Public satisfaction with urban trees and their management in Australia: The roles of values, beliefs, knowledge, and trust

《Public satisfaction with urban trees and their management in Australia: The roles of values, beliefs, knowledge, and trust》

打印

作者: Dave Kendal;Camilo Ordóñez;Melanie Davern;Richard A. Fuller;Dieter F. Hochuli;Rodney van der Ree;Stephen J. Livesley;Caragh G. Threlfall

来源: URBAN FORESTRY & URBAN GREENING,Vol.73,Issue1,Article 127623

语言: 英文

关键字

作者单位: Healthy Landscapes Research Group, School of Geography, Planning and Spatial Sciences, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania 7000, Australia;School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences, Burnley Campus, The University of Melbourne, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia;Healthy Liveable Cities Group, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University, 124 La Trobe Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia;Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria 3052, Australia;School of Biological Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia;School of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales 2006, Australia;School of Biosciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia;WSP Australia Pty Ltd., Australia;Healthy Landscapes Research Group, School of Geography, Planning and Spatial Sciences, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania 7000, Australia;School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences, Burnley Campus, The University of Melbourne, Richmond, Victoria 3121, Australia;Healthy Liveable Cities Group, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University, 124 La Trobe Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia;Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria 3052, Australia;School of Biological Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland 4072, Australia;School of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales 2006, Australia;School of Biosciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia;WSP Australia Pty Ltd., Australia;Edinburgh School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK;School of Design and Arts, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, China;Universiti Putra Malaysia, Department of Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Design and Architecture, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia;Universiti Putra Malaysia, Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia;Tokyo City University - Setagaya Campus, Faculty of Urban Life Studies, 1-28-1 Tamazutsumi, Setagaya-ku, Tokyo 158–8557, Japan;Universiti Malaysia Kelantan, Department of Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Architecture and Ekistics, University Malaysia Kelantan, 16310 Bachok, Kelantan, Malaysia;Review"}]},{"#name":"title","$":{"id":"tit0005"},"_":"ABC of green infrastructure analysis and planning: The basic ideas and methodological guidance based on landscape ecological principle"}],"floats":[],"footnotes":[],"attachments":[]},"openArchive":false,"openAccess":false,"document-subtype":"rev","content-family":"serial","contentType":"JL","abstract":{"$$":[{"$$":[{"$":{"id":"sect0005"},"#name":"section-title","_":"Abstract"},{"$$":[{"$":{"view":"all","id":"sp0085"},"#name":"simple-para","_":"Green infrastructure (GI) is a pivotal multifunctional approach for urban green spaces fragmentation problem. The green space fragmentation issue has increasingly caught worldwide researchers’ critical attention. However, researchers face challenges in understanding GI analysis and planning. Only limited research exists on GI analysis and planning case studies. Therefore, this study reviewed case studies on GI analysis and planning. The finding simplifies GI analysis and planning case studies methodology and critical points to get more worldwide researchers’ attention. The study applied a systematic literature review (SLR) on 34 qualified studies to determine the trends and similarities of GI case studies. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA 2009) was adopted for the study. The review found a sequential methodological pattern in GI analysis and planning study. The review themes were trend analysis, basic study information, study nature, geographic information system (GIS) software and plugin, remote sensing processing and data needed, and analysis and output. Thus, the study provides a basic methodology and framework for developing GI analysis and planning based on the landscape ecology principle."