Establish “green infrastructure” in urban areas

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    not assessed
  • Certainty
    not assessed
  • Harms
    not assessed

Study locations

Key messages

  • One study evaluated the effects of establishing “green infrastructure in urban areas on butterflies and moths. This study was in Taiwan.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

  • Richness/diversity (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Taiwan found that green roofs had a lower species richness of butterflies than urban parks.

POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

  • Abundance (1 study): One replicated, site comparison study in Taiwan found that green roofs had a lower abundance of butterflies than urban parks, but the abundance was higher on older green roofs with more nectar plant species in a larger area.

BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A replicated, site comparison study in 2011–2012 on 11 green roofs in Taipei City, Taiwan (Lee & Lin 2015) found that green roofs had a lower abundance and species richness of butterflies than urban parks, but the abundance of butterflies was higher on older green roofs with more nectar plant species in a larger area. On green roofs, both the abundance (514 individuals) and species richness (12 species) of butterflies was lower than in urban parks (abundance: 3,141–8,882 butterflies; richness: 50–109 species). However, the abundance of butterflies was higher on green roofs established longer ago, and on roofs with more nectar plant species covering a larger area (data presented as model results). Eleven green roofs (95–590 m2, 7–34 m above ground), established 13–46 months before the study, contained a total of 34 butterfly nectar plant species (1–16 species/roof, covering 2–41 m2). Two urban parks (13–26 ha), established 18–25 years before the study, contained 20–45 nectar plant species. From August 2011–May 2012, butterflies were surveyed for four hours twice/month on each roof. From July 2008–June 2009, butterflies were surveyed in one urban park, and from March 2011–February 2012 they were surveyed in a second park (no further details provided).

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Bladon A.J., Smith R.K. & Sutherland W.J. (2022) Butterfly and Moth Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions for butterflies and moths. Conservation Evidence Series Synopsis. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Butterfly and Moth Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Butterfly and Moth Conservation
Butterfly and Moth Conservation

Butterfly and Moth Conservation - Published 2022

Butterfly and Moth Synopsis

What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 19

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust