|Full text PDF:||http://hdl.handle.net/2115/58873|
1. Conservation and restoration of urban biodiversity have increasingly become a significant consideration in city planning policies. From a conservation viewpoint, this is because urban area potentially harbors richer biological communities than those in rural areas. Nature in cities also provides opportunities for regular encounters by urban dwellers (i.e. averting the "extinction of experience"). 2. As cities are typically designed by top-down policy-making, initial development schemes have a crucial role in determining the capacity to sustain regional biodiversity and ecosystem services. Currently, urban development forms are classified into two alternatives: urban land-sparing (intensive development in a small land) and urban land-sharing (extensive development in a greater land). 3. In this thesis, I investigated relative benefits of urban land-sharing and land-sparing for biodiversity conservation and promotion of people's nature experience. 4. As a result, I found that urban land-sparing is a better option for biodiversity conservation in general. Especially in areas that will become heavily urbanised, land-sparing shows a remarkable conservation benefit. On the other hand, I also found an advantage of urban land-sharing to promote human-nature interactions in urban areas: people living in urban land-sharing regions use urban greenspaces more frequently than those in land-sparing regions. 5. This thesis revealed a potential conflict in the design of cities between the urban form that is most desirable for the protection of regional biodiversity, and that which best promotes people's nature experiences. The challenge is thus to reconcile biodiversity conservation and promotion of people's nature experiences in urban landscapes.