demographic transition of most countries is a shift in the

distribution of the population from rural to urban places. The world’s urban population in
1970 was 37 percent of the total. The population rose to 47 percent in 2000 and it was
estimated that by the year 2010 the urban population would have surpassed the rural
population and urban residents would comprise 56 percent of the total by 2020 (United
Nations, 2000). Also, in the year 2000 the United Nations projected that whiles the world’s
rural population would increase by about 4 percent over the next two decades the urban
population would grow by as much as 47 percent rising from 2.8 to 4.2 billion people.
Urban growth is concentrated in certain areas of the world and has significant impacts in
those areas. High rates of urbanization typically result from rapid urban growth (United
Nations, 2001). The urbanization process is normally characterized by an attenuated S-shaped
curve, which has increases in levels of urbanization most rapid during the middle stages of
economic development (Davis, 1968 in United Nations, 2001). The experience of present
developed countries tends to corroborate the above hypothesis, with slowing levels of
urbanization occurring for these countries in the last quarter of this century. On the contrary
however, growth in urbanization has increased in developing countries over the same period
(United Nations, 2000).
Most urban growth is now occurring in developing countries. The levels of urbanization in
developed countries remain much higher than those of developing countries, but the gap is
rapidly closing up. There was a 43-percentage point difference in levels of urbanization
between developed and developing regions in 1975. This had been reduced to a 37-point

14
difference in 1995. The difference is projected to decline even further to 32 percentage points
by 2015 (United Nations, 2000).

3.2 Urbanization
According to Glenn (1984), the term urbanization as traditionally measured by demographers
is urban population divided by total population of a region. It can also be defined as the
annual rate of change of the percentage of people living in urban areas, or the difference
between the growth rate of urban population and that of total population (Hope et al., 1999).
Urbanization, as defined by Nsiah-Gyabaah (2003) is the “shift from a rural to an urban
society and involves an increase in the number of people in urban areas during a particular
year”. He further argues that urbanization is the outcome of the social, economic and political
developments that lead to urban concentration and growth of large cities, changes in land use
and transformation from rural to metropolitan pattern of organization and government. In
effect, urbanization affects all spheres of human life both in the rural and urban setting.
Asamoah (2010) also argues that urbanization is the process and the rate at which human
activities and population are attracted to a locality or point in space within relatively short
period of time. According to her, the term urbanization can be defined as “the rapid
development and transformation of a region including increases in the size, population and
human activities at a given period of time”.
The work of Naab et al. (2013) reveals that urbanization affects all sectors of the economy.
At the heart of urbanization are cities (Drescher and Iaquinta, 2002). Cities are considered as
the cause of environmental degradation and resource depletion, casting an ecological
footprint across the globe, far beyond their immediate regions (Girardet, 1996 in Jenks and
Burgess, 2004).
More often than not, cities are seen as congested, polluting, with poor housing, collapsing
infrastructure, crime and poverty. In spite of these, it is cities that drive economies and it is
within them that innovation occurs and an increasing part of global output is produced (Jenks
and Burgess, 2004). Cities are seen as indicators of humankind's "progress" into the 21st
century, but it remains to determine the ways in which this progress is beneficial and those in
which it is detrimental. Concentration of the economic, social, political and administrative
organs of a nation or region in cities has made them magnets for rich as well as poor
households. Yet cities are only one part of urbanization; urbanization is also the
transformation of rural consciousness and the summation of many individual decisions
although they are not the whole picture (Drescher and Iaquinta, 2002).

15
Cities may have problems, but they are not necessarily a problem in themselves (Jenks and
Burgess, 2004). In particular, Mitlin and Satterthwaite (1996) have noted that the poor
environmental performance of many cities rather than inherent characteristics of cities in
general can be attributed to failure of effective governance.
Urban growth as an economic phenomenon is inextricably linked with the process of
urbanization. Urbanization itself has punctuated economic development. The spatial
distribution of economic activity, measured in terms of population, output and income, is
concentrated. The patterns of such concentrations and their relationship to measured
economic and demographic variables constitute some of the most intriguing phenomena in
urban economics. They have significant implications for the economic role and size
distribution of cities, the efficiency of production in an economy, and overall economic
growth. As economies move from those of traditional societies to their modern stage, the role
of the urban sector changes from merely providing services to leading in innovation and
serving as engines of growth (Ioannides and Rossi-Hansberg, 2005).
Urbanization strongly influences the growth process influencing both the efficiency of
growth and the extent of income inequality within an economy. In turn, growth influences the
urbanization process, driving the spatial evolution of production and population
agglomeration (Black and Henderson, 1999).
Urbanization occurs as countries shift sectorial composition away from agriculture into
industry and as technological advances in domestic agriculture release labour from
agriculture to migrate to cities. Urbanization, the shift of population from rural to urban
environments, is typically a transitory process, albeit one that is socially and culturally
traumatic. As a country develops, it moves from labour-intensive agricultural production to
labour being increasingly employed in industry and services. The latter are not land-intensive
and are situated in cities because of agglomeration economies. Thus, urbanization moves
populations from traditional rural environments with informal political and economic
institutions to the relative anonymity and more formal institutions of urban settings. That in
itself requires institutional development within a country. Spatially, it separates families,
particularly by generation, as the young migrate to cities and the old stay behind.
Urbanization is a spatial evolution process. By upper middle-income ranges, countries
become “fully” urbanized, in the sense that the percent urbanized levels out at 60-90% of the
national population living in cities. The actual percent urbanized with full urbanization varies
with geography, the role of modern agriculture in the economy, and national definitions of
urban (Henderson, 2004).

16
3.3 Concepts and Terminologies Associated with Green Areas
A large number of concepts and terms have emerged in academics and policies to describe
and define green areas as a result of increasing recognition of and emphasis on the
importance of urban “nature”. These concepts and terms are presented as general umbrella
concepts or indicate specific types of green areas. Related to the umbrella ones are natural
green space, green space (system/network) or green open space, urban greening, (public)
open space, and green (infra) structure, ecological (infra) structure etc. For the specific types,
the examples may include urban forest or forestry, urban woodland, community forest or
forestry, and urban wilderness in addition to traditional parks and gardens (Shan, 2009).
The emergence of these (new) concepts and terms has reflected the development in relation to
increasing understanding and recognition of the role of green areas in cities. Associated to
urban development, understandings of nature in cities have shifted from an originally
romantic and aesthetic attitude, through a functional view related to health and recreation, to
an ecological emphasis beginning from the late 20th Century. One fact however remains;
these views of nature in cities co-exist nowadays, with the functional (health) and ecological
considerations dominating. This in turn generates that these concepts and terms are frequently
used loosely and interchangeably in the literature (Shan, 2009). It is therefore imperative for a
systematic review to be made on the terms and concepts.

3.3.1 Natural Green Space

The term natural green space as defined in English Nature (2000) is “land, water and
geological features which have been naturally colonized by plants and animals and which are
accessible on foot to large numbers of residents”. According to Harrison et al., (1995 pp.1-2),
its surface is “predominantly natural: earth, water and living things”.
According to Shan (2009) the definition specifically covered the following:
Sites awaiting redevelopment which have been colonized by spontaneous assemblages of
plants and animals;
Land alongside water-ways, transport and service corridors which although perhaps once
deliberately landscaped or planted are now mixtures of planted and spontaneous assemblages;
Tracts of ‘encapsulated countryside’ such as woodlands, scrub, heathlands, meadows, and
marshes which through appropriate management continue to support essentially wild plant
and animal assemblages. Often these natural areas exist within the framework of formally
designated public open space; ponds, ditches, rivers, lakes and reservoirs;

17
The less intensively managed parts of parks, school grounds, sports pitches, golf courses,
churchyards and cemeteries; Incidental pocket-sized plots along residential and commercial
roads, pathways, car-parks and property boundaries, including walls and built structures
which are often spontaneously colonized by plants and animals; Allotments, orchards and
gardens.
He also explains that the term refers to areas colonized naturally by plants and animals and
are under little human influence. Clearly, naturalness was given high priority and the term
represents the view of ecologist and conservationist. However, in theory, the strictly “natural”
definition is not applicable in cities because it underscores nature’s own independent process
and being unchanged by human activity and may thus exclude all artificial or modified types
of vegetation, or nature of the third kind (Shan, 2009). Fact is that, these vegetated areas,
whether man-made or modified, predominate in urban green landscapes and can also have
high value of biodiversity, particularly many large parks for example. Also, using the
definition strictly necessitates complete knowledge of the site history so that one can decide
whether a site has been naturally colonized or is the product of planting and extensive
management (Shan, 2009).

3.3.2 Green Space

Concepts that support the incorporation of green spaces into the physical landscape of urban
areas to enhance the living condition in these areas have been propounded by various
scholars. Emphasis on the preservation of urban natural environment (green spaces) was
made by some of the earliest urban utopian concepts like Charles Fourier‘s fantasy villages
called “phalansteries”, Ernest Callebach’s novel “Ecotopia,” and the most famous Ebenezer
Howard’s “Garden City,” (Roelofs, 1999) and George Cadbury’s “Bournville Village” (Adjei
Mensah, 2014) which are all significant landmarks in green city movements. Dunett et al
(2002) and Swanwick et al. (2003) suggest that the term “green space” is a more recent term
and its origin can be traced from the urban nature conservation movement and the European
thinking about green space planning which started in UK. Green space is a vital part of the
public realm. Attractive, safe and accessible parks and green spaces contribute positive
social, economic and environmental benefits, improving public health, well-being and quality
of life (CABE, 2004). Adjei Mensah (2014) states that the meaning of green space is often
confused with other terminologies in urban planning particularly open space and public open
spaces and in most cases these terms are used loosely or interchangeably. He also states that

18
to clarify the meaning of green space and differentiate it from other concepts in the urban
landscape, some authors came up with the following definitions.
Shan (2009) asserts that green space is a recent term which originated from the urban nature
conservation movement and the European thinking about green space planning. According to
the Greenspace Scotland (2008), green space refers to any vegetated land or water within or
adjoining an urban area and includes: natural “green space,” green corridors and amenity
grassland, parks and gardens. It also includes outdoor sports facilities, playing fields,
cemeteries and allotments and derelict, vacant and contaminated land. It is also defined as
those spaces made up of soil surface area capable of supporting vegetation growth
(Greenspace Scotland, 2008).
Forsyth (2003) states that a green space consists of several outdoor places with substantial
amounts of vegetation which is often recruited to reflect the human dimensions. Kit Campbell
Associates (2001) also describes a green space as any vegetated land or structure, water or
geological feature within urban areas. These spaces according to Forsyth (2003) include
urban parks and other green areas that may have some “natural” looking constituents but be
actually designed, planted, and conserved by people.

According to the European Union (EU), urban green space is defined as “public green space
located in urban areas, mainly covered by vegetation which are directly used for active or
passive recreation, or indirectly used by virtue of their positive influence on the urban
environment, accessible to citizens, serving the diverse needs of citizens and thus enhancing
the quality of life in cities or urban regions” (URGE- Team, 2004, p. 13 in Booklet 2).

In Ghana, urban green space refers to “unused landscapes in cities or towns such as parks
which have sufficient greenery on them to make them ameliorate the harsh conditions
engendered by concrete buildings/structures in such areas” (Barnes, 2014).

In China, the term urban green space refers to “all the green land/area covered by vegetation
city-wide” (Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development, 2002). Thus, urban green
space includes everything in cities that has vegetation (Gairola and Noresah, 2010).

Urban green space (UGS) can also be defined as “all publicly owned and publicly accessible
open space with a high degree of cover by vegetation, e.g. parks, woodlands, nature areas and
other green space. It can have a designed or cultural character as well as a more natural
character” (Schipperijn, 2010).

19
Bonsignore (2003) also defines urban green space as “outdoor settings that contain significant
amounts of vegetation”. Swanwick et al. (2003, pp.97-98) define urban green space as “land
that consists predominantly of unsealed, permeable, ‘soft’ surfaces such as soil, grass, shrubs
and trees … whether or not they are publicly accessible or publicly managed”. Jim and Chen
(2003, p.95) assert that “green spaces in cities exist mainly as semi-natural areas, managed
parks and gardens, supplemented by scattered vegetated pockets associated with roads and
incidental locations.”

According to Iuculano and Ubaldo (1992) in Fratini and Marone (2011), the term “urban
green-space” is used to describe those portions of a territory not constructed on, of private
character (green-space intended to increase the enjoyment of the owner, a private subject) or
of a public nature (green-space intended to increase public use through discharge of functions
in favour of average citizens), that coexist with the structures and the manmade features and
are intended for enjoyment and health of the citizens on the whole.

Chen (2013) notes that while there are differences between definitions of UGS in various
countries two striking features are common as regards the use of the concept. The features
are:
1. Dominance of vegetation;
2. An entire geographical area influenced by urbanization (the entire territorial area, not only
built-up areas);

It has also been identified that the concept “urban green space” is an oxymoron embracing
incompatible features. Juxtaposed with a built-up concrete area representing “extreme”
intervention in the natural process, green space in cities does not completely change the
inherent “naturalness” of the land (such as still providing ecosystem services and supporting
natural processes). In this regard, urban green space is very essential in the protection of
some land from extreme human activities and interventions, and balancing conflict between
sealed concrete areas and unsealed natural areas (Uggla, 2012).

Notwithstanding the subtle differences in the definitions above, a conclusion can be made
that a green space in cities or urban green space refers to urban spaces primarily covered by
vegetation, whether natural or artificial. It is not only limited to urban parks and gardens but
rather covers land that is made up predominantly of unsealed, permeable, “soft” surfaces such
as soil, grass, shrubs and trees which are privately or publicly accessible or managed
(Dunnett et al., 2002). The character of “predominant” is accentuated because green spaces

20
may include buildings and other forms of hard surfaces. Swanwick et al (2003) came up with
the following explanations to give much understanding about the description of green spaces
in urban landscapes. They explain that, urban areas are made up of the built environment and
the external environment between buildings. The external environment is made up of two
main entities, “green space” and “grey space”. The green space may either be linear (occurred
along transport routes such as roads, railways), semi-natural (wetlands, woodland), functional
(allotments, churchyards, school grounds) and amenity (parks and gardens) (Dunnett et al.,
2002; Swanwick et al., 2003).

The second component of the external environment which is ‘grey space’ covers land that to
a greater extent is sealed, impermeable and has ‘hard’ surfaces such as concrete, paving or
tarmac. The grey space is of two types, functional grey space (which provides a specific
purpose such as roads, pavements, car parks and other hard surfaced areas related to different
types of built development) and civic grey space (publicly accessible areas planned basically
for public enjoyment such as town squares, plazas and esplanades) (Swanwick et al., 2003).

3.3.3 Ecological Infrastructure

Ecological infrastructure is a widely used term to refer to green space and often focuses upon
connectivity (Saraev, 2012). It has been suggested that fundamental to the development of
ecological infrastructure thinking were the paradigm designs of Frederick Law Olmsted and
Ebenezer Howard. The ideas of relating the ecological capacity and social opportunities of an
area have now been taken as a given in landscape planning but the works of Olmsted and
Howard were some of the first to explore this relationship. Olmsted’s work in New York and
Boston is still discussed by many ecological infrastructure researchers as early examples that
promoted the integration of form and function that leads to landscape multi-functionality.
These are themes that are now considered fundamental in ecological infrastructure thinking.
Howard’s work in the UK promoted similar values to Olmsted’s. Howard suggested through
his designs that placing green spaces in close proximity to residential zones would improve
both the psychological and physical health of local population. The relevance of Olmsted and
Howard cannot be underestimated when discussing ecological infrastructure. The rise in
ecological infrastructure research has coincided with a reassessment of what landscapes
should be in terms of form and function. Ecological infrastructure as a term relates to the
connective matrices of green spaces that can be found in and around urban and urban-fringe
landscapes. They provide a number of complimentary benefits for ecological, economic and

