Home / Design Guide / Design Strategies

RELATED CASE STUDIES //

How design for biodiversity can be applied in real urban contexts across Aotearoa, across a range of project types, scales, and conditions.


Part of the design framework for the
Aotearoa Design for Urban Biodiversity Guide.

→ More case studies

Urban green spaces

SCALES / ,
SYNERGIES / , ,
An urban green space with native planting providing habitat, movement pathways, and ecosystem services for plants, invertebrates, and birds within a built environment in Aotearoa New Zealand.

Definition

Urban green spaces are vegetated areas within cities, such as parks, streetscapes, gardens, and green roofs, that support native biodiversity and ecological processes within the built environment.

What this strategy does

Provides habitat, refuge, and movement pathways for native species while delivering ecosystem services in urban areas; excludes ornamental-only or ecologically simplified landscapes.

Context

In Aotearoa New Zealand cities, ongoing densification and habitat fragmentation reduce native biodiversity and ecosystem function. Urban green space is decreasing in many Aotearoa cities, particularly on a per-person basis.1 Urban green spaces are a primary mechanism for maintaining ecological performance and social wellbeing within compact urban form.2

Technical considerations

Design considerations

Increase Indigenous vegetation and understorey

  • Prioritise multi-layered native planting (trees, shrubs, groundcover) to increase habitat availability and species occupancy.2, 3, 4, 5

Maximise vegetation diversity and structural complexity

  • Use a mix of species, ages, and forms to support a wider range of taxa and improve ecological resilience.2, 3, 4, 5

Meet minimum Indigenous cover thresholds

  • Target a minimum of 10% Indigenous vegetation cover across urban areas to sustain native biodiversity at the landscape scale.6, 7

Design for connectivity

  • Use green corridors, stepping-stone habitats, riparian margins, and blue–green infrastructure to link isolated patches and support dispersal.6, 7, 8, 9

Optimise patch size and configuration

  • Favour larger, well-connected patches with reduced edge effects and diverse internal structure.6, 10, 11

Implementation considerations

Design priority

  • Integrate biodiversity objectives and green space provision early in spatial planning, subdivision layout, and open space design.

Key constraint

  • Small, isolated, or highly manicured spaces deliver limited biodiversity value without connectivity or structural complexity.6, 10

Relevant tools or standards

  • Use NZ-based spatial ecology and urban biodiversity assessment tools (e.g. NZ Biodiversity Factor12, LUCI/Nature BRAID13, Plant-SyNZ14) where applicable.7

Issues & barriers

Densification-driven habitat loss

  • Higher-density development reduces green cover and increases fragmentation, undermining native species viability.6, 10, 12

Insufficient spatial and ecological design

  • Many urban green spaces are undersized, disconnected, or lack appropriate vegetation structure.6, 10

Dominance of exotic planting

  • Exotic-dominated landscapes often fail to provide suitable resources for native fauna.4, 6

Synergies & opportunities

  • Climate change – Urban green spaces reduce urban heat, manage stormwater, store carbon, and improve climate resilience.13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18
  • Human wellbeing – Access to biodiverse green spaces supports physical activity, mental health, social cohesion, and cultural connection to nature.15, 16, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25

Financial case

Ecosystem services and performance value

  • Stormwater and flood mitigation: Vegetated areas reduce runoff and reliance on grey infrastructure, lowering long-term municipal costs.26, 27
  • Climate regulation: Urban vegetation moderates temperature and sequesters carbon, reducing energy demand.26, 27
  • Soil stability and water quality: Strategic peri-urban planting reduces erosion and downstream treatment costs.28

Cost-effectiveness: Investment logic

  • Economic assessments show biodiversity conservation benefits in Aotearoa New Zealand can substantially exceed implementation costs when ecosystem services are included.29

Monitoring & evaluation metrics

Core metric

  • Species richness and occupancy of key native taxa (e.g. birds, invertebrates) can be assessed using repeat surveys or community monitoring.2, 30

Advanced or long-term metric

  • Landscape connectivity, patch size, and Indigenous vegetation cover can be assessed through spatial modelling and longitudinal monitoring.7

