Cress_Jasmine_PlantsInChange_GP2_FinalReport2




PLANTS IN CHANGE
agency  aesthetics  globalization  managment

Graduate Project Final 
Report

Jasmine Pearl Cress

Advisor: Cynthia Girling

May 7th 2020





RELEASE FORM

Landscape Architecture
School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture
University of British Columbia

Name: Jasmine Pearl Cress

UBC Student number: 94276169

Graduate Project Title: Plants in Change

In presenting this report in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the 
Master of Land-scape Architecture, University of British Columbia, I agree that 
UBC may make this work freely available for reference or study. I give 
permission for copying the report for educational purposes in accordance with 
copyright laws.

_________________________________________________________________
Name Signature Date

Jasmine Cress May 6th 2020





i

Humans and plants have a long 
history of co-dependency. Today, the 
most interaction some people have 
with plant life is on their own 
properties or in urban spaces. Often 
the value of plants is reduced 
primarily to current ideas of what is 
aesthetic in these spaces, based on 
values from the 18th century, and 
landscape architecture has continued 
to uphold those values. Continuing to 
use the same plant species and 
insisting that certain vegetative 
communities belong in specific 
spaces and indicating unsustainable 
maintenance practices to preserve 
these aesthetics. This approach strips 
plants of their agency and reinforces 
a lack of public understanding of 
living, moving plant life and what 
that has to offer. 

In light of growing urban 
centers and their contribution to a 
changing climate we can no longer 
afford to place the same aesthetic 
value on our plants and landscapes. 
Through education and a switch in 
ideology and practice of designed 
landscapes, can allowing plants their 
agency create healthier, more 
biodiverse spaces, and dynamic 
experiences? 

This project will look at 
human-plant relationships in terms of 
varying comfort levels and 
expectations of different vegetal 
communities (such as horticultural, 
spontaneous, native, ‘natural’ etc…) as 
they relate to location. As well as the 
maintenance regimes, and ecological 
value, as it pertains to green 
infrastructure value of everyday 
spaces (such as domestic yards, 
boulevards, parks, and small urban 
spaces). With the aim to provide 
guidelines for new techniques for 
managing our landscapes (new and 
existing developments), that will 
allow plants their agency, leading to 
new forms, new experiences, and 
more ecologically robust landscapes. 

PROJECT STATEMENT





ii

INTRODUCTION

CRITICAL ESSAY
plants/AGENCY
plants/AESTHETICS
plants/URBAN ECOLOGIES
plants/ MANAGEMENT

PRECEDENTS
Parc Henri Matisse

PROJECT STATEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS

YardWorks
One Drop at a Time
Grey to Green
Natur-Park Südgelände

DESIGN METHODOLOGY
PROJECTED SCHEDULE

ENDNOTES
WORKS CITED

LIST OF FIGURES

7
13

5

i
ii
1

17
25

31
33
36
38
40
42

46
48

95
101

108
BIBLIOGRAPHY

51

107

STREETS FOR CHANGE (GP2)

TABLE OF CONTENTS





1

The world is moving faster. Our 

cities are growing, urban sprawl is 

increasing, the climate is changing, the 

landscape is changing. Faster than ever, 

urbanization and the movement of 

humans and materials are making their 

impact on the planet. Plants have been 

moved from place to place both 

intentionally and unintentionally, for 

better or for worse, invading and 

enriching the ecology of these places as 

they go.2 Yet our intentional treatment of 

landscape remains static, bound to our 

ideologies and misconceptions of 

‘nature’, our desire for control, and 

arrogant view of our own place in the 

world. 

Some defining characteristics of 

cities are: dense human populations, 

impervious surfaces, and high 

temperatures. This leads to reduced land 

area for plants and animals, excess 

(often toxic) runoff, compacted soils, 

and temperatures in urban areas more 

closely related to those predicted with 

climate change over the next 20 or 30 

years.3 Urban environments clearly 

cannot be considered the same way 

their surrounding ‘natural’ landscapes 

are or as they were before the city was 

in place.

Plants act at the forefront of all this 

change. Their ability to transform and 

adapt places them in the center of the 

discussion of climate-based resilience.4

Urban environments have 

dramatically altered soil profiles. The 

abundance of humans and hard surfaces 

does not allow for the regular processes 

of soil formation, and we are left with the 

other end of the spectrum, compacted 

toxic soils. Soils support all life, and the 

poor soil quality found in urban 

environments contributes to issues of 

runoff, habitat fragmentation, 

biodiversity loss and human health. 

These environments inhibit growth of 

plant life, but there are some species that 

prevail (generally considered weeds) that 

are well adapted to these conditions and 

are the possible future of our cities if 

they can be accepted. The presence of 

these species has the potential to 

re-build soil health and mitigate some of 

the problems mentioned above.5

The idea that developed land can 

be reclaimed and returned to the 

ecologies they were before colonization 

is an illusion. This is especially true in 

cities. Incentives for this sort of 

reclamation, meant to return these 

spaces to a ‘balanced state’ often 

requires the same amount of labor and 

inputs as one would do gardening, and 

are unsuccessful. Instead of looking to 

plants from the past for poor mitigation, 

we should look to the plants of the 

future for greater resiliency.6

Other issues like habitat 

fragmentation and biodiversity loss can 

be alleviated if we collaborate 

respectfully with plant life. Plants create 

the structure for other species to move 

though and are a source of food and 

shelter. Spontaneous, unruly vegetation, 

especially in a range of secessional 

states, has been shown to support higher 

levels of insects, birds, and invertebrates 

then other urban vegetation types such 

as lawns and semi-natural forests.7

Often ‘public green space’ is 

employed to mitigate the effects of 

urbanization and climate change but a 

large percentage of cities are made up of 

private property and residential yard 

space, with important roles to contribute 

to the health of cities. For example, in the 

United Kingdom yard space accounts for 

around a quarter of land area in cities. If 

these spaces can be linked and 

optimized, they can greatly contribute to 

the green infrastructure of an urban 

environment. As cities continue to grow 

these under-utilized spaces will become 

of greater importance to designers and 

policy makers.8

INTRODUCTION



2

The world is moving faster. Our 

cities are growing, urban sprawl is 

increasing, the climate is changing, the 

landscape is changing. Faster than ever, 

urbanization and the movement of 

humans and materials are making their 

impact on the planet. Plants have been 

moved from place to place both 

intentionally and unintentionally, for 

better or for worse, invading and 

enriching the ecology of these places as 

they go.2 Yet our intentional treatment of 

landscape remains static, bound to our 

ideologies and misconceptions of 

‘nature’, our desire for control, and 

arrogant view of our own place in the 

world. 

Some defining characteristics of 

cities are: dense human populations, 

impervious surfaces, and high 

temperatures. This leads to reduced land 

area for plants and animals, excess 

(often toxic) runoff, compacted soils, 

and temperatures in urban areas more 

closely related to those predicted with 

climate change over the next 20 or 30 

years.3 Urban environments clearly 

cannot be considered the same way 

their surrounding ‘natural’ landscapes 

are or as they were before the city was 

in place.

Plants act at the forefront of all this 

change. Their ability to transform and 

adapt places them in the center of the 

discussion of climate-based resilience.4

Urban environments have 

dramatically altered soil profiles. The 

abundance of humans and hard surfaces 

does not allow for the regular processes 

of soil formation, and we are left with the 

other end of the spectrum, compacted 

toxic soils. Soils support all life, and the 

poor soil quality found in urban 

environments contributes to issues of 

runoff, habitat fragmentation, 

biodiversity loss and human health. 

These environments inhibit growth of 

plant life, but there are some species that 

prevail (generally considered weeds) that 

are well adapted to these conditions and 

are the possible future of our cities if 

they can be accepted. The presence of 

these species has the potential to 

re-build soil health and mitigate some of 

the problems mentioned above.5

The idea that developed land can 

be reclaimed and returned to the 

ecologies they were before colonization 

is an illusion. This is especially true in 

cities. Incentives for this sort of 

reclamation, meant to return these 

spaces to a ‘balanced state’ often 

requires the same amount of labor and 

inputs as one would do gardening, and 

are unsuccessful. Instead of looking to 

plants from the past for poor mitigation, 

we should look to the plants of the 

future for greater resiliency.6

Other issues like habitat 

fragmentation and biodiversity loss can 

be alleviated if we collaborate 

respectfully with plant life. Plants create 

the structure for other species to move 

though and are a source of food and 

shelter. Spontaneous, unruly vegetation, 

especially in a range of secessional 

states, has been shown to support higher 

levels of insects, birds, and invertebrates 

then other urban vegetation types such 

as lawns and semi-natural forests.7

Often ‘public green space’ is 

employed to mitigate the effects of 

urbanization and climate change but a 

large percentage of cities are made up of 

private property and residential yard 

space, with important roles to contribute 

to the health of cities. For example, in the 

United Kingdom yard space accounts for 

around a quarter of land area in cities. If 

these spaces can be linked and 

optimized, they can greatly contribute to 

the green infrastructure of an urban 

environment. As cities continue to grow 

these under-utilized spaces will become 

of greater importance to designers and 

policy makers.8

When we neglect natural processes in 

city design, we not only risk the 

intensification of natural hazards and the 

degradation of natural resources, but 

also forfeit a sense of connection to a 

larger whole beyond ourselves.1 

  Anne Spirn



3

Though as simple as this proposal 

might seem it does not come without its 

challenges. In the first chapter of their 

book The Dynamic Landscape, by Nigel 

Dunnett and James Hitchmough, the 

authors proposed that in order to reap 

the benefits of landscape plantings, 

radical changes may have to be made so 

that both selection and maintenance of 

plants are more ecologically based. This 

includes allowing processes natural to 

plant life, such as regeneration, 

competition, death, and decay to take 

shape. The authors stress that for this to 

work, public acceptance much match 

the vegetation regime. They suggest a 

framework for allowing ecological 

processes within an urban context at a 

wide spectrum (as the term ‘ecological’ is 

easily interpreted in different ways). 

Three factors that determine the kind of 

vegetation one might find in an urban 

area are identified: resources for 

management, public acceptance 

(Aesthetics), and ecological value 

through the site itself, or public 

perception. They describe anthropogenic 

landscape (AL) and creative conservation 

landscape (CCL) as the middle ground 

where new opportunities lie, so long as 

public attitudes can be shifted in the 

future by finding different ways to ‘sell’ 

these ecologies.9 This project works 

within this triangle.

Ecology: 
relative importance 
of nature conservation

Aesthetics: 
public acceptance of 
‘wild’ vegetation

Resources: 
availability of resources for managment
and/or intensity of maintenance

Low High

Low

High Low

High

AL
(anthropogenic

landscape)

S
(spontaneous
vegetation)

CCL
(creative conservation

landscape)

H
(horticutural
vegetation)

Fig. 1



4



5

CRITICAL ESSAY

Throughout the critical essay and 

precedent portions of this report highlighted 

text refers to the end of the section where 

they have been outlined as questions, 

objectives, and goals. They serve as a starting 

point to begin thinking about moving forward 

with the rest of the project.



6



7

In Western thought plants are 
more often than not considered to be 
lesser then that of animals;10 lesser in 
agency, in their ability to purposefully 
respond and make change to their 
environments. from this perspective, 
plants are subject only to what we 
prescribe to them as we study and 
attempt to control their every 
movement, categorizing them into 
boxes in an attempt to understand a 
very complex interwoven system.

 
 Rossetta Elkin is a Landscape 

Architect whose research involves 
bridging the gap between the natural 
and social sciences by looking at 
what we can do with plants, what 
plants are actually doing, and the 
agency they have on their own.11 She 
argues that this is due to the 
difficulty of evaluating the behavior 
of life that is different to that of 
humans and other animals, as it does 
not fit into the same criteria of that 
used to study humans and other 
animals that plant life is often 
belittled in its agency. But to 
overlook plants as intelligent, active 
participants in their environments 
limits us from the creative 
collaborations we could otherwise 
have with them.12

Why do we view plants as void of agency?
The word plant come from two 

Latin origins, with two distinctly 
different meanings. Planta, to sprout, 
and Plantare, to fix in place; 
Performance and permanence.13 It is 
possible that due to the performance 
of plants materializing differently to 
that of animals we have become 
fixated on the later. We do not tend 
to see being fixed as an advantage, 
but where animals have evolved to 
have legs, plants have evolved unique 
chemical communications as well as 
relationships with the soils which 
they move and exploit amongst other 
resources, constantly in competition 
with one another, just like that of 
animals.14

Most fields involving the study 
of plants today, such as horticulture 
and landscape architecture, study 
and learn about plant life based on 
Linnaeus’s classification system 
‘binomial nomenclature’ from the 
1700s. The problem with this system 
is that is reinforces the hierarchy of 
‘the human who is studying the 
plant’, it does not focus on 
collaborations between plants and 
humans.  It also enforces that idea of 
plant life exists in one form, as 
opposed to being a series of 
transformations.15

plants/AGENCY



8

Science and plant agency
The belief that plants have their 

own agency and should not be 
viewed as static and in one form is 
not new, science has been exploring 
and proving these ideas for a long 
time. In 1790, Johann Wolfgang von 
Goethe, who studied under Linnaeus 
took up the study of plant 
‘Morphology’ as he called it. He 
believed that what made plants 
plants was their constant 
transformation in the form of a 
sequence that was assigned to each 
plant, and due to this it was beyond 
comprehension to see plants as static 
entities.16 He believed that Linnaeus’s 
system was limiting to plants as a 
whole.17 He saw each plant part as 
being in anticipation or progression 
of another plant part, only a moment 
in formation, creating a wide variety 
of forms on a single plant,18 never 
achieving an end point, always in a 
constant state of formation. He 
developed what is known as the 
Urpflanze, or Plant Archetype as 
being a basic plant form through 
which the variety of plant forms and 
combinations of forms could be 
derived from. These archetypes 
suggest a logic to the sequence of 
these transformations that are 

essential to the plant’s identification 
and not considered in 
nomenclature.19

In 1896, Charles Darwin 
published The Power of Movement in 
Plants, outlining a series of 
experiments where a variety of 
plants, given different treatments of 
light, were covered by a sheet of 
glass. A thin glass filament was 
carefully fixed to a part of the plant 
and the plants movements were 
observed and traced along the glass 
plate. Theses experiments lead 
Darwin to conclude that “every 
growing part of every plant is 
continually circumnutating” and in 
turn equated this to actions 
preformed unconsciously by 

fig. 2
The Urpflanze.

animals.20 This experiment 
demonstrated that plants have the 
ability to move through their 
environment on their own accord, not 
due to external stimuli.21 Darwin 
confirms that plant movement is 
structured by physical laws but 
regulated the living organism itself, 
and that it is not the environment that 
shapes plants, but it is plants that 
shape the environment.22



9

fig. 3
examples of plant tracings on glass

Science and plant agency
The belief that plants have their 

own agency and should not be 
viewed as static and in one form is 
not new, science has been exploring 
and proving these ideas for a long 
time. In 1790, Johann Wolfgang von 
Goethe, who studied under Linnaeus 
took up the study of plant 
‘Morphology’ as he called it. He 
believed that what made plants 
plants was their constant 
transformation in the form of a 
sequence that was assigned to each 
plant, and due to this it was beyond 
comprehension to see plants as static 
entities.16 He believed that Linnaeus’s 
system was limiting to plants as a 
whole.17 He saw each plant part as 
being in anticipation or progression 
of another plant part, only a moment 
in formation, creating a wide variety 
of forms on a single plant,18 never 
achieving an end point, always in a 
constant state of formation. He 
developed what is known as the 
Urpflanze, or Plant Archetype as 
being a basic plant form through 
which the variety of plant forms and 
combinations of forms could be 
derived from. These archetypes 
suggest a logic to the sequence of 
these transformations that are 

essential to the plant’s identification 
and not considered in 
nomenclature.19

In 1896, Charles Darwin 
published The Power of Movement in 
Plants, outlining a series of 
experiments where a variety of 
plants, given different treatments of 
light, were covered by a sheet of 
glass. A thin glass filament was 
carefully fixed to a part of the plant 
and the plants movements were 
observed and traced along the glass 
plate. Theses experiments lead 
Darwin to conclude that “every 
growing part of every plant is 
continually circumnutating” and in 
turn equated this to actions 
preformed unconsciously by 

animals.20 This experiment 
demonstrated that plants have the 
ability to move through their 
environment on their own accord, not 
due to external stimuli.21 Darwin 
confirms that plant movement is 
structured by physical laws but 
regulated the living organism itself, 
and that it is not the environment that 
shapes plants, but it is plants that 
shape the environment.22



10

What does it mean for plants to have agency?
To have agency implies 

purposeful action in a given 
environment.23 To say plants have 
agency is to say they are capable to 
making choices to change their 
environment, shape space, and 
exploit resources. This is attributed to 
the unique capabilities that plants 
have (and animals do not) through 
their ongoing transformations. It is 
these changes through form and 
lifecycle that give plants agency.24

In root growth, plants deliberately 
and powerfully push through soil,25 
changing its physical properties, 
exploiting water and air and forming 
relationships with fungi and other 
micro-organisms.

By using manufactured soils, and 
limiting space, humans are 
preventing this.

The upper structures of plants 
(leaves, stems, branches), move and 
grow to their own desire, exploiting 
air, water, and sunlight as they see fit, 
and creating a wide variety of forms 
and environmental conditions in their 
path.

By choosing their placement and 
dictating their shapes, we strip them 
of this agency.

When deciduous plants leaf out and 
in turn lose their leaves, they are 
doing so at a specific time. Allowing 
enough light to reach the ground for 
other plant life and organisms. It also 
adds organic matter to the soil 
already containing what they will 
need in the following months, and 
creates a place for animals and 
organisms to live.

By removing this material or choosing 
evergreen plants over deciduous ones 
we are limiting this.

Plants produce flowers, fruit, and set 
seed for reproduction. They do this at 
a specific time of year, and these take 
a specific shape and color so specific 
sources will pollinate and spread 
them (wind, animals etc…)

By choosing plants that have been 
bred by humans for aesthetic benefits 
(be that to exaggerate or diminish) or 
by cutting them off prematurely, 
humans are limiting plants in this 
agency.



11

fig. 4
the agency of plants



12

Questions Objectives Goals
What could creative 
collaborations between plants 
and humans look like?

How could the concept of 
migrating gardens be 
incorporated into urban 
systems

Discover creative collaborations 
between humans and plants. 
Focusing on plants as a series 
of transformations.

Allow plants their 
transformative agency

Promote soil health and space 
for plants

Avoid prescribing exact 
locations and forms for plants

Leave decaying material in the 
landscape

Avoid plant cultivars bred by 
humans

Avoid dictating placement of 
plants

Allow plants to form at their 
will

 Landscape architecture and plant agency

Today in landscape architecture 
plants are treated as tools.26 The 
sciences have managed to impress 
on the profession that the purpose of 
plants is to service humans.27 Plant 
use focuses on features such as 
showy leaves, flowers, and canopy 
structure for beautification, or ‘green’ 
incentives and directed to be 
managed in a way that suggests and 
maintains them as predictable, 
continually reinforcing the static 
image.28 Plants act at the intersection 
of life and matter, space and time, 
nature and culture, and in landscape 
architecture, theory and practice.29 
We need to move away from these 
scientific views of working with plant 

life in spatial practice and move 
towards collaborations with plant life 
that allows them their aliveness and 
transformations, or agency, so they 
are no longer defined by human 
involvement.30 But by their potential 
for formation.31 How landscape 
architects dictate plant life within 
practice can be rethought and 
redesigned.32 Some places to start 
could be to consider specifying 
plants at the scale of ecological 
systems, not often done as it 
contradicts the static image.33 Or to 
consider the idea of migrating 
gardens/ landscapes where plant life 
and materials are allowed movement 
a crossed space and time.34 



13

 What we perceive to be 
aesthetic is a strong reflection of our 
history and collective cultural values. 
What we perceive as aesthetic uses 
of plants in our landscapes today has 
strong ties to the picturesque 
landscapes of the 18th century.35 This 
aesthetic is tended and constrained, 
often consisting of open grassy areas 
and groupings of trees doted 
throughout the landscape, with a 
mellow body of water in the distance, 
today we might think of this as being 
‘park-like’.36 It is believed and well 
referenced that humans prefer 
landscapes that (at least in our early 
days) were beneficial for survival. 
Large open areas meant we could 
see for long distances and predators 

could not creep up on us. Today I 
would argue that shrubby, layered, 
disorderly vegetation of high 
ecological quality should be what 
indicates our survival.37

In Messy Ecosystems, Orderly 
Frames, Joan Nassauer famously 
recognizes that signs of care are very 
important when people evaluate the 
attractiveness of a landscape. This 
translates to the neat, tended 
landscapes of the picturesque, and 
other landscapes we see on a regular 
basis, be it agriculture, recreational, 
or in photographs, beauty is 
perceived from the landscapes we 
interact with the most.38

picturesque landscape
fig. 5

plants/AESTHETICS



14

Aesthetics and ecological quality
The problem with this aesthetic 

of picturesque ‘neat’ landscapes is 
that they often imply a certain 
amount of ecological functioning 
that is not there.39 One example 
being that a large amount of 
decaying dead wood left in a forest is 
an important component of 
ecological management, but people 
do not tend to like this, seeing it as 
messy and disorderly. Removing the 
dead wood increases the aesthetic 
value but decreases the ecological 
value,40 but what people still see is a 
forest (a picturesque version of a 
forest), and the general perception of 
what that holds, as they have been 
conditioned to do. We can only see 
ecological quality through our own 
cultural lenses.41 Aesthetic preference 
often comes before ecological 
quality.42

Yet, as Elizabeth Meyer states in 
her infamous manifesto Sustaining 
beauty: the performance of 
appearance ‘Concern for beauty and 
aesthetics is necessary for 
sustainable design if it is to have a 
significant cultural impact.’ She 
makes the claim that aesthetics are 
necessary to provoke strong feelings 
of care for the environment and 

advocates for an ‘immersive aesthetic 
experience’ she is not equating these 
aesthetics to the visual and formal, 
but through the immersive 
experiences of the sites natural 
processes and infers that we need 
new techniques to employ this beauty 
found through experience.43

fig.6

“The difference between function 
and appearance demonstrates that 

applied landscape ecology is 
essentially a design problem.” 

                Joan Nassauer



15

Moving forward
We need a shift in the common 

perception of what is aesthetic in the 
urban landscape. A shift to 
something that more closely relates 
to the values and issues of our time. 
This involves designing and carrying 
out our lives in spaces that better 
reflect the processes around us, 
rooted in the normative processes of 
nature and of living.44

 
Often landscape architects look 

to architecture for form and spatial 
thinking which holds us back from 
the forms of natural processes and 
disorder45. New forms for this new 
aesthetic need to come from the 
original source of inspiration, the 
natural world, or culture, that reflect 
current knowledge, beliefs, and 
values.46

 
We should celebrate the 

processes that sustain us. One 
example of this from ancient Rome 
(though very architectural in form) 
are the aquaducts that brought 
water into the city. Celebrated for 
their contribution to the health of the 
city and a link between the people 
and the processes that sustained 
them.47 We could develop a similar 
appreciation and celebratory 

attitude towards the transformative 
forms of natural processes and plant 
life that sustain our species and make 
our urban spaces healthier places.

Joan Nassauer suggests that to 
express ecological function we must 
‘frame ecological function within a 
recognizable system of form’ that is, 
neatness. I argue that this is not 
enough. It is a starting point, but this 
requires a cultural shift and 
continuing to use the same cues and 
forms from the past will not do this.

To achieve this celebratory, 
transformative, dynamic, aesthetic 
and forms rooted in the processes of 
the place away from the traditional 
idea of a designed landscapes and 
gardens will require re-educating of 
the public eye and active, immersive 
participation from citizens.48 

“This aesthetic encompasses both 
nature and culture…. Celebrates 

motion and change, encompasses 
dynamic processes rather than static 

objects and scenes, and embraces 
multiple rather than singular visions. 
This is not a timeless aesthetic, but 

one that recognizes both the flow of 
passing time and the singularity of the 

moment in time, and that demands 
both continuity and revolution.”

             Anne Spirn



16

Questions Objectives Goals
Could a slow shift in urban 
vegetation strategies (where 
people see plants the most) 
promote a shift in ideas of 
beauty?

How do we create immersive 
experiences of natural 
processes?

How can we shift common 
ideas of what is aesthetic?

Promote beauty through 
immersive experiences of 
natural processes 

Produce spaces that better 
reflect the processes around us

Produce new forms that better 
reflect the values of today

Promote layered disorderly 
vegetation

Public education

Encourage immersive 
participation from citizens



17

Urban ecology can be defined 
as “the study of ways that human 
and ecological systems evolve 
together in urbanizing regions.”49 A 
complex mix of culture, history, and 
ecological processes.50 They are 
novel ecosystems with high levels of 
disturbance and fragmentation, 
dominated by humans.51

Humans, whether ecologists are 
willing to except it or not are an 
integral part of ecological processes. 
Our inability to see ourselves as 
incorporated in these systems has led 
us to where we are today.52 With 
humans comes imported materials, 
making cities literal melting pots for 
plant life from all over the world.53 
History, globalization, and now 
climate change have made it possible 
that plant life from all over the world 
are able to conjoin in our urban 
environments.54 Some of these 
introductions were intentional, such 
as the introduction of many of our 
horticultural plants. Others were 
unintentional, brought in on ships 
and peoples clothing. Whether 
intentional or unintentional these 
plants have had desirable and 
undesirable impacts on our 
landscapes.55

Botanist Peter Del Tredici 
recognizes three broad categories of 
urban vegetation.56

Remnant native 
Managed horticultural
Abandoned ruderal 
(spontaneous) 

These three types can be 
identified he says by the nature of 
their soils, past land use, the types of 
vegetation, and levels of 
maintenance.57

Native
Fact of the matter is that these 

spaces will never return to their 
pre-colonial states. High levels of 
disturbance are not limited to our 
cities, direct or indirectly there is not 
a place left on the planet that has not 
been impacted by humans in some 
way.58

The introduction of native 
vegetation into urban ecosystems is 
a hot topic and trend these days. It is 
seen as the most likely way to 
enhance urban ecology and to be 
good stewards of the land, by 
‘restoring the balance of nature’.59 
Interestingly, misconceptions around 
naïve plants began at the start of 

WWII when German native plant 
species were promoted as being 
superior, comparing exotic plants to 
Jews.60 Another example of culture 
and history playing out on our 
landscapes and morals today.

While planting native vegetation 
is not ‘bad’ per say and does not 
come with the general benefits 
plants contribute to urban 
environments. It would be incorrect 
to believe that planting native 
species will eventually achieve the 
previous equilibrium, the 
transformations landscapes and plant 
communities have undergone is 
irreversible.61 The reality is that all 
planted spaces will require some 
level of management.62 Sometimes 
even more so in the case of native 
vegetation as they do not always 
appreciate manufactured soils and 
other characteristics of cites such as 
air pollution, road salt etc.. In areas 
previously overtaken by well adapted 
exotic species it could take years of 
weeding and applying chemicals 
before the natives are established, if 
that even works.63

Horticultural 
Many of the exotic species in 

question are the result of an influx of 
European colonizers as early as 1600 
to discovered new-to-them lands all 
over the world. They brought plants 
and animals with them for agriculture 
and ornamental use in an attempt to 
create a ‘New England’, beautifying 
these places to a European 
understanding and destroying and 
exploiting existing plant and animal 
communities in its place. Soon plants 
were being brought back to Europe 
and moved all over the world. It 
wasn’t until the 20th century that 
people began to take a step back and 

consider the identity of these places, 
and conservation came into play.64

Transferred to these New 
England colonies were elements of 
the picturesque landscape such as 
lawns, clusters of trees, and plants 
from other movements within 
European garden design, as well as 
plants from other colonized 
countries. Many of which persist in 
our ornamental landscapes today. 
The forms of lawns, hedges, and 
flowerbeds can be found repeated 
throughout urban landscapes. The 
repeated use of the same plant life 
creates a homogenizing effect across 
the city.65 As many of us do not have 
a strong connection to Europe 
anymore these ideologies are no 
longer relevant.