21
social spheres and have been increasingly viewed as concept that both planners and
practitioners can draw on (Mell, 2008).
Currently, there are as many definitions of ecological infrastructure as there are authors
working on the concept and as in most academic and practitioner research, the definitions
used by an organization or an author directly relate to the focus of their own ecological
infrastructure research. For example, conservationist authors strongly emphasize the
ecological and biodiversity components, planners may review the concept in terms of policy
implementation, while recreational greenways and green infrastructure specialists may focus
on the benefits gained through development (Mell, 2010). It must also be underscored that
explosion of interest about ecological infrastructure doesn’t necessarily equate to increased
understanding of the concept and that the term ecological infrastructure can mean different
things to different people. In spite of the fact that there is diversity in the definitions
developed for ecological infrastructure, there are common themes which underlie each of
them (Mell, 2010).

‘Ecological infrastructure’ in an urban environment refers to all non-hard and non- built
areas, including surface water areas as well as a zone of 1-2 km between town and
countryside that are more or less connected to each other. The structure should be organized
with an overruling strategy; thus, it must be possible to recognize a system in the structure.
Accordingly, an ecological infrastructure is a network of patches of natural character
including surface water and greenways, penetrating an urban built-up area.
The concept should not be limited by administrative considerations; thus, both public and
private lands are included in an ecological infrastructure (Sandström, 2002).
Countryside Agency (2006) describes ecological infrastructure to comprise the provision of
planned networks of linked multifunctional green spaces that contribute to protecting natural
habitats and biodiversity, enable response to climate change and other biosphere changes,
enable more sustainable and healthy lifestyles, enhance urban liveability and wellbeing,
improve the accessibility of key recreational and green assets, support the urban and rural
economy and assist in the better long-term planning and management of green spaces and
corridors.
Ecological infrastructure is the network of natural and semi-natural areas, features and green
spaces in rural and urban, and terrestrial, freshwater, coastal and marine areas, which together
enhance ecosystem health and resilience, contribute to biodiversity conservation and benefit

22
human populations through the maintenance and enhancement of ecosystem services
(Naumann et al., 2011).
Ecological Infrastructure refers to the “combined structure, position, connectivity and types
of green spaces which together enable delivery of multiple benefits as goods and services”
(Forest Research, 2010).
Ecological Infrastructure is also explained by TEP (2005 p.1) as the physical environment
within and between cities, towns and villages. The network of open spaces, waterways,
gardens, woodlands, green corridors, street trees and open countryside that brings many
social, economic and environmental benefits to local people and communities.
Ecological Infrastructure is a sub-regional network of protected sites, nature reserves, green
spaces and greenway linkages. Ecological Infrastructure should provide for multi-functional
use…it should operate at all spatial scales from urban centres through to open countryside
(TCPA, 2004 p.6).
Ecological Infrastructure is an interconnected network of green spaces that conserves natural
ecosystems values and functions and provides associated benefits to human populations.
Ecological Infrastructure is the ecological framework needed for environmental, social and
economic sustainability (Benedict and McMahon, 2002 p.12).
Our nation’s natural life support system - an interconnected network of protected land and
water that supports native species, maintains natural ecological processes, sustains sir and
water resources and contributes to the health and quality of life for America’s communities
and people (Williamson, 2003 p.4).
Although, there are differences in the above definitions of ecological infrastructure, the
following features are common to what constitute ecological infrastructure: access, spatial
variance, multi-functionality, natural and human benefits, biodiversity, sustainability and
connectivity. Again, each of the definitions identifies that ecological infrastructure is, or
should be, part of a wider ecological network linking different ecological features (Mell,
2010).

3.3.4 Typologies of Ecological Infrastructure

Using stakeholder participation, Davies et al. (2006) came out with a typology that they felt
could constitute ecological infrastructure. The typology showed that ecological infrastructure
is made up from a number of diverse landscape features and components and presented a
number of classifications proposed to hold a ‘green’ value. The typology system developed
by Davies et al. emulates work by Ahern in his classifications of Greenways. Rather than on

23
elements or issues earlier discussed in reference to the development of the green
infrastructure concept Ahern (1995) based his typology classifications on issues of scale,
goals, landscape context and planning strategy.

Mell (2010) argues that Ahern’s typology of assessing ecological infrastructure offers an
opportunity to explore the difficulties in categorizing green spaces. He further explains that
various landscape elements, for example a cemetery, may be managed to provide a site for
reflection and spiritual respite but could be located in an ecologically important landscape. It
may, therefore, be imperative in the development of ecological infrastructure to acknowledge
the variance in land use and actual land classifications.

Mell (2010) again notes the attempt by the RCEP (2007) to develop a typology for ecological
infrastructure. As their broad classifications of what constitutes ecological infrastructure, the
RCEP outlined the categories formal, informal, green space corridors, strategic green spaces,
sports grounds and public private spaces.