Additional resources or tools

References
  1. Blaschke, P., Pedersen Zari, M., Chapman, R., Randal, E., Perry, M., Howden-Chapman, P., & Gyde, E. (2024). Multiple roles of green space in the resilience, sustainability and equity of Aotearoa New Zealand’s cities. Land, 13(7), 1022.
  2. Threlfall, C., Mata, L., Mackie, J., Hahs, A., Stork, N., Williams, N., & Livesley, S. (2017). Increasing biodiversity in urban green spaces through simple vegetation interventions. Journal of Applied Ecology, 54, 1874–1883. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12876
  3. Jang, J., & Woo, S. (2022). Native trees as a provider of vital urban ecosystem services in urbanising New Zealand. Land, 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11010092
  4. Stewart, G., Meurk, C., Ignatieva, M., Buckley, H., Magueur, A., Case, B., Hudson, M., & Parker, M. (2009). Urban biotopes of Aotearoa New Zealand II. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 8, 149–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2009.06.004
  5. Wallace, K., & Clarkson, B. (2019). Urban forest restoration ecology: a review from Hamilton, New Zealand. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand, 49, 347–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/03036758.2019.1637352
  6. Nguyễn, T., Meurk, C., Benavidez, R., Jackson, B., & Pahlow, M. (2021). The effect of blue–green infrastructure on habitat connectivity and biodiversity. Sustainability, 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13126732
  7. Hand, K., Freeman, C., Seddon, P., Stein, A., & van Heezik, Y. (2016). Fine-scale biodiversity assessment across urban landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning, 151, 33–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.03.002
  8. MacKinnon, M., Zari, P., & Brown, D. (2023). Improving urban habitat connectivity for native birds. Land, 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12071456
  9. Mayrand, F., & Clergeau, P. (2018). Green roofs and green walls for biodiversity conservation. Sustainability, 10, 985. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10040985
  10. Rastandeh, A. (2018). Urban biodiversity in an era of climate change. Victoria University of Wellington thesis. https://doi.org/10.26686/wgtn.17134823.v1
  11. Ye, Q., Wang, X., Liang, L., Qiu, J., & Tsim, S. (2025). Landscape factors for biodiversity in urban parks. Diversity, 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17040262
  12. Theis, J., Woolley, C., Seddon, P., Shanahan, D., Freeman, C., Pedersen Zari, & van Heezik, Y. (2025). The New Zealand Biodiversity Factor—Residential. Land, 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14030526
  13. MacKinnon, M., Pedersen Zari, M., Brown, D. K., Benavidez, R., & Jackson, B. (2022). Urban biomimicry for flood mitigation using an ecosystem service assessment tool in central Wellington, New Zealand. Biomimetics, 8(1), 9.
  14. Manaaki Whenua Landcare Research (2007) Plant-SyNZ: An invertebrate herbivore biodiversity assessment tool. https://plant-synz.landcareresearch.co.nz/
  15. Schmidt, K., & Walz, A. (2021). Ecosystem-based adaptation through urban green structures. One Ecosystem, 6. https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.6.e65706
  16. Lehmann, S. (2021). Growing biodiverse urban futures. Sustainability, 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052932
  17. Blaschke, P., Zari, P., Chapman, R., Randal, E., Perry, M., Howden-Chapman, P., & Gyde, E. (2024). Multiple roles of green space in Aotearoa New Zealand cities. Land, 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13071022
  18. Egerer, M., et al. (2024). Urban oases: social–ecological importance of small green spaces. Ecosystems and People, 20. https://doi.org/10.1080/26395916.2024.2315991
  19. Ariluoma, M., et al. (2024). Co-benefits of biodiversity and carbon sinks in urban yards. Frontiers in Sustainable Cities. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsc.2024.1327614
  20. Suryaningrum, F., et al. (2021). Tree planting for carbon and biodiversity co-benefits. New Forests, 53, 589–602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11056-021-09883-w
  21. Russo, A., et al. (2025). Native vs. non-native plants in climate-resilient urban green spaces. Land, 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14050954
  22. Jennings, V., & Bamkole, O. (2019). Social cohesion and urban green space. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16030452
  23. Wan, C., Shen, G., & Choi, S. (2021). Urban green spaces and social cohesion. City, Culture and Society, 24, 100383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2021.100383
  24. Lai, H., et al. (2019). Green space, biodiversity and health. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.2077
  25. Schebella, M., et al. (2019). Wellbeing benefits of biodiversity in urban green spaces. Sustainability, 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030802
  26. Wang’ombe, G. (2024). Urban green spaces and community health. International Journal of Arts, Recreation and Sports. https://doi.org/10.47941/ijars.1941
  27. Cameron, R., et al. (2020). Avian biodiversity and positive emotions in urban green spaces. Urban Ecosystems, 23, 301–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-020-00929-z
  28. Krivtsov, V., et al. (2022). Ecosystem services of urban ponds and green spaces. Blue-Green Systems. https://doi.org/10.2166/bgs.2022.021
  29. Semeraro, T., et al. (2021). Planning urban green spaces: human benefits. Land, 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10020105
  30. Pearson, D. (2021). Peri-urban ecosystem services in Aotearoa New Zealand. Land, 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10121345
  31. Yao, R., Scarpa, R., Harrison, D., & Burns, R. (2019). Economic benefits of biodiversity enhancement. Ecosystem Services, 37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100954
  32. Sullivan, J., & Molles, L. (2016). Community-based biodiversity monitoring in New Zealand. Ecological Management and Restoration, 17, 210–217. https://doi.org/10.1111/emr.12225

RELATED DESIGN STRATEGIES //

Specific design interventions that support ecological health, habitat quality, and species diversity across urban and built environments.

→ More design strategies