  
Monocultures

For reliability of form and 
tolerance to the harsh environmental 
conditions found in cities as well as 
aesthetic preference, we often rely 
on cultivated clones and cultivars of 
a limited number of different plants. 
Urban monocultures can be defined 
as ‘large numbers of the same 
species growing in a relatively 
restricted area’.66 Often ornamental 
selections of plants across the urban 

landscape reflect this. Modernist 
planting designs often take this one 
step further specifying large blocks of 
the same species/ cultivar, treating 
plants as space fillers, or ‘green 
concrete’. One benefit to the visually 
dull performance of this is it requires 
only a basic knowledge of plant life.67

The consequences of this could 
be dramatic. A classic example being 
Dutch Elm disease in eastern North 
America. A fungus specific to the 
American elm tree was introduced 
accidentally through processes of 
globalization. Nearly wiping out a 
dominating street tree across eastern 
north American cities.68 In an 
unpredictable world with a changing 
climate, relying on the same plant life 
(especially the repeated use of them 
contained to urban metropolises), 
not only creates visually dull, 
uninspiring spaces, but makes these 
plants more susceptible to pests and 
diseases. It is not sustainable.69

However, horticultural plants 
create neat landscapes with the 
aesthetics of care.70 They dominate 
many of the more prevalent spaces in 
our cities, such as parks, ball fields, 
cemeteries, commercial landscaping, 
and of course, the domestic yard. 
Characterized by manufactured soils 
and high levels of maintenance.71 Do 
these species really belong here? 
Where some have taken well to the 
conditions presented in their new 
homes (and some arguably too well) 
others only persist under human 
propagation and constant care, 
having not been able to adapt.72

plants/URBAN ECOLOGIES



18

Urban ecology can be defined 
as “the study of ways that human 
and ecological systems evolve 
together in urbanizing regions.”49 A 
complex mix of culture, history, and 
ecological processes.50 They are 
novel ecosystems with high levels of 
disturbance and fragmentation, 
dominated by humans.51

Humans, whether ecologists are 
willing to except it or not are an 
integral part of ecological processes. 
Our inability to see ourselves as 
incorporated in these systems has led 
us to where we are today.52 With 
humans comes imported materials, 
making cities literal melting pots for 
plant life from all over the world.53 
History, globalization, and now 
climate change have made it possible 
that plant life from all over the world 
are able to conjoin in our urban 
environments.54 Some of these 
introductions were intentional, such 
as the introduction of many of our 
horticultural plants. Others were 
unintentional, brought in on ships 
and peoples clothing. Whether 
intentional or unintentional these 
plants have had desirable and 
undesirable impacts on our 
landscapes.55

Botanist Peter Del Tredici 
recognizes three broad categories of 
urban vegetation.56

Remnant native 
Managed horticultural
Abandoned ruderal 
(spontaneous) 

These three types can be 
identified he says by the nature of 
their soils, past land use, the types of 
vegetation, and levels of 
maintenance.57

Native
Fact of the matter is that these 

spaces will never return to their 
pre-colonial states. High levels of 
disturbance are not limited to our 
cities, direct or indirectly there is not 
a place left on the planet that has not 
been impacted by humans in some 
way.58

The introduction of native 
vegetation into urban ecosystems is 
a hot topic and trend these days. It is 
seen as the most likely way to 
enhance urban ecology and to be 
good stewards of the land, by 
‘restoring the balance of nature’.59 
Interestingly, misconceptions around 
naïve plants began at the start of 

WWII when German native plant 
species were promoted as being 
superior, comparing exotic plants to 
Jews.60 Another example of culture 
and history playing out on our 
landscapes and morals today.

While planting native vegetation 
is not ‘bad’ per say and does not 
come with the general benefits 
plants contribute to urban 
environments. It would be incorrect 
to believe that planting native 
species will eventually achieve the 
previous equilibrium, the 
transformations landscapes and plant 
communities have undergone is 
irreversible.61 The reality is that all 
planted spaces will require some 
level of management.62 Sometimes 
even more so in the case of native 
vegetation as they do not always 
appreciate manufactured soils and 
other characteristics of cites such as 
air pollution, road salt etc.. In areas 
previously overtaken by well adapted 
exotic species it could take years of 
weeding and applying chemicals 
before the natives are established, if 
that even works.63

Horticultural 
Many of the exotic species in 

question are the result of an influx of 
European colonizers as early as 1600 
to discovered new-to-them lands all 
over the world. They brought plants 
and animals with them for agriculture 
and ornamental use in an attempt to 
create a ‘New England’, beautifying 
these places to a European 
understanding and destroying and 
exploiting existing plant and animal 
communities in its place. Soon plants 
were being brought back to Europe 
and moved all over the world. It 
wasn’t until the 20th century that 
people began to take a step back and 

consider the identity of these places, 
and conservation came into play.64

Transferred to these New 
England colonies were elements of 
the picturesque landscape such as 
lawns, clusters of trees, and plants 
from other movements within 
European garden design, as well as 
plants from other colonized 
countries. Many of which persist in 
our ornamental landscapes today. 
The forms of lawns, hedges, and 
flowerbeds can be found repeated 
throughout urban landscapes. The 
repeated use of the same plant life 
creates a homogenizing effect across 
the city.65 As many of us do not have 
a strong connection to Europe 
anymore these ideologies are no 
longer relevant.

  
Monocultures

For reliability of form and 
tolerance to the harsh environmental 
conditions found in cities as well as 
aesthetic preference, we often rely 
on cultivated clones and cultivars of 
a limited number of different plants. 
Urban monocultures can be defined 
as ‘large numbers of the same 
species growing in a relatively 
restricted area’.66 Often ornamental 
selections of plants across the urban 

landscape reflect this. Modernist 
planting designs often take this one 
step further specifying large blocks of 
the same species/ cultivar, treating 
plants as space fillers, or ‘green 
concrete’. One benefit to the visually 
dull performance of this is it requires 
only a basic knowledge of plant life.67

The consequences of this could 
be dramatic. A classic example being 
Dutch Elm disease in eastern North 
America. A fungus specific to the 
American elm tree was introduced 
accidentally through processes of 
globalization. Nearly wiping out a 
dominating street tree across eastern 
north American cities.68 In an 
unpredictable world with a changing 
climate, relying on the same plant life 
(especially the repeated use of them 
contained to urban metropolises), 
not only creates visually dull, 
uninspiring spaces, but makes these 
plants more susceptible to pests and 
diseases. It is not sustainable.69

However, horticultural plants 
create neat landscapes with the 
aesthetics of care.70 They dominate 
many of the more prevalent spaces in 
our cities, such as parks, ball fields, 
cemeteries, commercial landscaping, 
and of course, the domestic yard. 
Characterized by manufactured soils 
and high levels of maintenance.71 Do 
these species really belong here? 
Where some have taken well to the 
conditions presented in their new 
homes (and some arguably too well) 
others only persist under human 
propagation and constant care, 
having not been able to adapt.72

a planting of native plants

an abandoned planting of native plants
fig. 7



19

Urban ecology can be defined 
as “the study of ways that human 
and ecological systems evolve 
together in urbanizing regions.”49 A 
complex mix of culture, history, and 
ecological processes.50 They are 
novel ecosystems with high levels of 
disturbance and fragmentation, 
dominated by humans.51

Humans, whether ecologists are 
willing to except it or not are an 
integral part of ecological processes. 
Our inability to see ourselves as 
incorporated in these systems has led 
us to where we are today.52 With 
humans comes imported materials, 
making cities literal melting pots for 
plant life from all over the world.53 
History, globalization, and now 
climate change have made it possible 
that plant life from all over the world 
are able to conjoin in our urban 
environments.54 Some of these 
introductions were intentional, such 
as the introduction of many of our 
horticultural plants. Others were 
unintentional, brought in on ships 
and peoples clothing. Whether 
intentional or unintentional these 
plants have had desirable and 
undesirable impacts on our 
landscapes.55

Botanist Peter Del Tredici 
recognizes three broad categories of 
urban vegetation.56

Remnant native 
Managed horticultural
Abandoned ruderal 
(spontaneous) 

These three types can be 
identified he says by the nature of 
their soils, past land use, the types of 
vegetation, and levels of 
maintenance.57

Native
Fact of the matter is that these 

spaces will never return to their 
pre-colonial states. High levels of 
disturbance are not limited to our 
cities, direct or indirectly there is not 
a place left on the planet that has not 
been impacted by humans in some 
way.58

The introduction of native 
vegetation into urban ecosystems is 
a hot topic and trend these days. It is 
seen as the most likely way to 
enhance urban ecology and to be 
good stewards of the land, by 
‘restoring the balance of nature’.59 
Interestingly, misconceptions around 
naïve plants began at the start of 

WWII when German native plant 
species were promoted as being 
superior, comparing exotic plants to 
Jews.60 Another example of culture 
and history playing out on our 
landscapes and morals today.

While planting native vegetation 
is not ‘bad’ per say and does not 
come with the general benefits 
plants contribute to urban 
environments. It would be incorrect 
to believe that planting native 
species will eventually achieve the 
previous equilibrium, the 
transformations landscapes and plant 
communities have undergone is 
irreversible.61 The reality is that all 
planted spaces will require some 
level of management.62 Sometimes 
even more so in the case of native 
vegetation as they do not always 
appreciate manufactured soils and 
other characteristics of cites such as 
air pollution, road salt etc.. In areas 
previously overtaken by well adapted 
exotic species it could take years of 
weeding and applying chemicals 
before the natives are established, if 
that even works.63

Horticultural 
Many of the exotic species in 

question are the result of an influx of 
European colonizers as early as 1600 
to discovered new-to-them lands all 
over the world. They brought plants 
and animals with them for agriculture 
and ornamental use in an attempt to 
create a ‘New England’, beautifying 
these places to a European 
understanding and destroying and 
exploiting existing plant and animal 
communities in its place. Soon plants 
were being brought back to Europe 
and moved all over the world. It 
wasn’t until the 20th century that 
people began to take a step back and 

consider the identity of these places, 
and conservation came into play.64

Transferred to these New 
England colonies were elements of 
the picturesque landscape such as 
lawns, clusters of trees, and plants 
from other movements within 
European garden design, as well as 
plants from other colonized 
countries. Many of which persist in 
our ornamental landscapes today. 
The forms of lawns, hedges, and 
flowerbeds can be found repeated 
throughout urban landscapes. The 
repeated use of the same plant life 
creates a homogenizing effect across 
the city.65 As many of us do not have 
a strong connection to Europe 
anymore these ideologies are no 
longer relevant.

  
Monocultures

For reliability of form and 
tolerance to the harsh environmental 
conditions found in cities as well as 
aesthetic preference, we often rely 
on cultivated clones and cultivars of 
a limited number of different plants. 
Urban monocultures can be defined 
as ‘large numbers of the same 
species growing in a relatively 
restricted area’.66 Often ornamental 
selections of plants across the urban 

landscape reflect this. Modernist 
planting designs often take this one 
step further specifying large blocks of 
the same species/ cultivar, treating 
plants as space fillers, or ‘green 
concrete’. One benefit to the visually 
dull performance of this is it requires 
only a basic knowledge of plant life.67

The consequences of this could 
be dramatic. A classic example being 
Dutch Elm disease in eastern North 
America. A fungus specific to the 
American elm tree was introduced 
accidentally through processes of 
globalization. Nearly wiping out a 
dominating street tree across eastern 
north American cities.68 In an 
unpredictable world with a changing 
climate, relying on the same plant life 
(especially the repeated use of them 
contained to urban metropolises), 
not only creates visually dull, 
uninspiring spaces, but makes these 
plants more susceptible to pests and 
diseases. It is not sustainable.69

However, horticultural plants 
create neat landscapes with the 
aesthetics of care.70 They dominate 
many of the more prevalent spaces in 
our cities, such as parks, ball fields, 
cemeteries, commercial landscaping, 
and of course, the domestic yard. 
Characterized by manufactured soils 
and high levels of maintenance.71 Do 
these species really belong here? 
Where some have taken well to the 
conditions presented in their new 
homes (and some arguably too well) 
others only persist under human 
propagation and constant care, 
having not been able to adapt.72green concrete

fig. 8



20

Urban ecology can be defined 
as “the study of ways that human 
and ecological systems evolve 
together in urbanizing regions.”49 A 
complex mix of culture, history, and 
ecological processes.50 They are 
novel ecosystems with high levels of 
disturbance and fragmentation, 
dominated by humans.51

Humans, whether ecologists are 
willing to except it or not are an 
integral part of ecological processes. 
Our inability to see ourselves as 
incorporated in these systems has led 
us to where we are today.52 With 
humans comes imported materials, 
making cities literal melting pots for 
plant life from all over the world.53 
History, globalization, and now 
climate change have made it possible 
that plant life from all over the world 
are able to conjoin in our urban 
environments.54 Some of these 
introductions were intentional, such 
as the introduction of many of our 
horticultural plants. Others were 
unintentional, brought in on ships 
and peoples clothing. Whether 
intentional or unintentional these 
plants have had desirable and 
undesirable impacts on our 
landscapes.55

Botanist Peter Del Tredici 
recognizes three broad categories of 
urban vegetation.56

Remnant native 
Managed horticultural
Abandoned ruderal 
(spontaneous) 

These three types can be 
identified he says by the nature of 
their soils, past land use, the types of 
vegetation, and levels of 
maintenance.57

Native
Fact of the matter is that these 

spaces will never return to their 
pre-colonial states. High levels of 
disturbance are not limited to our 
cities, direct or indirectly there is not 
a place left on the planet that has not 
been impacted by humans in some 
way.58

The introduction of native 
vegetation into urban ecosystems is 
a hot topic and trend these days. It is 
seen as the most likely way to 
enhance urban ecology and to be 
good stewards of the land, by 
‘restoring the balance of nature’.59 
Interestingly, misconceptions around 
naïve plants began at the start of 

WWII when German native plant 
species were promoted as being 
superior, comparing exotic plants to 
Jews.60 Another example of culture 
and history playing out on our 
landscapes and morals today.

While planting native vegetation 
is not ‘bad’ per say and does not 
come with the general benefits 
plants contribute to urban 
environments. It would be incorrect 
to believe that planting native 
species will eventually achieve the 
previous equilibrium, the 
transformations landscapes and plant 
communities have undergone is 
irreversible.61 The reality is that all 
planted spaces will require some 
level of management.62 Sometimes 
even more so in the case of native 
vegetation as they do not always 
appreciate manufactured soils and 
other characteristics of cites such as 
air pollution, road salt etc.. In areas 
previously overtaken by well adapted 
exotic species it could take years of 
weeding and applying chemicals 
before the natives are established, if 
that even works.63

Horticultural 
Many of the exotic species in 

question are the result of an influx of 
European colonizers as early as 1600 
to discovered new-to-them lands all 
over the world. They brought plants 
and animals with them for agriculture 
and ornamental use in an attempt to 
create a ‘New England’, beautifying 
these places to a European 
understanding and destroying and 
exploiting existing plant and animal 
communities in its place. Soon plants 
were being brought back to Europe 
and moved all over the world. It 
wasn’t until the 20th century that 
people began to take a step back and 

consider the identity of these places, 
and conservation came into play.64

Transferred to these New 
England colonies were elements of 
the picturesque landscape such as 
lawns, clusters of trees, and plants 
from other movements within 
European garden design, as well as 
plants from other colonized 
countries. Many of which persist in 
our ornamental landscapes today. 
The forms of lawns, hedges, and 
flowerbeds can be found repeated 
throughout urban landscapes. The 
repeated use of the same plant life 
creates a homogenizing effect across 
the city.65 As many of us do not have 
a strong connection to Europe 
anymore these ideologies are no 
longer relevant.

  
Monocultures

For reliability of form and 
tolerance to the harsh environmental 
conditions found in cities as well as 
aesthetic preference, we often rely 
on cultivated clones and cultivars of 
a limited number of different plants. 
Urban monocultures can be defined 
as ‘large numbers of the same 
species growing in a relatively 
restricted area’.66 Often ornamental 
selections of plants across the urban 

landscape reflect this. Modernist 
planting designs often take this one 
step further specifying large blocks of 
the same species/ cultivar, treating 
plants as space fillers, or ‘green 
concrete’. One benefit to the visually 
dull performance of this is it requires 
only a basic knowledge of plant life.67

Spontaneous 
Some of the plants that have 

been able to adapt quite nicely to 
their new landscapes and urban 
conditions are often referred to as 
spontaneous or ruderal, as they are 
often found in abandoned urban 
spaces with far from ideal 
conditions.73 These plants thrive with 
no maintenance or human care. In 
areas of high disturbance with thin 
compacted toxic soils. They can 
include native plants, introduced 
cultivated plants, or introduced, 
adapted ‘weeds’.74 The dramatically 
varying conditions in cities, in various 
states of disturbance has made for 
an array of highly diverse plant 
communities. Forming unique 
displays of the processes that have 
created, and are creating these 
spaces and pushing boundary’s 
between aesthetics, disorder, and 
ecology.75

Benefit
Spontaneous plant life provides 

many important ecological 
contributions to our cities and 
landscapes.76 Such as nutrient 
absorption, heat reduction, erosion 
control, soil and air remediation, food 
and habitat for wildlife, and 
(someday maybe again) food and 

medicine for people, amongst many 
others.77 Often theses are referred to 
as ‘ecosystem services’, which are 
essentially the benefits ecosystems 
provide to humans. This is 
problematic however for two reasons. 
1) It does not really refer to a process, 
but an end product. 2) It leads to an 
anthropocentric understanding that 
the natural world does not include 
humans, is there to provide for us, 
and there for our disposal. When in 
fact the services are broad, 
contributed by everyone, for 
everyone (humans, plants, rocks, and 
animals alike) and for the planet.

 
Spontaneous plants can achieve 

many of these services and quite 
possibly more considering they do 
not require any inputs or 
maintenance. What are often 
considered ‘waste spaces’ are often 
exceptionally high in biodiversity. So 
much so that some European 
researchers are suggesting some of 
these spaces that are more long 
standing be conserved.78

Succession
The high levels of diversity in 

these communities is largely 
attributed to the allowance for the 
processes of succession to occur (due 

to being left without direct contact 
with humans). Ecological succession 
is ‘The change in the composition of 
plant and animal assemblages over 
time’.79 In general, in the case of 
spontaneous plant life it begins with 
small herbaceous legumes, annuals, 
and perennials that can best tolerate 
the poor soil conditions. As soil 
health builds these plant 
communities gradually fade out in 
favor of others. Often coming to a 
point where there is a stand of woody 
plant life that will be disrupted in 
some way and a fragment of the 
process begins again.80 This (contrary 
to popular belief) is an unpredictable 
cycle that is fundamental to ecology 
and ecosystem health. Though a lot 
of what we do today in traditional 
landscape management in cities aims 
at preventing this.81 Unfortunately, 
public perception of these spaces 
and plants is still stuck on them as 
‘weedy’.82 Can we learn and take cues 
from the spontaneous plant life found 
in our urban environments, and 
include and incorporate these plants 
and processes into our managed 
landscapes?

Gilles Clement
Gilles Clement is a French 

horticulturalist and landscape 
architect whose work revolves around 
the spontaneous dynamics of nature 
in urban landscapes.83 Clement has 
devised two main concepts 
throughout the course of his work. 
That of ‘The Third Landscape’ and 
‘The Garden in Movement’. The Third 
Landscape refers to the marginal 
spaces that have been directly 
impacted by humans but are not 
directly in care of humans these are 
the spaces with high levels of 
diversity where spontaneous plant 
life is often found.84 The Garden in 
Movement refers to how these spaces 
change with minimal influence from 
humans. These spaces rearrange 
themselves unpredictably, in defiance 
of traditional garden design. To 
Clement these plant communities are 
high in aesthetic value due to the 
change they undergo, offering 
‘wonder and enchantment’.85 

Spontaneous urban plants are 
the current realities and futures of 
our cities, regardless of how people 
may currently feel about them.86 
They successfully and positively 
contribute to urban ecologies in light 
of and despite the conditions they 
find there, that will only become 
more significant in the future. Due to 
the influence of cities in our changing 
climate we have a responsibility to 
work with spontaneous plant life in 
their agency towards the future of 
our planet.87

The consequences of this could 
be dramatic. A classic example being 
Dutch Elm disease in eastern North 
America. A fungus specific to the 
American elm tree was introduced 
accidentally through processes of 
globalization. Nearly wiping out a 
dominating street tree across eastern 
north American cities.68 In an 
unpredictable world with a changing 
climate, relying on the same plant life 
(especially the repeated use of them 
contained to urban metropolises), 
not only creates visually dull, 
uninspiring spaces, but makes these 
plants more susceptible to pests and 
diseases. It is not sustainable.69

However, horticultural plants 
create neat landscapes with the 
aesthetics of care.70 They dominate 
many of the more prevalent spaces in 
our cities, such as parks, ball fields, 
cemeteries, commercial landscaping, 
and of course, the domestic yard. 
Characterized by manufactured soils 
and high levels of maintenance.71 Do 
these species really belong here? 
Where some have taken well to the 
conditions presented in their new 
homes (and some arguably too well) 
others only persist under human 
propagation and constant care, 
having not been able to adapt.72



21

Spontaneous 
Some of the plants that have 

been able to adapt quite nicely to 
their new landscapes and urban 
conditions are often referred to as 
spontaneous or ruderal, as they are 
often found in abandoned urban 
spaces with far from ideal 
conditions.73 These plants thrive with 
no maintenance or human care. In 
areas of high disturbance with thin 
compacted toxic soils. They can 
include native plants, introduced 
cultivated plants, or introduced, 
adapted ‘weeds’.74 The dramatically 
varying conditions in cities, in various 
states of disturbance has made for 
an array of highly diverse plant 
communities. Forming unique 
displays of the processes that have 
created, and are creating these 
spaces and pushing boundary’s 
between aesthetics, disorder, and 
ecology.75

Benefit
Spontaneous plant life provides 

many important ecological 
contributions to our cities and 
landscapes.76 Such as nutrient 
absorption, heat reduction, erosion 
control, soil and air remediation, food 
and habitat for wildlife, and 
(someday maybe again) food and 

medicine for people, amongst many 
others.77 Often theses are referred to 
as ‘ecosystem services’, which are 
essentially the benefits ecosystems 
provide to humans. This is 
problematic however for two reasons. 
1) It does not really refer to a process, 
but an end product. 2) It leads to an 
anthropocentric understanding that 
the natural world does not include 
humans, is there to provide for us, 
and there for our disposal. When in 
fact the services are broad, 
contributed by everyone, for 
everyone (humans, plants, rocks, and 
animals alike) and for the planet.

 
Spontaneous plants can achieve 

many of these services and quite 
possibly more considering they do 
not require any inputs or 
maintenance. What are often 
considered ‘waste spaces’ are often 
exceptionally high in biodiversity. So 
much so that some European 
researchers are suggesting some of 
these spaces that are more long 
standing be conserved.78

Succession
The high levels of diversity in 

these communities is largely 
attributed to the allowance for the 
processes of succession to occur (due 

to being left without direct contact 
with humans). Ecological succession 
is ‘The change in the composition of 
plant and animal assemblages over 
time’.79 In general, in the case of 
spontaneous plant life it begins with 
small herbaceous legumes, annuals, 
and perennials that can best tolerate 
the poor soil conditions. As soil 
health builds these plant 
communities gradually fade out in 
favor of others. Often coming to a 
point where there is a stand of woody 
plant life that will be disrupted in 
some way and a fragment of the 
process begins again.80 This (contrary 
to popular belief) is an unpredictable 
cycle that is fundamental to ecology 
and ecosystem health. Though a lot 
of what we do today in traditional 
landscape management in cities aims 
at preventing this.81 Unfortunately, 
public perception of these spaces 
and plants is still stuck on them as 
‘weedy’.82 Can we learn and take cues 
from the spontaneous plant life found 
in our urban environments, and 
include and incorporate these plants 
and processes into our managed 
landscapes?

Gilles Clement
Gilles Clement is a French 

horticulturalist and landscape 
architect whose work revolves around 
the spontaneous dynamics of nature 
in urban landscapes.83 Clement has 
devised two main concepts 
throughout the course of his work. 
That of ‘The Third Landscape’ and 
‘The Garden in Movement’. The Third 
Landscape refers to the marginal 
spaces that have been directly 
impacted by humans but are not 
directly in care of humans these are 
the spaces with high levels of 
diversity where spontaneous plant 
life is often found.84 The Garden in 
Movement refers to how these spaces 
change with minimal influence from 
humans. These spaces rearrange 
themselves unpredictably, in defiance 
of traditional garden design. To 
Clement these plant communities are 
high in aesthetic value due to the 
change they undergo, offering 
‘wonder and enchantment’.85 

Spontaneous urban plants are 
the current realities and futures of 
our cities, regardless of how people 
may currently feel about them.86 
They successfully and positively 
contribute to urban ecologies in light 
of and despite the conditions they 
find there, that will only become 
more significant in the future. Due to 
the influence of cities in our changing 
climate we have a responsibility to 
work with spontaneous plant life in 
their agency towards the future of 
our planet.87

spontaneous urban vegetation
fig. 9



22

Spontaneous 
Some of the plants that have 

been able to adapt quite nicely to 
their new landscapes and urban 
conditions are often referred to as 
spontaneous or ruderal, as they are 
often found in abandoned urban 
spaces with far from ideal 
conditions.73 These plants thrive with 
no maintenance or human care. In 
areas of high disturbance with thin 
compacted toxic soils. They can 
include native plants, introduced 
cultivated plants, or introduced, 
adapted ‘weeds’.74 The dramatically 
varying conditions in cities, in various 
states of disturbance has made for 
an array of highly diverse plant 
communities. Forming unique 
displays of the processes that have 
created, and are creating these 
spaces and pushing boundary’s 
between aesthetics, disorder, and 
ecology.75

Benefit
Spontaneous plant life provides 

many important ecological 
contributions to our cities and 
landscapes.76 Such as nutrient 
absorption, heat reduction, erosion 
control, soil and air remediation, food 
and habitat for wildlife, and 
(someday maybe again) food and 

medicine for people, amongst many 
others.77 Often theses are referred to 
as ‘ecosystem services’, which are 
essentially the benefits ecosystems 
provide to humans. This is 
problematic however for two reasons. 
1) It does not really refer to a process, 
but an end product. 2) It leads to an 
anthropocentric understanding that 
the natural world does not include 
humans, is there to provide for us, 
and there for our disposal. When in 
fact the services are broad, 
contributed by everyone, for 
everyone (humans, plants, rocks, and 
animals alike) and for the planet.

 
Spontaneous plants can achieve 

many of these services and quite 
possibly more considering they do 
not require any inputs or 
maintenance. What are often 
considered ‘waste spaces’ are often 
exceptionally high in biodiversity. So 
much so that some European 
researchers are suggesting some of 
these spaces that are more long 
standing be conserved.78

Succession
The high levels of diversity in 

these communities is largely 
attributed to the allowance for the 
processes of succession to occur (due 

to being left without direct contact 
with humans). Ecological succession 
is ‘The change in the composition of 
plant and animal assemblages over 
time’.79 In general, in the case of 
spontaneous plant life it begins with 
small herbaceous legumes, annuals, 
and perennials that can best tolerate 
the poor soil conditions. As soil 
health builds these plant 
communities gradually fade out in 
favor of others. Often coming to a 
point where there is a stand of woody 
plant life that will be disrupted in 
some way and a fragment of the 
process begins again.80 This (contrary 
to popular belief) is an unpredictable 
cycle that is fundamental to ecology 
and ecosystem health. Though a lot 
of what we do today in traditional 
landscape management in cities aims 
at preventing this.81 Unfortunately, 
public perception of these spaces 
and plants is still stuck on them as 
‘weedy’.82 Can we learn and take cues 
from the spontaneous plant life found 
in our urban environments, and 
include and incorporate these plants 
and processes into our managed 
landscapes?

Gilles Clement
Gilles Clement is a French 

horticulturalist and landscape 
architect whose work revolves around 
the spontaneous dynamics of nature 
in urban landscapes.83 Clement has 
devised two main concepts 
throughout the course of his work. 
That of ‘The Third Landscape’ and 
‘The Garden in Movement’. The Third 
Landscape refers to the marginal 
spaces that have been directly 
impacted by humans but are not 
directly in care of humans these are 
the spaces with high levels of 
diversity where spontaneous plant 
life is often found.84 The Garden in 
Movement refers to how these spaces 
change with minimal influence from 
humans. These spaces rearrange 
themselves unpredictably, in defiance 
of traditional garden design. To 
Clement these plant communities are 
high in aesthetic value due to the 
change they undergo, offering 
‘wonder and enchantment’.85 

Spontaneous urban plants are 
the current realities and futures of 
our cities, regardless of how people 
may currently feel about them.86 
They successfully and positively 
contribute to urban ecologies in light 
of and despite the conditions they 
find there, that will only become 
more significant in the future. Due to 
the influence of cities in our changing 
climate we have a responsibility to 
work with spontaneous plant life in 
their agency towards the future of 
our planet.87



23

Questions Objectives Goals
Can we begin to see ourselves 
as incorporated into the natural 
systems around us? 

Can we learn and take cues 
from the spontaneous plant life 
found in our urban 
environments, and include and 
incorporate these plants and 
processes into our managed 
landscapes?

Work between the constraints 
for aesthetics, disorder, and 
ecology

Encourage succession 

Work with spontaneous 
vegetation

Spontaneous 
Some of the plants that have 

been able to adapt quite nicely to 
their new landscapes and urban 
conditions are often referred to as 
spontaneous or ruderal, as they are 
often found in abandoned urban 
spaces with far from ideal 
conditions.73 These plants thrive with 
no maintenance or human care. In 
areas of high disturbance with thin 
compacted toxic soils. They can 
include native plants, introduced 
cultivated plants, or introduced, 
adapted ‘weeds’.74 The dramatically 
varying conditions in cities, in various 
states of disturbance has made for 
an array of highly diverse plant 
communities. Forming unique 
displays of the processes that have 
created, and are creating these 
spaces and pushing boundary’s 
between aesthetics, disorder, and 
ecology.75

Benefit
Spontaneous plant life provides 

many important ecological 
contributions to our cities and 
landscapes.76 Such as nutrient 
absorption, heat reduction, erosion 
control, soil and air remediation, food 
and habitat for wildlife, and 
(someday maybe again) food and 

medicine for people, amongst many 
others.77 Often theses are referred to 
as ‘ecosystem services’, which are 
essentially the benefits ecosystems 
provide to humans. This is 
problematic however for two reasons. 
1) It does not really refer to a process, 
but an end product. 2) It leads to an 
anthropocentric understanding that 
the natural world does not include 
humans, is there to provide for us, 
and there for our disposal. When in 
fact the services are broad, 
contributed by everyone, for 
everyone (humans, plants, rocks, and 
animals alike) and for the planet.