It is worth noting that, without a vivid idea of what ecological infrastructure consists of, it is
difficult to argue the different semantic and disciplinary values of the concept.
Discussion about ecological infrastructure typology needs to be done in conjunction with the
literature, assessing both its conceptual basis and its value to landscape management
practices. An assessment of this nature makes it possible for an examination of the
fundamental principles (e.g connectivity, multi-functionality, and access) to be reviewed
(Mell, 2010).
Mell (2010) also proposed a typology that fits ecological infrastructure with the following
areas: form, function and context, and can be broken down into ecological, economic and
social criteria reviewing the value of specific landscape or ecological infrastructure elements
(Refer to Table 3.1 below).

Typology classification Element or Function

Form Ecological (physical space, connectivity,

elements) Economic (costs of a space, design)
Social and cultural norms (users of a space,
aesthetics of a space, motivations)
Function Ecological (biodiversity, conservation)
Economic (industry, business, regeneration)
Social (education, recreation, health)
Context Ecological (biodiversity, supporting networks,

24
 ecological mobility)
Economic (costs of a space, economic
development, sustainability)
Social and cultural norms (location,
facilitations, motivations, perceptions)
Source: Mell, 2010.

3.4 Functions of Green Spaces

So many works have been carried out on the functions of green spaces. These functions are
usually categorized into Ecological functions, Socio-cultural values, Economic benefits and
Structural functions (see Figure 3.1). In most cities today, the ecological function has been
given top priority at least in government political agendas (Chen 2013).

25
Figure 3.1: Taxonomy of Functions and Values of Urban Green Space.
Source: Chen, 2013.

3.4.1 Ecological Functions

Urban green space has many direct ecological functions. For example, urban trees help
improve the air quality by capturing air pollution (Nowak et al., 2006). Urban vegetation also
contributes to the reduction of atmospheric CO 2 by direct sequestration (McPherson, 1998;
Nowak and Crane, 2002).
Caspersen et al., (2006) note that forests, parks and other open spaces in and around cities
provide attractive settings for outdoor recreation, both for daily (short-term) and longer-term
use. They also state that living in a ‘green’ environment and/or close to accessible green
spaces is essential for resident’s satisfaction with their living environment.

26
Urban green space, such as forests or parks, can ameliorate UHI effect by preventing
incoming solar radiation from heating the surrounding buildings and surfaces, cooling the air
by evapotranspiration, and reducing wind speed (Akbari et al., 2001).
Also, the presence of UGS, and especially urban woodland, can reduce surface runoff (by
intercepting precipitation), absorb pollutants, and emit hydrocarbons as well as modify solar
radiation, air temperature, wind speed, and relative humidity (Pauleit and Duhme, 2000; Choi
et al., 2012). Increased vegetative cover and higher-albedo surface materials have been
identified as approaches that can help achieve cooling effects in urban areas (Jonsson, 2004).
Again, urban parks are now a vital urban infrastructure for mitigating UHIs in this era of
global warming (Lee et al., 2009).
According to Deng et al. (2008), there are four main aspects of ecological contributions of
urban green space to cities and their inhabitants: maintaining urban biodiversity; improving
the microclimate and alleviating urban heat island effects; reducing air pollution and
purifying air; urban natural disaster prevention and refuge provision.

3.4.2 Socio-Cultural Values

Sullivan et al. (2004) note that green space can provide places where people can meet and
develop social ties. Coley et al. (1997, p.487) found that ‗the presence of trees consistently
predicted greater use of outdoor spaces by all people, young and older, as well as groupings
of people consisting of both youth and adults together’.
Parks provide urban residents relief from their stressful lives, accelerate recovery from
disease, and can foster active living, fighting sedentary lifestyles associated with obesity,
cardiac diseases and various types of cancer. Community gardens, a recent feature of many
inner-city parks, can provide residents space for social interaction and enable people to
supplement their diets with fresh fruits and vegetables. Parks have the tendency to foster
closer community ties. Parks can also moderate vulgarity and nurture child development.
Most children would opt to play in outdoor spaces that provide them with a range of sensory
experiences and which help them to refine their motor skills (Byrne and Sipe, 2010).
Combined, dense population, traffic noise and pollution generate an environment in which
inhabitants are severely exposed to stress inducing factors. Hence the need for accessibility to
green areas is enlarged in an urban environment characterized by an intense lifestyle and high
exposure to environmental pollution and other stress inducers (Caspersen et al., 2006).

27
Yu (2002) cited by Chen (2013) also indicates that urban green space provides an opportunity
for communication and connection for local residents and improves neighborhood
relationships and enhances internal cohesion within the community. “Working class” people
enjoy some health benefits according to the amount of green space existing in their
neighborhood and this reduces “health inequalities” (Hartig, 2008). Groenewegen et al.
(2006) even describe green space as “Vitamin G” for human well-being.
Van der Ryn and Cowan (2007) note the attention given to the educational function and value
of urban green space from the likelihood of using nature for the lessons for sustainability.
Chen (2013) also argues that people who reside in cities full of cemented floors, relentless
buildings and concrete have very little chance to come close to remote nature. Green space in
the city provides such a place for people particularly children to discover nature and acquire a
brilliant environmental education (URGE-Team, 2004).

