Consequences of residential development for biodiversity and human well-being

www.frontiersinecology.org © The Ecological Society of America R development is a leading driver of land-use change and has transformed human and natural communities around the world (McMichael 2000; Alberti 2005; Hansen et al. 2005). The density and extent of housing is a strong predictor of atmospheric carbon emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels (MacKellar et al. 1995) and of the decline of native species populations (Liu et al. 2007; Lepczyk et al. 2008). Even as human population growth rates are stabilizing in the US and other developed countries, housing development continues to expand as a result of fewer people occupying each household, and the increasing prevalence of second homes (Bradbury et al. 2014). Today, residential development covers 27% of the land area in the US, representing a fivefold expansion over the past 50 years (Brown et al. 2005). Yet our understanding of how the extent and configuration of our homes and communities affect nature and society is markedly incomplete (McKinney 2002). Urbanization has a strong influence on biodiversity and ecosystem function (Hansen et al. 2005; McKinney 2008; Groffman et al. 2014), and on human well-being (Ewing et al. 2003; Turner et al. 2004). There is also compelling evidence that proximity to open space (undeveloped land maintained in a natural or semi-natural state) has an important effect on home values and homeowner attitudes (Figure 1; Geoghegan 2002; Irwin 2002). To design communities that meet the triple “bottom line” of sustainability – a viable environment, a thriving economy, and an equitable society (Figure 2a; WCED 1987) – planners, developers, and land managers must understand how the characteristics that define residential development (eg housing extent, density, age, configuration, and stewardship, as well as proximity to open space) affect natural and human systems (McKinney 2008; Cook et al. 2012). Despite widespread support for the concept of sustainability (Leiserowitz et al. 2006), scientific research, planning, and practice related to the built environment may reflect neither the core principles of this concept (Berke and Conroy 2000) nor the interdisciplinary problem-solving approaches that are urgently needed (Kates et al. 2001). This review is the first comprehensive and interdisciplinary synthesis of the literature on the biophysical, ecoREVIEWS REVIEWS REVIEWS