 
Spontaneous plants can achieve 

many of these services and quite 
possibly more considering they do 
not require any inputs or 
maintenance. What are often 
considered ‘waste spaces’ are often 
exceptionally high in biodiversity. So 
much so that some European 
researchers are suggesting some of 
these spaces that are more long 
standing be conserved.78

Succession
The high levels of diversity in 

these communities is largely 
attributed to the allowance for the 
processes of succession to occur (due 

to being left without direct contact 
with humans). Ecological succession 
is ‘The change in the composition of 
plant and animal assemblages over 
time’.79 In general, in the case of 
spontaneous plant life it begins with 
small herbaceous legumes, annuals, 
and perennials that can best tolerate 
the poor soil conditions. As soil 
health builds these plant 
communities gradually fade out in 
favor of others. Often coming to a 
point where there is a stand of woody 
plant life that will be disrupted in 
some way and a fragment of the 
process begins again.80 This (contrary 
to popular belief) is an unpredictable 
cycle that is fundamental to ecology 
and ecosystem health. Though a lot 
of what we do today in traditional 
landscape management in cities aims 
at preventing this.81 Unfortunately, 
public perception of these spaces 
and plants is still stuck on them as 
‘weedy’.82 Can we learn and take cues 
from the spontaneous plant life found 
in our urban environments, and 
include and incorporate these plants 
and processes into our managed 
landscapes?

Gilles Clement
Gilles Clement is a French 

horticulturalist and landscape 
architect whose work revolves around 
the spontaneous dynamics of nature 
in urban landscapes.83 Clement has 
devised two main concepts 
throughout the course of his work. 
That of ‘The Third Landscape’ and 
‘The Garden in Movement’. The Third 
Landscape refers to the marginal 
spaces that have been directly 
impacted by humans but are not 
directly in care of humans these are 
the spaces with high levels of 
diversity where spontaneous plant 
life is often found.84 The Garden in 
Movement refers to how these spaces 
change with minimal influence from 
humans. These spaces rearrange 
themselves unpredictably, in defiance 
of traditional garden design. To 
Clement these plant communities are 
high in aesthetic value due to the 
change they undergo, offering 
‘wonder and enchantment’.85 

Spontaneous urban plants are 
the current realities and futures of 
our cities, regardless of how people 
may currently feel about them.86 
They successfully and positively 
contribute to urban ecologies in light 
of and despite the conditions they 
find there, that will only become 
more significant in the future. Due to 
the influence of cities in our changing 
climate we have a responsibility to 
work with spontaneous plant life in 
their agency towards the future of 
our planet.87



24



25

“Flowers sprouting in a path present the gardener with a choice: to 
conserve the path or the flowers”

Gilles Clement

“…The gardener works with this movement (evidently choosing, as far as 
possible, to conserve the flowers). Rather than plan the garden ahead of time 

on a drafting table with lists of species, she helps the garden to emerge in 
collaboration with the functional inventions of plants.”

Jonathan Skinner

People maintain their 
landscapes. Whether for forestry, 
agriculture, recreation, or pleasure 
defining a space of land and 
maintaining it is central to who we 
are. We love it, we complain about it, 
we do it with purpose, and we do it 
with no thought at all. 

In the landscapes urban 
residences see and spend so much 
time in, subsequently being the 
places they often have the most 
interactions with plant life, the 
message of domination and control 
(as mentioned in previous sections) 
is prevalent in what we do and in 
what we see.

It is said that the actions that 
lead to this aesthetic is an apparent 
need to communicate to other 
nearby residence intention and care 
over our spaces. A sort of social 

message to uphold a status, a way to 
be read by other people. Care and 
‘neatness’ being a sign of good 
citizenship and thus aesthetically 
pleasing.88

Whatever the message, 
gardening and maintenance should 
not be underestimated. It can be a 
political act, one between urbanism 
and environmental justice.89

plants/MANAGMENT



26

Weeding: To remove unwanted 
plants from an area. This may be 
done for personal preference, 
aesthetic preference, or becuse they 
are causing some harm to other 
surrounding plants.

Pruning: To selectively chose living 
or dead parts of a plant to remove. 
Sometimes to promote fruit 
production, but often (in this 
context) to ‘improve’ the health, 
shape, or appearance of a plant.

Trimming/ Shearing: To remove a 
uniform amount of the plant from its 
outside edges. Done to reduce the 
size of a plant or make it a particular 
shape.

Mowing: A type of pruning. 
Repetitive cutting, often of a 
herbaceous plant withing a few 
inches of the ground. In this context 
often resulting in a lawn.

Mulching: To cover a surface of earth 
with an organic or inorganic material. 
Often done to suppress ‘weeds’, 
maintain soil moisture, add organics, 
or for decorative purposes. 

Raking: The collection of a material 
off the ground with a specific tool 
(rake). To move materials around 
and/or, more often to ‘improve’ the 
cleanliness and appearance of a 
space.
Foundation plantings: The trend to 
plant low shrubs directly around the 
base of a building.

Straight lines and patterns: The 
tendency for planting, plant forms, 
and bed layout to be uniform, and 
repetitive, with crisp strong lines. A 
strong indicator of human intention 
and dominance. 

Bright colors: A preference 
displayed throughout the urban 
landscape and reflected in plant 
cultivation and nurseries. 

Hardscape: Human made elements 
found throughout the urban 
landscape. Offering utility, or 
aesthetics.

Typical maintenance and planting strategies often found today at an urban or 
residential scale often include…

fig.10



27

Weeding: To remove unwanted 
plants from an area. This may be 
done for personal preference, 
aesthetic preference, or becuse they 
are causing some harm to other 
surrounding plants.

Pruning: To selectively chose living 
or dead parts of a plant to remove. 
Sometimes to promote fruit 
production, but often (in this 
context) to ‘improve’ the health, 
shape, or appearance of a plant.

Trimming/ Shearing: To remove a 
uniform amount of the plant from its 
outside edges. Done to reduce the 
size of a plant or make it a particular 
shape.

Mowing: A type of pruning. 
Repetitive cutting, often of a 
herbaceous plant withing a few 
inches of the ground. In this context 
often resulting in a lawn.

Mulching: To cover a surface of earth 
with an organic or inorganic material. 
Often done to suppress ‘weeds’, 
maintain soil moisture, add organics, 
or for decorative purposes. 

Raking: The collection of a material 
off the ground with a specific tool 
(rake). To move materials around 
and/or, more often to ‘improve’ the 
cleanliness and appearance of a 
space.
Foundation plantings: The trend to 
plant low shrubs directly around the 
base of a building.

Straight lines and patterns: The 
tendency for planting, plant forms, 
and bed layout to be uniform, and 
repetitive, with crisp strong lines. A 
strong indicator of human intention 
and dominance. 

Bright colors: A preference 
displayed throughout the urban 
landscape and reflected in plant 
cultivation and nurseries. 

Hardscape: Human made elements 
found throughout the urban 
landscape. Offering utility, or 
aesthetics.

fig.11



28

 Through these practices plant 
life is often overlooked and ignored 
as the backdrop for humans and 
animals to go about their lives in 
front of.90 The static, superficial 
treatment of plants suppressed of 
their individuality only confirms this 
image. The term ‘plant blindness’ 
comes to mind, something I see in 
people daily. Plant blindness is 
simply, ‘The inability to see or notice 
the plants in one’s own environment” 
as well as the “Inability to appreciate 
the aesthetic and unique biological 
features”.91 I would argue that the 
previously mentioned procedures 
greatly impact this. Leading to the 
next part of plant blindness, “The 
inability to recognize the importance 
of plants in the biosphere and in 
human affairs”.92

But people do, interestingly, 
notice plants when there are none 
around or when they are out of line, 
both of which receive negative 
reactions. Where humans do 
appreciate ‘nature’ there is also ‘too 
much nature’, often resulting in ‘too 
much care’.93 Opposing conflicts such 
as this between humans and plant 
life inevitably separate us more: 
weedy or beautiful, useful or useless, 
desired or despised94. We see divides 

like this causing conflict in our own 
human to human relationships. They 
need to be resolved if we are to 
collaborate with plant life in our care 
procedures towards them, to 
contribute positively towards 
environmental conditions.95

 
 The current horticultural 
techniques promote the image of 
plants as immobile. Denying them 
transformations and belittling their 
potential at larger scales, yet it is 
often not questioned.96 Thinking of 
gardens as isolated and contained to 
(for example) a residential property 
and void of movement limits plant life 
the ability to contribute to natural 
processes as they should.97

It is exactly due to conundrums 
like this that make gardens such 
powerful tools. The hands-on 
interaction people have with their 
gardens and the ability to relate and 
see change directly affected to them 
make gardens an ideal starting place 
to discuss and explore human-plant 
relationships.98

There is a mistrust in allowing 
plants their transformations and 
change. Plants that do this are 
considered weeds, undesirable and 

uncared for. To re-think the 
stereotype of a ‘weed’ Peter Del 
Tredici suggests replacing the term 
with ‘cosmopolitan urban 
vegetation’.99 Re-thinking the concept 
of ‘a weed’ can perhaps assist us in 
how we think about management of 
all plant life, particularly spontaneous 
plants and the processes that support 
them. Welcoming and working with 
spontaneous plants in our urban 
environment will require a different 
kind of expertise and skill.100 But it 
may also assist in solving our dialectic 
relationship with plant life and 
enhance our spaces ecologically, 
socially, and aesthetically.101

 There is an increased interest in 
including spontaneous plants and 
processes into design, projecting a 
long-term change in our attitudes 

towards such plant life and the 
aesthetic they bring.102 As designers 
working with spontaneous plants may 
sound like a very hands-off approach 
when in fact it requires a more 
intimate relationship between the 
designer and the ground.103 Today, 
design in necessary for spontaneous 
processes to occur.104

What are these new 
collaborations between the plant, the 
gardener, and the designer? How will 
they be achieved? What are their 
combined aesthetic? What new 
agency does the gardener have to 
contribute to the agency of the 
plant?105 How do we facilitate in the 
movement of plants? The way people 
interact with their landscapes and 
plants is in direct effect to all of these 
questions, beauty is in experience.106



29

Questions Objectives Goals
What new forms of expertise 
and skills will be required for 
working with spontaneous 
plants and processes.
 
What are new collaborations 
between the plant, the 
gardener, and the designer?

What new agency does the 
gardener have to contribute to 
the agency of the plant?

Collaborate with plant life in 
our care procedures towards 
them.

Re-think the stereotype of a 
weed

Re-evaluate our dialectic 
relationship with plant life

Promote beauty as experience

Hands on interactions between 
people and plants

 Through these practices plant 
life is often overlooked and ignored 
as the backdrop for humans and 
animals to go about their lives in 
front of.90 The static, superficial 
treatment of plants suppressed of 
their individuality only confirms this 
image. The term ‘plant blindness’ 
comes to mind, something I see in 
people daily. Plant blindness is 
simply, ‘The inability to see or notice 
the plants in one’s own environment” 
as well as the “Inability to appreciate 
the aesthetic and unique biological 
features”.91 I would argue that the 
previously mentioned procedures 
greatly impact this. Leading to the 
next part of plant blindness, “The 
inability to recognize the importance 
of plants in the biosphere and in 
human affairs”.92

But people do, interestingly, 
notice plants when there are none 
around or when they are out of line, 
both of which receive negative 
reactions. Where humans do 
appreciate ‘nature’ there is also ‘too 
much nature’, often resulting in ‘too 
much care’.93 Opposing conflicts such 
as this between humans and plant 
life inevitably separate us more: 
weedy or beautiful, useful or useless, 
desired or despised94. We see divides 

like this causing conflict in our own 
human to human relationships. They 
need to be resolved if we are to 
collaborate with plant life in our care 
procedures towards them, to 
contribute positively towards 
environmental conditions.95

 
 The current horticultural 
techniques promote the image of 
plants as immobile. Denying them 
transformations and belittling their 
potential at larger scales, yet it is 
often not questioned.96 Thinking of 
gardens as isolated and contained to 
(for example) a residential property 
and void of movement limits plant life 
the ability to contribute to natural 
processes as they should.97

It is exactly due to conundrums 
like this that make gardens such 
powerful tools. The hands-on 
interaction people have with their 
gardens and the ability to relate and 
see change directly affected to them 
make gardens an ideal starting place 
to discuss and explore human-plant 
relationships.98

There is a mistrust in allowing 
plants their transformations and 
change. Plants that do this are 
considered weeds, undesirable and 

uncared for. To re-think the 
stereotype of a ‘weed’ Peter Del 
Tredici suggests replacing the term 
with ‘cosmopolitan urban 
vegetation’.99 Re-thinking the concept 
of ‘a weed’ can perhaps assist us in 
how we think about management of 
all plant life, particularly spontaneous 
plants and the processes that support 
them. Welcoming and working with 
spontaneous plants in our urban 
environment will require a different 
kind of expertise and skill.100 But it 
may also assist in solving our dialectic 
relationship with plant life and 
enhance our spaces ecologically, 
socially, and aesthetically.101

 There is an increased interest in 
including spontaneous plants and 
processes into design, projecting a 
long-term change in our attitudes 

towards such plant life and the 
aesthetic they bring.102 As designers 
working with spontaneous plants may 
sound like a very hands-off approach 
when in fact it requires a more 
intimate relationship between the 
designer and the ground.103 Today, 
design in necessary for spontaneous 
processes to occur.104

What are these new 
collaborations between the plant, the 
gardener, and the designer? How will 
they be achieved? What are their 
combined aesthetic? What new 
agency does the gardener have to 
contribute to the agency of the 
plant?105 How do we facilitate in the 
movement of plants? The way people 
interact with their landscapes and 
plants is in direct effect to all of these 
questions, beauty is in experience.106



30



31

PRECEDENTS

 Each precedent has the following 5 topics, 

found within the report, ranked from 1 to 5.

(Based on my own judgements/assumptions)

Agency: Refers to whether the plants

apparent agency is allowed

Aesthetics: Refers to the projects

questioning of traditional aesthetics

Urban ecologies: Is the project

contributing to urban ecologies?

Management: Does management work

with the natural processes of the site?

Are innovative strategies employed? 

People: Is encouraging people plant

relationships important to the project? 



32



33

Designer: Gilles Clement, 
in collaboration with Éric Berlin, Claude
Courtecuisse and Sylvain Flipo

Location: Lille, France
Date:       Completed 1995

Parc Henri Matisse

Parc Henri Matisse is an 
8-hectare park located in Lille, 
northern France. The project was a 
part of a larger city revitalization 
project that included a shopping 
mall, office and conference space 
and a high-speed rail hub, with 
several notable architects working on 
the project.107 

The park itself consists of two 
main features. A large accessible 
lawn area, and, in the center, a large 
2500 square meter raised concrete 
island, made partly from nearby 
construction waste and inaccessible 
to the public. The large concrete 
structure is often mistaken for a 

bunker left over from WWII.108

This island is named Derborence 
island after the Deborence forest in 
Switzerland, one of the few remaining 
primary forests left in Europe, largely 
due to its remote location.109 This is 
more symbolic in the concept of the 
island then a reflection of its actual 
function. A top the 7-meter-high 
walls a variety of tree species were 
planted for their hardiness to urban 
conditions (not chosen in relation to 
the Deborence forest) some species 
are native to Europe while others 
originate from other parts of the 
globe. The island has intentionally 
been made inaccessible to the public 

to allow the processes of ecological 
succession to occur undisturbed. The 
only visitors are scientists who come 
to occasionally monitor biodiversity 
on this ecological experiment.110

The island is considered to be a 
sort of seed bank that allows these 
species to colonize surrounding 
areas. Throughout the park and 
particularly around the edges, some 
of this vegetation has been allowed 
to naturalize. While other areas are 
only occasionally mown, creating 
edge-like effects for wildlife.111

In his work Clement strives to 
incorporate spontaneous plants and 
dynamics processes into urban 
landscapes. Referring to them as 
‘Gardens of Movement’ focusing on 
what he calls ‘The Third Landscape’ 
spaces that have been impacted by 

humans but are not in direct care of 
them either. Deborence island is a 
direct attempt to construct one of 
these spaces.112

The merging of nature and 
culture within the park brings 
together several conversations and 
provocations. Introducing this ‘wild 
space’ that is being allowed to move 
within the urban landscape has 
brought about questions of 
aesthetics and new considerations 
for spatial arrangements more 
closely related to natural processes 
and questions how much the agency 
of nature should be included into 
urban design. Adding to the 
discussion of the role of culture in 
urban ecology.113

Critique and take-away 
There has been lash back from 

the public over the aesthetic value of 
the island/ park, with people calling 
it ‘visual pollution’. It is obvious that 
this is not a conventional use of park 
space, and some believe it may be 
too quick of a leap. Some form of 
public awareness and education of 
the space would have benefited the 
parks intentions and possibly 
reduced negative attitudes. As a 
place to reflect upon the relationship 
of nature and the city it seems odd 
that the island is so inaccessible. 
Original plans for the park did 
include an education center with 
video monitoring at the top of the 
island. Elements such as this would 
likely have greatly increased the 
success of the project.114

Where I love the intentions 
behind this park, and the concept of 
a seed bank feeding other spaces 
withing the city. The shear 
dominating nature of Deborence 
island makes a statement in itself, 
and where I think this is an 
interesting statement (over whom is 
governing whom), I question whether 
it is the message we want to be 
sending. Also, it isn’t only a lack of 
public awareness that I see missing 

within the park but a lack of public 
engagement. To disinclude people 
from a very dominating structure 
would be enough to form a sense of 
resentment, let alone create any sort 
of sense of ownership

fig.12

Aesthetics

Urban Ecologies

Agency

People and Plants

Managment



34

Parc Henri Matisse is an 
8-hectare park located in Lille, 
northern France. The project was a 
part of a larger city revitalization 
project that included a shopping 
mall, office and conference space 
and a high-speed rail hub, with 
several notable architects working on 
the project.107 

The park itself consists of two 
main features. A large accessible 
lawn area, and, in the center, a large 
2500 square meter raised concrete 
island, made partly from nearby 
construction waste and inaccessible 
to the public. The large concrete 
structure is often mistaken for a 

bunker left over from WWII.108

This island is named Derborence 
island after the Deborence forest in 
Switzerland, one of the few remaining 
primary forests left in Europe, largely 
due to its remote location.109 This is 
more symbolic in the concept of the 
island then a reflection of its actual 
function. A top the 7-meter-high 
walls a variety of tree species were 
planted for their hardiness to urban 
conditions (not chosen in relation to 
the Deborence forest) some species 
are native to Europe while others 
originate from other parts of the 
globe. The island has intentionally 
been made inaccessible to the public 

to allow the processes of ecological 
succession to occur undisturbed. The 
only visitors are scientists who come 
to occasionally monitor biodiversity 
on this ecological experiment.110

The island is considered to be a 
sort of seed bank that allows these 
species to colonize surrounding 
areas. Throughout the park and 
particularly around the edges, some 
of this vegetation has been allowed 
to naturalize. While other areas are 
only occasionally mown, creating 
edge-like effects for wildlife.111

In his work Clement strives to 
incorporate spontaneous plants and 
dynamics processes into urban 
landscapes. Referring to them as 
‘Gardens of Movement’ focusing on 
what he calls ‘The Third Landscape’ 
spaces that have been impacted by 

humans but are not in direct care of 
them either. Deborence island is a 
direct attempt to construct one of 
these spaces.112

The merging of nature and 
culture within the park brings 
together several conversations and 
provocations. Introducing this ‘wild 
space’ that is being allowed to move 
within the urban landscape has 
brought about questions of 
aesthetics and new considerations 
for spatial arrangements more 
closely related to natural processes 
and questions how much the agency 
of nature should be included into 
urban design. Adding to the 
discussion of the role of culture in 
urban ecology.113

Critique and take-away 
There has been lash back from 

the public over the aesthetic value of 
the island/ park, with people calling 
it ‘visual pollution’. It is obvious that 
this is not a conventional use of park 
space, and some believe it may be 
too quick of a leap. Some form of 
public awareness and education of 
the space would have benefited the 
parks intentions and possibly 
reduced negative attitudes. As a 
place to reflect upon the relationship 
of nature and the city it seems odd 
that the island is so inaccessible. 
Original plans for the park did 
include an education center with 
video monitoring at the top of the 
island. Elements such as this would 
likely have greatly increased the 
success of the project.114

Where I love the intentions 
behind this park, and the concept of 
a seed bank feeding other spaces 
withing the city. The shear 
dominating nature of Deborence 
island makes a statement in itself, 
and where I think this is an 
interesting statement (over whom is 
governing whom), I question whether 
it is the message we want to be 
sending. Also, it isn’t only a lack of 
public awareness that I see missing 

within the park but a lack of public 
engagement. To disinclude people 
from a very dominating structure 
would be enough to form a sense of 
resentment, let alone create any sort 
of sense of ownership

fig.13

fig.14



35

Parc Henri Matisse is an 
8-hectare park located in Lille, 
northern France. The project was a 
part of a larger city revitalization 
project that included a shopping 
mall, office and conference space 
and a high-speed rail hub, with 
several notable architects working on 
the project.107 

The park itself consists of two 
main features. A large accessible 
lawn area, and, in the center, a large 
2500 square meter raised concrete 
island, made partly from nearby 
construction waste and inaccessible 
to the public. The large concrete 
structure is often mistaken for a 

bunker left over from WWII.108

This island is named Derborence 
island after the Deborence forest in 
Switzerland, one of the few remaining 
primary forests left in Europe, largely 
due to its remote location.109 This is 
more symbolic in the concept of the 
island then a reflection of its actual 
function. A top the 7-meter-high 
walls a variety of tree species were 
planted for their hardiness to urban 
conditions (not chosen in relation to 
the Deborence forest) some species 
are native to Europe while others 
originate from other parts of the 
globe. The island has intentionally 
been made inaccessible to the public 

to allow the processes of ecological 
succession to occur undisturbed. The 
only visitors are scientists who come 
to occasionally monitor biodiversity 
on this ecological experiment.110

The island is considered to be a 
sort of seed bank that allows these 
species to colonize surrounding 
areas. Throughout the park and 
particularly around the edges, some 
of this vegetation has been allowed 
to naturalize. While other areas are 
only occasionally mown, creating 
edge-like effects for wildlife.111

In his work Clement strives to 
incorporate spontaneous plants and 
dynamics processes into urban 
landscapes. Referring to them as 
‘Gardens of Movement’ focusing on 
what he calls ‘The Third Landscape’ 
spaces that have been impacted by 

humans but are not in direct care of 
them either. Deborence island is a 
direct attempt to construct one of 
these spaces.112

The merging of nature and 
culture within the park brings 
together several conversations and 
provocations. Introducing this ‘wild 
space’ that is being allowed to move 
within the urban landscape has 
brought about questions of 
aesthetics and new considerations 
for spatial arrangements more 
closely related to natural processes 
and questions how much the agency 
of nature should be included into 
urban design. Adding to the 
discussion of the role of culture in 
urban ecology.113

Critique and take-away 
There has been lash back from 

the public over the aesthetic value of 
the island/ park, with people calling 
it ‘visual pollution’. It is obvious that 
this is not a conventional use of park 
space, and some believe it may be 
too quick of a leap. Some form of 
public awareness and education of 
the space would have benefited the 
parks intentions and possibly 
reduced negative attitudes. As a 
place to reflect upon the relationship 
of nature and the city it seems odd 
that the island is so inaccessible. 
Original plans for the park did 
include an education center with 
video monitoring at the top of the 
island. Elements such as this would 
likely have greatly increased the 
success of the project.114

Where I love the intentions 
behind this park, and the concept of 
a seed bank feeding other spaces 
withing the city. The shear 
dominating nature of Deborence 
island makes a statement in itself, 
and where I think this is an 
interesting statement (over whom is 
governing whom), I question whether 
it is the message we want to be 
sending. Also, it isn’t only a lack of 
public awareness that I see missing 

within the park but a lack of public 
engagement. To disinclude people 
from a very dominating structure 
would be enough to form a sense of 
resentment, let alone create any sort 
of sense of ownership



36

YardWorks
Designer: Dr. Joshua Cerra and

graduate students of
landscapearchitecture at
Cornell University

Location:  Kingston, NY
Date:       2014-2016

Aesthetics

Urban Ecologies

Agency

People and Plants

Managment

Yardworks is a three-year studio 
project run out of Cornell university 
where students work closely with 
landowners to incorporate urban 
ecological design strategies on their 
properties carefully balancing 
ecological goals with the client’s 
programmatic needs and aesthetic 
interests. The project stresses that 
these incentives are only of value if 
they align with these needs and 
interests. They look primarily at avian 
habitat and diversity in doing so.115

The project brings the potential 
for enhanced ecologically healthy 
communities directly to people’s 
doorsteps. Residential yards take up a 
considerable amount of space within 
the urban matrix, and in doing so 
greatly contribute to urban 
ecosystems. This potential is greatly 
increased when yards are linked by 
various strategies into connective 
corridors. Students looked at 
neighborhoods across all scales and 
developed general and site-specific 
guidelines at the site scale, something 
Cerra believes is missing for designers, 

clear, practical urban ecological design 
strategies and methods.116

They have identified through this 
process 8 general guidelines covering…

Landscape network support
Vegetative structure
Site refuge
Avian forage resource support
Pollinator support
Plant diversity
Discrete habitat features
Green infrastructure 

fig.15



37

Critique and take-away
This project displays some of 

the opportunities and constraints of 
working in residential areas. 
Aesthetics seemingly being the 
biggest issue as these landowners 
are willing and enthusiastic enough 
about the benefits of the project to 
voluntarily enroll. I appreciate that it 
brings urban ecosystem health 
directly to citizens doorsteps and 
that it acknowledges the potential in 
residential yards, as well as working 
closely with clients. But I would not 
say it does anything to bring the 
natural processes needed to sustain 
these functions to these people. Or 
even to educate their public on how 

their aesthetic desires could be 
countering their efforts. Their 
guidelines do not imply anything 
innovative. 

fig.16



38

One Drop at a Time
Designer: de la Fleur LLC
Location:  Elmhurst, Illinois
Date:       Completed 2007

Aesthetics

Urban Ecologies

Agency

People and Plants

Managment

One drop at a time is a project 
implemented on a 7500f2 residential 
property in a suburban community in 
Chicago. The homeowner and 
landscape architect (who is also a 
tenant on the property) worked 
closely to convert what was once a 
typical suburban yard consisting of a 
lawn and concrete pathways into a 
series of self-sufficient stormwater 
management strategies.117 Consisting 
of 7 components: a green roof, 
several rain barrels, porous 
pavement, a rain garden, gravel grass 
(a type of porous pavement), a 
cistern, and a bioswale.118 This system 
both captures rainwater and treats 
storm water before it enters storm 
drains. It is estimated that it should 
prevent 85% of water in a one-year 
storm event from entering these 
drains and illuminates the need for 
irrigation.119

As the first of its kind to do this 
within the Chicago suburbs the goal 
of this project was not only to treat 
storm water but to provide an 
example to other residents of how 
these components could be 
incorporated onto their yards and 
what that might look like. Education 
is a big part of the ongoing goals of 
the project.120

The landscape architect 
recognizes that “skepticism and 
ignorance all too often prevent the 
emergence of innovative solutions 
and stand in the way of a “mind-set 
change”. He sees this project as 
contributing to this change, one drop 
at a time.121

Local acceptance of the 
aesthetics of the project was seen as 
a key constraint. How could it step 
outside the box while still satisfying 
the public eye of how a yard should 
look like? To appease this native 
prairie plants were used throughout 
the site, different, but comparable to 
the traditional lawn.122 A 
steppingstone.

Initially seeded (mostly), 
maintenance for the prairie grasses 
involves some weeding and an 
annual spring burn. The burn helps to 
rejuvenate plants as well as enforce 
some level of controlled appearance. 
Not a typical maintenance strategy 
employed in a residential setting, a 
natural area management permit was 
acquired, and the local fire 
department is on hand during the 
process. The project must be well 
accepted because often friends and 
neighbors help with this process.123

It is acknowledged that the 
biggest effects of a system such as 
this is on mass. The more 
homeowners to implement solutions 
like this the bigger the impact, and 
they are the target audience for the 
ongoing education.124 A website 
providing information about 
individual components and regular 
tours on site expose and teach 
people how they too can implement 
these solutions at a residential scale. 
At a local scale it hopes to change 
the perception of what is aesthetic in 
these spaces.125

Critique and take-away
This is an excellent example of a 

project at the residential scale that 
breaks down walls between people 
and their environment by stepping 

outside the box, questioning 
aesthetics and using management 
tactics not often seen at the 
residential scale that are not focused 
on complete control. I see the 
exposer and education component 
as being a very important step in this 
process so that one day it can be 
taken one step further in plant 
species and maintenance.

There is a strong focus on 
metrics throughout the project and 
treating the landscape like a sort of 
machine that I do not think is the 
best approach (though it may be the 
necessary one) to having people 
understand the landscape as a living 
system and appreciate it beyond the 
benefits we receive from it.

fig.17



39

One drop at a time is a project 
implemented on a 7500f2 residential 
property in a suburban community in 
Chicago. The homeowner and 
landscape architect (who is also a 
tenant on the property) worked 
closely to convert what was once a 
typical suburban yard consisting of a 
lawn and concrete pathways into a 
series of self-sufficient stormwater 
management strategies.117 Consisting 
of 7 components: a green roof, 
several rain barrels, porous 
pavement, a rain garden, gravel grass 
(a type of porous pavement), a 
cistern, and a bioswale.118 This system 
both captures rainwater and treats 
storm water before it enters storm 
drains. It is estimated that it should 
prevent 85% of water in a one-year 
storm event from entering these 
drains and illuminates the need for 
irrigation.119

As the first of its kind to do this 
within the Chicago suburbs the goal 
of this project was not only to treat 
storm water but to provide an 
example to other residents of how 
these components could be 
incorporated onto their yards and 
what that might look like. Education 
is a big part of the ongoing goals of 
the project.120

The landscape architect 
recognizes that “skepticism and 
ignorance all too often prevent the 
emergence of innovative solutions 
and stand in the way of a “mind-set 
change”. He sees this project as 
contributing to this change, one drop 
at a time.121

Local acceptance of the 
aesthetics of the project was seen as 
a key constraint. How could it step 
outside the box while still satisfying 
the public eye of how a yard should 
look like? To appease this native 
prairie plants were used throughout 
the site, different, but comparable to 
the traditional lawn.122 A 
steppingstone.

Initially seeded (mostly), 
maintenance for the prairie grasses 
involves some weeding and an 
annual spring burn. The burn helps to 
rejuvenate plants as well as enforce 
some level of controlled appearance. 
Not a typical maintenance strategy 
employed in a residential setting, a 
natural area management permit was 
acquired, and the local fire 
department is on hand during the 
process. The project must be well 
accepted because often friends and 
neighbors help with this process.123

It is acknowledged that the 
biggest effects of a system such as 
this is on mass. The more 
homeowners to implement solutions 
like this the bigger the impact, and 
they are the target audience for the 
ongoing education.124 A website 
providing information about 
individual components and regular 
tours on site expose and teach 
people how they too can implement 
these solutions at a residential scale. 
At a local scale it hopes to change 
the perception of what is aesthetic in 
these spaces.125

Critique and take-away
This is an excellent example of a 

project at the residential scale that 
breaks down walls between people 
and their environment by stepping 

outside the box, questioning 
aesthetics and using management 
tactics not often seen at the 
residential scale that are not focused 
on complete control. I see the 
exposer and education component 
as being a very important step in this 
process so that one day it can be 
taken one step further in plant 
species and maintenance.

There is a strong focus on 
metrics throughout the project and 
treating the landscape like a sort of 
machine that I do not think is the 
best approach (though it may be the 
necessary one) to having people 
understand the landscape as a living 
system and appreciate it beyond the 
benefits we receive from it.

fig.18



40

Grey to Green
Designer: Nigel Dunnett (planting)
Location: Sheffield, UK
Date:        Phase 1 completed in spring 

Aesthetics

Urban Ecologies

Agency

People and Plants

Managment

Grey to Green is an example of a 
project in the public realm. The 
design team for this three-phase 
project included a city council 
member, 2 engineers for highway 
design and urban drainage systems, 
and planting design by Nigel 
Dunnett,126 A leader in innovative 
sustainable planting design.127 The 
goal of the project was to transform 
a particularly old and dull part of the 
city with a complicated and 
congested road network into and 
attractive environment with new 
program for people to go about their 
work and lives in, with sustainable 
urban design systems (SuDs) at the 
center of it all.128 1.3km of old 
roadways will/ have begun to be 
transformed into appealing perennial 
flower meadows, rain gardens, public 
art, and pathways, designed to 

manage stormwater into an area that 
has twice seen flooding.129 Almost 
most impressively the project has 
met its budgets for construction and 
maintenance.130 The project has won 
numerous awards both within 
Sheffield, nationally and 
internationally.131

Nigel Dunnett, who is 
responsible for the planting design in 
the project, is a Professor in the 
Department of Landscape 
Architecture at the University of 
Sheffield. He focuses on an 
ecological approach to planting 
design to create low input but 
dynamic high impact landscapes. 
Where he aims to achieve attractive 
decorative displays, he also looks to 
address climate change and 
sustainability within the same 
designs. At a variety of scales.132

The grey to green project he 
says is “hugely popular, people are 
desperate for this sort of thing in 
their surroundings, about 20% of 
people have changed their daily 
journeys just so that they can 
experience this.”133 The new street 
scape is adding more than just 
quantitative green infrastructure 
benefits, a certain amount of human 
emotional response is reflective in 
this work and it has huge public 
support.134

Critique and take-away
This is an example of how 

landscape architects can add value 
to urban ecologies and human 
experience though immersive, 
naturalistic, (arguably) wild planting 

design, the power of which, and the 
plant life involved should not be 
overlooked.135 This is another 
steppingstone to greater support for 
these types of projects and ones that 
are able to take this one step further.

Though I could find very little 
information on the specifics of the 
plant pallet or the design its-self I 
feel this this is also a good example 
of the constraints of working with the 
public realm. What I see in images is 
a traditional meadow type planting 
with a strong focus on bright showy 
flowers, and there is a large interest 
in how ‘beautiful’ it is. This and a 
strong focus on metrics does nothing 
to re-evaluate our relationships with 
plant life or what we value in them.

fig.20

fig.19



41

Grey to Green is an example of a 
project in the public realm. The 
design team for this three-phase 
project included a city council 
member, 2 engineers for highway 
design and urban drainage systems, 
and planting design by Nigel 
Dunnett,126 A leader in innovative 
sustainable planting design.127 The 
goal of the project was to transform 
a particularly old and dull part of the 
city with a complicated and 
congested road network into and 
attractive environment with new 
program for people to go about their 
work and lives in, with sustainable 
urban design systems (SuDs) at the 
center of it all.128 1.3km of old 
roadways will/ have begun to be 
transformed into appealing perennial 
flower meadows, rain gardens, public 
art, and pathways, designed to 

manage stormwater into an area that 
has twice seen flooding.129 Almost 
most impressively the project has 
met its budgets for construction and 
maintenance.130 The project has won 
numerous awards both within 
Sheffield, nationally and 
internationally.131

Nigel Dunnett, who is 
responsible for the planting design in 
the project, is a Professor in the 
Department of Landscape 
Architecture at the University of 
Sheffield. He focuses on an 
ecological approach to planting 
design to create low input but 
dynamic high impact landscapes. 
Where he aims to achieve attractive 
decorative displays, he also looks to 
address climate change and 
sustainability within the same 
designs. At a variety of scales.132

The grey to green project he 
says is “hugely popular, people are 
desperate for this sort of thing in 
their surroundings, about 20% of 
people have changed their daily 
journeys just so that they can 
experience this.”133 The new street 
scape is adding more than just 
quantitative green infrastructure 
benefits, a certain amount of human 
emotional response is reflective in 
this work and it has huge public 
support.134

Critique and take-away
This is an example of how 

landscape architects can add value 
to urban ecologies and human 
experience though immersive, 
naturalistic, (arguably) wild planting 

design, the power of which, and the 
plant life involved should not be 
overlooked.135 This is another 
steppingstone to greater support for 
these types of projects and ones that 
are able to take this one step further.

Though I could find very little 
information on the specifics of the 
plant pallet or the design its-self I 
feel this this is also a good example 
of the constraints of working with the 
public realm. What I see in images is 
a traditional meadow type planting 
with a strong focus on bright showy 
flowers, and there is a large interest 
in how ‘beautiful’ it is. This and a 
strong focus on metrics does nothing 
to re-evaluate our relationships with 
plant life or what we value in them.

fig.21



42

Natur-Park Südgelände
Designer: Planning Group ÖkoCon &

Planland
Location: District of Tempelhof, Berlin,

Germany
Date:      Opened 2000

Aesthetics

Urban Ecologies

Agency

People and Plants

Managment

Once a working railyard, 
Südgelände is now an 18-hectare 
park that offers space for recreation 
and biodiversity. It is one of the first 
parks in Germany, overcome with 
spontaneous vegetation, to become 
classified as a landscape and nature 
conservation area.136

The railway, built in 1889, closed 
in 1952. From that point until the 
1980s it was relatively unvisited by 
humans. Urban and local plant life 
moved in a began to reclaim the site, 
over time in became home to a 
variety of endangered and rare plants 
and animals.137

At the beginning of the 1980s 
there were plans to clear the site and 
re-establish a train station. Due to 
public protests however the area was 
protected. Not only does it offer a 
space for conservation and citizens 
to come together, the park also 
offers space for artists: sculptors, 
painters, photographers, and graffiti 
artist alike. The left-over remnants of 
the past railway are left throughout 
the site and often made into 
features.138 Layering the past with the 
dynamic processes that will shape 
the site in its future.

Goals for this project were 
based on this merging of culture and 
wilderness. While the need for 
conservation and the benefits the 
park supplies are recognized, so is 
the need to promote public 
awareness. Though most of the park 
visitors are allowed to roam free and 
explore, other areas that are cut off 
from the public are allowed to 
continue on their growth as they 
would, while in other places 
succession is managed.139

Due to this it was decided that  
some areas of the park would be 
subjected to a maintenance regimen 
to maintain the conditions certain 
rare plants and animals require. This 
was not done with-out some 
backlash, it being thought of by 
some as ‘a kind of fascism’.140

Despite this a range of 
management tactics were put in 
place. Initially some plants were 
thinned and removed, and since 1997 
sheep have periodically been allowed 
to graze in some of the meadows. 
Some areas of the park are plowed 
annually, breaking up the ground to 
reinitiate succession.141

Critique and take-away 
This is an example of the 

benefits of spontaneous plant life 

being taken into account and valued. 
Not only by designers but by citizens. 
The design of the park aims to 
connect and restore relationships 
between people and plants (‘wild’ 
plants), it begins to do this by 
making it accessible and raising 
awareness. The park has a new kind 
of beauty in its urban expression that 
has been well excepted by urban 
residents.142

Throughout the park plant life is 
allowed to thrive and move at its will 
with minor maintenance 
interventions. I would argue that 
these are passive, adaptable, and 
thoughtful collaborations between 
the human and the plant to 
encourage species diversity. 
Especially with the use of sheep and 
plowing, the plant still has every right 
to move and act as it would. The 
type, and shape of the plant is not 
being determined.

fig.22



43

43

Once a working railyard, 
Südgelände is now an 18-hectare 
park that offers space for recreation 
and biodiversity. It is one of the first 
parks in Germany, overcome with 
spontaneous vegetation, to become 
classified as a landscape and nature 
conservation area.136

The railway, built in 1889, closed 
in 1952. From that point until the 
1980s it was relatively unvisited by 
humans. Urban and local plant life 
moved in a began to reclaim the site, 
over time in became home to a 
variety of endangered and rare plants 
and animals.137

At the beginning of the 1980s 
there were plans to clear the site and 
re-establish a train station. Due to 
public protests however the area was 
protected. Not only does it offer a 
space for conservation and citizens 
to come together, the park also 
offers space for artists: sculptors, 
painters, photographers, and graffiti 
artist alike. The left-over remnants of 
the past railway are left throughout 
the site and often made into 
features.138 Layering the past with the 
dynamic processes that will shape 
the site in its future.

Goals for this project were 
based on this merging of culture and 
wilderness. While the need for 
conservation and the benefits the 
park supplies are recognized, so is 
the need to promote public 
awareness. Though most of the park 
visitors are allowed to roam free and 
explore, other areas that are cut off 
from the public are allowed to 
continue on their growth as they 
would, while in other places 
succession is managed.139

Due to this it was decided that  
some areas of the park would be 
subjected to a maintenance regimen 
to maintain the conditions certain 
rare plants and animals require. This 
was not done with-out some 
backlash, it being thought of by 
some as ‘a kind of fascism’.140

Despite this a range of 
management tactics were put in 
place. Initially some plants were 
thinned and removed, and since 1997 
sheep have periodically been allowed 
to graze in some of the meadows. 
Some areas of the park are plowed 
annually, breaking up the ground to 
reinitiate succession.141

Critique and take-away 
This is an example of the 

benefits of spontaneous plant life 

being taken into account and valued. 
Not only by designers but by citizens. 
The design of the park aims to 
connect and restore relationships 
between people and plants (‘wild’ 
plants), it begins to do this by 
making it accessible and raising 
awareness. The park has a new kind 
of beauty in its urban expression that 
has been well excepted by urban 
residents.142

Throughout the park plant life is 
allowed to thrive and move at its will 
with minor maintenance 
interventions. I would argue that 
these are passive, adaptable, and 
thoughtful collaborations between 
the human and the plant to 
encourage species diversity. 
Especially with the use of sheep and 
plowing, the plant still has every right 
to move and act as it would. The 
type, and shape of the plant is not 
being determined.

fig.23



44

Questions Objectives Goals
How will aesthetics play a role 
in new considerations for 
spatial arrangements

What are passive, adaptable, 
and thoughtful collaborations 
between the human and the 
plant

What is the new beauty in 
urban expression?

Enhance ecological health of 
communities

Change the perception of what 
is aesthetic

Provide alternatives to the 
status quo 

Investigate maintenance 
regimes not typical to 
residential settings.

add value to urban ecologies 
and human experience though 
immersive, naturalistic, wild 
planting design

Connect and restore 
relationships between people 
and plants

Incorporate a seed bank for 
surrounding areas

Naturalized vegetation

Incorporate spontaneous plants 
and dynamics processes into 
urban landscapes

Staged public awareness and 
education

Public engagement to promote 
a sense of ownership

Look at neighborhoods a 
crossed all scales

Implement management 
practices for a range of 
successional stages

Allow plant life to thrive and 
move at its will



45



46

I imagine this project materializing 
into a series of guidelines for 
residence within the site, and 
displaying how these guidelines act 
out over a set period of time. Leading 
up to this there will likely be a 
phasing period over a set number of 
years, each phase will explore…

 A location within the site
An educational 
component/cultural shift

 Stakeholders
 Opportunities and constraints  

 Plant movement and  
transformations

As it relates to plant agency, 
aesthetics, urban ecologies, and 
management.

In the process of achieving this more 
research into professionals working in 
these realms within the field will be 
conducted. Focusing on a continuum 
of precedent research for more 
examples of work done around…

 Movement
 Natural processes 
 Plant agency
 Participatory design
 Public education
 Domestic settings

Determining a method of 
representation will be critical in 
delivering the message of movement 
and transformations. As well as a way 
of working and exploring ideas that 
will uphold this. This could be 
communicated through way of maps, 
sections, materials, and animations. 

DESIGN METHODOLOGY



47



48

December January

18

GP1 Report

Ongoing Research

Site Selection

Site Analysis

Week 3 
in-progress reveiw

Schemetic Design
- connectivity
- phasing
- park/boulevards/yards
- plant movement 

- precedents
- maintenance techniques
- plants, current and future

PROJECTED SCHEDULE



49

Febuary March April

Week 6 
mid-term reveiw

Week 9 
in-progress reveiw

Week 12 
SUBSTANTIALS

Week15  
final reviews

Detailed Design

Production

- managment techniques
- park/boulevards/yards
- plant movement



50



 ‘Streets for Change’ would be a 
Community wide, city run project, 
aimed at changing perceptions of 
aesthetics in the urban landscape, 
values held around plant life, and 
where we place ourselves as humans 
within natural systems. For the 
purpose of creating better 
connected, dynamic, ephemeral 
spaces that reflect our changing 
values of today and in turn combat 
the undesirable effects of 
urbanization.

51

Streets for Change



52



 Treatment of plants in the urban landscape is focused on preserving an 
image and controlling the unknown. Plants are subject to what we find visually 
appealing and often pushed to the background, unnoticed by many.

 These aesthetic following of this dates back to the early origins of our 
profession and is a reflection of the picturesque141. The maintenance practises 
drawn below uphold this aesthetic and are often labor intensive and require 
high amounts of inputs.

 Excessive use of water. Large amounts of city drinking water is used to 
irrigate lawns and flower gardens where there is increasingly lower supplies 
due to dense populations and climate change. During the hottest times of the 
year Vancouver residence increase their water intake by 50% largely due to 
lawn irrigation.142 

53

Current Practises and Impacts 



 The use of Pesticides and fertilizers to keep garden plants healthy and 
attractive pose health risks to people and the environment. The list is long, but 
often they pollute water ways, negatively effecting beneficial non targeted 
species locally and cumulatively on a much larger scale.

 The Ornamental horticulture industry is worth roughly $14.48 billion 
dollars in Canada (2009). The largest of all horticulture sectors143. Production  
is degrading to land, large areas of which are often constantly in production. 
Greenhouses use large amounts of energy for heating and produce high rates 
of CO2 emissions. They have a high consumption of water, pesticides, and 
fertilizers at a very large scale.144 Some plants are transported over long 
distances, and some are planted with the intent of having them for only on 
season.

54



 Many of the ornamental plants, particularly annual plants, produced in 
these nursery's do not support and house wildlife or pollinators, often by 
means of the traits we have bred them for145. On top of this, grass and some 
shrubs are often trimmed before they have the chance to flower or produce 
fruit.

 The soils found in our urban spaces are dramatically altered, compacted, 
low on organic material, and high in toxins. Manufactured horticultural soils 
used in garden beds and lawns have high ecological footprints, being largely 
composed of sand and peat. They decompose quickly and have low water and 
nutrient retention.146 Leading to increased use of water, pesticides, and 
fertilizers. The trend to remove leaf litter and other decaying plant material in 
urban landscapes is in direct opposition to producing healthy sustainable soils. 

55



 Poor soil quality as well as large amounts on impervious surfaces leads 
to large amounts of, often, toxic storm water making its way into water bodies 
and water systems, risking max capacity. Healthy soils and layered vegetation 
can help filter pollutants and retain water. 147

 Cities are responsible for 70% of the worlds CO2 emissions. Plants can 
help offset this by taking in and storing carbon in their leaves and stems and in 
turn storing it in the soil when they die. Vegetation cover throughout the 
urban framework currently trends towards being sparse, lacking in structural 
diversity, decay, and 
maintained to one 
state. Increased 
vegetation cover, 
encouraging plants that 
will thrive, as well as 
fast growing plants in 
structurally diverse 
communities increases 
carbon sequestration, 
as well as reducing 
temperatures within 
city spaces.148

 To top all of this 
many hours of labor are 
put in and paid for by 
residents and cities., to 
uphold what is truly an 
unsustainable image.

56



Plant Movement Globally

 Humans, are deeply woven into 
ecological processes. Our inability to 
see ourselves as incorporated in 
these systems has, in part, led us to 
where we are today. The movement 
of people to North America is in 
direct correlation with the movement 
of plants and rise in global 
temperatures (see figure 24).

 Many of the plants in our urban 
landscapes were introduced to these 
places by people, both intentionally 
and unintentionally. Having drastic 

effects on the ecologies of these 
places, for better or for worse. This 
will continue as temperatures 
continue to rise and plants migrate 
north. It is predicted, and currently 
being seen that temperatures will 
rise faster then plants can migrate, 
causing some to go extinct. Assisted 
migration is an option. Continuing 
the human induced exchange of 
plant material around the globe.149

fig. 24

fig. 25

Predicted shift in USDA plant hardiness zones from 2010 -2040

57



Public parks

Single family dwellings

Two or more family dwellings

Commercail/ Industrial

57% Private 
Property

Vancouver

fig.23

Vancouver consists largely of single 
family dwellings accompanied by 
domestic yards. Where only a 
fraction is public parks. Private 
residential property already plays a 
significant role in urban ecosystems, 
yet they receive very little 
attention.150 It is due to this and an 
abundance of these types of spaces 
in cities around the world that this 
project considers residential areas.  

 The project looks at public 
park space, and public ‘in-between’ 
spaces such as boulevards. For their 
contributed ecological value and 
interface with citizens.
 Joan Nassauer writes ‘The 
aesthetic of care is the beauty we 
notice in everyday experience’.151

 Creating a more dynamic 
aesthetic, and thus landscape, that 
better reflects natural processes, 
requires carrying out our lives in 
spaces that better reflect the issues 
of today. It invites active participation 
from citizens.
 The location of a site is not of 
great importance to the project. 
however typologies and plant 
considerations have been made 
based of of Vancouver’s WestSide.

58

Where



Vancouver consists largely of single 
family dwellings accompanied by 
domestic yards. Where only a 
fraction is public parks. Private 
residential property already plays a 
significant role in urban ecosystems, 
yet they receive very little 
attention.150 It is due to this and an 
abundance of these types of spaces 
in cities around the world that this 
project considers residential areas.  

 The project looks at public 
park space, and public ‘in-between’ 
spaces such as boulevards. For their 
contributed ecological value and 
interface with citizens.
 Joan Nassauer writes ‘The 
aesthetic of care is the beauty we 
notice in everyday experience’.151

 Creating a more dynamic 
aesthetic, and thus landscape, that 
better reflects natural processes, 
requires carrying out our lives in 
spaces that better reflect the issues 
of today. It invites active participation 
from citizens.
 The location of a site is not of 
great importance to the project. 
however typologies and plant 
considerations have been made 
based of of Vancouver’s WestSide.

59



Habitat 
Fragmentation

Soil Health

Air Quality Urban Heat

Pollinator 
Decline

Stormwater

High Inputs

GlobalizationClimate
change

Why

Improved urban
ecologies

Can create...

Foraging
opportunities

New relationships
with plant life

Migrating 
gardens

Dynamic 
ephemeral

experiences

Re-framing
common plants

Acting in 
everyday
spaces

Incouraging 
novel ecologies

Managing
succession

Utilizing new/ 
uncommon
managment

practises

Time Education

Community
Engagement

Will require...

Creative Collarbor
ati

on
s

Agency of 
PLANTS

New HUMAN 
agency

Static treatment 
of plant life

Desire for 
control

Picturesque
landscape
aesthetic

Humans as
seperate from

natural 
systems

Plants idolized 
over others

Scientific
understanding 

of plant life

Problem

Landscape architect Rosetta 
Elkin who’s work involves looking at 
what we can do with plants, what 
plants are actually doing, and the 
agency they have on their own refers 

to this new human-plant relationship 
where plants are allowed their 
agency as ‘creative collaborations’152. 

Framework

60



Succession

Possible ways
to intervene

Possible
outcomes

Herbaceous Shrub Tree

Seed Cut Back Burn Graze Dig Mow Plant

 Plants change and move, and it is generally unpredictable. And this is 
ok, encouraged actually. This has been translated into the diagram below 
where there are multiple ways to intervene, or, that is, for the human to 
collaborate with plant communities with more passive management strategies 
that could have numerous possible outcomes.

Passive management practices that are human induced but not dictating 
could be: 

61



 Succession is generally an 
unpredictable process. The rate and 
stages of which depends on many 
different factors. For the purposes of 
this project I have divided the first 
stages of this process into three 
general communities. Herbaceous, 
shrub, and pioneer tree. 

 Much of what is done in 
conventional landscape maintenance 
aims at preventing these processes. 
Working within it and creating a 
range of these states across the 
urban landscape would provide the 
full range of benefits and create 

steppingstones for animals, birds, 
and other materials and processes to 
move through. 

 Each community contributes 
to various ecological processes, and 
there is definitely overlap but in 
general:

1st 2nd 3rd

Early
Herbaceous

Herbaceous Shrub Pioneer tree
species

1st

Early
Herbaceous

Herbaceous

These communities are 

beneficial in improving 

soil quality by 

accumulating soil 

nutrients. They are 

valuable on compacted 

sites and sites with 

erosion problems.   

More established and 

balanced herbaceous 

communities are 

beneficial to pollinators. 

   

62

Plant assemblages and ecological benifits



Shrub

Woody plants become 

particularly valuable 

as nesting and food 

sources for animals 

and birds.   

 

The addition of 

fast-growing trees 

greatly increases the 

amount of carbon being 

sequestered from the 

atmosphere. As well 

providing nesting to 

other kinds of birds and 

being more effective in 

reducing urban 

temperatures.   

  

 

Pioneer tree
species

63



 Succession as it might take 
place in a typically maintained urban 
space if we were to just stop 
maintaining or managing it at all.  
Management interventions would 
take place at different points within 
this process.

https://vimeo.com/416035390 

 Individual site conditions are a 
huge contributor to the outcome – 
that is the arrangement of the plant 
community and thus its ecological 
contributions - in terms of the plant's 
agency, and the management 
decisions made on behalf of the 
human (and its agency). As this is 
incredibly difficult to do 

Slope Compacted soil Saturated soil Dry and sunny Shade

Snowberry
Clover 
Quack grass
Ivy
Poplar
Ocean spray

Dandelion 
Clover
Plantain weed

Poplar
Sedge sp.
Douglas aster
Willow  
Salmon berry
Elderberry
Pacific crabapple 

Ocean spray
Queen Anne’s lace 
Yarrow
Douglas aster
Mahonia
Sumac
Western fescue  

Sword fern
Vine maple
Mahonia
mosses 

comprehensively at the scale of this 
project it is not mentioned beyond 
here. Above are lists of some plants 
(by no means exhaustive) that could 
be found in some common site 
conditions or that may be beneficial 
to plant or seed there.

64

Site Conditions



65



66



The three-phase program takes 
place over 30 years, a generation. 
Each phase engages a different space 
and introduces the public to a new 
group of plants and new ways to 
appreciate them.

67

The Program



Phase 1 takes place in existing 
park spaces, Parks are already spaces 
with a purpose, set aside that people 
go to with intent. This makes them 
good places to integrate displays for 
public education. 

68

Phase 1



Niches: 
A topography and 
range of 
conditions is 
created, and an 
even seed mix is 
applied. Over time 
plants move to 
their suited 
conditions.

Cues of care: 
Plants are 
planted/seeded in 
some form of 
container that is 
allowed to 
degrade, soil 
erode, and new 
plants move into.

Patterns: 
Plants are planted 
in rows or some 
other pattern, and 
the public watches 
knowingly as the 
plants rearrange 
themselves.

Erode

Degrade

In this phase people start to 
become accustom to the disorderly 
aesthetic, learn about new 
management techniques, and about 
plant movement and change. 

  
Some ideas for interactive displays 
could be… 

69



This is one example of a plant profile you might find on an online 
platform. These profiles focus on  re-framing plants away from a focus on 
aesthetics and aesthetic care. Illustrated to indicate the plants many different 
forms, they provide basic information on how the plant moves through the 
landscape, and the functions it provides. Not just to humans but also to 
animals and other processes. 

Online: 
Signage directs 
people to 
websites and 
social media 
pages with further 
information, ideas, 
and inspiration.  

70



71



Further links provide more information on management…

Not all introduced species found in these spaces can be treated equally. 
Some are simply too aggressive. This does not necessarily mean they should 
not exist and do not have some positive contributions, just that in numbers 
they are too strong and require some special attention. 

 This flow chart and management plan for blackberry is not an attempt 
to totally eradicate (though there is a small possibility it could lead to that) 

A B
72



but to encourage other plant communities to move in and create more 
balance. The bottom rows show a variety of possible arrangements of these 
plant communities with the combined agency of the plant and of the human. 
They are by no means comprehensive or a finished product.

C
73



A

74



B

75



76



C

77



 In Phase 2 people continue to 
become more a custom to the 
aesthetic and types of plants.
Taking place in the in-between and 
sometime under looked spaces in our 
cities such as boulevards, greenways 
and other spaces people pass though 
daily, making them the ideal next 
steppingstone in the program. 

78

Phase 2



 The communal nature of these 
spaces makes them a good place to 
introduce foraging as a legitimate 
opportunity and community activity. 

 Management in these spaces is 
centered around plants that are 
edible for humans. 

https://vimeo.com/416049207

79



80



 Phase 3, 20 years into the 
program takes place in the front and 
backyards of the citizens themselves.  
Yards are places where people have 
their very own little (square) piece of 
the natural world under their own 
control. What these places look like 
are a direct reflection of the person 
themselves and of our collective 
values. Though often treated like 
little boxes they are in reality all 
connected.

 In this phase people are more 
excepting of the aesthetic and type 
of plant life. The linear nature of the 
previous phase causes them to act as 
linear seed banks, spreading into 
yards. Slowly households begin to 
signup for the program as this look 
and the management supporting it 
becomes the new cue of good 
citizenship to anyone passing by.

81

Phase 3



 At this time, as the public has 
watched plants move around their 
community and learned of their 
origins, there is an understanding 
that theses spaces are all connected, 
and the role humans play within this. 
With direction on which species to 
introduce, yellow indicates 
opportunities to introduce (or not) 
plants for assisted migration north 
with rising temperatures and climate 
change. 
 Each the flowcharts starts with 
a general landscape typology and 
indicates possible management 
interventions to amend the site. The 
bottom rows show a variety of 
possible arrangements of these plant 
communities with the combined 
agency of the plant and of the 
human. They are by no means 
comprehensive or a finished product.

82



83



In this example of cultivated soil one 
option is to seed the area and as the 
herbaceous community grows there 
is another option to burn or mow it 
maintaining a herbaceous community, 
or it can be left and allow woody 
plants to move in over time.

84



85



In the case of existing dense 
horticultural vegetation there are 
several options: If the area was to be 
grazed presumably the sheep or 
goats would eat most everything 
except for larger woody plants. Some 
of which would grow back but also 
making space for other plants from 
off site or that were previously 
suppressed to grow. This could be 
encouraged by seeding or planting.

86



87



Demonstration of what some of 
these practises could look like...

https://vimeo.com/416049207

88



89



https://vimeo.com/416049207

90



 This program does not strip people from being able to express 
themselves, their values, and desires. Management plans could be configured 
to favor different functions.
 