3.4.3 Economic Aspect

The economic values of urban green space arise from its production and employment
opportunities. Products (such as fuel wood, fibre, fruits and compost), and employment
opportunities (such as new planting projects, maintenance and management of certain areas)
are examples of tangible economic values of green space. Urban agriculture, for example has
increasingly gained attention. Different vegetable gardens, food gardens, herb gardens and
fruit gardens have become very popular in western countries where city dwellers own their
home gardens and community gardens. Backyard gardens to a very large extent help to
alleviate shortages of food and save on household expenses especially in urban areas (Chen,
2013).
Derkzen (2012) asserts that the ecological, or production and employment functions of urban
green space are better quantifiable and may lead to economic gains, for example on the
community level where temperature moderation, run-off retention and dust filtration can
lower the costs for households and the municipal government.
A difference in temperature of about five degrees celsius can substantially lower the costs for
air-conditioning and the permeable soils of green space reduces flood risk and the costs of
repairing, rebuilding and insurance claims (Baycan-Levent et al., 2010). Derkzen (2012)
again notes that there is a market value in the natural produce of urban green areas such as
wood, young trees and compost and the capacity for energy production.
Furthermore, management and maintenance of green space create local employment and a
work load for planners and policy makers, plus for related facilities such as bicycle hire and

28
catering services (Rodenburg et al., 2001). Green space itself can also be studied for research
purposes, in research areas such as geology, environmental economics, human geography,
urban forestry, environmental and landscape planning or genetics (Derkzen, 2012).
Anwar and Breuste (2008) have also indicated that another direct economic benefit that can
be gained from urban green space are the revenues derived from tourism, as it is proved that
the presence of green space is closely related to the attractiveness of a city for locals as well
as outsiders, and urban green spaces also have the influence to attract businesses and
institutions that wish to be associated with a natural environment.
Chen (2012) argues that there is another intangible form of economic value associated with
green space: well-planned and managed urban green space can considerably improve a city’s
competitiveness and productivity and help to increase the value of land and further attract
more investment. Green space like public parks, natural areas and golf courses can have a
statistically substantial effect on the sale prices of houses in close proximity to those
resources (Bolitzer and Netusil, 2000).

3.4.4 Structural Functions

Just like buildings and infrastructure, vegetation, urban green spaces and natural landscape
are architectural structures for urban space. The structural functions of urban green space are
often used in urban planning and design by defining urban structure and urban form,
regulating urban development, buffering between city zones, organizing traffic and the
architectural use for planning and design (Lui, 2008).
Parks and urban green spaces are often used in urban planning practice to separate urban
zones at a smaller scale. Green spaces are especially valued in a compact city form and they
offer a natural balance to build form and can be developed as a green network to ensure
contact with the natural world (URGE, 2004).
Urban green spaces and vegetation play very crucial roles in organizing traffic. For a
considerable period of time, planning and design of urban green space have been related to
traffic network. It is of immense relevance that the design and management of public space
reconcile the needs of these often-conflicting modes of transport. Vegetation and green space
add to high quality streetscapes and public space. Well-designed streets and public spaces
boost walking and cycling and foster a safer environment by reducing vehicle speeds and use
(CABE Space, 2004).
The architectural values for planning and design associated with urban green spaces,
vegetation and natural landscapes cannot be overemphasized. Vegetation is used in defining

29
open space and integrating the buildings to the surrounding environment. Plants form walls,
canopies or floors of varying heights and densities; these are architectural characteristics.
Landscape variation is created through different colours, textures, forms and densities of
plants. Urban trees can direct vision, break up large spaces, and define space. They can be
used to frame scenes and to provide foreground and backgrounds for landscape features‖
(Tyrväinen et al., 2005, p.89).
Urban green spaces, vegetation and natural landscapes give local character and identity,
provide distinctive landscape and give legibility and structure to the urban fabric‖ (URGE,
2004, p.14).
Chen (2013) has also indicated that urban green space not only constitute the physical
structural framework of urban development, but also improves the overall image of a city and
creates a unique branding and sense of identity. Studies have revealed that natural areas in a
city are one of the key qualities that make the city visually appealing (Swanwick, 2004).
Today, cities compete intensely with one another, nationally and internationally, to attract
more intelligence and investment (Chen, 2013). A positive city image created by urban green
space can greatly promote its amenities and liveability, and thus attract people to live, stay or
visit in a city, and further encourage investment and create more employment (Chiesura,
2004).

3.5 Drawbacks of Urban Green Space

Green space does not always offer benefits to the society. Jorgensen et al., (2007) have
underscored that urban green spaces are seen as dangerous places especially if they are not
well kept and protected. UGS can be used as hideouts for criminals and according to
Jorgensen and Anthopoulou (2007), people might fear using those places. Ribeiro et al.,
(2009) also note that a good number of people have to deal with pollen allergies and urban
vegetation is an important source of allergenic pollen in cities.

3.6 Urban Green Space and Planning

Competition between land uses is not uncommon these days and is very intensive in the
process of urban development and regeneration. Relationships between existing and potential
urban green space and other land uses such as housing and infrastructure are usually trade-off
relationships. In addition, there is even prioritization when it comes to land use of urban
green space. For instance, developing an intensively used amusement park with large paved
areas can conflict with the goal of preserving plant biodiversity. Planners and policy or

30
decision-makers need to evaluate and consider carefully what the advantages and
disadvantages of alternative options are in order to make these trade-off decisions.

