References
- Bauer D.J., Sterba S.K., Hallfors D.D., 2008. Evaluating group-based interventions when control participants are ungrouped. Multivariate Behavioral Research 43(2): 210–236. DOI 10.1080/00273170802034810.
- Bertram C., Rehdanz K., 2015. The role of urban green space for human well-being. Ecological Economics 120: 139–152. DOI 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.10.013.
- Bolund P., Hunhammar S., 1999. Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecological Economics 29(2): 293–301. DOI 10.1016/ S0921-8009(99)00013-0.
- Brown G., Strickland-Munro J., Kobryn H., Moore S.A., 2016. Stakeholder analysis for marine conservation planning using public participation GIS. Applied Geography 67: 77–93. DOI 10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.12.004.
- Chang J., Qu Z., Xu R., Pan K., Xu B., Min Y., Ge Y., 2017. Assessing the ecosystem services provided by urban green spaces along urban center-edge gradients. Scientific Reports 7(1): 1–9. DOI 10.1038/s41598-017-11559-5.
- Carrus G., Scopelliti M., Lafortezza R., Colangelo G., Ferrini F., Salbitano F., Agrimi M., Portoghesi L., Semenzato P., Sanesi G., 2015. Go greener, feel better? The positive effects of biodiversity on the well-being of individuals visiting urban and peri-urban green areas. Landscape and Urban Planning 134: 221–228. DOI 10.1016/j.landurb-plan.2014.10.022.
- Coleman A.F., Eisenman T.S., Locke D.H., Harper R.W., 2023. Exploring links between resident satisfaction and participation in an urban tree planting initiative. Cities 134. DOI 10.1016/j.cities.2023.104195.
- Carolan M.S., 2008. The bright-and blind-spots of science: Why objective knowledge is not enough to resolve environmental controversies. Critical Sociology 34(5): 725–740. DOI 10.1177/0896920508093365.
- Czepkiewicz M., Jankowski P., Zwoliński Z., 2018. Geo-questionnaire: A spatially explicit method for eliciting public preferences, behavioural patterns, and local knowledge –An overview. Quaestiones Geographicae 37: 177–190.
- Deterding S., Dixon D., Khaled R., Nacke L., 2011. From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining gamification. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments 9–15. DOI 10.1145/2181037.2181040
- Díaz S., Demissew S., Carabias J., Joly C., Lonsdale M., Ash N., Larigauderie A., et al., 2015. The IPBES Conceptual Framework –connecting nature and people. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 14: 1–16. DOI 10.1016/j.cosust.2014.11.002.
- dos Santos M., Massarollo M., de Moraes E., 2016. The family interview in the process of donating organs and tissues for transplantation: Perceptions of potential donors’ relatives. Transplantation Proceedings 46(6): 1674–1677. DOI 10.1016/j.transproceed.2014.05.010.
- EEA, 2022. Who benefits from nature in cities? Social inequalities in access to urban green and blue spaces across Europe. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency. https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/who-bene-fits-from-nature-in (accessed 1 December 2023).
- Elwood S., Deborah M., 2000. Placing interviews: Location and scales of power in qualitative research. The Professional Geographer 52(4): 649–657. DOI 10.1111/00330124.00253.
- Fukuda T., Yokoi K., Yabuki N., Motamedi A., 2019. An indoor thermal environment design system for renovation using augmented reality. Journal of Computational Design and Engineering 6(2): 179–188. DOI 10.1016/j. jcde.2018.05.007.
- Gagnon M., Jacob D., McCabe J., 2015. Locating the qualitative interview: Reflecting on space and place in nursing research. Journal of Research in Nursing 20: 3–5. DOI 216217. 10.1177/1744987114536571.
- Geron N.A., Martin D.G., Rogan J., Healy M., 2023. Residents’ roles as environmental policy actors using an urban governance framework: A case study of a tree planting program. Cities 135. DOI 10.1016/j.cities.2023.104201.
- Grace D., 2013. Transnational institutional ethnography: Tracing text and talk beyond state boundaries. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 12(1): 587–605. DOI 10.1177/160940691301200131.
- Hanssen T., 2012. The influence of interview location on the value of travel time savings. Transportation 39(6): 1133–1145. DOI 10.1007/s11116-011-9378-1.
- Herzog H., 2005. On home turf: Interview location and its social meaning. Qualitative Sociology 28(1): 25–47. DOI 10.1007/s11133-005-2629-8.