 It should be noted that many plants have agency in more then one area, 
one plant many be a food source to humans, valuable to pollinators, and food 
and nesting habitat for birds and animals, just to name a few, and this is of 
course strengthened in communities. 

 

“The Foodie”
A yard for the bird 
or animal lover 
would have 
greater vertical 
stratification, 
shrubby areas for 
nesting, and 
berries for food.

“Save the Bees”
Someone 
particularly 
concerned with 
the current state 
of pollinators 
might favor more 
of a meadow with 
flowering 
herbaceous plants.

“The Bird Lover”
Those who love to 
cook might 
selectively 
manage for plants 
edible to humans. 
This yard might 
have fruit trees 
and grassy areas 
for foraging 
herbaceous plants. 

91



Education

The 
in between

“The Foodie”

Not Participating

92



 When all of this is put together 
we have a system where plants are 
allowed to more move freely 
throughout the urban landscape and 
are valued for their species, forms, 
and placement, as having agency and 
a valuable role to play, instead of 
being held back by current aesthetic 
preferences. Creating places that are 
more resilient and act towards 
mitigating local and global 
environmental issues facing us today, 
as opposed to contributing to them. 

 With new ways to care for our 
own small pieces of the natural world 
people and plants work together to 
create new experiences and 
ecologically robust landscapes. 

“Save the Bees”

“The Bird Lover”

93



94

1. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for
Urban Design”
2. Milligan, “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene”
3. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
4. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
5. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”; Pavao-Zuckerman, “The Nature of 
Urban Soils and Their Role in Ecological Restoration in Cities.”; Gandy, 
“Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to 
Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism.”
6. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World.”
7. Robinson, “Ecosystem Services Provided by Urban Spontaneous 
Vegetation.”
8. Cerra, “Emerging Strategies for Voluntary Urban Ecological Stewardship 
on Private Property.”
9. Dunnett, “Introduction to Naturalistic Planting in Urban Landscapes”
10. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
11. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
12. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
13. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
14. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
15. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
16. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
17. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
18. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
19. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
20. Darwin, The Power of Movement in Plants
21. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
22. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
23. “Agency (Philosophy).”
24. Doody, “Performing Weeds: Gardening, Plant Agencies and Urban Plant 
Conservation”
25. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
26. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
27. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
28. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
29. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”; Elkin, “Working with 
Plant Life”

30. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
31. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
32. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
33. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
34. Milligan, “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene”
35. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
36. Parsons, “Conflict between Ecological Sustainability and Environmental 
Aesthetics: Conundrum,Canärd or Curiosity.”
37. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference”
38. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
39. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
40. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference.”
41. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
42. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference”
43. Meyer, “Sustaining Beauty. The Performance of Appearance: A Manifesto 
in Three Parts”
44. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”

45. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”
46. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”
47. Jones, “Gilles Clément Revisited: Biology, Art and Ecology”
48. Alberti, Advances in Urban Ecology: Integrating Humans and Ecological 
Processes in Urban Ecosystems
49. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
50. Del Tredici, “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for the Northeast”
51. Kingsbury, “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design”
52. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
53. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
54. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
55. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
56. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
57. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
58. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
59. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
60. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
61. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”

62. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”; Del Tredici, 
“The Flora of the Future”
63. Ignatieva, “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and Similarity of Landscape 
Design Language in Former Colonial Cities”
64. Ignatieva, “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and Similarity of Landscape 
Design Language in Former Colonial Cities”
65. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
66. Dunnett, “Communicating Naturalistic Plantings: Plans and 
Specifications”
67. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
68. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
69. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
70. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
71. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
72. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
73. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
74. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
75. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
76. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
77. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
78. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
79. Dunnett, “The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities”
80. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”; Dunnett, 
“The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities”
81. Kingsbury, “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design.”
82. Gandy, “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.”
83. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
84. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
85. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
86. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
87. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”

88. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
89. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
90. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
91. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
92. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
93. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
94. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
95. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
96. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
97. Del Tredici, “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for the Northeast”
98. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
99. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri 
Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits 
to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
100. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
101. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
102. Koningen, “Creative Management”
103. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
104. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
105. Scheffler, “Parc Henri Matisse.”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles 
Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles 
Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
106. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
107. Gandy, “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.”; Gandy, 
“Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to 
Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
108. Scheffler, “Parc Henri Matisse.”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles 
Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles 
Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
109. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
110. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
111. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 

Urbanism”
112. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
113. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
114. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
115. Kim, “One Drop At A Time.”
116. fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
117. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
118. “ASLA 2009 Professional Awards”
119. fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
120. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
121. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”; fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
122. “ASLA 2009 Professional Awards”
123. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
124. “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield”
125. Nigel Dunnett, “About”
126. “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield”
127. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
128. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
129. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
130. Nigel Dunnett, “About”
131. Landscape and the City
132. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
133. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
134. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”; Kowarik, Natur-Park 
Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in 
Berlin.”
135. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”
136. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”; Kowarik, Natur-Park 
Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in 
Berlin.”
137. Kowarik, Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation 
in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.”
138. Lachmund, “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.”
139. Lachmund, “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.”
140. Kowarik, Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation 
in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.”
141. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames.”
142. “How We Use Water”

143. Canadian Ornamental Horticulture Alliance. “The Impact of Ornamental 
Horticulture on Canada’s Economy”
144. Wainwright, “Environmental Impact of Production Horticulture”
145. Wilde, “State of the Science and Challenges of Breeding Landscape 
Plants with Ecological Function.”
146. Urban, “Up by Roots: Healthy Soils and Tress in the Built Environment”; 
Craul, “Urban Soil in Landscape Design”
147. Bartens, “Can Urban Tree Roots Improve Infiltration through Compacted 
Subsoils for Stormwater Management?”
148. Staff Writers. “Structurally Complex Forests Better at Carbon 
Sequestration.”; Ontl, “Forest Management for Carbon Sequestration and 
Climate Adaptation”
149. Neilson, “Forecasting Regional to Global Plant Migration in Response to 
Climate Change”
150. Cerra, “The Yardworks Project: Developing Urban Ecological Design 
Strategies for Residential Private Property”
151. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
152. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”

 

 



95

1. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for
Urban Design”
2. Milligan, “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene”
3. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
4. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
5. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”; Pavao-Zuckerman, “The Nature of 
Urban Soils and Their Role in Ecological Restoration in Cities.”; Gandy, 
“Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to 
Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism.”
6. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World.”
7. Robinson, “Ecosystem Services Provided by Urban Spontaneous 
Vegetation.”
8. Cerra, “Emerging Strategies for Voluntary Urban Ecological Stewardship 
on Private Property.”
9. Dunnett, “Introduction to Naturalistic Planting in Urban Landscapes”
10. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
11. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
12. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
13. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
14. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
15. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
16. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
17. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
18. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
19. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
20. Darwin, The Power of Movement in Plants
21. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
22. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
23. “Agency (Philosophy).”
24. Doody, “Performing Weeds: Gardening, Plant Agencies and Urban Plant 
Conservation”
25. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
26. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
27. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
28. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
29. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”; Elkin, “Working with 
Plant Life”

30. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
31. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
32. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
33. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
34. Milligan, “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene”
35. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
36. Parsons, “Conflict between Ecological Sustainability and Environmental 
Aesthetics: Conundrum,Canärd or Curiosity.”
37. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference”
38. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
39. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
40. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference.”
41. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
42. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference”
43. Meyer, “Sustaining Beauty. The Performance of Appearance: A Manifesto 
in Three Parts”
44. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”

45. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”
46. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”
47. Jones, “Gilles Clément Revisited: Biology, Art and Ecology”
48. Alberti, Advances in Urban Ecology: Integrating Humans and Ecological 
Processes in Urban Ecosystems
49. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
50. Del Tredici, “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for the Northeast”
51. Kingsbury, “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design”
52. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
53. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
54. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
55. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
56. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
57. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
58. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
59. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
60. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
61. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”

62. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”; Del Tredici, 
“The Flora of the Future”
63. Ignatieva, “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and Similarity of Landscape 
Design Language in Former Colonial Cities”
64. Ignatieva, “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and Similarity of Landscape 
Design Language in Former Colonial Cities”
65. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
66. Dunnett, “Communicating Naturalistic Plantings: Plans and 
Specifications”
67. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
68. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
69. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
70. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
71. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
72. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
73. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
74. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
75. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
76. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
77. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
78. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
79. Dunnett, “The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities”
80. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”; Dunnett, 
“The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities”
81. Kingsbury, “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design.”
82. Gandy, “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.”
83. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
84. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
85. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
86. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
87. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”

88. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
89. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
90. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
91. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
92. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
93. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
94. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
95. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
96. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
97. Del Tredici, “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for the Northeast”
98. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
99. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri 
Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits 
to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
100. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
101. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
102. Koningen, “Creative Management”
103. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
104. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
105. Scheffler, “Parc Henri Matisse.”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles 
Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles 
Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
106. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
107. Gandy, “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.”; Gandy, 
“Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to 
Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
108. Scheffler, “Parc Henri Matisse.”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles 
Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles 
Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
109. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
110. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
111. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 

Urbanism”
112. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
113. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
114. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
115. Kim, “One Drop At A Time.”
116. fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
117. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
118. “ASLA 2009 Professional Awards”
119. fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
120. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
121. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”; fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
122. “ASLA 2009 Professional Awards”
123. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
124. “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield”
125. Nigel Dunnett, “About”
126. “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield”
127. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
128. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
129. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
130. Nigel Dunnett, “About”
131. Landscape and the City
132. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
133. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
134. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”; Kowarik, Natur-Park 
Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in 
Berlin.”
135. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”
136. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”; Kowarik, Natur-Park 
Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in 
Berlin.”
137. Kowarik, Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation 
in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.”
138. Lachmund, “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.”
139. Lachmund, “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.”
140. Kowarik, Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation 
in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.”
141. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames.”
142. “How We Use Water”

143. Canadian Ornamental Horticulture Alliance. “The Impact of Ornamental 
Horticulture on Canada’s Economy”
144. Wainwright, “Environmental Impact of Production Horticulture”
145. Wilde, “State of the Science and Challenges of Breeding Landscape 
Plants with Ecological Function.”
146. Urban, “Up by Roots: Healthy Soils and Tress in the Built Environment”; 
Craul, “Urban Soil in Landscape Design”
147. Bartens, “Can Urban Tree Roots Improve Infiltration through Compacted 
Subsoils for Stormwater Management?”
148. Staff Writers. “Structurally Complex Forests Better at Carbon 
Sequestration.”; Ontl, “Forest Management for Carbon Sequestration and 
Climate Adaptation”
149. Neilson, “Forecasting Regional to Global Plant Migration in Response to 
Climate Change”
150. Cerra, “The Yardworks Project: Developing Urban Ecological Design 
Strategies for Residential Private Property”
151. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
152. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”

 

 

ENDNOTES



96

1. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for
Urban Design”
2. Milligan, “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene”
3. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
4. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
5. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”; Pavao-Zuckerman, “The Nature of 
Urban Soils and Their Role in Ecological Restoration in Cities.”; Gandy, 
“Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to 
Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism.”
6. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World.”
7. Robinson, “Ecosystem Services Provided by Urban Spontaneous 
Vegetation.”
8. Cerra, “Emerging Strategies for Voluntary Urban Ecological Stewardship 
on Private Property.”
9. Dunnett, “Introduction to Naturalistic Planting in Urban Landscapes”
10. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
11. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
12. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
13. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
14. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
15. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
16. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
17. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
18. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
19. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
20. Darwin, The Power of Movement in Plants
21. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
22. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
23. “Agency (Philosophy).”
24. Doody, “Performing Weeds: Gardening, Plant Agencies and Urban Plant 
Conservation”
25. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
26. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
27. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
28. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
29. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”; Elkin, “Working with 
Plant Life”

30. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
31. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
32. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
33. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
34. Milligan, “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene”
35. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
36. Parsons, “Conflict between Ecological Sustainability and Environmental 
Aesthetics: Conundrum,Canärd or Curiosity.”
37. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference”
38. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
39. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
40. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference.”
41. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
42. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference”
43. Meyer, “Sustaining Beauty. The Performance of Appearance: A Manifesto 
in Three Parts”
44. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”

45. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”
46. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”
47. Jones, “Gilles Clément Revisited: Biology, Art and Ecology”
48. Alberti, Advances in Urban Ecology: Integrating Humans and Ecological 
Processes in Urban Ecosystems
49. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
50. Del Tredici, “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for the Northeast”
51. Kingsbury, “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design”
52. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
53. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
54. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
55. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
56. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
57. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
58. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
59. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
60. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
61. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”

62. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”; Del Tredici, 
“The Flora of the Future”
63. Ignatieva, “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and Similarity of Landscape 
Design Language in Former Colonial Cities”
64. Ignatieva, “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and Similarity of Landscape 
Design Language in Former Colonial Cities”
65. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
66. Dunnett, “Communicating Naturalistic Plantings: Plans and 
Specifications”
67. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
68. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
69. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
70. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
71. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
72. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
73. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
74. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
75. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
76. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
77. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
78. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
79. Dunnett, “The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities”
80. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”; Dunnett, 
“The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities”
81. Kingsbury, “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design.”
82. Gandy, “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.”
83. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
84. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
85. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
86. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
87. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”

88. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
89. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
90. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
91. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
92. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
93. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
94. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
95. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
96. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
97. Del Tredici, “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for the Northeast”
98. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
99. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri 
Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits 
to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
100. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
101. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
102. Koningen, “Creative Management”
103. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
104. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
105. Scheffler, “Parc Henri Matisse.”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles 
Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles 
Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
106. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
107. Gandy, “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.”; Gandy, 
“Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to 
Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
108. Scheffler, “Parc Henri Matisse.”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles 
Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles 
Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
109. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
110. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
111. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 

Urbanism”
112. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
113. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
114. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
115. Kim, “One Drop At A Time.”
116. fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
117. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
118. “ASLA 2009 Professional Awards”
119. fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
120. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
121. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”; fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
122. “ASLA 2009 Professional Awards”
123. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
124. “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield”
125. Nigel Dunnett, “About”
126. “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield”
127. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
128. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
129. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
130. Nigel Dunnett, “About”
131. Landscape and the City
132. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
133. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
134. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”; Kowarik, Natur-Park 
Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in 
Berlin.”
135. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”
136. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”; Kowarik, Natur-Park 
Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in 
Berlin.”
137. Kowarik, Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation 
in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.”
138. Lachmund, “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.”
139. Lachmund, “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.”
140. Kowarik, Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation 
in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.”
141. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames.”
142. “How We Use Water”

143. Canadian Ornamental Horticulture Alliance. “The Impact of Ornamental 
Horticulture on Canada’s Economy”
144. Wainwright, “Environmental Impact of Production Horticulture”
145. Wilde, “State of the Science and Challenges of Breeding Landscape 
Plants with Ecological Function.”
146. Urban, “Up by Roots: Healthy Soils and Tress in the Built Environment”; 
Craul, “Urban Soil in Landscape Design”
147. Bartens, “Can Urban Tree Roots Improve Infiltration through Compacted 
Subsoils for Stormwater Management?”
148. Staff Writers. “Structurally Complex Forests Better at Carbon 
Sequestration.”; Ontl, “Forest Management for Carbon Sequestration and 
Climate Adaptation”
149. Neilson, “Forecasting Regional to Global Plant Migration in Response to 
Climate Change”
150. Cerra, “The Yardworks Project: Developing Urban Ecological Design 
Strategies for Residential Private Property”
151. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
152. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”

 

 



97

1. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for
Urban Design”
2. Milligan, “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene”
3. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
4. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
5. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”; Pavao-Zuckerman, “The Nature of 
Urban Soils and Their Role in Ecological Restoration in Cities.”; Gandy, 
“Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to 
Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism.”
6. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World.”
7. Robinson, “Ecosystem Services Provided by Urban Spontaneous 
Vegetation.”
8. Cerra, “Emerging Strategies for Voluntary Urban Ecological Stewardship 
on Private Property.”
9. Dunnett, “Introduction to Naturalistic Planting in Urban Landscapes”
10. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
11. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
12. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
13. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
14. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
15. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
16. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
17. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
18. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
19. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
20. Darwin, The Power of Movement in Plants
21. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
22. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
23. “Agency (Philosophy).”
24. Doody, “Performing Weeds: Gardening, Plant Agencies and Urban Plant 
Conservation”
25. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
26. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
27. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
28. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
29. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”; Elkin, “Working with 
Plant Life”

30. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
31. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
32. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
33. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
34. Milligan, “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene”
35. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
36. Parsons, “Conflict between Ecological Sustainability and Environmental 
Aesthetics: Conundrum,Canärd or Curiosity.”
37. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference”
38. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
39. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
40. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference.”
41. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
42. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference”
43. Meyer, “Sustaining Beauty. The Performance of Appearance: A Manifesto 
in Three Parts”
44. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”

45. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”
46. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”
47. Jones, “Gilles Clément Revisited: Biology, Art and Ecology”
48. Alberti, Advances in Urban Ecology: Integrating Humans and Ecological 
Processes in Urban Ecosystems
49. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
50. Del Tredici, “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for the Northeast”
51. Kingsbury, “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design”
52. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
53. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
54. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
55. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
56. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
57. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
58. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
59. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
60. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
61. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”

62. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”; Del Tredici, 
“The Flora of the Future”
63. Ignatieva, “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and Similarity of Landscape 
Design Language in Former Colonial Cities”
64. Ignatieva, “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and Similarity of Landscape 
Design Language in Former Colonial Cities”
65. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
66. Dunnett, “Communicating Naturalistic Plantings: Plans and 
Specifications”
67. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
68. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
69. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
70. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
71. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
72. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
73. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
74. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
75. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
76. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
77. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
78. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
79. Dunnett, “The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities”
80. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”; Dunnett, 
“The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities”
81. Kingsbury, “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design.”
82. Gandy, “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.”
83. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
84. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
85. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
86. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
87. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”

88. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
89. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
90. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
91. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
92. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
93. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
94. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
95. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
96. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
97. Del Tredici, “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for the Northeast”
98. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
99. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri 
Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits 
to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
100. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
101. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
102. Koningen, “Creative Management”
103. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
104. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
105. Scheffler, “Parc Henri Matisse.”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles 
Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles 
Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
106. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
107. Gandy, “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.”; Gandy, 
“Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to 
Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
108. Scheffler, “Parc Henri Matisse.”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles 
Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles 
Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
109. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
110. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
111. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 

Urbanism”
112. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
113. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
114. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
115. Kim, “One Drop At A Time.”
116. fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
117. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
118. “ASLA 2009 Professional Awards”
119. fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
120. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
121. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”; fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
122. “ASLA 2009 Professional Awards”
123. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
124. “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield”
125. Nigel Dunnett, “About”
126. “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield”
127. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
128. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
129. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
130. Nigel Dunnett, “About”
131. Landscape and the City
132. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
133. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
134. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”; Kowarik, Natur-Park 
Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in 
Berlin.”
135. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”
136. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”; Kowarik, Natur-Park 
Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in 
Berlin.”
137. Kowarik, Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation 
in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.”
138. Lachmund, “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.”
139. Lachmund, “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.”
140. Kowarik, Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation 
in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.”
141. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames.”
142. “How We Use Water”

143. Canadian Ornamental Horticulture Alliance. “The Impact of Ornamental 
Horticulture on Canada’s Economy”
144. Wainwright, “Environmental Impact of Production Horticulture”
145. Wilde, “State of the Science and Challenges of Breeding Landscape 
Plants with Ecological Function.”
146. Urban, “Up by Roots: Healthy Soils and Tress in the Built Environment”; 
Craul, “Urban Soil in Landscape Design”
147. Bartens, “Can Urban Tree Roots Improve Infiltration through Compacted 
Subsoils for Stormwater Management?”
148. Staff Writers. “Structurally Complex Forests Better at Carbon 
Sequestration.”; Ontl, “Forest Management for Carbon Sequestration and 
Climate Adaptation”
149. Neilson, “Forecasting Regional to Global Plant Migration in Response to 
Climate Change”
150. Cerra, “The Yardworks Project: Developing Urban Ecological Design 
Strategies for Residential Private Property”
151. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
152. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”

 

 



98

1. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for
Urban Design”
2. Milligan, “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene”
3. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
4. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
5. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”; Pavao-Zuckerman, “The Nature of 
Urban Soils and Their Role in Ecological Restoration in Cities.”; Gandy, 
“Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to 
Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism.”
6. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World.”
7. Robinson, “Ecosystem Services Provided by Urban Spontaneous 
Vegetation.”
8. Cerra, “Emerging Strategies for Voluntary Urban Ecological Stewardship 
on Private Property.”
9. Dunnett, “Introduction to Naturalistic Planting in Urban Landscapes”
10. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
11. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
12. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
13. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
14. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
15. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
16. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
17. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
18. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
19. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
20. Darwin, The Power of Movement in Plants
21. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
22. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
23. “Agency (Philosophy).”
24. Doody, “Performing Weeds: Gardening, Plant Agencies and Urban Plant 
Conservation”
25. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
26. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
27. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
28. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
29. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”; Elkin, “Working with 
Plant Life”

30. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
31. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
32. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
33. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
34. Milligan, “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene”
35. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
36. Parsons, “Conflict between Ecological Sustainability and Environmental 
Aesthetics: Conundrum,Canärd or Curiosity.”
37. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference”
38. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
39. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
40. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference.”
41. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
42. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference”
43. Meyer, “Sustaining Beauty. The Performance of Appearance: A Manifesto 
in Three Parts”
44. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”

45. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”
46. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”
47. Jones, “Gilles Clément Revisited: Biology, Art and Ecology”
48. Alberti, Advances in Urban Ecology: Integrating Humans and Ecological 
Processes in Urban Ecosystems
49. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
50. Del Tredici, “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for the Northeast”
51. Kingsbury, “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design”
52. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
53. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
54. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
55. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
56. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
57. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
58. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
59. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
60. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
61. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”

62. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”; Del Tredici, 
“The Flora of the Future”
63. Ignatieva, “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and Similarity of Landscape 
Design Language in Former Colonial Cities”
64. Ignatieva, “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and Similarity of Landscape 
Design Language in Former Colonial Cities”
65. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
66. Dunnett, “Communicating Naturalistic Plantings: Plans and 
Specifications”
67. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
68. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
69. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
70. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
71. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
72. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
73. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
74. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
75. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
76. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
77. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
78. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
79. Dunnett, “The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities”
80. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”; Dunnett, 
“The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities”
81. Kingsbury, “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design.”
82. Gandy, “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.”
83. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
84. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
85. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
86. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
87. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”

88. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
89. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
90. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
91. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
92. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
93. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
94. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
95. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
96. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
97. Del Tredici, “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for the Northeast”
98. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
99. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri 
Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits 
to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
100. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
101. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
102. Koningen, “Creative Management”
103. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
104. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
105. Scheffler, “Parc Henri Matisse.”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles 
Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles 
Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
106. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
107. Gandy, “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.”; Gandy, 
“Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to 
Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
108. Scheffler, “Parc Henri Matisse.”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles 
Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles 
Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
109. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
110. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
111. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 

Urbanism”
112. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
113. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
114. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
115. Kim, “One Drop At A Time.”
116. fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
117. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
118. “ASLA 2009 Professional Awards”
119. fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
120. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
121. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”; fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
122. “ASLA 2009 Professional Awards”
123. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
124. “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield”
125. Nigel Dunnett, “About”
126. “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield”
127. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
128. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
129. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
130. Nigel Dunnett, “About”
131. Landscape and the City
132. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
133. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
134. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”; Kowarik, Natur-Park 
Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in 
Berlin.”
135. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”
136. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”; Kowarik, Natur-Park 
Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in 
Berlin.”
137. Kowarik, Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation 
in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.”
138. Lachmund, “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.”
139. Lachmund, “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.”
140. Kowarik, Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation 
in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.”
141. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames.”
142. “How We Use Water”

143. Canadian Ornamental Horticulture Alliance. “The Impact of Ornamental 
Horticulture on Canada’s Economy”
144. Wainwright, “Environmental Impact of Production Horticulture”
145. Wilde, “State of the Science and Challenges of Breeding Landscape 
Plants with Ecological Function.”
146. Urban, “Up by Roots: Healthy Soils and Tress in the Built Environment”; 
Craul, “Urban Soil in Landscape Design”
147. Bartens, “Can Urban Tree Roots Improve Infiltration through Compacted 
Subsoils for Stormwater Management?”
148. Staff Writers. “Structurally Complex Forests Better at Carbon 
Sequestration.”; Ontl, “Forest Management for Carbon Sequestration and 
Climate Adaptation”
149. Neilson, “Forecasting Regional to Global Plant Migration in Response to 
Climate Change”
150. Cerra, “The Yardworks Project: Developing Urban Ecological Design 
Strategies for Residential Private Property”
151. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
152. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”

 

 



99

1. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for
Urban Design”
2. Milligan, “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene”
3. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
4. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
5. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”; Pavao-Zuckerman, “The Nature of 
Urban Soils and Their Role in Ecological Restoration in Cities.”; Gandy, 
“Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to 
Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism.”
6. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World.”
7. Robinson, “Ecosystem Services Provided by Urban Spontaneous 
Vegetation.”
8. Cerra, “Emerging Strategies for Voluntary Urban Ecological Stewardship 
on Private Property.”
9. Dunnett, “Introduction to Naturalistic Planting in Urban Landscapes”
10. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
11. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
12. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
13. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
14. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
15. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
16. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
17. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
18. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
19. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
20. Darwin, The Power of Movement in Plants
21. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
22. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
23. “Agency (Philosophy).”
24. Doody, “Performing Weeds: Gardening, Plant Agencies and Urban Plant 
Conservation”
25. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
26. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
27. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
28. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
29. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”; Elkin, “Working with 
Plant Life”

30. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
31. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
32. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
33. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
34. Milligan, “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene”
35. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
36. Parsons, “Conflict between Ecological Sustainability and Environmental 
Aesthetics: Conundrum,Canärd or Curiosity.”
37. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference”
38. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
39. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
40. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference.”
41. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
42. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference”
43. Meyer, “Sustaining Beauty. The Performance of Appearance: A Manifesto 
in Three Parts”
44. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”

45. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”
46. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”
47. Jones, “Gilles Clément Revisited: Biology, Art and Ecology”
48. Alberti, Advances in Urban Ecology: Integrating Humans and Ecological 
Processes in Urban Ecosystems
49. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
50. Del Tredici, “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for the Northeast”
51. Kingsbury, “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design”
52. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
53. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
54. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
55. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
56. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
57. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
58. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
59. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
60. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
61. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”

62. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”; Del Tredici, 
“The Flora of the Future”
63. Ignatieva, “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and Similarity of Landscape 
Design Language in Former Colonial Cities”
64. Ignatieva, “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and Similarity of Landscape 
Design Language in Former Colonial Cities”
65. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
66. Dunnett, “Communicating Naturalistic Plantings: Plans and 
Specifications”
67. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
68. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
69. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
70. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
71. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
72. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
73. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
74. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
75. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
76. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
77. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
78. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
79. Dunnett, “The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities”
80. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”; Dunnett, 
“The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities”
81. Kingsbury, “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design.”
82. Gandy, “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.”
83. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
84. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
85. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
86. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
87. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”

88. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
89. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
90. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
91. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
92. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
93. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
94. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
95. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
96. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
97. Del Tredici, “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for the Northeast”
98. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
99. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri 
Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits 
to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
100. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
101. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
102. Koningen, “Creative Management”
103. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
104. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
105. Scheffler, “Parc Henri Matisse.”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles 
Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles 
Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
106. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
107. Gandy, “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.”; Gandy, 
“Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to 
Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
108. Scheffler, “Parc Henri Matisse.”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles 
Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles 
Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
109. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
110. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
111. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 

Urbanism”
112. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
113. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
114. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
115. Kim, “One Drop At A Time.”
116. fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
117. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
118. “ASLA 2009 Professional Awards”
119. fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
120. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
121. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”; fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
122. “ASLA 2009 Professional Awards”
123. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
124. “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield”
125. Nigel Dunnett, “About”
126. “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield”
127. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
128. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
129. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
130. Nigel Dunnett, “About”
131. Landscape and the City
132. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
133. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
134. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”; Kowarik, Natur-Park 
Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in 
Berlin.”
135. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”
136. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”; Kowarik, Natur-Park 
Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in 
Berlin.”
137. Kowarik, Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation 
in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.”
138. Lachmund, “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.”
139. Lachmund, “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.”
140. Kowarik, Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation 
in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.”
141. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames.”
142. “How We Use Water”

143. Canadian Ornamental Horticulture Alliance. “The Impact of Ornamental 
Horticulture on Canada’s Economy”
144. Wainwright, “Environmental Impact of Production Horticulture”
145. Wilde, “State of the Science and Challenges of Breeding Landscape 
Plants with Ecological Function.”
146. Urban, “Up by Roots: Healthy Soils and Tress in the Built Environment”; 
Craul, “Urban Soil in Landscape Design”
147. Bartens, “Can Urban Tree Roots Improve Infiltration through Compacted 
Subsoils for Stormwater Management?”
148. Staff Writers. “Structurally Complex Forests Better at Carbon 
Sequestration.”; Ontl, “Forest Management for Carbon Sequestration and 
Climate Adaptation”
149. Neilson, “Forecasting Regional to Global Plant Migration in Response to 
Climate Change”
150. Cerra, “The Yardworks Project: Developing Urban Ecological Design 
Strategies for Residential Private Property”
151. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
152. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”