Conventionally, urban green space development has often been considered only on a local
project level, e.g. at the level of an individual park. In urban areas, when there is pressure on
land use, green space considerations are always weak in comparison with more commercially
oriented development (Liu, 2008).

31
 CHAPTER FOUR

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This section discusses the various methods that were employed in generating data for the
study. Also, the types and sources of data, tools and procedure for data analysis using
Remote Sensing and GIS in the study area were also explained in this section.
4.1 Reconnaissance Survey

Reconnaissance survey was carried out to provide the researcher with adequate knowledge of
the study area. During the survey, the researcher visited the Office of Surveyor General of
Abuja Municipal Council (AMAC) to get the base map of the area. The researcher also
visited the National Population Commission Abuja to obtain information on the population of
the study area. The researcher also engaged in discussion with staff of the Office of Surveyor
General to get insight into the pattern of ecological area growth in the study area and get
information on places that are rapidly changing.
4.1.1 Types of Data

The data required for the study include:

i. Landsat 5 Thematic Mapper (TM) of 1986 with spatial resolution of 80 m

ii. Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager and Thermal Infrared Sensor (OLI/TIRS) of 2022
with spatial resolution of 30 m

iii. Population of the study area

4.2 Sources of Data

Landsat 5 TM of 1986 and Landsat 8 OLI of 2022 were obtained from United State
Geological Survey website (USGS). The images will be used to determine the magnitude
and pattern of change of ecological sites in the study area. The population of the area will be
obtained from the National Population Commission Abuja Chapter. Data on the factors that
influence changes and implication of changes of ecological sites in the study area will be
gotten through the administration of a well-structured questionnaire.
4.3 Sample Size and Techniques

The sample frame of the study is the population of FCC which was projected to 2022 using
the 2006 population figure (778,567). In order to determine the sample population, the

32
population of the study area was projected to 2022 using the exponential growth model with
an annual growth rate of 8.6%, thus;

Pn = Po (Po x r/100)n

Where

Pn = population projection

Po = The base population.

r= growth rate of the population,

n= time lapse in year.

The projected population is given as 1,887,246 persons as seen in Table 3.1.

Smith (2000) formula for finite population was employed to statistically determine the

minimum sample size for the study, thus;

Necessary sample size = (Z-score)2 x StdDev (1-StdDev) / (margin of error)2 ,

Where:

Z-SCORE (confidence level -95% = (1.96)2

Standard Deviation (StdDev) = 0.5

Margin of error = 0.05.

The sample size can be determined thus:

((1.98)2 x 5(.5)) / (.05)2

(3.8416x.25) /.0025

.9604 / .0025

33
384.16 = 384

To obtain the proportion of questionnaire to be administered in each of the ward, simple

arithmetic was used which is given as

n ×Q

Where

n = population of each ward

Q = Total number of questionnaires

N = Total population of the study area

However, 384 copies of questionnaire will be administered to ascertain the factors

that influenced changes and implication of ecological changes in the study area. The

sampling of respondents will be done by using purposive sampling technique. This will be

achieved by going from house to house within each ward and respondents who have lived for

at least 20 years will be sampled. The reason for this is because only respondents that have

been residents for 20 years and above can provide adequate information on the study area

from 1986 to 2022. The copies of questionnaire will be administered in a-wait-and-take

manner to avoid non-return or incomplete filling of the questionnaire. Three field assistants

will be recruited and trained on the questionnaire administration and they will be selected

based on their knowledge on the study area

In-depth Interview will also be conducted to obtain substantial information on the

determinant and implication of ecological changes in the study area; 7 stakeholders (2 female

and 5 male) will be interviewed. This will comprise of 3 individuals from the Ministry of

Lands and Town Planning, Office of the Surveyor General and Abuja Geographic

Information Agency and 4 clan heads in the study area which are represented as (A, B, C, D,

34
E, F, G). This is in line with the recommendation of Creswell (1998) who recommended a

minimum of 5 and maximum of 25 persons which is based on saturation, a point at which

data collection process no longer offer any new or relevant information (Charmaz, 2006).

Table 4.1: Population and Sample Size of the Study Area

Ward 2006 Population 2022 Population Sample Size
City center 63006 152726 31
Garki 67284 163096 33
Gui 71892 174267 35
Gwagwa 60160 145827 30
Gwarinpa 116315 281947 57
Jiwa 81576 197740 40
Kabusa 77809 188609 38
Karshi 39916 96756 20
Karu 115698 280452 57
Nyanya 84911 205824 42
Orozo 5340 12943 3
Wuse 8776 21273 4
Total 792683 1921463 382
Source: Adopted and Modified from NPC (2022)
The IDIs will give more insight on the determinant and implication of ecological site

changes as the informant are people who have lived and deal with land related matters in the

study area. However, the qualitative data generated through IDIs will be recorded using a

tape recorder which will be transcribed in written form and sorted in line with the research

objectives 4 and 5 respectively. Personal observation will also be done by the researcher to

checkmate responses from the research instrument.

4.4 Data Processing Techniques

4.4.1 Image geo-referencing

The satellite imageries acquired from the United State Geological Survey (USGS)

Land Look platform were already otho-rectified, thus there was no need for geo-referencing.

