By Shaikh Fairul Edros Ahmad Shaikh, Bergita Gusti Lipu, Miya Irawati, Alex M Lechner, and Perrine Hamel

Caption: Differences in vegetation structure between new towns and unplanned settlements. *Parks are a comparison between a private park in a new town and a public park near unplanned settlements. While there are some physical differences in urban nature, we examined whether these differences are reflected in how ecosystem services (or nature’s benefits) are used and perceived by residents in these communities. Photo Credit: Shaikh Fairul Edros.

This Plain Language Summary is published in advance of the paper discussed. Please check back soon for a link to the full paper.

Urban nature, such as trees, parks, rivers, and lakes, supports everyday life in cities. It can provide water, help cool hot neighbourhoods, reduce flooding, and improve well-being through contact with greenery. These benefits are known as ecosystem services. Not everyone benefits from these services in the same way. In fast-growing cities, different settlement types often reflect major differences in wealth, infrastructure, and environmental quality. This matters because it can shape both people’s access to urban nature and how they experience its benefits.

This study looks at South Tangerang City, Indonesia, where master-planned new town developments sit alongside unplanned settlements that have grown more organically. We surveyed 403 residents across both settlement types to understand how they use and perceive different ecosystem services. We considered three broad categories: (1) provisioning services (such as water); (2) regulating services (such as flood and heat mitigation); and (3) cultural services (such as enjoying views of nature from home and recreation).

We found clear differences in some ecosystem services. Residents in new town developments were about twice as likely to report having views of nature from their homes, suggesting that people do not evenly share access to everyday experiences of greenery. In contrast, residents in unplanned settlements were more likely to rely on groundwater for water provisioning, indicating a greater dependence on natural water sources in daily life. This reliance may also signal higher vulnerability if people pollute, overuse, or disrupt those sources.

Interestingly, perceptions of regulating services, including the role of nature in reducing heat and flooding, were similar across both settlement types. Overall, our findings show that settlement types in the city, shaped in part by new-build gentrification, influences how residents access and depend on ecosystem services. Urban planning should recognise these social-ecological differences and aim to reduce unequal access to the benefits of urban nature across communities.