 

 



100

1. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for
Urban Design”
2. Milligan, “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene”
3. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
4. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
5. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”; Pavao-Zuckerman, “The Nature of 
Urban Soils and Their Role in Ecological Restoration in Cities.”; Gandy, 
“Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to 
Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism.”
6. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World.”
7. Robinson, “Ecosystem Services Provided by Urban Spontaneous 
Vegetation.”
8. Cerra, “Emerging Strategies for Voluntary Urban Ecological Stewardship 
on Private Property.”
9. Dunnett, “Introduction to Naturalistic Planting in Urban Landscapes”
10. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
11. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
12. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
13. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
14. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
15. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
16. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
17. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
18. Nassar, “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.”
19. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
20. Darwin, The Power of Movement in Plants
21. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
22. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
23. “Agency (Philosophy).”
24. Doody, “Performing Weeds: Gardening, Plant Agencies and Urban Plant 
Conservation”
25. Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin
26. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
27. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
28. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
29. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”; Elkin, “Working with 
Plant Life”

30. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
31. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
32. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
33. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
34. Milligan, “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene”
35. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
36. Parsons, “Conflict between Ecological Sustainability and Environmental 
Aesthetics: Conundrum,Canärd or Curiosity.”
37. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference”
38. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
39. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
40. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference.”
41. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
42. Zhao, “Visual Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological 
Quality and Aesthetic Preference”
43. Meyer, “Sustaining Beauty. The Performance of Appearance: A Manifesto 
in Three Parts”
44. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”

45. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”
46. Spirn, “The Poetics of City and Nature: Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design”
47. Jones, “Gilles Clément Revisited: Biology, Art and Ecology”
48. Alberti, Advances in Urban Ecology: Integrating Humans and Ecological 
Processes in Urban Ecosystems
49. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
50. Del Tredici, “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for the Northeast”
51. Kingsbury, “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design”
52. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
53. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
54. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
55. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
56. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
57. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
58. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
59. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
60. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
61. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”

62. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”; Del Tredici, 
“The Flora of the Future”
63. Ignatieva, “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and Similarity of Landscape 
Design Language in Former Colonial Cities”
64. Ignatieva, “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and Similarity of Landscape 
Design Language in Former Colonial Cities”
65. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
66. Dunnett, “Communicating Naturalistic Plantings: Plans and 
Specifications”
67. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
68. Sanramour, “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense”
69. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
70. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
71. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
72. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
73. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
74. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
75. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
76. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
77. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
78. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
79. Dunnett, “The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities”
80. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”; Dunnett, 
“The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities”
81. Kingsbury, “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design.”
82. Gandy, “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.”
83. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
84. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
85. Del Tredici, “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World”
86. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”
87. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”

88. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
89. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”
90. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
91. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
92. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames”
93. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
94. Elkin, “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life”
95. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
96. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
97. Del Tredici, “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for the Northeast”
98. Del Tredici, “The Flora of the Future”
99. Del Tredici, “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri 
Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits 
to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
100. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
101. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
102. Koningen, “Creative Management”
103. Lokman, “Gardens as Migratory Devices”
104. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
105. Scheffler, “Parc Henri Matisse.”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles 
Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles 
Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
106. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
107. Gandy, “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.”; Gandy, 
“Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to 
Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
108. Scheffler, “Parc Henri Matisse.”; Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles 
Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles 
Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism”
109. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
110. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
111. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 

Urbanism”
112. Gandy, “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism”
113. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
114. Cerra, “The Yardwork’s Project”
115. Kim, “One Drop At A Time.”
116. fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
117. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
118. “ASLA 2009 Professional Awards”
119. fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
120. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
121. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”; fleur, “One Drop at a Time”
122. “ASLA 2009 Professional Awards”
123. Kim, “One Drop At A Time”
124. “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield”
125. Nigel Dunnett, “About”
126. “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield”
127. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
128. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
129. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
130. Nigel Dunnett, “About”
131. Landscape and the City
132. Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases”
133. Hazelwood, “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design”
134. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”; Kowarik, Natur-Park 
Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in 
Berlin.”
135. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”
136. “Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.”; Kowarik, Natur-Park 
Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in 
Berlin.”
137. Kowarik, Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation 
in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.”
138. Lachmund, “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.”
139. Lachmund, “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.”
140. Kowarik, Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking Conservation and Recreation 
in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.”
141. Nassauer, “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames.”
142. “How We Use Water”

143. Canadian Ornamental Horticulture Alliance. “The Impact of Ornamental 
Horticulture on Canada’s Economy”
144. Wainwright, “Environmental Impact of Production Horticulture”
145. Wilde, “State of the Science and Challenges of Breeding Landscape 
Plants with Ecological Function.”
146. Urban, “Up by Roots: Healthy Soils and Tress in the Built Environment”; 
Craul, “Urban Soil in Landscape Design”
147. Bartens, “Can Urban Tree Roots Improve Infiltration through Compacted 
Subsoils for Stormwater Management?”
148. Staff Writers. “Structurally Complex Forests Better at Carbon 
Sequestration.”; Ontl, “Forest Management for Carbon Sequestration and 
Climate Adaptation”
149. Neilson, “Forecasting Regional to Global Plant Migration in Response to 
Climate Change”
150. Cerra, “The Yardworks Project: Developing Urban Ecological Design 
Strategies for Residential Private Property”
151. Nassauer, “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care”
152. Elkin, “Working with Plant Life”

 

 



101

“Agency (Philosophy).” In Wikipedia, December 11, 2019. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Agency_(philosophy)&oldid=9302
54620.

Alberti, M. Advances in Urban Ecology: Integrating Humans and Ecological 
Processes in Urban Ecosystems. New York: Springer, 2008.

“ASLA 2009 Professional Awards,” 2009. 
https://www.asla.org/2009awards/298.html.

Bartens, Julia, Susan D. Day, J. Roger Harris, Joseph E. Dove, and Theresa M. 
Wynn. “Can Urban Tree Roots Improve Infiltration through Compacted 
Subsoils for Stormwater Management?” Journal of Environmental Quality 37, 
no. 6 (November 2008): 2048–57. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2008.0117. 

Canadian Ornamental Horticulture Alliance. “The Impact of Ornamental 
Horticulture on Canada’s Economy”. January 2009. 
https://cnla.ca/uploads/pdf/Deloitte_The-impact-of-ornamental-horticulture-o
n-Canada%E2%80%99s-economy.pdf 

Cerra, Joshua F. “Emerging Strategies for Voluntary Urban Ecological 
Stewardship on Private Property.” Landscape and Urban Planning 157 (January 
2017): 586–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.06.016.

Cerra, Joshua F. “The Yardworks Project: Developing Urban Ecological Design 
Strategies for Residential Private Property.” Edited by Charlene M LeBleu. 
Landscape Research Record, no. 5 (2016): 91–100.

Craul, Phillip J. “Urban Soil in Landscape Design.” New York: Wiley, 1992

Darwin, Charles and Francis, Darwin. The Power of Movement in Plants. New 
York: D. Appleton and Company, 1898.

Del Tredici, Peter. “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World.” In Botanical 
Progress, Horticultural Innovation and Cultural Changes, edited by Michel 
Conan, W. John Kress, Smithsonian Institution, and United States Botanic 
Garden. Washington, D.C. : [Cambridge]: Published by Dumbarton Oaks 
Research Library and Collection ; Distributed by Harvard University Press, 
2007.

Del Tredici, Peter. “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World.” Nature and Culture 5, no. 3 (December 1, 2010): 299–315. 
https://doi.org/10.3167/nc.2010.050305.

Del Tredici, Peter. “The Flora of the Future.” Places Journal, no. 2014 (April 17, 
2014). https://doi.org/10.22269/140417. 

Del Tredici, Peter, and Michael Luegering. “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for 
the Northeast.” Harvard Design Magazine, no. 37 (2014).

Doody, Brendan J, Harvey C Perkins, Jon J Sullivan, Colin D Meurk, and 
Brendan J Stewart. “Performing Weeds: Gardening, Plant Agencies and Urban 
Plant Conservation,” no. 56 (2014): 124–36.
Dunnett, Nigel. “The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities - Pattern and 
Process in Designed Plant Comminities.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, 
Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel 
Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 
2008.

Dunnett, Nigel, and James Hitchmough. “Introduction to Naturalistic Planting 
in Urban Landscapes.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, Ecology and 
Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel Dunnett and 
James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 2008.

Dunnett, Nigel, Wolfram Kircher, and Noel Kingsbury. “Communicating 
Naturalistic Plantings: Plans and Specifications.” In The Dynamic Landscape: 
Design, Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by 
Nigel Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & 
Francis, 2008.

Elkin, Rosetta S. “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life.” Journal of 
Landscape Architecture 12, no.2 (May 4, 2017): 60–73. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2017.1361087.

Elkin, Rosetta S. “Working with Plant Life.” New Geographies Journal, no. 9 
(January 2018): 125–29.

fleur, Marcus de la. “One Drop at a Time - New Resource Paradigms at 168 Elm 
Ave.,” 2014. https://www.delafleur.com/168_Elm/.

Gandy, Matthew. “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.” 
Cosmopolis (blog), May 4, 2011. 
http://matthewgandy.blogspot.com/2011/05/urban-islands-parc-henri-matisse
-lille.html.

Gandy, Matthew. “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 37, no. 1 
(January 2013): 259–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2012.01164.x.

 “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield.” CIRIA, n.d. 
https://www.susdrain.org/casestudies/pdfs/suds_awards/006_18_03_28_susdr
ain_suds_awards_grey_to_green_phase_1_sheffield.pdf. 

Hazelwood, Jon. “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting Design – 
Urban Choreography.” Urban Choreography, 2019. 
https://urbanchoreography.net/2019/10/10/super-bloom-new-floralfrontiers-in-
public-planting-design/.
 
“How We Use Water.” Accessed May 6, 2020. 
http://www.metrovancouver.org/welovewater/conservingwater/how-we-use-wa
ter/Pages/default.aspx.  

Ignatieva, Maria E., and Glenn H. Stewart. “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and 
Similarity of Landscape Design Language in Former Colonial Cities.” In Ecology 
of Cities and Towns, edited by Mark J. McDonnell, Amy K. Hahs, and Jurgen H. 
Breuste, 399–421. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. 
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609763.024.

Skinner, Jonathan. “Gardens of Resistance: Gilles Clément, New Poetics, and 
Future Landscapes.” Qui Parle 19, no. 2 (2011): 259. 
https://doi.org/10.5250/quiparle.19.2.0259.

Jones, Louisa. “Gilles Clément Revisited: Biology, Art and Ecology. A Reply to 
Danielle Dagenais.” Studies in the History of Gardens & Designed Landscapes 
26, no. 3 (July 2006): 249–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/14601176.2006.10435469. 

Kim, Jinki, and John Whalen. “One Drop At A Time.” Landscape Performance 
Series, December 19, 2013. 
https://www.landscapeperformance.org/case-study-briefs/one-drop-at-a-time.

Kingsbury, Noel. “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design.” In 
The Dynamic Landscape: Design, Ecology and Management of Naturalistic 
Urban Planting, edited by Nigel Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. 
London: Taylor & Francis, 2008.

Koningen, Hein. “Creative Managment.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, 
Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel 
Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 
2008.

Kowarik, Ingo, and Andreas Langer. “Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking 
Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.” In Wild 
Urban Woodlands, edited by Ingo Kowarik and Stefan Körner, 287–99. 
Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2005. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-26859-6_18.

Lachmund, Jens.  “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.” In Greening Berlin: The Co-Production of Science, Politics, and Urban 
Nature. Inside Technology. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2013.

Landscape and the City, 2017. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=185&v=Sl1qvv5Q6Z8&feature
=emb_logo

Lokman, Kees, and Susan Herrington. “Gardens as Migratory Devices.” New 
Geographies 8 (2016): 141–51.

Meyer, Elizabeth K. “Sustaining Beauty. The Performance of Appearance: A 
Manifesto in Three Parts.” Journal of Landscape Architecture 3, no. 1 (March 
2008): 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2008.9723392. 

Milligan, Brett. “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene.” Places Journal, no. 2015 (June 29, 2015). 
https://doi.org/10.22269/150629.

Nassar, Dalia. “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.” In Covert Plants: Vegetal Consciousness and Agency in 
an Anthropocentric World, edited by Prudence Gibson and Baylee Brits, 1st 
edition. Brainstorm Books. Santa Barbara, CA: Punctum Books, 2018.

Nassauer, Joan I. “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care.” 
HortScience 6, no. 23 (1988): 973–77.

Nassauer, Joan Iverson. “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames.” Landscape 
Journal 14, no. 2 (1995): 161–70. https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.14.2.161.

“Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.” Accessed December 18, 2019. 
https://gruen-berlin.de/en/naturpark-sudgelande. 

Neilson, Ronald P., Louis F. Pitelka, Allen M. Solomon, Ran Nathan, Guy F. 
Midgley, Jóse M. V. Fragoso, Heike Lischke, and Ken Thompson. “Forecasting 
Regional to Global Plant Migration in Response to Climate Change.” 
BioScience 55, no. 9 (2005): 749. 
https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0749:FRTGPM]2.0.CO;2. 

Nigel Dunnett. “About,” February 8, 2016. 
http://www.nigeldunnett.com/about/.   

Ontl, Todd A, Maria K Janowiak, Christopher W Swanston, Jad Daley, Stephen 
Handler, Meredith Cornett, Steve Hagenbuch, Cathy Handrick, Liza Mccarthy, 
and Nancy Patch. “Forest Management for Carbon Sequestration and Climate 
Adaptation.” Journal of Forestry 118, no. 1 (January 7, 2020): 86–101. 
https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvz062. 

Parsons, Russ. “Conflict between Ecological Sustainability and Environmental 
Aesthetics: Conundrum,Canärd or Curiosity.” Landscape and Urban Planning 
32, no. 3 (August 1995): 227–44. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(95)07004-E.

Pavao-Zuckerman, Mitchell A. “The Nature of Urban Soils and Their Role in 
Ecological Restoration in Cities.” Restoration Ecology 16, no. 4 (December 
2008): 642–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.2008.00486.x. 
Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin, 2016. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiNfjYaDiEE&fbclid=IwAR1QjJhDXJCrkz7L
dKnujp9Vq1XsQvtxjMeBxXDMMmjfBS_Axq5LYdK46g. 

Robinson, Sarah L., and Jeremy T. Lundholm. “Ecosystem Services Provided by 
Urban Spontaneous Vegetation.” Urban Ecosystems 15, no. 3 (September 
2012): 545–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-012-0225-8. 

Sanramour, Frank S. “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense,” 1999, 57–66.

Scheffler, Nathanael. “Parc Henri Matisse.” Accessed December 18, 2019. 
http://www.nathanaelscheffler.com/parc-henri-matisse.

Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases,” 2016. 
http://www.greytogreen.org.uk/phase2.html. 

Spirn, Anna W. “The Poetics of City and Nature : Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design.” Places 6, no. 1 (1989): 82–93.

Staff Writers. “Structurally Complex Forests Better at Carbon Sequestration.” 
ScienceDaily. Accessed May 7, 2020. 
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/08/190812130843.htm. 

Urban, James. “Up by Roots: Healthy Soils and Tress in the Built Environment.” 
Champaign, Ill: International Society of Arboriculture, 2008.

Van Matre, Lynn. “Garden Rare in Suburbs Germinates Eco-Concept.” 
Chicagotribune.Com, 2004. 
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2004-07-06-0407060102-stor
y.html.

Wainwright, Henry, Charlotte Jordan, and Harry Day. “Environmental Impact of 
Production Horticulture.” In Horticulture: Plants for People and Places, Volume 
1, edited by Geoffrey R. Dixon and David E. Aldous, 503–22. Dordrecht: 
Springer Netherlands, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8578-5_15. 

Wilde, H. Dayton, Kamal J. K. Gandhi, and Gregory Colson. “State of the 
Science and Challenges of Breeding Landscape Plants with Ecological 
Function.” Horticulture Research 2 (2015): 14069. 
https://doi.org/10.1038/hortres.2014.69   

Zhao, Jingwei, Ronghua Wang, Pingjia Luo, Lu Xing, and Tong Sun. “Visual 
Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological Quality and 
Aesthetic Preference.” Landscape and Ecological Engineering 13, no. 1 
(January 2017): 107–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355-016-0306-6

WORKS CITED



102

“Agency (Philosophy).” In Wikipedia, December 11, 2019. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Agency_(philosophy)&oldid=9302
54620.

Alberti, M. Advances in Urban Ecology: Integrating Humans and Ecological 
Processes in Urban Ecosystems. New York: Springer, 2008.

“ASLA 2009 Professional Awards,” 2009. 
https://www.asla.org/2009awards/298.html.

Bartens, Julia, Susan D. Day, J. Roger Harris, Joseph E. Dove, and Theresa M. 
Wynn. “Can Urban Tree Roots Improve Infiltration through Compacted 
Subsoils for Stormwater Management?” Journal of Environmental Quality 37, 
no. 6 (November 2008): 2048–57. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2008.0117. 

Canadian Ornamental Horticulture Alliance. “The Impact of Ornamental 
Horticulture on Canada’s Economy”. January 2009. 
https://cnla.ca/uploads/pdf/Deloitte_The-impact-of-ornamental-horticulture-o
n-Canada%E2%80%99s-economy.pdf 

Cerra, Joshua F. “Emerging Strategies for Voluntary Urban Ecological 
Stewardship on Private Property.” Landscape and Urban Planning 157 (January 
2017): 586–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.06.016.

Cerra, Joshua F. “The Yardworks Project: Developing Urban Ecological Design 
Strategies for Residential Private Property.” Edited by Charlene M LeBleu. 
Landscape Research Record, no. 5 (2016): 91–100.

Craul, Phillip J. “Urban Soil in Landscape Design.” New York: Wiley, 1992

Darwin, Charles and Francis, Darwin. The Power of Movement in Plants. New 
York: D. Appleton and Company, 1898.

Del Tredici, Peter. “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World.” In Botanical 
Progress, Horticultural Innovation and Cultural Changes, edited by Michel 
Conan, W. John Kress, Smithsonian Institution, and United States Botanic 
Garden. Washington, D.C. : [Cambridge]: Published by Dumbarton Oaks 
Research Library and Collection ; Distributed by Harvard University Press, 
2007.

Del Tredici, Peter. “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World.” Nature and Culture 5, no. 3 (December 1, 2010): 299–315. 
https://doi.org/10.3167/nc.2010.050305.

Del Tredici, Peter. “The Flora of the Future.” Places Journal, no. 2014 (April 17, 
2014). https://doi.org/10.22269/140417. 

Del Tredici, Peter, and Michael Luegering. “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for 
the Northeast.” Harvard Design Magazine, no. 37 (2014).

Doody, Brendan J, Harvey C Perkins, Jon J Sullivan, Colin D Meurk, and 
Brendan J Stewart. “Performing Weeds: Gardening, Plant Agencies and Urban 
Plant Conservation,” no. 56 (2014): 124–36.
Dunnett, Nigel. “The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities - Pattern and 
Process in Designed Plant Comminities.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, 
Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel 
Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 
2008.

Dunnett, Nigel, and James Hitchmough. “Introduction to Naturalistic Planting 
in Urban Landscapes.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, Ecology and 
Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel Dunnett and 
James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 2008.

Dunnett, Nigel, Wolfram Kircher, and Noel Kingsbury. “Communicating 
Naturalistic Plantings: Plans and Specifications.” In The Dynamic Landscape: 
Design, Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by 
Nigel Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & 
Francis, 2008.

Elkin, Rosetta S. “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life.” Journal of 
Landscape Architecture 12, no.2 (May 4, 2017): 60–73. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2017.1361087.

Elkin, Rosetta S. “Working with Plant Life.” New Geographies Journal, no. 9 
(January 2018): 125–29.

fleur, Marcus de la. “One Drop at a Time - New Resource Paradigms at 168 Elm 
Ave.,” 2014. https://www.delafleur.com/168_Elm/.

Gandy, Matthew. “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.” 
Cosmopolis (blog), May 4, 2011. 
http://matthewgandy.blogspot.com/2011/05/urban-islands-parc-henri-matisse
-lille.html.

Gandy, Matthew. “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 37, no. 1 
(January 2013): 259–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2012.01164.x.

 “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield.” CIRIA, n.d. 
https://www.susdrain.org/casestudies/pdfs/suds_awards/006_18_03_28_susdr
ain_suds_awards_grey_to_green_phase_1_sheffield.pdf. 

Hazelwood, Jon. “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting Design – 
Urban Choreography.” Urban Choreography, 2019. 
https://urbanchoreography.net/2019/10/10/super-bloom-new-floralfrontiers-in-
public-planting-design/.
 
“How We Use Water.” Accessed May 6, 2020. 
http://www.metrovancouver.org/welovewater/conservingwater/how-we-use-wa
ter/Pages/default.aspx.  

Ignatieva, Maria E., and Glenn H. Stewart. “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and 
Similarity of Landscape Design Language in Former Colonial Cities.” In Ecology 
of Cities and Towns, edited by Mark J. McDonnell, Amy K. Hahs, and Jurgen H. 
Breuste, 399–421. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. 
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609763.024.

Skinner, Jonathan. “Gardens of Resistance: Gilles Clément, New Poetics, and 
Future Landscapes.” Qui Parle 19, no. 2 (2011): 259. 
https://doi.org/10.5250/quiparle.19.2.0259.

Jones, Louisa. “Gilles Clément Revisited: Biology, Art and Ecology. A Reply to 
Danielle Dagenais.” Studies in the History of Gardens & Designed Landscapes 
26, no. 3 (July 2006): 249–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/14601176.2006.10435469. 

Kim, Jinki, and John Whalen. “One Drop At A Time.” Landscape Performance 
Series, December 19, 2013. 
https://www.landscapeperformance.org/case-study-briefs/one-drop-at-a-time.

Kingsbury, Noel. “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design.” In 
The Dynamic Landscape: Design, Ecology and Management of Naturalistic 
Urban Planting, edited by Nigel Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. 
London: Taylor & Francis, 2008.

Koningen, Hein. “Creative Managment.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, 
Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel 
Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 
2008.

Kowarik, Ingo, and Andreas Langer. “Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking 
Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.” In Wild 
Urban Woodlands, edited by Ingo Kowarik and Stefan Körner, 287–99. 
Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2005. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-26859-6_18.

Lachmund, Jens.  “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.” In Greening Berlin: The Co-Production of Science, Politics, and Urban 
Nature. Inside Technology. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2013.

Landscape and the City, 2017. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=185&v=Sl1qvv5Q6Z8&feature
=emb_logo

Lokman, Kees, and Susan Herrington. “Gardens as Migratory Devices.” New 
Geographies 8 (2016): 141–51.

Meyer, Elizabeth K. “Sustaining Beauty. The Performance of Appearance: A 
Manifesto in Three Parts.” Journal of Landscape Architecture 3, no. 1 (March 
2008): 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2008.9723392. 

Milligan, Brett. “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene.” Places Journal, no. 2015 (June 29, 2015). 
https://doi.org/10.22269/150629.

Nassar, Dalia. “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.” In Covert Plants: Vegetal Consciousness and Agency in 
an Anthropocentric World, edited by Prudence Gibson and Baylee Brits, 1st 
edition. Brainstorm Books. Santa Barbara, CA: Punctum Books, 2018.

Nassauer, Joan I. “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care.” 
HortScience 6, no. 23 (1988): 973–77.

Nassauer, Joan Iverson. “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames.” Landscape 
Journal 14, no. 2 (1995): 161–70. https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.14.2.161.

“Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.” Accessed December 18, 2019. 
https://gruen-berlin.de/en/naturpark-sudgelande. 

Neilson, Ronald P., Louis F. Pitelka, Allen M. Solomon, Ran Nathan, Guy F. 
Midgley, Jóse M. V. Fragoso, Heike Lischke, and Ken Thompson. “Forecasting 
Regional to Global Plant Migration in Response to Climate Change.” 
BioScience 55, no. 9 (2005): 749. 
https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0749:FRTGPM]2.0.CO;2. 

Nigel Dunnett. “About,” February 8, 2016. 
http://www.nigeldunnett.com/about/.   

Ontl, Todd A, Maria K Janowiak, Christopher W Swanston, Jad Daley, Stephen 
Handler, Meredith Cornett, Steve Hagenbuch, Cathy Handrick, Liza Mccarthy, 
and Nancy Patch. “Forest Management for Carbon Sequestration and Climate 
Adaptation.” Journal of Forestry 118, no. 1 (January 7, 2020): 86–101. 
https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvz062. 

Parsons, Russ. “Conflict between Ecological Sustainability and Environmental 
Aesthetics: Conundrum,Canärd or Curiosity.” Landscape and Urban Planning 
32, no. 3 (August 1995): 227–44. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(95)07004-E.

Pavao-Zuckerman, Mitchell A. “The Nature of Urban Soils and Their Role in 
Ecological Restoration in Cities.” Restoration Ecology 16, no. 4 (December 
2008): 642–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.2008.00486.x. 
Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin, 2016. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiNfjYaDiEE&fbclid=IwAR1QjJhDXJCrkz7L
dKnujp9Vq1XsQvtxjMeBxXDMMmjfBS_Axq5LYdK46g. 

Robinson, Sarah L., and Jeremy T. Lundholm. “Ecosystem Services Provided by 
Urban Spontaneous Vegetation.” Urban Ecosystems 15, no. 3 (September 
2012): 545–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-012-0225-8. 

Sanramour, Frank S. “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense,” 1999, 57–66.

Scheffler, Nathanael. “Parc Henri Matisse.” Accessed December 18, 2019. 
http://www.nathanaelscheffler.com/parc-henri-matisse.

Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases,” 2016. 
http://www.greytogreen.org.uk/phase2.html. 

Spirn, Anna W. “The Poetics of City and Nature : Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design.” Places 6, no. 1 (1989): 82–93.

Staff Writers. “Structurally Complex Forests Better at Carbon Sequestration.” 
ScienceDaily. Accessed May 7, 2020. 
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/08/190812130843.htm. 

Urban, James. “Up by Roots: Healthy Soils and Tress in the Built Environment.” 
Champaign, Ill: International Society of Arboriculture, 2008.

Van Matre, Lynn. “Garden Rare in Suburbs Germinates Eco-Concept.” 
Chicagotribune.Com, 2004. 
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2004-07-06-0407060102-stor
y.html.

Wainwright, Henry, Charlotte Jordan, and Harry Day. “Environmental Impact of 
Production Horticulture.” In Horticulture: Plants for People and Places, Volume 
1, edited by Geoffrey R. Dixon and David E. Aldous, 503–22. Dordrecht: 
Springer Netherlands, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8578-5_15. 

Wilde, H. Dayton, Kamal J. K. Gandhi, and Gregory Colson. “State of the 
Science and Challenges of Breeding Landscape Plants with Ecological 
Function.” Horticulture Research 2 (2015): 14069. 
https://doi.org/10.1038/hortres.2014.69   

Zhao, Jingwei, Ronghua Wang, Pingjia Luo, Lu Xing, and Tong Sun. “Visual 
Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological Quality and 
Aesthetic Preference.” Landscape and Ecological Engineering 13, no. 1 
(January 2017): 107–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355-016-0306-6



103

“Agency (Philosophy).” In Wikipedia, December 11, 2019. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Agency_(philosophy)&oldid=9302
54620.

Alberti, M. Advances in Urban Ecology: Integrating Humans and Ecological 
Processes in Urban Ecosystems. New York: Springer, 2008.

“ASLA 2009 Professional Awards,” 2009. 
https://www.asla.org/2009awards/298.html.

Bartens, Julia, Susan D. Day, J. Roger Harris, Joseph E. Dove, and Theresa M. 
Wynn. “Can Urban Tree Roots Improve Infiltration through Compacted 
Subsoils for Stormwater Management?” Journal of Environmental Quality 37, 
no. 6 (November 2008): 2048–57. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2008.0117. 

Canadian Ornamental Horticulture Alliance. “The Impact of Ornamental 
Horticulture on Canada’s Economy”. January 2009. 
https://cnla.ca/uploads/pdf/Deloitte_The-impact-of-ornamental-horticulture-o
n-Canada%E2%80%99s-economy.pdf 

Cerra, Joshua F. “Emerging Strategies for Voluntary Urban Ecological 
Stewardship on Private Property.” Landscape and Urban Planning 157 (January 
2017): 586–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.06.016.

Cerra, Joshua F. “The Yardworks Project: Developing Urban Ecological Design 
Strategies for Residential Private Property.” Edited by Charlene M LeBleu. 
Landscape Research Record, no. 5 (2016): 91–100.

Craul, Phillip J. “Urban Soil in Landscape Design.” New York: Wiley, 1992

Darwin, Charles and Francis, Darwin. The Power of Movement in Plants. New 
York: D. Appleton and Company, 1898.

Del Tredici, Peter. “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World.” In Botanical 
Progress, Horticultural Innovation and Cultural Changes, edited by Michel 
Conan, W. John Kress, Smithsonian Institution, and United States Botanic 
Garden. Washington, D.C. : [Cambridge]: Published by Dumbarton Oaks 
Research Library and Collection ; Distributed by Harvard University Press, 
2007.