- Hovorka D.S., Auerbach N., 2010. The generative potential of participatory geographic information systems. In: Tojo T., David L.C., Michel A. (eds), Positive design and appreciative construction: From sustainable development to sustainable value. Emerald Group Publishing: 157–173.
- Hurlbert M., Gupta J., 2015. The split ladder of participation: a diagnostic, strategic, and evaluation tool to assess when participation is necessary. Environmental Science & Policy 50. DOI 100-113. 10.1016/j.envsci.2015.01.011.
- Illic V., 2015. Planning implementation of method of observation in social sciences. Etnoantropoloski Problemi –Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology 10(2): 287–309.
- Inglot A., Przewoźna P., Mielewczyk M., Mączka K., Matczak P., 2021. The effect of interview location on the perception of Ecosystem Services provided by trees. A Polish case study. Gdańsk University of Technology: MOST WIEDZY Digital Repository. DOI 10.34808/agxg-ek62.
- Jackson P., 2021. Interview locations. In: Mac Ginty R., Brett R., Vogel B. (eds), The companion to peace and conflict fieldwork. Palgrave Macmillan: 101–113. DOI 10.1007/978-3030-46433-2.
- Jenner B.M., Myers K.C., 2018. Intimacy, rapport, and exceptional disclosure: A comparison of in-person and mediated interview contexts. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 22(2): 165–177. DOI 10.1080/13645579.2018.1512694.
- Jones N.A., Ross H., Lynam T., Perez P., Leitch A., 2011. Mental models: An interdisciplinary synthesis of theory and methods. Ecology and Society 16(1). http://www. ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art46/
- Jones N.A., Ross H., Lynam T., Perez P., 2014. Eliciting mental models: A comparison of interview procedures in the context of natural resource management. Ecology and Society 19(1): 1–7. DOI 10.5751/es-06248-190113.
- Jones-Walters L., Çil A., 2011. Biodiversity and stakeholder participation. Journal for Nature Conservation 19: 327–329. DOI 10.1016/j.jnc.2011.09.001.
- Jóźwiak K., Moerbeek M., 2013. Optimal treatment allocation and study duration for trials with discrete-time survival endpoints. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 143(5): 971–982. DOI 10.1016/j.jspi.2012.11.006.
- Ko H., Son Y., 2018. Perceptions of cultural ecosystem services in urban green spaces: A case study in Gwacheon, Republic of Korea. Ecological Indicators 91: 299–306. DOI 10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.04.006.
- Korpilo S., Virtanen T., Saukkonen T., Lehvävirta S., 2018. More than A to B: Understanding and managing visitor spatial behaviour in urban forests using public participation GIS. Journal of Environmental Management 207: 124–133. DOI 10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.11.020.
- Kronenberg J., 2012. Urban ecosystem services. Sustainable Development Applications 3: 13–30. https://sendzimir.org. pl/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Sustainable_Devel-opment_Applications_3.pdf
- Lee J.H., 2021. Setting the governance of a participatory ecosystem service assessment based on text mining the language of stakeholders’ opinions. Journal of Environmental Management 284. DOI 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112003.
- Livesley S.J., McPherson E.G., Calfapietra C., 2016. The urban forest and ecosystem services: Impacts on urban water, heat, and pollution cycles at the tree, street, and city scale. Journal of Environmental Quality 45: 119–124. DOI 10.2134/jeq2015.11.0567.
- Mabon L., Barkved L., de Bruin K., Wan-Yu S., 2022. Whose knowledge counts in nature-based solutions? Understanding epistemic justice for nature-based solutions through a multi-city comparison across Europe and Asia. Environmental Science & Policy 136: 652–664. DOI 10.1016/j.envsci.2022.07.025.
- Mace G.M., 2014. Whose conservation? Science 345: 1558–1560. DOI 10.1126/science.1254704.
- Mączka K., Matczak P., Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska A., Rechciński M., Olszańska A., Cent J., Grodzińska-Jurczak M., 2016. Application of the ecosystem services concept in environmental policy –A systematic empirical analysis of national level policy documents in Poland. Ecological Economics 128: 169–176. DOI 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.04.023.
- Mączka K., Chmielewski P., Jeran A., Matczak P., van Riper C.J., 2019. The ecosystem services concept as a tool for public participation in management of Poland’s Nat-ura 2000 network. Ecosystem Services 35: 173–183. DOI 10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.12.005.
