Tree compensation rates: Compensating for the loss of future tree values

Nowak, David J.; Aevermann, Tim

doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2019.03.014

Cited by 19 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The distribution of tree diameters has functional implications, as tree size and leaf area influence supporting, provisioning, and regulating ecosystem services. With respect to these ecosystem services, a youthful distribution may have relatively limited functional benefit in comparison with a maturing distribution because small trees are relatively minor contributors to ecosystem services [3][4][5]. Nevertheless, as small trees in cities with a youthful distribution grow into larger size classes, cities will benefit from increased ecosystem services.…”

Section: Functional Implications Of Structural Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Structural diversity also has functional repercussions. Large trees are greater functional contributors than small trees with respect to ecosystem services [3][4][5], so cities dominated by small trees may be missing out on valuable ecosystem services. As such, diameter distributions can be used to characterise various differing levels of ecosystem service provision.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

DBH Distributions in America’s Urban Forests—An Overview of Structural Diversity

Morgenroth

Nowak

Koeser

2020

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives: The structural diversity of an urban forest affects ecosystem service provision, and can inform management, planning, as well as policy. Trunk diameter at breast height (DBH) is amongst the most common measures of tree structure due to its ease of measurement and strong relationships with other structural and non-structural urban forest characteristics. Materials and Methods: In this study, the DBH distributions of urban forests are summarised for 38 American cities with a combined population of over 30 million people and a range of geographic, climatic, and demographic conditions. The Anderson–Darling (AD) test was used to test the hypothesis that all DBH distributions came from a common population. Moreover, structural diversity was compared using the Shannon–Wiener index. Results: The AD test results failed to identify any statistically significant differences in DBH distributions. However, qualitatively, the DBH distributions have two primary forms, which have important functional, management, and planning implications. The vast majority of cities have an exponentially inverse-proportional distribution, such that the proportion of trees in each successively larger DBH class decreases exponentially. The Shannon–Wiener index indicates an uneven DBH distribution in the cities with an exponentially inverse-proportional diameter distribution; these cities are dominated by trees in the smallest diameter class. Potential explanations for a large proportion of trees in the smallest diameter classes include a large number of small, naturally regenerating trees; a preference for smaller trees in urban areas; or a recent increase in tree planting efforts. Conclusions: Despite no statistical differences in DBH distributions for the 38 study cities, the functional, management, and planning implications will differ considerably.

show abstract

Section: Functional Implications Of Structural Diversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

DBH Distributions in America’s Urban Forests—An Overview of Structural Diversity

Morgenroth

Nowak

Koeser

2020

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Scots pine ( Pinus sylvestris ) is more valuable than Norway spruce ( Picea abies ) for many ES, including esthetics and recreation (Felton et al 2020 ). Nowak and Aevermann ( 2019 ) also underline the importance of tree size since it strongly affects many ES, such as pollution removal and protection from the sun. They propose calculating the loss of future values that would occur if trees were removed, and suggest that compensation for tree removal be based on the ES losses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ranking ecosystem services delivered by trees in urban and rural areas

Przewoźna

Mączka

Mielewczyk

et al. 2022

Ambio

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Policies and strategies for tree management and protection on a national, regional, and local level have not sufficiently considered differences between rural and urban areas. We used expert knowledge to compare rural and urban areas in a case study evaluating the relative importance of ecosystem services (ES) in policy development. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and focus group discussions were used to rank 17 ES, representing four classes of services: provisioning, regulating, habitat, and cultural. The results indicated that effective protection strategies, beyond simply increasing general tree cover, should consider specific benefits trees provide to local communities. We discuss the role of objective prioritization of ES delivered by trees in urban and rural areas and their consequences for decision-making processes.

show abstract

“…I have termed this required minimum benefit the "annual unit value", or AUV. The protocol resembles a procedure devised, for somewhat different purposes, by Nowak and Aevermann (2019).…”

Section: Rationality and The Unit Valuementioning

confidence: 99%

“…A more sophisticated approach would use a profile of survival through time (Nowak & Aevermann, 2019). This could easily inform the "rational" protocol.…”

Section: Further Adjustmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Further considerations concerning CAVAT

Price

2021

Arboricultural Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The amenity tree valuation method CAVAT apparently gives reduced weight to future benefits, similarly to discounting. Discounting future conditions allows calculation of a value per year per square centimetre of tree basal area, on the premise that tree planting was rationally done. The resulting value ascribed to a target tree is much lower than that calculated by CAVAT. CAVAT's value is the same as given by the "rational" procedure if trees were predicted not to grow. The "rational" perspective provides a reasoned estimate of CAVAT's avowed objective of calculating a compensation replacement value for lost trees. CAVAT itself seemingly calculates over-generous compensation. The "rational" protocol's apparently low value may be adjusted upwards to recognise incomplete planting survival, conditions of high cost, overheads and, sometimes, defective discounting. These, and any neglect of the value of subsequent replanting and of people's particular associations with trees, may undervalue fair financial recompense, especially when no compensation planting is made. However, some of these factors would revise CAVAT values upwards too, so the gap between outcomes might remain. Neither protocol translates from a cost basis to a full amenity benefit of trees.

show abstract

Tree compensation rates: Compensating for the loss of future tree values

Cited by 19 publications

References 10 publications

DBH Distributions in America’s Urban Forests—An Overview of Structural Diversity

DBH Distributions in America’s Urban Forests—An Overview of Structural Diversity

Ranking ecosystem services delivered by trees in urban and rural areas

Further considerations concerning CAVAT

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About