Del Tredici, Peter. “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World.” Nature and Culture 5, no. 3 (December 1, 2010): 299–315. 
https://doi.org/10.3167/nc.2010.050305.

Del Tredici, Peter. “The Flora of the Future.” Places Journal, no. 2014 (April 17, 
2014). https://doi.org/10.22269/140417. 

Del Tredici, Peter, and Michael Luegering. “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for 
the Northeast.” Harvard Design Magazine, no. 37 (2014).

Doody, Brendan J, Harvey C Perkins, Jon J Sullivan, Colin D Meurk, and 
Brendan J Stewart. “Performing Weeds: Gardening, Plant Agencies and Urban 
Plant Conservation,” no. 56 (2014): 124–36.
Dunnett, Nigel. “The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities - Pattern and 
Process in Designed Plant Comminities.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, 
Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel 
Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 
2008.

Dunnett, Nigel, and James Hitchmough. “Introduction to Naturalistic Planting 
in Urban Landscapes.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, Ecology and 
Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel Dunnett and 
James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 2008.

Dunnett, Nigel, Wolfram Kircher, and Noel Kingsbury. “Communicating 
Naturalistic Plantings: Plans and Specifications.” In The Dynamic Landscape: 
Design, Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by 
Nigel Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & 
Francis, 2008.

Elkin, Rosetta S. “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life.” Journal of 
Landscape Architecture 12, no.2 (May 4, 2017): 60–73. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2017.1361087.

Elkin, Rosetta S. “Working with Plant Life.” New Geographies Journal, no. 9 
(January 2018): 125–29.

fleur, Marcus de la. “One Drop at a Time - New Resource Paradigms at 168 Elm 
Ave.,” 2014. https://www.delafleur.com/168_Elm/.

Gandy, Matthew. “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.” 
Cosmopolis (blog), May 4, 2011. 
http://matthewgandy.blogspot.com/2011/05/urban-islands-parc-henri-matisse
-lille.html.

Gandy, Matthew. “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 37, no. 1 
(January 2013): 259–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2012.01164.x.

 “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield.” CIRIA, n.d. 
https://www.susdrain.org/casestudies/pdfs/suds_awards/006_18_03_28_susdr
ain_suds_awards_grey_to_green_phase_1_sheffield.pdf. 

Hazelwood, Jon. “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting Design – 
Urban Choreography.” Urban Choreography, 2019. 
https://urbanchoreography.net/2019/10/10/super-bloom-new-floralfrontiers-in-
public-planting-design/.
 
“How We Use Water.” Accessed May 6, 2020. 
http://www.metrovancouver.org/welovewater/conservingwater/how-we-use-wa
ter/Pages/default.aspx.  

Ignatieva, Maria E., and Glenn H. Stewart. “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and 
Similarity of Landscape Design Language in Former Colonial Cities.” In Ecology 
of Cities and Towns, edited by Mark J. McDonnell, Amy K. Hahs, and Jurgen H. 
Breuste, 399–421. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. 
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609763.024.

Skinner, Jonathan. “Gardens of Resistance: Gilles Clément, New Poetics, and 
Future Landscapes.” Qui Parle 19, no. 2 (2011): 259. 
https://doi.org/10.5250/quiparle.19.2.0259.

Jones, Louisa. “Gilles Clément Revisited: Biology, Art and Ecology. A Reply to 
Danielle Dagenais.” Studies in the History of Gardens & Designed Landscapes 
26, no. 3 (July 2006): 249–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/14601176.2006.10435469. 

Kim, Jinki, and John Whalen. “One Drop At A Time.” Landscape Performance 
Series, December 19, 2013. 
https://www.landscapeperformance.org/case-study-briefs/one-drop-at-a-time.

Kingsbury, Noel. “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design.” In 
The Dynamic Landscape: Design, Ecology and Management of Naturalistic 
Urban Planting, edited by Nigel Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. 
London: Taylor & Francis, 2008.

Koningen, Hein. “Creative Managment.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, 
Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel 
Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 
2008.

Kowarik, Ingo, and Andreas Langer. “Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking 
Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.” In Wild 
Urban Woodlands, edited by Ingo Kowarik and Stefan Körner, 287–99. 
Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2005. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-26859-6_18.

Lachmund, Jens.  “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.” In Greening Berlin: The Co-Production of Science, Politics, and Urban 
Nature. Inside Technology. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2013.

Landscape and the City, 2017. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=185&v=Sl1qvv5Q6Z8&feature
=emb_logo

Lokman, Kees, and Susan Herrington. “Gardens as Migratory Devices.” New 
Geographies 8 (2016): 141–51.

Meyer, Elizabeth K. “Sustaining Beauty. The Performance of Appearance: A 
Manifesto in Three Parts.” Journal of Landscape Architecture 3, no. 1 (March 
2008): 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2008.9723392. 

Milligan, Brett. “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene.” Places Journal, no. 2015 (June 29, 2015). 
https://doi.org/10.22269/150629.

Nassar, Dalia. “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.” In Covert Plants: Vegetal Consciousness and Agency in 
an Anthropocentric World, edited by Prudence Gibson and Baylee Brits, 1st 
edition. Brainstorm Books. Santa Barbara, CA: Punctum Books, 2018.

Nassauer, Joan I. “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care.” 
HortScience 6, no. 23 (1988): 973–77.

Nassauer, Joan Iverson. “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames.” Landscape 
Journal 14, no. 2 (1995): 161–70. https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.14.2.161.

“Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.” Accessed December 18, 2019. 
https://gruen-berlin.de/en/naturpark-sudgelande. 

Neilson, Ronald P., Louis F. Pitelka, Allen M. Solomon, Ran Nathan, Guy F. 
Midgley, Jóse M. V. Fragoso, Heike Lischke, and Ken Thompson. “Forecasting 
Regional to Global Plant Migration in Response to Climate Change.” 
BioScience 55, no. 9 (2005): 749. 
https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0749:FRTGPM]2.0.CO;2. 

Nigel Dunnett. “About,” February 8, 2016. 
http://www.nigeldunnett.com/about/.   

Ontl, Todd A, Maria K Janowiak, Christopher W Swanston, Jad Daley, Stephen 
Handler, Meredith Cornett, Steve Hagenbuch, Cathy Handrick, Liza Mccarthy, 
and Nancy Patch. “Forest Management for Carbon Sequestration and Climate 
Adaptation.” Journal of Forestry 118, no. 1 (January 7, 2020): 86–101. 
https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvz062. 

Parsons, Russ. “Conflict between Ecological Sustainability and Environmental 
Aesthetics: Conundrum,Canärd or Curiosity.” Landscape and Urban Planning 
32, no. 3 (August 1995): 227–44. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(95)07004-E.

Pavao-Zuckerman, Mitchell A. “The Nature of Urban Soils and Their Role in 
Ecological Restoration in Cities.” Restoration Ecology 16, no. 4 (December 
2008): 642–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.2008.00486.x. 
Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin, 2016. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiNfjYaDiEE&fbclid=IwAR1QjJhDXJCrkz7L
dKnujp9Vq1XsQvtxjMeBxXDMMmjfBS_Axq5LYdK46g. 

Robinson, Sarah L., and Jeremy T. Lundholm. “Ecosystem Services Provided by 
Urban Spontaneous Vegetation.” Urban Ecosystems 15, no. 3 (September 
2012): 545–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-012-0225-8. 

Sanramour, Frank S. “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense,” 1999, 57–66.

Scheffler, Nathanael. “Parc Henri Matisse.” Accessed December 18, 2019. 
http://www.nathanaelscheffler.com/parc-henri-matisse.

Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases,” 2016. 
http://www.greytogreen.org.uk/phase2.html. 

Spirn, Anna W. “The Poetics of City and Nature : Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design.” Places 6, no. 1 (1989): 82–93.

Staff Writers. “Structurally Complex Forests Better at Carbon Sequestration.” 
ScienceDaily. Accessed May 7, 2020. 
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/08/190812130843.htm. 

Urban, James. “Up by Roots: Healthy Soils and Tress in the Built Environment.” 
Champaign, Ill: International Society of Arboriculture, 2008.

Van Matre, Lynn. “Garden Rare in Suburbs Germinates Eco-Concept.” 
Chicagotribune.Com, 2004. 
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2004-07-06-0407060102-stor
y.html.

Wainwright, Henry, Charlotte Jordan, and Harry Day. “Environmental Impact of 
Production Horticulture.” In Horticulture: Plants for People and Places, Volume 
1, edited by Geoffrey R. Dixon and David E. Aldous, 503–22. Dordrecht: 
Springer Netherlands, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8578-5_15. 

Wilde, H. Dayton, Kamal J. K. Gandhi, and Gregory Colson. “State of the 
Science and Challenges of Breeding Landscape Plants with Ecological 
Function.” Horticulture Research 2 (2015): 14069. 
https://doi.org/10.1038/hortres.2014.69   

Zhao, Jingwei, Ronghua Wang, Pingjia Luo, Lu Xing, and Tong Sun. “Visual 
Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological Quality and 
Aesthetic Preference.” Landscape and Ecological Engineering 13, no. 1 
(January 2017): 107–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355-016-0306-6



104

“Agency (Philosophy).” In Wikipedia, December 11, 2019. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Agency_(philosophy)&oldid=9302
54620.

Alberti, M. Advances in Urban Ecology: Integrating Humans and Ecological 
Processes in Urban Ecosystems. New York: Springer, 2008.

“ASLA 2009 Professional Awards,” 2009. 
https://www.asla.org/2009awards/298.html.

Bartens, Julia, Susan D. Day, J. Roger Harris, Joseph E. Dove, and Theresa M. 
Wynn. “Can Urban Tree Roots Improve Infiltration through Compacted 
Subsoils for Stormwater Management?” Journal of Environmental Quality 37, 
no. 6 (November 2008): 2048–57. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2008.0117. 

Canadian Ornamental Horticulture Alliance. “The Impact of Ornamental 
Horticulture on Canada’s Economy”. January 2009. 
https://cnla.ca/uploads/pdf/Deloitte_The-impact-of-ornamental-horticulture-o
n-Canada%E2%80%99s-economy.pdf 

Cerra, Joshua F. “Emerging Strategies for Voluntary Urban Ecological 
Stewardship on Private Property.” Landscape and Urban Planning 157 (January 
2017): 586–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.06.016.

Cerra, Joshua F. “The Yardworks Project: Developing Urban Ecological Design 
Strategies for Residential Private Property.” Edited by Charlene M LeBleu. 
Landscape Research Record, no. 5 (2016): 91–100.

Craul, Phillip J. “Urban Soil in Landscape Design.” New York: Wiley, 1992

Darwin, Charles and Francis, Darwin. The Power of Movement in Plants. New 
York: D. Appleton and Company, 1898.

Del Tredici, Peter. “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World.” In Botanical 
Progress, Horticultural Innovation and Cultural Changes, edited by Michel 
Conan, W. John Kress, Smithsonian Institution, and United States Botanic 
Garden. Washington, D.C. : [Cambridge]: Published by Dumbarton Oaks 
Research Library and Collection ; Distributed by Harvard University Press, 
2007.

Del Tredici, Peter. “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World.” Nature and Culture 5, no. 3 (December 1, 2010): 299–315. 
https://doi.org/10.3167/nc.2010.050305.

Del Tredici, Peter. “The Flora of the Future.” Places Journal, no. 2014 (April 17, 
2014). https://doi.org/10.22269/140417. 

Del Tredici, Peter, and Michael Luegering. “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for 
the Northeast.” Harvard Design Magazine, no. 37 (2014).

Doody, Brendan J, Harvey C Perkins, Jon J Sullivan, Colin D Meurk, and 
Brendan J Stewart. “Performing Weeds: Gardening, Plant Agencies and Urban 
Plant Conservation,” no. 56 (2014): 124–36.
Dunnett, Nigel. “The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities - Pattern and 
Process in Designed Plant Comminities.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, 
Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel 
Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 
2008.

Dunnett, Nigel, and James Hitchmough. “Introduction to Naturalistic Planting 
in Urban Landscapes.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, Ecology and 
Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel Dunnett and 
James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 2008.

Dunnett, Nigel, Wolfram Kircher, and Noel Kingsbury. “Communicating 
Naturalistic Plantings: Plans and Specifications.” In The Dynamic Landscape: 
Design, Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by 
Nigel Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & 
Francis, 2008.

Elkin, Rosetta S. “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life.” Journal of 
Landscape Architecture 12, no.2 (May 4, 2017): 60–73. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2017.1361087.

Elkin, Rosetta S. “Working with Plant Life.” New Geographies Journal, no. 9 
(January 2018): 125–29.

fleur, Marcus de la. “One Drop at a Time - New Resource Paradigms at 168 Elm 
Ave.,” 2014. https://www.delafleur.com/168_Elm/.

Gandy, Matthew. “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.” 
Cosmopolis (blog), May 4, 2011. 
http://matthewgandy.blogspot.com/2011/05/urban-islands-parc-henri-matisse
-lille.html.

Gandy, Matthew. “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 37, no. 1 
(January 2013): 259–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2012.01164.x.

 “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield.” CIRIA, n.d. 
https://www.susdrain.org/casestudies/pdfs/suds_awards/006_18_03_28_susdr
ain_suds_awards_grey_to_green_phase_1_sheffield.pdf. 

Hazelwood, Jon. “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting Design – 
Urban Choreography.” Urban Choreography, 2019. 
https://urbanchoreography.net/2019/10/10/super-bloom-new-floralfrontiers-in-
public-planting-design/.
 
“How We Use Water.” Accessed May 6, 2020. 
http://www.metrovancouver.org/welovewater/conservingwater/how-we-use-wa
ter/Pages/default.aspx.  

Ignatieva, Maria E., and Glenn H. Stewart. “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and 
Similarity of Landscape Design Language in Former Colonial Cities.” In Ecology 
of Cities and Towns, edited by Mark J. McDonnell, Amy K. Hahs, and Jurgen H. 
Breuste, 399–421. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. 
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609763.024.

Skinner, Jonathan. “Gardens of Resistance: Gilles Clément, New Poetics, and 
Future Landscapes.” Qui Parle 19, no. 2 (2011): 259. 
https://doi.org/10.5250/quiparle.19.2.0259.

Jones, Louisa. “Gilles Clément Revisited: Biology, Art and Ecology. A Reply to 
Danielle Dagenais.” Studies in the History of Gardens & Designed Landscapes 
26, no. 3 (July 2006): 249–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/14601176.2006.10435469. 

Kim, Jinki, and John Whalen. “One Drop At A Time.” Landscape Performance 
Series, December 19, 2013. 
https://www.landscapeperformance.org/case-study-briefs/one-drop-at-a-time.

Kingsbury, Noel. “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design.” In 
The Dynamic Landscape: Design, Ecology and Management of Naturalistic 
Urban Planting, edited by Nigel Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. 
London: Taylor & Francis, 2008.

Koningen, Hein. “Creative Managment.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, 
Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel 
Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 
2008.

Kowarik, Ingo, and Andreas Langer. “Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking 
Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.” In Wild 
Urban Woodlands, edited by Ingo Kowarik and Stefan Körner, 287–99. 
Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2005. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-26859-6_18.

Lachmund, Jens.  “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.” In Greening Berlin: The Co-Production of Science, Politics, and Urban 
Nature. Inside Technology. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2013.

Landscape and the City, 2017. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=185&v=Sl1qvv5Q6Z8&feature
=emb_logo

Lokman, Kees, and Susan Herrington. “Gardens as Migratory Devices.” New 
Geographies 8 (2016): 141–51.

Meyer, Elizabeth K. “Sustaining Beauty. The Performance of Appearance: A 
Manifesto in Three Parts.” Journal of Landscape Architecture 3, no. 1 (March 
2008): 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2008.9723392. 

Milligan, Brett. “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene.” Places Journal, no. 2015 (June 29, 2015). 
https://doi.org/10.22269/150629.

Nassar, Dalia. “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.” In Covert Plants: Vegetal Consciousness and Agency in 
an Anthropocentric World, edited by Prudence Gibson and Baylee Brits, 1st 
edition. Brainstorm Books. Santa Barbara, CA: Punctum Books, 2018.

Nassauer, Joan I. “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care.” 
HortScience 6, no. 23 (1988): 973–77.

Nassauer, Joan Iverson. “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames.” Landscape 
Journal 14, no. 2 (1995): 161–70. https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.14.2.161.

“Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.” Accessed December 18, 2019. 
https://gruen-berlin.de/en/naturpark-sudgelande. 

Neilson, Ronald P., Louis F. Pitelka, Allen M. Solomon, Ran Nathan, Guy F. 
Midgley, Jóse M. V. Fragoso, Heike Lischke, and Ken Thompson. “Forecasting 
Regional to Global Plant Migration in Response to Climate Change.” 
BioScience 55, no. 9 (2005): 749. 
https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0749:FRTGPM]2.0.CO;2. 

Nigel Dunnett. “About,” February 8, 2016. 
http://www.nigeldunnett.com/about/.   

Ontl, Todd A, Maria K Janowiak, Christopher W Swanston, Jad Daley, Stephen 
Handler, Meredith Cornett, Steve Hagenbuch, Cathy Handrick, Liza Mccarthy, 
and Nancy Patch. “Forest Management for Carbon Sequestration and Climate 
Adaptation.” Journal of Forestry 118, no. 1 (January 7, 2020): 86–101. 
https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvz062. 

Parsons, Russ. “Conflict between Ecological Sustainability and Environmental 
Aesthetics: Conundrum,Canärd or Curiosity.” Landscape and Urban Planning 
32, no. 3 (August 1995): 227–44. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(95)07004-E.

Pavao-Zuckerman, Mitchell A. “The Nature of Urban Soils and Their Role in 
Ecological Restoration in Cities.” Restoration Ecology 16, no. 4 (December 
2008): 642–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.2008.00486.x. 
Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin, 2016. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiNfjYaDiEE&fbclid=IwAR1QjJhDXJCrkz7L
dKnujp9Vq1XsQvtxjMeBxXDMMmjfBS_Axq5LYdK46g. 

Robinson, Sarah L., and Jeremy T. Lundholm. “Ecosystem Services Provided by 
Urban Spontaneous Vegetation.” Urban Ecosystems 15, no. 3 (September 
2012): 545–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-012-0225-8. 

Sanramour, Frank S. “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense,” 1999, 57–66.

Scheffler, Nathanael. “Parc Henri Matisse.” Accessed December 18, 2019. 
http://www.nathanaelscheffler.com/parc-henri-matisse.

Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases,” 2016. 
http://www.greytogreen.org.uk/phase2.html. 

Spirn, Anna W. “The Poetics of City and Nature : Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design.” Places 6, no. 1 (1989): 82–93.

Staff Writers. “Structurally Complex Forests Better at Carbon Sequestration.” 
ScienceDaily. Accessed May 7, 2020. 
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/08/190812130843.htm. 

Urban, James. “Up by Roots: Healthy Soils and Tress in the Built Environment.” 
Champaign, Ill: International Society of Arboriculture, 2008.

Van Matre, Lynn. “Garden Rare in Suburbs Germinates Eco-Concept.” 
Chicagotribune.Com, 2004. 
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2004-07-06-0407060102-stor
y.html.

Wainwright, Henry, Charlotte Jordan, and Harry Day. “Environmental Impact of 
Production Horticulture.” In Horticulture: Plants for People and Places, Volume 
1, edited by Geoffrey R. Dixon and David E. Aldous, 503–22. Dordrecht: 
Springer Netherlands, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8578-5_15. 

Wilde, H. Dayton, Kamal J. K. Gandhi, and Gregory Colson. “State of the 
Science and Challenges of Breeding Landscape Plants with Ecological 
Function.” Horticulture Research 2 (2015): 14069. 
https://doi.org/10.1038/hortres.2014.69   

Zhao, Jingwei, Ronghua Wang, Pingjia Luo, Lu Xing, and Tong Sun. “Visual 
Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological Quality and 
Aesthetic Preference.” Landscape and Ecological Engineering 13, no. 1 
(January 2017): 107–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355-016-0306-6



105

“Agency (Philosophy).” In Wikipedia, December 11, 2019. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Agency_(philosophy)&oldid=9302
54620.

Alberti, M. Advances in Urban Ecology: Integrating Humans and Ecological 
Processes in Urban Ecosystems. New York: Springer, 2008.

“ASLA 2009 Professional Awards,” 2009. 
https://www.asla.org/2009awards/298.html.

Bartens, Julia, Susan D. Day, J. Roger Harris, Joseph E. Dove, and Theresa M. 
Wynn. “Can Urban Tree Roots Improve Infiltration through Compacted 
Subsoils for Stormwater Management?” Journal of Environmental Quality 37, 
no. 6 (November 2008): 2048–57. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2008.0117. 

Canadian Ornamental Horticulture Alliance. “The Impact of Ornamental 
Horticulture on Canada’s Economy”. January 2009. 
https://cnla.ca/uploads/pdf/Deloitte_The-impact-of-ornamental-horticulture-o
n-Canada%E2%80%99s-economy.pdf 

Cerra, Joshua F. “Emerging Strategies for Voluntary Urban Ecological 
Stewardship on Private Property.” Landscape and Urban Planning 157 (January 
2017): 586–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.06.016.

Cerra, Joshua F. “The Yardworks Project: Developing Urban Ecological Design 
Strategies for Residential Private Property.” Edited by Charlene M LeBleu. 
Landscape Research Record, no. 5 (2016): 91–100.

Craul, Phillip J. “Urban Soil in Landscape Design.” New York: Wiley, 1992

Darwin, Charles and Francis, Darwin. The Power of Movement in Plants. New 
York: D. Appleton and Company, 1898.

Del Tredici, Peter. “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World.” In Botanical 
Progress, Horticultural Innovation and Cultural Changes, edited by Michel 
Conan, W. John Kress, Smithsonian Institution, and United States Botanic 
Garden. Washington, D.C. : [Cambridge]: Published by Dumbarton Oaks 
Research Library and Collection ; Distributed by Harvard University Press, 
2007.

Del Tredici, Peter. “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World.” Nature and Culture 5, no. 3 (December 1, 2010): 299–315. 
https://doi.org/10.3167/nc.2010.050305.

Del Tredici, Peter. “The Flora of the Future.” Places Journal, no. 2014 (April 17, 
2014). https://doi.org/10.22269/140417. 

Del Tredici, Peter, and Michael Luegering. “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for 
the Northeast.” Harvard Design Magazine, no. 37 (2014).

Doody, Brendan J, Harvey C Perkins, Jon J Sullivan, Colin D Meurk, and 
Brendan J Stewart. “Performing Weeds: Gardening, Plant Agencies and Urban 
Plant Conservation,” no. 56 (2014): 124–36.
Dunnett, Nigel. “The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities - Pattern and 
Process in Designed Plant Comminities.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, 
Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel 
Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 
2008.

Dunnett, Nigel, and James Hitchmough. “Introduction to Naturalistic Planting 
in Urban Landscapes.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, Ecology and 
Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel Dunnett and 
James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 2008.

Dunnett, Nigel, Wolfram Kircher, and Noel Kingsbury. “Communicating 
Naturalistic Plantings: Plans and Specifications.” In The Dynamic Landscape: 
Design, Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by 
Nigel Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & 
Francis, 2008.

Elkin, Rosetta S. “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life.” Journal of 
Landscape Architecture 12, no.2 (May 4, 2017): 60–73. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2017.1361087.

Elkin, Rosetta S. “Working with Plant Life.” New Geographies Journal, no. 9 
(January 2018): 125–29.

fleur, Marcus de la. “One Drop at a Time - New Resource Paradigms at 168 Elm 
Ave.,” 2014. https://www.delafleur.com/168_Elm/.

Gandy, Matthew. “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.” 
Cosmopolis (blog), May 4, 2011. 
http://matthewgandy.blogspot.com/2011/05/urban-islands-parc-henri-matisse
-lille.html.

Gandy, Matthew. “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 37, no. 1 
(January 2013): 259–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2012.01164.x.

 “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield.” CIRIA, n.d. 
https://www.susdrain.org/casestudies/pdfs/suds_awards/006_18_03_28_susdr
ain_suds_awards_grey_to_green_phase_1_sheffield.pdf. 

Hazelwood, Jon. “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting Design – 
Urban Choreography.” Urban Choreography, 2019. 
https://urbanchoreography.net/2019/10/10/super-bloom-new-floralfrontiers-in-
public-planting-design/.
 
“How We Use Water.” Accessed May 6, 2020. 
http://www.metrovancouver.org/welovewater/conservingwater/how-we-use-wa
ter/Pages/default.aspx.  

Ignatieva, Maria E., and Glenn H. Stewart. “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and 
Similarity of Landscape Design Language in Former Colonial Cities.” In Ecology 
of Cities and Towns, edited by Mark J. McDonnell, Amy K. Hahs, and Jurgen H. 
Breuste, 399–421. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. 
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609763.024.

Skinner, Jonathan. “Gardens of Resistance: Gilles Clément, New Poetics, and 
Future Landscapes.” Qui Parle 19, no. 2 (2011): 259. 
https://doi.org/10.5250/quiparle.19.2.0259.

Jones, Louisa. “Gilles Clément Revisited: Biology, Art and Ecology. A Reply to 
Danielle Dagenais.” Studies in the History of Gardens & Designed Landscapes 
26, no. 3 (July 2006): 249–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/14601176.2006.10435469. 

Kim, Jinki, and John Whalen. “One Drop At A Time.” Landscape Performance 
Series, December 19, 2013. 
https://www.landscapeperformance.org/case-study-briefs/one-drop-at-a-time.

Kingsbury, Noel. “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design.” In 
The Dynamic Landscape: Design, Ecology and Management of Naturalistic 
Urban Planting, edited by Nigel Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. 
London: Taylor & Francis, 2008.

Koningen, Hein. “Creative Managment.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, 
Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel 
Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 
2008.

Kowarik, Ingo, and Andreas Langer. “Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking 
Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.” In Wild 
Urban Woodlands, edited by Ingo Kowarik and Stefan Körner, 287–99. 
Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2005. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-26859-6_18.

Lachmund, Jens.  “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.” In Greening Berlin: The Co-Production of Science, Politics, and Urban 
Nature. Inside Technology. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2013.

Landscape and the City, 2017. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=185&v=Sl1qvv5Q6Z8&feature
=emb_logo

Lokman, Kees, and Susan Herrington. “Gardens as Migratory Devices.” New 
Geographies 8 (2016): 141–51.

Meyer, Elizabeth K. “Sustaining Beauty. The Performance of Appearance: A 
Manifesto in Three Parts.” Journal of Landscape Architecture 3, no. 1 (March 
2008): 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2008.9723392. 

Milligan, Brett. “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene.” Places Journal, no. 2015 (June 29, 2015). 
https://doi.org/10.22269/150629.

Nassar, Dalia. “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.” In Covert Plants: Vegetal Consciousness and Agency in 
an Anthropocentric World, edited by Prudence Gibson and Baylee Brits, 1st 
edition. Brainstorm Books. Santa Barbara, CA: Punctum Books, 2018.

Nassauer, Joan I. “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care.” 
HortScience 6, no. 23 (1988): 973–77.

Nassauer, Joan Iverson. “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames.” Landscape 
Journal 14, no. 2 (1995): 161–70. https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.14.2.161.

“Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.” Accessed December 18, 2019. 
https://gruen-berlin.de/en/naturpark-sudgelande. 

Neilson, Ronald P., Louis F. Pitelka, Allen M. Solomon, Ran Nathan, Guy F. 
Midgley, Jóse M. V. Fragoso, Heike Lischke, and Ken Thompson. “Forecasting 
Regional to Global Plant Migration in Response to Climate Change.” 
BioScience 55, no. 9 (2005): 749. 
https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0749:FRTGPM]2.0.CO;2. 

Nigel Dunnett. “About,” February 8, 2016. 
http://www.nigeldunnett.com/about/.   

Ontl, Todd A, Maria K Janowiak, Christopher W Swanston, Jad Daley, Stephen 
Handler, Meredith Cornett, Steve Hagenbuch, Cathy Handrick, Liza Mccarthy, 
and Nancy Patch. “Forest Management for Carbon Sequestration and Climate 
Adaptation.” Journal of Forestry 118, no. 1 (January 7, 2020): 86–101. 
https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvz062. 

Parsons, Russ. “Conflict between Ecological Sustainability and Environmental 
Aesthetics: Conundrum,Canärd or Curiosity.” Landscape and Urban Planning 
32, no. 3 (August 1995): 227–44. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(95)07004-E.

Pavao-Zuckerman, Mitchell A. “The Nature of Urban Soils and Their Role in 
Ecological Restoration in Cities.” Restoration Ecology 16, no. 4 (December 
2008): 642–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.2008.00486.x. 
Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin, 2016. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiNfjYaDiEE&fbclid=IwAR1QjJhDXJCrkz7L
dKnujp9Vq1XsQvtxjMeBxXDMMmjfBS_Axq5LYdK46g. 

Robinson, Sarah L., and Jeremy T. Lundholm. “Ecosystem Services Provided by 
Urban Spontaneous Vegetation.” Urban Ecosystems 15, no. 3 (September 
2012): 545–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-012-0225-8. 

Sanramour, Frank S. “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense,” 1999, 57–66.

Scheffler, Nathanael. “Parc Henri Matisse.” Accessed December 18, 2019. 
http://www.nathanaelscheffler.com/parc-henri-matisse.

Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases,” 2016. 
http://www.greytogreen.org.uk/phase2.html. 

Spirn, Anna W. “The Poetics of City and Nature : Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design.” Places 6, no. 1 (1989): 82–93.

