Ecosystem services and well-being dimensions related to urban green spaces – A systematic review

• ES and UGS well-being dimensions are revised. • ES supplied by UGS are mainly studied in Europe, China, the USA and South Africa. • Cultural ES are the main services studied in UGS. • Health and good social relations are the most studied well-being dimensions. • Surveys are the preferable method to assess UGS ES. Models validation is limited. Urban green spaces (UGS) supply several ecosystem services (ES) key to human wellbeing. In this article, we conducted a systematic review focused on identifying UGS's ES and wellbeing dimensions. From the 3626 articles screened, 218 were used in this review. Most studies were conducted in Europe, China, the United States of America (USA) and South Africa. Among all UGS, parks and gardens were the most investigated, with less of a focus on urban trees, forests, coastal mangroves, golf courses, roadside vegetation, and brownfields/unmanaged urban greenery. Cultural ES were the most studied, although it is well known that UGS also supply many provisioning and regulating ES. Health (mental and physical) and good social relations were the most investigated wellbeing dimensions, and food security received the least attention. Regarding the methodologies used to investigate the UGS contribution to human wellbeing, surveys, indicators, and surveys combined with statistical methods were the most common. Only a few works focusing on spatial modelling were validated, which is critical to ensure the reliability of the spatial models applied to UGS ES studies. Overall, this work identified the research gaps and future perspectives in ES and wellbeing dimensions provided by UGS, key to improving further research.