- Mączka K., Matczak P., Jeran A., Chmielewski P., Baker S., 2021. Conflicts in ecosystem services management: Analysis of stakeholder participation in Natura 2000 in Poland. Environmental Science & Policy 117: 16–24. DOI 10.1016/j.envsci.2021.01.001.
- Mandelbaum E., 2018. Seeing and conceptualizing: Modularity and the shallow contents of perception. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 97(2): 267–283. DOI 10.1111/ phpr.12368.
- Maricchiolo F., Mosca O., Paolini D., Marino D., 2021. Feeling good in the place we live: The moderating role of the perception of environmental resources in the relationship between values and personal and family well-being. Sustainability 13(8). DOI 10.3390/su13084407.
- McVittie A., Faccioli M., 2020. Biodiversity and ecosystem services net gain assessment: A comparison of metrics. Ecosystem Services 44. DOI 10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101145.
- MEA, 2005. Millennium ecosystem assessment: Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Island Press, Washing-ton DC.
- Moran L., Rau H., 2016. Mapping divergent concepts of sustainability: Lay knowledge, local practices and environmental governance. Local Environment 21(3): 344–360. DOI 10.1080/13549839.2014.963838.
- Neuhäuser M., Mackowiak M.M., Ruxton G.D., 2021. Unequal sample sizes according to the square-root allocation rule are useful when comparing several treatments with a control. Ethology 127(12): 1094–1100. DOI 10.1111/ eth.13230.
- Nicolosi E., Corbett J.B., 2018. Engagement with climate change and the environment: A review of the role of relationships to place. Local Environment 23(1): 77–99. DOI 10.1080/13549839.2017.1385002.
- Nyelele C., Kroll C.N., Nowak D.J. 2019. Present and future ecosystem services of trees in the Bronx, NY. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 42: 10–20. DOI 10.1016/j. ufug.2019.04.018.
- Olsson J.A., Brunner J., Nordin A., Hanson H.I., 2020. A just urban ecosystem service governance at the neighbourhood level-perspectives from Sofielund, Malmö, Sweden. Environmental Science & Policy 112: 305–313. DOI 10.1016/j.envsci.2020.06.025.
- Ordóñez C., Threlfall C.G., Livesley S.J., Kendal D., Fuller R.A., Davern M., van der Ree R., Hochuli D.F., 2020. Decision-making of municipal urban forest managers through the lens of governance. Environmental Science & Policy 104: 136–147. DOI 10.1016/j.envsci.2019.11.008.
- Otto-Banaszak I., Matczak P., Wesseler J., Wechsung F., 2010. Different perceptions of adaptation to climate change: A mental model approach applied to the evidence from expert interview. Regional Environmental Change 15(7): 779–796. DOI 10.1007/s10113-010-0144-2.
- Piga B.E.A., Stancato G., Rainisio N., Boffi M., 2021. How do nature-based solutions’ color tones influence people’s emotional reaction? An assessment via virtual and augmented reality in a participatory process. Sustainability 13. DOI 10.3390/su132313388.
- Pocewicz A., Nielsen-Pincus M., Brown G., Schnitzer R., 2012. An evaluation of internet versus paper-based methods for public participation geographic information systems (PPGIS). Transactions in GIS 16(1). DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9671.2011.01287.x
- Rawluk A., Ford R.M., Neolaka F.L., Williams K.J., 2017. Public values for integration in natural disaster management and planning: A case study from Victoria, Australia. Journal of Environmental Management 185: 11–20. DOI 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.10.052.
- Reed M.S., 2008. Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review. Biological Conservation 141(10): 2417–2431. DOI 10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014.
- Riechers M., Barkmann J., Tscharntke T., 2016. Perceptions of cultural ecosystem services from urban green. Ecosystem Services 17: 33–39. DOI 10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.11.007.
- Riechers M., Barkmann J., Tscharntke T., 2018. Diverging perceptions by social groups on cultural ecosystem services provided by urban green. Landscape and Urban Planning 175: 161–168. DOI 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.03.017.
- Rodosthenous C., Mavrotheris E., Greller W., Tabuenca B., 2023. Creating environmental awareness in education through IoT and gamification. In: Auer M.E., Pachatz W., Rüütmann T. (eds), Learning in the age of digital and green transition (Lecture notes in networks and systems 634). DOI 10.1007/978-3-031-26190-9_69.
- Röhrich W., Hardiess G., Mallot H., 2014. View-based organization and interplay of spatial working and long-term memories. PLoS ONE 9: 11–19. DOI 10.1371/journal. pone.0112793.
- Salmond J.A., Tadaki M., Vardoulakis S., Arbuthnott K., Coutts A., Demuzere M., Dirks K.N., Heaviside C., Lim S., Macintyre H., McInnes R.N., Wheeler B.W., 2016. Health and climate related ecosystem services provided by street trees in the urban environment. Environmental Health 15: 36. DOI 10.1186/s12940-016-0103-6.
- Schirpke U., Marino D., Marucci A., Palmieri M., Scolozzi R., 2017. Operationalising ecosystem services for effective management of protected areas: Experiences and challenges. Ecosystem Services 28: 105–114. DOI 10.1016/j. ecoser.2017.10.009.
- Scholz T., Hof A., Schmitt T., 2018. Cooling effects and regulating ecosystem services provided by urban trees –Nov-el analysis approaches using urban tree cadastre data. Sustainability 10: 712. DOI 10.3390/su10030712.
- Schroeter R., Scheel O., Renn O., Schweizer P.J., 2016. Testing the value of public participation in Germany: Theory, operationalization and a case study on the evaluation of participation. Energy Research & Social Science 13: 116–125. DOI 10.1016/j.erss.2015.12.013.
- Shwartz A., Turbé A., Simon L., Julliard R., 2014. Enhancing urban biodiversity and its influence on city-dwellers: An experiment. Biological Conservation 171: 82–90. DOI 10.1016/j.biocon.2014.01.009.
- Silva R.A., Lapola D.M., Patricio G.B., Teixeira M.C., Pinho P., Priess J.A., 2016. Operationalizing payments for ecosystem services in Brazil’s sugarcane belt: How do stakeholder opinions match with successful cases in Latin America? Ecosystem Services 22: 128–138. DOI 10.1016/j. ecoser.2016.09.013.
- Simon P.J., Batterbury J., Fernando L., 2006. Rescaling governance and the impacts of political and environmental decentralization: An introduction. World Development 34(11): 1851–1863. DOI 10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.11.019.
- Song X.P., Tan P.Y., Edwards P., Richards D., 2018. The economic benefits and costs of trees in urban forest stewardship: A systematic review. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 29: 162–170. DOI 10.1016/j.ufug.2017.11.017.
- Stedman R.C., 2003. Is it really just a social construction?: The contribution of the physical environment to sense of place. Society & Natural Resources 16(8): 671–685. DOI 10.1080/08941920309189.
- Tabuenca B., García-Alcántara V., Gilarranz-Casado C., Bar-rado-Aguirre S., 2020. Fostering environmental awareness with smart IoT planters in campuses. Sensors 20. DOI 10.3390/s20082227.
- Tabuenca B., Moreno-Sancho J.L., Arquero-Gallego J., Grel-ler W., Hernández-Leo D., 2023. Generating an environ-mental awareness system for learning using IoT technology. Internet of Things 22. DOI 10.1016/j.iot.2023.100756.
- TEEB, 2010. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: Mainstreaming the economics of nature: A synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. https://teebweb.org/publications/teeb-for/syn-thesis/ (accessed 1 December 2023).
- Tenório M.M., Reinaldo F.A.F., Góis L.A., Lopes R.P., dos Santos Junior G., 2018. Elements of gamification in virtual learning environments. In: Auer M., Guralnick D., Si-monics I. (eds), Teaching and learning in a digital world. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing 716. DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-73204-6_12.
- Tsai B.W., Lu D.J., Chung M.K., Lien M.C., 2013. Evaluation of PPGIS empowerment –A case study of Mei-nong Yellow Butterfly Valley in Taiwan. Journal of Environmental Management 116: 204–212. DOI 10.1016/j. jenvman.2012.12.005
- WHO, 2016. Urban green spaces and health. Geneva: World Health Organization –Regional Office for Europe. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/345751 (accessed 1 December 2023).
- WHO, 2021. Green and blue spaces and mental health: New evidence and perspectives for action. Geneva: World Health Organization –Regional Office for Europe. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/342931 (accessed 1 December 2023).
- Zadeh F.A., Sulaiman A.B., 2010. Dynamic street environment. Local Environment 15(5): 433–452. DOI 10.1080/13549831003735403.