Staff Writers. “Structurally Complex Forests Better at Carbon Sequestration.” 
ScienceDaily. Accessed May 7, 2020. 
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/08/190812130843.htm. 

Urban, James. “Up by Roots: Healthy Soils and Tress in the Built Environment.” 
Champaign, Ill: International Society of Arboriculture, 2008.

Van Matre, Lynn. “Garden Rare in Suburbs Germinates Eco-Concept.” 
Chicagotribune.Com, 2004. 
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2004-07-06-0407060102-stor
y.html.

Wainwright, Henry, Charlotte Jordan, and Harry Day. “Environmental Impact of 
Production Horticulture.” In Horticulture: Plants for People and Places, Volume 
1, edited by Geoffrey R. Dixon and David E. Aldous, 503–22. Dordrecht: 
Springer Netherlands, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8578-5_15. 

Wilde, H. Dayton, Kamal J. K. Gandhi, and Gregory Colson. “State of the 
Science and Challenges of Breeding Landscape Plants with Ecological 
Function.” Horticulture Research 2 (2015): 14069. 
https://doi.org/10.1038/hortres.2014.69   

Zhao, Jingwei, Ronghua Wang, Pingjia Luo, Lu Xing, and Tong Sun. “Visual 
Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological Quality and 
Aesthetic Preference.” Landscape and Ecological Engineering 13, no. 1 
(January 2017): 107–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355-016-0306-6



106

“Agency (Philosophy).” In Wikipedia, December 11, 2019. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Agency_(philosophy)&oldid=9302
54620.

Alberti, M. Advances in Urban Ecology: Integrating Humans and Ecological 
Processes in Urban Ecosystems. New York: Springer, 2008.

“ASLA 2009 Professional Awards,” 2009. 
https://www.asla.org/2009awards/298.html.

Bartens, Julia, Susan D. Day, J. Roger Harris, Joseph E. Dove, and Theresa M. 
Wynn. “Can Urban Tree Roots Improve Infiltration through Compacted 
Subsoils for Stormwater Management?” Journal of Environmental Quality 37, 
no. 6 (November 2008): 2048–57. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2008.0117. 

Canadian Ornamental Horticulture Alliance. “The Impact of Ornamental 
Horticulture on Canada’s Economy”. January 2009. 
https://cnla.ca/uploads/pdf/Deloitte_The-impact-of-ornamental-horticulture-o
n-Canada%E2%80%99s-economy.pdf 

Cerra, Joshua F. “Emerging Strategies for Voluntary Urban Ecological 
Stewardship on Private Property.” Landscape and Urban Planning 157 (January 
2017): 586–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.06.016.

Cerra, Joshua F. “The Yardworks Project: Developing Urban Ecological Design 
Strategies for Residential Private Property.” Edited by Charlene M LeBleu. 
Landscape Research Record, no. 5 (2016): 91–100.

Craul, Phillip J. “Urban Soil in Landscape Design.” New York: Wiley, 1992

Darwin, Charles and Francis, Darwin. The Power of Movement in Plants. New 
York: D. Appleton and Company, 1898.

Del Tredici, Peter. “The Role of Horticulture in a Changing World.” In Botanical 
Progress, Horticultural Innovation and Cultural Changes, edited by Michel 
Conan, W. John Kress, Smithsonian Institution, and United States Botanic 
Garden. Washington, D.C. : [Cambridge]: Published by Dumbarton Oaks 
Research Library and Collection ; Distributed by Harvard University Press, 
2007.

Del Tredici, Peter. “Spontaneous Urban Vegetation: Reflections of Change in a 
Globalized World.” Nature and Culture 5, no. 3 (December 1, 2010): 299–315. 
https://doi.org/10.3167/nc.2010.050305.

Del Tredici, Peter. “The Flora of the Future.” Places Journal, no. 2014 (April 17, 
2014). https://doi.org/10.22269/140417. 

Del Tredici, Peter, and Michael Luegering. “A Cosmopolitan Urban Meadow for 
the Northeast.” Harvard Design Magazine, no. 37 (2014).

Doody, Brendan J, Harvey C Perkins, Jon J Sullivan, Colin D Meurk, and 
Brendan J Stewart. “Performing Weeds: Gardening, Plant Agencies and Urban 
Plant Conservation,” no. 56 (2014): 124–36.
Dunnett, Nigel. “The Dynamic Nature of Plant Communities - Pattern and 
Process in Designed Plant Comminities.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, 
Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel 
Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 
2008.

Dunnett, Nigel, and James Hitchmough. “Introduction to Naturalistic Planting 
in Urban Landscapes.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, Ecology and 
Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel Dunnett and 
James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 2008.

Dunnett, Nigel, Wolfram Kircher, and Noel Kingsbury. “Communicating 
Naturalistic Plantings: Plans and Specifications.” In The Dynamic Landscape: 
Design, Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by 
Nigel Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & 
Francis, 2008.

Elkin, Rosetta S. “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life.” Journal of 
Landscape Architecture 12, no.2 (May 4, 2017): 60–73. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2017.1361087.

Elkin, Rosetta S. “Working with Plant Life.” New Geographies Journal, no. 9 
(January 2018): 125–29.

fleur, Marcus de la. “One Drop at a Time - New Resource Paradigms at 168 Elm 
Ave.,” 2014. https://www.delafleur.com/168_Elm/.

Gandy, Matthew. “Cosmopolis: Urban Islands: Parc Henri-Matisse, Lille.” 
Cosmopolis (blog), May 4, 2011. 
http://matthewgandy.blogspot.com/2011/05/urban-islands-parc-henri-matisse
-lille.html.

Gandy, Matthew. “Entropy by Design: Gilles Clément, Parc Henri Matisse and the 
Limits to Avant-Garde Urbanism: Gilles Clément and the Limits to Avant-Garde 
Urbanism.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 37, no. 1 
(January 2013): 259–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2012.01164.x.

 “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield.” CIRIA, n.d. 
https://www.susdrain.org/casestudies/pdfs/suds_awards/006_18_03_28_susdr
ain_suds_awards_grey_to_green_phase_1_sheffield.pdf. 

Hazelwood, Jon. “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting Design – 
Urban Choreography.” Urban Choreography, 2019. 
https://urbanchoreography.net/2019/10/10/super-bloom-new-floralfrontiers-in-
public-planting-design/.
 
“How We Use Water.” Accessed May 6, 2020. 
http://www.metrovancouver.org/welovewater/conservingwater/how-we-use-wa
ter/Pages/default.aspx.  

Ignatieva, Maria E., and Glenn H. Stewart. “Homogeneity of Urban Biotopes and 
Similarity of Landscape Design Language in Former Colonial Cities.” In Ecology 
of Cities and Towns, edited by Mark J. McDonnell, Amy K. Hahs, and Jurgen H. 
Breuste, 399–421. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. 
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609763.024.

Skinner, Jonathan. “Gardens of Resistance: Gilles Clément, New Poetics, and 
Future Landscapes.” Qui Parle 19, no. 2 (2011): 259. 
https://doi.org/10.5250/quiparle.19.2.0259.

Jones, Louisa. “Gilles Clément Revisited: Biology, Art and Ecology. A Reply to 
Danielle Dagenais.” Studies in the History of Gardens & Designed Landscapes 
26, no. 3 (July 2006): 249–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/14601176.2006.10435469. 

Kim, Jinki, and John Whalen. “One Drop At A Time.” Landscape Performance 
Series, December 19, 2013. 
https://www.landscapeperformance.org/case-study-briefs/one-drop-at-a-time.

Kingsbury, Noel. “Contemporary Overview of Naturalistic Planting Design.” In 
The Dynamic Landscape: Design, Ecology and Management of Naturalistic 
Urban Planting, edited by Nigel Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. 
London: Taylor & Francis, 2008.

Koningen, Hein. “Creative Managment.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, 
Ecology and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel 
Dunnett and James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 
2008.

Kowarik, Ingo, and Andreas Langer. “Natur-Park Südgelände: Linking 
Conservation and Recreation in an Abandoned Railyard in Berlin.” In Wild 
Urban Woodlands, edited by Ingo Kowarik and Stefan Körner, 287–99. 
Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2005. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-26859-6_18.

Lachmund, Jens.  “Places in the Making: From Wastelands to Urban Nature 
Parks.” In Greening Berlin: The Co-Production of Science, Politics, and Urban 
Nature. Inside Technology. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2013.

Landscape and the City, 2017. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=185&v=Sl1qvv5Q6Z8&feature
=emb_logo

Lokman, Kees, and Susan Herrington. “Gardens as Migratory Devices.” New 
Geographies 8 (2016): 141–51.

Meyer, Elizabeth K. “Sustaining Beauty. The Performance of Appearance: A 
Manifesto in Three Parts.” Journal of Landscape Architecture 3, no. 1 (March 
2008): 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2008.9723392. 

Milligan, Brett. “Landscape Migration: Environmental Design in the 
Anthropocene.” Places Journal, no. 2015 (June 29, 2015). 
https://doi.org/10.22269/150629.

Nassar, Dalia. “Metaphoric Plants: Goethe’s Metamorphosis of Plants and the 
Metaphors of Reason.” In Covert Plants: Vegetal Consciousness and Agency in 
an Anthropocentric World, edited by Prudence Gibson and Baylee Brits, 1st 
edition. Brainstorm Books. Santa Barbara, CA: Punctum Books, 2018.

Nassauer, Joan I. “The Aesthetics of Horticulture: Neatness as a Form of Care.” 
HortScience 6, no. 23 (1988): 973–77.

Nassauer, Joan Iverson. “Messy Ecosystems, Orderly Frames.” Landscape 
Journal 14, no. 2 (1995): 161–70. https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.14.2.161.

“Natur-Park Schöneberger Südgelände.” Accessed December 18, 2019. 
https://gruen-berlin.de/en/naturpark-sudgelande. 

Neilson, Ronald P., Louis F. Pitelka, Allen M. Solomon, Ran Nathan, Guy F. 
Midgley, Jóse M. V. Fragoso, Heike Lischke, and Ken Thompson. “Forecasting 
Regional to Global Plant Migration in Response to Climate Change.” 
BioScience 55, no. 9 (2005): 749. 
https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2005)055[0749:FRTGPM]2.0.CO;2. 

Nigel Dunnett. “About,” February 8, 2016. 
http://www.nigeldunnett.com/about/.   

Ontl, Todd A, Maria K Janowiak, Christopher W Swanston, Jad Daley, Stephen 
Handler, Meredith Cornett, Steve Hagenbuch, Cathy Handrick, Liza Mccarthy, 
and Nancy Patch. “Forest Management for Carbon Sequestration and Climate 
Adaptation.” Journal of Forestry 118, no. 1 (January 7, 2020): 86–101. 
https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvz062. 

Parsons, Russ. “Conflict between Ecological Sustainability and Environmental 
Aesthetics: Conundrum,Canärd or Curiosity.” Landscape and Urban Planning 
32, no. 3 (August 1995): 227–44. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(95)07004-E.

Pavao-Zuckerman, Mitchell A. “The Nature of Urban Soils and Their Role in 
Ecological Restoration in Cities.” Restoration Ecology 16, no. 4 (December 
2008): 642–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.2008.00486.x. 
Resilience Colloquium: Rosetta Sarah Elkin, 2016. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiNfjYaDiEE&fbclid=IwAR1QjJhDXJCrkz7L
dKnujp9Vq1XsQvtxjMeBxXDMMmjfBS_Axq5LYdK46g. 

Robinson, Sarah L., and Jeremy T. Lundholm. “Ecosystem Services Provided by 
Urban Spontaneous Vegetation.” Urban Ecosystems 15, no. 3 (September 
2012): 545–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-012-0225-8. 

Sanramour, Frank S. “Trees for Urban Planting: Diversity, Uniformity, and 
Common Sense,” 1999, 57–66.

Scheffler, Nathanael. “Parc Henri Matisse.” Accessed December 18, 2019. 
http://www.nathanaelscheffler.com/parc-henri-matisse.

Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases,” 2016. 
http://www.greytogreen.org.uk/phase2.html. 

Spirn, Anna W. “The Poetics of City and Nature : Toward a New Aesthetic for 
Urban Design.” Places 6, no. 1 (1989): 82–93.

Staff Writers. “Structurally Complex Forests Better at Carbon Sequestration.” 
ScienceDaily. Accessed May 7, 2020. 
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/08/190812130843.htm. 

Urban, James. “Up by Roots: Healthy Soils and Tress in the Built Environment.” 
Champaign, Ill: International Society of Arboriculture, 2008.

Van Matre, Lynn. “Garden Rare in Suburbs Germinates Eco-Concept.” 
Chicagotribune.Com, 2004. 
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2004-07-06-0407060102-stor
y.html.

Wainwright, Henry, Charlotte Jordan, and Harry Day. “Environmental Impact of 
Production Horticulture.” In Horticulture: Plants for People and Places, Volume 
1, edited by Geoffrey R. Dixon and David E. Aldous, 503–22. Dordrecht: 
Springer Netherlands, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8578-5_15. 

Wilde, H. Dayton, Kamal J. K. Gandhi, and Gregory Colson. “State of the 
Science and Challenges of Breeding Landscape Plants with Ecological 
Function.” Horticulture Research 2 (2015): 14069. 
https://doi.org/10.1038/hortres.2014.69   

Zhao, Jingwei, Ronghua Wang, Pingjia Luo, Lu Xing, and Tong Sun. “Visual 
Ecology: Exploring the Relationships between Ecological Quality and 
Aesthetic Preference.” Landscape and Ecological Engineering 13, no. 1 
(January 2017): 107–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11355-016-0306-6



107

Chow, Jane. “The Effect of Mowing and Hand Removal on the Regrowth Rate 
of Himalayan Blackberry (Rubus Armeniacus).” Simon Fraser University, 2018.

Greenfield, Patrick. “On the Verge: A Quiet Roadside Revolution Is Boosting 
Wildflowers.” the Guardian, March 14, 2020. 
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/mar/14/on-the-verge-a-quiet-
roadsiderevolution-is-boosting-wildflowers-aoe. 

Hoshovsky, Marc. “ELEMENT STEWARDSHIP ABSTRACT for Rubus Discolor, 
(Rubus Procerus) Himalayan Blackberry,” n.d.

Mooney, Patrick, and Don Wuori. “Urban Songbird Habitat: Landscape Design 
Guidelines.” Holland Barrs Planning Group Inc., August 9, 2007.

“Spontaneous Urban Plants |.” Accessed May 7, 2020. 
http://www.spontaneousurbanplants.org/services/. 

“Wild Edible Plants of British Columbia.” Accessed May 7, 2020. 
https://northernbushcraft.com/guide.php?ctgy=edible_plants&region=bc. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY



108

1. Modified from: 
 Dunnett, Nigel, and James Hitchmough. “Introduction to Naturalistic 
Planting in Urban Landscapes.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, Ecology 
and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel Dunnett and 
James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 2008. 

2. Elkin, Rosetta S. “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life.” Journal of 
Landscape Architecture 12, no.2 (May 4, 2017): 60–73. https://-
doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2017.1361087.

3. Elkin, Rosetta S. “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life.” Journal of 
Landscape Architecture 12, no.2 (May 4, 2017): 60–73. https://-
doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2017.1361087.

4. Author’s Graphic

5. Author’s photograph. Grounds of Wimpole Hall, Cambrideshire, UK. 
Taken in Nov 2013

6. Accessed from: https://www.facebook.com/healthyyardsinternational/-
photos/a.367647497006552/799273747177256/?type=3&theater

7. Author’s photographs, Various locations on UBC campus

8. Author’s photographs, Various locations in Vancouver

9. Author’s photographs, Various locations in Vancouver

10. Author’s photograph. Vancouver street Dec 2019
 Author’s photograph. Vancouver street Jan 2019
 Author’s photograph. Fraser River Park Nov 2017

11. Author’s photograph. Queen Elizabeth park July 2018
 Author’s photograph. Butchart Gardens Aug 2017
 Author’s photograph. Vancouver street Dec 2019

12. Accessed from: https://www.reddit.com/r/gardening/com-
ments/7ezbd5/derborence_island_part_of_gilles_clements/ 

13. Scheffler, Nathanael. “Parc Henri Matisse —.” Accessed May 7, 2020. 
http://www.nathanaelscheffler.com/parc-henri-matisse. 

14. Scheffler, Nathanael. “Parc Henri Matisse —.” Accessed May 7, 2020. 
http://www.nathanaelscheffler.com/parc-henri-matisse.  

15. Kelly, Scott. “YardWorks Press.” Habitat Network. Accessed May 7, 2020. 
https://content.yardmap.org/yardworks-press/.

16. Cerra, Joshua F, and Rhiannon Crain. “BEATING THE PROPERTY BARRI-
ER: BUILDING COMMUNITY TO BUILD ECOLOGY IN CITIES.” Landscape 
Research Record, no. 5 (2016): 225–44.

17. fleur, Marcus de la. “One Drop at a Time - New Resource Paradigms at 
168 Elm Ave.,” 2014. https://www.delafleur.com/168_Elm/.
 
18. fleur, Marcus de la. “One Drop at a Time - New Resource Paradigms at 
168 Elm Ave.,” 2014. https://www.delafleur.com/168_Elm/.
 
19.   “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield.” CIRIA, n.d. https://www.-
susdrain.org/casestudies/pdfs/-
suds_awards/006_18_03_28_susdrain_suds_awards_grey_to_green_phase_1_
sheffield.pdf.

20.  Hazelwood, Jon. “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design – Urban Choreography.” Urban Choreography, 2019. https://urbancho-
reography.net/2019/10/10/super-bloom-new-flo-
ralfrontiers-in-public-planting-design/.

21.  Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases,” 2016. 
http://www.greytogreen.org.uk/phase2.html. 

22.  Lokman, Kees. “Vacancy as a Laboratory: Design Criteria for Reimagin-
ing Social-Ecological Systems on Vacant Urban Lands.” Landscape Research 
42, no. 7 (October 3, 2017): 728–46. https://-
doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2017.1355446. 

23. sagt, Vom Glück auf Reisen-ins Grüne » Kleine Fluchten Berlin. “Was 
blüht denn da im Gleisbett? Ein Spaziergang im Natur-Park Südgelände.” 
Kleine Fluchten Berlin (blog). Accessed May 7, 2020. https://ww-
w.kleine-fluchten-ber-
lin.de/was-bluht-denn-da-im-gleisbett-ein-botanischer-spaziergang-imnatur-p
ark-sudgelande/. 

24. Data from:
 “Invasive Non-Native Species | Biodivcanada.” Accessed May 7, 2020. 
https://biodivcanada.chm-cbd.net/ecosystem-sta-
tus-trends-2010/invasive-non-native-species#ws1D66248B 

Ritchie, Hannah, and Max Roser. “CO2 and Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” Our 
World in Data, May 11, 2017. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-green-
house-gas-emissions. 

“Who Lives in America: Teaching Immigration History With Data | Scholas-
tic.Com.” Accessed May 7, 2020. http://teacher.scholastic.com/activities/immi-
gration/immigration_data/index.htm. 
 

25. Data from:
 Avis-Riordan, Katie. “This Infographic Reveals How International Your 
Garden Really Is.” House Beautiful, October 31, 2017. http://www.housebeauti-
ful.co.uk/garden/plants/news/a2698/flower-plant-originsinfographic/. 
 
National Climate Assessment. “National Climate Assessment.” Accessed May 7, 
2020. https://nca2014.globalchange.gov/node/38744. 
  
 

LIST OF FIGURES



109

1. Modified from: 
 Dunnett, Nigel, and James Hitchmough. “Introduction to Naturalistic 
Planting in Urban Landscapes.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, Ecology 
and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel Dunnett and 
James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 2008. 

2. Elkin, Rosetta S. “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life.” Journal of 
Landscape Architecture 12, no.2 (May 4, 2017): 60–73. https://-
doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2017.1361087.

3. Elkin, Rosetta S. “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life.” Journal of 
Landscape Architecture 12, no.2 (May 4, 2017): 60–73. https://-
doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2017.1361087.

4. Author’s Graphic

5. Author’s photograph. Grounds of Wimpole Hall, Cambrideshire, UK. 
Taken in Nov 2013

6. Accessed from: https://www.facebook.com/healthyyardsinternational/-
photos/a.367647497006552/799273747177256/?type=3&theater

7. Author’s photographs, Various locations on UBC campus

8. Author’s photographs, Various locations in Vancouver

9. Author’s photographs, Various locations in Vancouver

10. Author’s photograph. Vancouver street Dec 2019
 Author’s photograph. Vancouver street Jan 2019
 Author’s photograph. Fraser River Park Nov 2017

11. Author’s photograph. Queen Elizabeth park July 2018
 Author’s photograph. Butchart Gardens Aug 2017
 Author’s photograph. Vancouver street Dec 2019

12. Accessed from: https://www.reddit.com/r/gardening/com-
ments/7ezbd5/derborence_island_part_of_gilles_clements/ 

13. Scheffler, Nathanael. “Parc Henri Matisse —.” Accessed May 7, 2020. 
http://www.nathanaelscheffler.com/parc-henri-matisse. 

14. Scheffler, Nathanael. “Parc Henri Matisse —.” Accessed May 7, 2020. 
http://www.nathanaelscheffler.com/parc-henri-matisse.  

15. Kelly, Scott. “YardWorks Press.” Habitat Network. Accessed May 7, 2020. 
https://content.yardmap.org/yardworks-press/.

16. Cerra, Joshua F, and Rhiannon Crain. “BEATING THE PROPERTY BARRI-
ER: BUILDING COMMUNITY TO BUILD ECOLOGY IN CITIES.” Landscape 
Research Record, no. 5 (2016): 225–44.

17. fleur, Marcus de la. “One Drop at a Time - New Resource Paradigms at 
168 Elm Ave.,” 2014. https://www.delafleur.com/168_Elm/.
 
18. fleur, Marcus de la. “One Drop at a Time - New Resource Paradigms at 
168 Elm Ave.,” 2014. https://www.delafleur.com/168_Elm/.
 
19.   “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield.” CIRIA, n.d. https://www.-
susdrain.org/casestudies/pdfs/-
suds_awards/006_18_03_28_susdrain_suds_awards_grey_to_green_phase_1_
sheffield.pdf.

20.  Hazelwood, Jon. “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design – Urban Choreography.” Urban Choreography, 2019. https://urbancho-
reography.net/2019/10/10/super-bloom-new-flo-
ralfrontiers-in-public-planting-design/.

21.  Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases,” 2016. 
http://www.greytogreen.org.uk/phase2.html. 

22.  Lokman, Kees. “Vacancy as a Laboratory: Design Criteria for Reimagin-
ing Social-Ecological Systems on Vacant Urban Lands.” Landscape Research 
42, no. 7 (October 3, 2017): 728–46. https://-
doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2017.1355446. 

23. sagt, Vom Glück auf Reisen-ins Grüne » Kleine Fluchten Berlin. “Was 
blüht denn da im Gleisbett? Ein Spaziergang im Natur-Park Südgelände.” 
Kleine Fluchten Berlin (blog). Accessed May 7, 2020. https://ww-
w.kleine-fluchten-ber-
lin.de/was-bluht-denn-da-im-gleisbett-ein-botanischer-spaziergang-imnatur-p
ark-sudgelande/. 

24. Data from:
 “Invasive Non-Native Species | Biodivcanada.” Accessed May 7, 2020. 
https://biodivcanada.chm-cbd.net/ecosystem-sta-
tus-trends-2010/invasive-non-native-species#ws1D66248B 

Ritchie, Hannah, and Max Roser. “CO2 and Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” Our 
World in Data, May 11, 2017. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-green-
house-gas-emissions. 

“Who Lives in America: Teaching Immigration History With Data | Scholas-
tic.Com.” Accessed May 7, 2020. http://teacher.scholastic.com/activities/immi-
gration/immigration_data/index.htm. 
 

25. Data from:
 Avis-Riordan, Katie. “This Infographic Reveals How International Your 
Garden Really Is.” House Beautiful, October 31, 2017. http://www.housebeauti-
ful.co.uk/garden/plants/news/a2698/flower-plant-originsinfographic/. 
 
National Climate Assessment. “National Climate Assessment.” Accessed May 7, 
2020. https://nca2014.globalchange.gov/node/38744. 
  
 



110

1. Modified from: 
 Dunnett, Nigel, and James Hitchmough. “Introduction to Naturalistic 
Planting in Urban Landscapes.” In The Dynamic Landscape: Design, Ecology 
and Management of Naturalistic Urban Planting, edited by Nigel Dunnett and 
James Hitchmough, Paperback ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 2008. 

2. Elkin, Rosetta S. “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life.” Journal of 
Landscape Architecture 12, no.2 (May 4, 2017): 60–73. https://-
doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2017.1361087.

3. Elkin, Rosetta S. “Live Matter: Towards a Theory of Plant Life.” Journal of 
Landscape Architecture 12, no.2 (May 4, 2017): 60–73. https://-
doi.org/10.1080/18626033.2017.1361087.

4. Author’s Graphic

5. Author’s photograph. Grounds of Wimpole Hall, Cambrideshire, UK. 
Taken in Nov 2013

6. Accessed from: https://www.facebook.com/healthyyardsinternational/-
photos/a.367647497006552/799273747177256/?type=3&theater

7. Author’s photographs, Various locations on UBC campus

8. Author’s photographs, Various locations in Vancouver

9. Author’s photographs, Various locations in Vancouver

10. Author’s photograph. Vancouver street Dec 2019
 Author’s photograph. Vancouver street Jan 2019
 Author’s photograph. Fraser River Park Nov 2017

11. Author’s photograph. Queen Elizabeth park July 2018
 Author’s photograph. Butchart Gardens Aug 2017
 Author’s photograph. Vancouver street Dec 2019

12. Accessed from: https://www.reddit.com/r/gardening/com-
ments/7ezbd5/derborence_island_part_of_gilles_clements/ 

13. Scheffler, Nathanael. “Parc Henri Matisse —.” Accessed May 7, 2020. 
http://www.nathanaelscheffler.com/parc-henri-matisse. 

14. Scheffler, Nathanael. “Parc Henri Matisse —.” Accessed May 7, 2020. 
http://www.nathanaelscheffler.com/parc-henri-matisse.  

15. Kelly, Scott. “YardWorks Press.” Habitat Network. Accessed May 7, 2020. 
https://content.yardmap.org/yardworks-press/.

16. Cerra, Joshua F, and Rhiannon Crain. “BEATING THE PROPERTY BARRI-
ER: BUILDING COMMUNITY TO BUILD ECOLOGY IN CITIES.” Landscape 
Research Record, no. 5 (2016): 225–44.

17. fleur, Marcus de la. “One Drop at a Time - New Resource Paradigms at 
168 Elm Ave.,” 2014. https://www.delafleur.com/168_Elm/.
 
18. fleur, Marcus de la. “One Drop at a Time - New Resource Paradigms at 
168 Elm Ave.,” 2014. https://www.delafleur.com/168_Elm/.
 
19.   “Grey to Green Phase 1, Sheffield.” CIRIA, n.d. https://www.-
susdrain.org/casestudies/pdfs/-
suds_awards/006_18_03_28_susdrain_suds_awards_grey_to_green_phase_1_
sheffield.pdf.

20.  Hazelwood, Jon. “Super Bloom: New Floral Frontiers in Public Planting 
Design – Urban Choreography.” Urban Choreography, 2019. https://urbancho-
reography.net/2019/10/10/super-bloom-new-flo-
ralfrontiers-in-public-planting-design/.

21.  Sheffield City Council. “Grey to Green Project – Future Phases,” 2016. 
http://www.greytogreen.org.uk/phase2.html. 

22.  Lokman, Kees. “Vacancy as a Laboratory: Design Criteria for Reimagin-
ing Social-Ecological Systems on Vacant Urban Lands.” Landscape Research 
42, no. 7 (October 3, 2017): 728–46. https://-
doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2017.1355446. 

23. sagt, Vom Glück auf Reisen-ins Grüne » Kleine Fluchten Berlin. “Was 
blüht denn da im Gleisbett? Ein Spaziergang im Natur-Park Südgelände.” 
Kleine Fluchten Berlin (blog). Accessed May 7, 2020. https://ww-
w.kleine-fluchten-ber-
lin.de/was-bluht-denn-da-im-gleisbett-ein-botanischer-spaziergang-imnatur-p
ark-sudgelande/. 

24. Data from:
 “Invasive Non-Native Species | Biodivcanada.” Accessed May 7, 2020. 
https://biodivcanada.chm-cbd.net/ecosystem-sta-
tus-trends-2010/invasive-non-native-species#ws1D66248B 

Ritchie, Hannah, and Max Roser. “CO2 and Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” Our 
World in Data, May 11, 2017. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-green-
house-gas-emissions. 

“Who Lives in America: Teaching Immigration History With Data | Scholas-
tic.Com.” Accessed May 7, 2020. http://teacher.scholastic.com/activities/immi-
gration/immigration_data/index.htm. 
 

25. Data from:
 Avis-Riordan, Katie. “This Infographic Reveals How International Your 
Garden Really Is.” House Beautiful, October 31, 2017. http://www.housebeauti-
ful.co.uk/garden/plants/news/a2698/flower-plant-originsinfographic/. 
 
National Climate Assessment. “National Climate Assessment.” Accessed May 7, 
2020. https://nca2014.globalchange.gov/node/38744. 
  
 



111


	Blank Page