35
4.4.2 Image Sub-Setting

Image sub-setting is a process of extracting an area of interest (AOI) from the large

images. The study area which is the area under study will be subset from each large scene of

the satellite imagery by using the extract/clip tools in ArcGIS 10.8 software. This will be

done using vector boundary data of FCC to clip the imageries, extracting the extents within

the boundary of the imageries which is the Area of Interest (AOI)

4.4.3 Image Classification

Supervised classification techniques will be performed using maximum likelihood

classification (MLC) algorithm in classifying the imagery into various classes. This was to

enable the researcher generate training class/sites in line with the actual land use/land cover

themes existing within the study area. However, Anderson, Hardey and Witmer, (1976).

classification scheme will be adopted and modified to suit the present land use classes

existing in the study area as seen in Table 3.1. The output of the classified raster will be

vectorized into vector (polygons) in order to measure the extent. The area coverage of each of

the LULC classes that was vectorized was measured square kilometer (km²) for each of the

years under review using the calculate geometry tool in the ArcMap.

Table 4.2: Landuse/Landcover Classification Scheme

Land use type Description

Built-up Residential, commercial, industrial, transportation,

communications, and utilities

Ecological Area land cover with natural vegetation (grasses, trees, shrubs etc.)

Water Body streams, canals, lakes, reservoirs, bays and estuaries

Forest deciduous forest, evergreen forest, and mixed forest

Agricultural cropland and pasture, orchards, nurseries, ornamental and

horticultural areas
Bare Surface area devoid of vegetation
Source: Anderson, Hardy, roach and Witmer (1976)

36
4.4.4 Accuracy Assessment

Accuracy assessment is an important part of any classification project. It compares the

classified image to another data source that is considered to be accurate or ground truth data.

However, the attribute and statistics from the classification result will be generated and used

for the post-classification comparison between the years. Sixty random points will be

generated over the classified map and they will be checked. The percentage of accurate pixel

will be examined.

4.5 Data Analysis

Objective I: To determine the pattern of urban ecological infrastructure change

between 1986 and 2022 in the study area: Land use and land cover change analysis from

remote sensing imageries is a principal means for, and component of, environmental

information and resource monitoring. Several works (Jensen, 1986; Omojola, 1997; Roberts,

et al, 1998) have discussed the means, methodologies and techniques for change detection

studies. Change detection for land use and land cover may be carried out using pre-

classification or post classification approach. The pre-classification change detection involves

matching pixel for pixel to process multi-date imageries of the same area so as to generate

changes. In this case, the digital number (DN) of cells in image of time to is digitally matched

and co-related with the DN value for the image of time t1 using change detection algorithm.

The result represents the change area. This is very original because it uses the raw or native

DN values of the image which reflects the spectral reflectance of surface features. In this

case, subtle changes may easily be captured. However, where different environmental

conditions prevail at the time of acquisition of the different images, differences in reflectance

which is reflected in DN values may not correspond to changes in surface feature or classes.

This may not be recognized by the change algorithm and hence unrealistic results may be

generated. The second methodological approach that will be employed is the post

37
classification change detection. This involves digital classification of the multi-temporal

image of the same area. The classified image data are thereafter overlaid. Change will be

generated based on the classes rather than on differences in DN values. Much as this is

straightforward, any miss classification error is automatically transmitted into the change

generated. So, the accuracy of change generated is a function of the accuracy of classified

imageries. Change analysis will then be performed by intersecting the different multi-

temporal land use and land cover layers (1986 and 2022). Change maps will be generated and

the resulting tables also produced.

Objective II: To determine the magnitude of change of ecological infrastructure in the

study area: The magnitude of change will also be determined from the classified raster

output of the satellite images of 1986, and 2022 respectively that will be vectorized

(polygon). Thus, subtracting the value of the developed land expanse of the reference year

from that of the base year.

Mathematically:

NT = B – A

Where:

A= the base year (1986)

B= the reference year (2022)

MT= Magnitude of change between 1986 and 2022

Objective III: To examine the determinants of the change in urban ecological

infrastructure in the study area: This will be achieved by employing descriptive statistics

like frequency and percentage. The result is presented in tables and the results were discussed

38
extensively, also Relative importance index (RII) will be used to analyze and rank the

responses on the determinants of the change.

Relative Importance Index

RII=Sum of weights (W1 + W2 +W3 +W4 +W5 ) / A x N …………Chua (2018)

where W= weights given to each effect which ranges from 1-5, with 5 = strongly agree, 4=

agree, 3= undecided, 2= disagree, 1= strongly disagree. A= highest weight in this case 5 and

N= total number of the respondents.

Objective IV: To Assess the implication of change in the pattern of ecological

infrastructure in the study area: Tables, simple percentages and charts will be employed.

Relative importance index (RII) will be used to analyze and rank the responses of the

respondents on the implication of the changes in the study area, thus;

Relative Importance Index

RII=Sum of weights (W1 + W2 +W3 +W4 +W5 ) / A x N

where W= weights given to each effect which ranges from 1-5. 5 = strongly agree, 4= agree,

3= undecided, 2= disagree, 1= strongly disagree. A= highest weight in this case 5 and N=

total number of the respondents.

39