A framework for developing urban forest ecosystem services and goods indicators

Dobbs, Cynnamon; Escobedo, Francisco J.; Zipperer, Wayne C.

doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.11.004

Cited by 349 publications

(206 citation statements)

References 53 publications

(78 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

180

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Experts and practitioners rated a set of indicators in terms of their importance for urban forest planning and design. As Dobbs et al argue, indicators "are one approach that could be used to better understand the structure of an urban forest, the suite of ESG provided by urban forests, and their influence on human well-being using a simple, innovative and repeatable metric" [21] (p.1). This paper extends this idea to include indicators as inputs to guide design and planning of urban forest structure.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indicators were developed from relevant literature that represented a wide range of economic, environmental and social issues [21][22][23][24][25][26]. The indicators included both quantitative and qualitative issues (see Appendix Table A1).…”

Section: Indicator Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Urban forests' contribution to human health and well-being has been the subject of much recent research [9][10][11], but the indicator sets reviewed did not sufficiently capture this dimension. Dobbs et al [21] did address human health and well-being, acknowledging "that quantifying the relationship between the urban forest and human well-being in terms of psychological and social values is critical in assessing ESG [Ecosystem Services and Goods]" [21] (p. 199). Their research focused on regulation indicators, such as air quality services of urban forests, in more detail than other dimensions of human health and well-being.…”

Section: Indicator Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Criteria and indicators are a commonly used tool in the profession of forestry [17][18][19] and urban design [20]. There have been a few studies looking at indicator sets for urban forestry [21][22][23][24][25][26]. None of the existing indicator sets captured the full range of urban forest benefits required for this study.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the purposes of this study, "enabling" indicators will be used that can both direct design choices for a series of alternative futures, as well as measure the results of these futures once they are modeled. Dobbs et al argue that the urban forest structure determines its ability to provide ecosystem services [21]. Enabling indicators are those that determine the structure of the urban forest.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Urban Forest Indicators for Planning and Designing Future Forests

Barron

Sheppard

Condon

2016

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes a research project exploring future urban forests. This study uses a Delphi approach to develop a set of key indicators for healthy, resilient urban forests. Two groups of experts participated in the Delphi survey: International academics and local practitioners. The results of the Delphi indicate that "urban tree diversity" and "physical access to nature" are indicators of high importance. "Tree risk" and "energy conservation" were rated as indicators of relatively low importance. Results revealed some differences between academics and practitioners in terms of their rating of the indicators. The research shows that some indicators rated as high importance are not necessarily the ones measured or promoted by many municipal urban forestry programs. In particular, social indicators of human health and well-being were rated highly by participants, but not routinely measured by urban forestry programs.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Indicator Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Indicator Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Urban Forest Indicators for Planning and Designing Future Forests

Barron

Sheppard

Condon

2016

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Smart Ecology of Cities: Integrating Development Impacts on Ecosystem Services for Land Parcels

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Exotic weeds and fluctuating microclimate can constrain native plant regeneration in urban forest restoration

Wallace

Laughlin

Clarkson

2017

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Restoring forest structure and composition is an important component of urban land management, but we lack clear understanding of the mechanisms driving restoration success. Here we studied two indicators of restoration success in temperate rainforests: native tree regeneration and epiphyte colonization. We hypothesized that ecosystem properties such as forest canopy openness, abundance of exotic herbaceous weeds, and the microclimate directly affect the density and diversity of native tree seedlings and epiphytes. Relationships between environmental conditions and the plant community were investigated in 27 restored urban forests spanning 3-70 years in age and in unrestored and remnant urban forests. We used structural equation modelling to determine the direct and indirect drivers of native tree regeneration and epiphyte colonization in the restored forests. Compared to remnant forest, unrestored forest had fewer native canopy tree species, significantly more light reaching the forest floor annually, and higher exotic weed cover. Additionally, epiphyte density was lower and native tree regeneration density was marginally lower in the unrestored forests. In restored forests, light availability was reduced to levels found in remnant forests within 20 years of restoration planting, followed shortly thereafter by declines in herbaceous exotic weeds and reduced fluctuation of relative humidity and soil temperatures. Contrary to expectations, canopy openness was only an indirect driver of tree regeneration and epiphyte colonization, but it directly regulated weed cover and microclimatic fluctuations, both of which directly drove the density and richness of regeneration and epiphyte colonization. Epiphyte density and diversity were also positively related to forest basal area, as large trees provide physical habitat for colonization. These results imply that ecosystem properties change predictably after initial restoration plantings, and that reaching critical thresholds in some ecosystem properties makes conditions suitable for the regeneration of late successional species, which is vital for restoration success and long-term ecosystem sustainability. Abiotic and biotic conditions that promote tree regeneration and epiphyte colonization will likely be present in forests with a basal area ≥27 m /ha. We recommend that urban forest restoration plantings be designed to promote rapid canopy closure to reduce light availability, suppress herbaceous weeds, and stabilize the microclimate.

show abstract

A framework for developing urban forest ecosystem services and goods indicators

Cited by 349 publications

References 53 publications

Urban Forest Indicators for Planning and Designing Future Forests

Urban Forest Indicators for Planning and Designing Future Forests

Smart Ecology of Cities: Integrating Development Impacts on Ecosystem Services for Land Parcels

Exotic weeds and fluctuating microclimate can constrain native plant regeneration in urban forest restoration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About