The current, dominating strategy of nature conservation within urban landscapes is to formally protect remaining patches of unexploited nature in nature reserves. However, integration of nature conservation frameworks into urban planning requires reconsideration of key issues, such as why, where, and how to protect nature in a purposeful way. As part of that process I statistically evaluate current nature conservation in 209 municipalities in southern Sweden by analysing the number, size, age, and land cover patterns of 1869 nature reserves in relation to the degree of urbanisation. The analyses reveal that in urban municipalities the nature reserves are fewer, but larger, and have a higher diversity of land covers. Having large nature reserves may be especially important in urban landscapes, since it is often highly fragmented. The land cover compositions show no differences between urban and rural nature reserves. However, urban nature reserves differ more from their surroundings compared with rural nature reserves, according to the identified changes in representation of land cover types with an increasing degree of urbanisation. The most urgent future challenge identified is to develop urban nature conservation strategies that are integrated into the urban context including other green areas and built-up areas, the land-use history, and the requirements for local ecosystem services across the landscape.

The importance of the landscape surrounding a protected area for sustaining its values is frequently discussed in conservation literature. Studies on the interactions of urbanisation and nature conservation at the global scale suggest that protected nature attracts urbanisation, and that this in turn might negatively impact the area. However, studies specifically addressing such land use dynamics at city scale are largely missing. In this study we examine the change in proportion of built up area in two zones (500 m and 1000 m) surrounding 15 urban nature reserves in southern Sweden. By using comprehensive maps from the last 50 years, we compared the zones to the overall urbanisation in the cities to reveal discrepancies in land use surrounding the nature reserves. We found that the amount of built up area in the buffer zones surrounding nature reserves followed the same trend as the corresponding cities and this relation was stable over time, although the positive relationship was not significant. The establishment of nature reserves had no detectable effect on surrounding land use, however two distinguished groups of reserves were identified with either more or less built up area in buffers zones compared to cities. These differences were related to specific local drivers such as land ownership, land use history and nature reserve location. In contrast to earlier studies at global scale, our study did not show that nature reserves attract urbanisation. Instead, we stress that the great variety of contextual factors at the city scale makes quantitative analysis of this kind extremely difficult. However, a general neglect from planning and nature conservation agencies to recognise nature reserves’ dependence on the surrounding landscape configuration could be detrimental to sustain their values in the long-term. Hence we suggest that zones surrounding nature-protected areas should be planned and managed according to local land use history and current landscape conditions to enable and enhance necessary cross-boundary interactions.

To effectively integrate nature conservation in sustainable landscape management, it isessential to deepen the understanding of why, what, where and for whom nature isprotected. This is especially important for nature conservation in human dominatedlandscapes such as cities, where the distance between built up and protected areas is inconstant decline due to urbanisation worldwide. In this study we use historical andcurrent data from Sweden to examine how urban compared to rural nature conservationhave been using formal nature reserve objectives. The focal nature conservationobjectives in our study area were preservation of biodiversity, restoration ofenvironments and outdoor recreation, as well as subdivision of those. The use of theseobjectives were analysed for 1869 nature reserves in relation to degree of urbanisation.We found that nature reserves in more urbanised landscapes were based on a highernumber of objectives. The urban reserves also had a different composition of objectives,where the objectives outdoor recreation and biodiversity preservation were morecommon in urban than in rural reserves. During the last decades we detected a shift inuse of objectives in urban areas, going from biodiversity preservation to a strongerfocus on outdoor recreation. National and global trends in the nature conservationdebate could also be seen as reflected in the use of objectives. To ensure its adaptivecapacity, we stress that urban nature conservation needs a more proactive strategy,where potential future social as well as ecological values must be embraced and notonly existing ones.

Urban landscapes constitute the future environment for most of the world’s human population.An increased understanding of the urbanization process and of the effects of urbanization at multiple scalesis, therefore, key to ensuring human well-being. In many conventional natural resource managementregimes, incomplete knowledge of ecosystem dynamics and institutional constraints often leads toinstitutional management frameworks that do not match the scale of ecological patterns and processes. Inthis paper, we argue that scale mismatches are particularly pronounced in urban landscapes. Urban greenspaces provide numerous important ecosystem services to urban citizens, and the management of theseurban green spaces, including recognition of scales, is crucial to the well-being of the citizens. From aqualitative study of the current management practices in five urban green spaces within the GreaterStockholm Metropolitan Area, Sweden, we found that 1) several spatial, temporal, and functional scalesare recognized, but the cross-scale interactions are often neglected, and 2) spatial and temporal meso-scalesare seldom given priority. One potential effect of the neglect of ecological cross-scale interactions in thesehighly fragmented landscapes is a gradual reduction in the capacity of the ecosystems to provide ecosystemservices. Two important strategies for overcoming urban scale mismatches are suggested: 1) developmentof an integrative view of the whole urban social–ecological landscape, and 2) creation of adaptivegovernance systems to support practical management.

Balancing interests of urban growth and development against the need to safeguard socially equitable and ecologically functional green space is a core urban planning issue. These urban needs are still commonly seen through a modernist lens where green areas are viewed as an antithesis to the city, creating a polarized landscape seemingly free from cross-scale social and ecological interactions.

This study aims to challenge this polarisation by using the concept of resilience both as a theoretical umbrella and applied to a case study. More operative and integrative planning approaches to large-scale urban green structures are here explored and discussed. The study reports on a trans-disciplinary work process designed by the authors as a sequence of workshops attended by ecologists, urban planners, architects, landscape architects and environmental historians and outreach meetings set in comprehensive planning and policy contexts. The explorations took the form of design experiments based in a suburban stretch of Stockholm (Sweden) which served as a basis for the discussions. This approach aimed to bring questions from a theoretical and general level and to discuss these in relation to a specific, local context in order to explore key points of conflict and possible alternatives.

Three recurring themes upholding dichotomist views on the urban landscape were identified: 1) large size and scale mismatches, 2) problems of artificial borders; and 3) static views of urban nature leading to a lack of interest in future potential. The resilience concept was useful for highlighting options and opening up for innovation and change, but at the same time it was identified as in need of complementary approaches to identify goals and to bring people on board. Through our design experiments, we show how synergies and social-ecological resilience can encourage creative solutions rather than polarizing positions. Drawing on recent practice-based discourse on large parks, we suggest the adoption of legibility, i.e. to work with people's perceptions and understanding of their surroundings through design, within the resilience framework. There is a clear need to further explore how such approaches can complement the resilience concept in social-ecological systems governance.