}],"$":{"view":"all","id":"abs0010"},"#name":"abstract-sec"}],"$":{"view":"all","id":"ab0010","class":"author"},"#name":"abstract"}],"$":{"xmlns:ce":true,"xmlns:dm":true,"xmlns:sb":true},"#name":"abstracts"},"pdf":{"urlType":"download","url":"/science/article/pii/S1618866722001431/pdfft?md5=cdfb14779f0480326c85f1e4c999c55a&pid=1-s2.0-S1618866722001431-main.pdf"},"iss-first":"","vol-first":"73","isThirdParty":false,"issn-primary-unformatted":"16188667","issn-primary-formatted":"1618-8667"},{"pii":"S1618866722001522","journalTitle":"Urban Forestry & Urban Greening","publicationYear":"2022","volumeSupText":"Volume 73","articleNumber":"127609","pageRange":"127609","trace-token":"AAAAQGg-Q53MTiazxoVELOJiBAn1pD0QS5QTdGnb3erd6HDSebbHP_Y8G6Mx7_0SC-xZMER1iAfrCIeguuyhXx6AT7NNBMMz-OwAGC3D2iHFll6XUNmxzw","authors":{"content":[{"#name":"author-group","$":{"id":"ag0005"},"$$":[{"#name":"author","$":{"id":"au0005","author-id":"S1618866722001522-634fb3121312cac6e7bc98885c4c616d"},"$$":[{"#name":"indexed-name","_":"Horak;Faculty of Forestry and Wood Sciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, CZ-165 00 Prague, Czech Republic;Faculty of Science, University of Hradec Králové, Rokitanského 62, CZ-500 03 Hradec Králové, Czech Republic;East Bohemian Museum in Pardubice, Zámek 2, CZ-530 02 Pardubice, Czech Republic;Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Bailrigg, Lancaster LA1 4YQ, UK;Original article"}]},{"#name":"title","$":{"id":"tit0005"},"_":"Patterns and determinants of plant, butterfly and beetle diversity reveal optimal city grassland management and green urban planning"}],"floats":[],"footnotes":[],"attachments":[]},"openArchive":false,"openAccess":false,"document-subtype":"fla","content-family":"serial","contentType":"JL","abstract":{"$$":[{"$$":[{"$":{"id":"sect0005"},"#name":"section-title","_":"Abstract"},{"$$":[{"$":{"view":"all","id":"sp0025"},"#name":"simple-para","_":"Urban landscapes are places with high interaction between humans and nature, and the benefit of maintaining their biodiversity to enhance human wellbeing is becoming clear. There is, therefore, an urgent need for understanding what influences biodiversity in cities to inform and influence urban landscape planning. We used a multi-taxa approach (plants, butterflies, and beetles) to assess the influence of the fragmented landscape of a European city, Pardubice (Czech Republic), on the biodiversity of urban grasslands. We randomly selected 40 urban grasslands and were interested in the influences of site and land-use characteristics on biodiversity. The influence of the land-use around the grasslands was analyzed along a gradient of spatial scales (i.e., the cover of land-use types within circular buffer zones of 250, 500, and 750 m around the study grasslands). We found that species richness of the three study taxa was positively influenced by the size of the grassland (measured as grassland perimeter). Butterflies were also negatively affected by increasing management intensity. Plants and beetles were influenced by the land-use type, with plant species richness positively affected by the extent of urban greenings (i.e., green areas such as urban parks, gardens, and sport grounds), and beetle species richness negatively affected by the extent of built-up areas in the grassland surroundings. Biodiversity responses to urbanization partly differed among the studied taxa, indicating different demands of specific groups, but the demands were not conflicting and instead, often complemented each other. Consideration of the three key factors influencing biodiversity identified here (grassland extent, land-use in the surroundings, and management intensity) would provide the optimal options for maintaining city biodiversity. Protecting current urban grasslands from development and restricting construction in their surroundings, restoring city wilderness areas using urban spatial planning, and setting up butterfly-friendly management regimes (e.g., mowing in mosaic) could all be future options to help enhance biodiversity in cities."}],"$":{"view":"all","id":"abs0010"},"#name":"abstract-sec"}],"$":{"view":"all","id":"ab0010","class":"author"},"#name":"abstract"},{"$$":[{"$":{"id":"sect0010"},"#name":"section-title","_":"Highlights"},{"$$":[{"$$":[{"$$":[{"$$":[{"#name":"label","_":"•"},{"$":{"view":"all","id":"p0005"},"#name":"para","_":"Multi-taxa approach was used for evaluation of importance of urban grasslands."}],"$":{"id":"u0005"},"#name":"list-item"},{"$$":[{"#name":"label","_":"•"},{"$":{"view":"all","id":"p0010"},"#name":"para","_":"Plants were positively influenced by the extent of urban greenings in the closer surroundings."}],"$":{"id":"u0010"},"#name":"list-item"},{"$$":[{"#name":"label","_":"•"},{"$":{"view":"all","id":"p0015"},"#name":"para","_":"Butterflies were positively influenced by the grassland size and low intensity management."}],"$":{"id":"u0015"},"#name":"list-item"},{"$$":[{"#name":"label","_":"•"},{"$":{"view":"all","id":"p0020"},"#name":"para","_":"Beetles were positively influenced by the size and affected by built-up areas."}],"$":{"id":"u0020"},"#name":"list-item"},{"$$":[{"#name":"label","_":"•"},{"$":{"view":"all","id":"p0025"},"#name":"para","_":"Biodiversity responses differed among taxa, but complemented each other."}],"$":{"id":"u0025"},"#name":"list-item"}],"$":{"id":"li0005"},"#name":"list"}],"$":{"view":"all","id":"sp0030"},"#name":"simple-para"}],"$":{"view":"all","id":"abs0015"},"#name":"abstract-sec"}],"$":{"view":"all","id":"ab0015","class":"author-highlights"},"#name":"abstract"}],"$":{"xmlns:ce":true,"xmlns:dm":true,"xmlns:sb":true},"#name":"abstracts"},"pdf":{"urlType":"download","url":"/science/article/pii/S1618866722001522/pdfft?md5=64cfe03223fc55a2fb479fdd3959eca9&pid=1-s2.0-S1618866722001522-main.pdf"},"iss-first":"","vol-first":"73","isThirdParty":false,"issn-primary-unformatted":"16188667","issn-primary-formatted":"1618-8667"},{"pii":"S1618866722001601","journalTitle":"Urban Forestry & Urban Greening","publicationYear":"2022","volumeSupText":"Volume 73","articleNumber":"127617","pageRange":"127617","trace-token":"AAAAQGg-Q53MTiazxoVELOJiBAn1pD0QS5QTdGnb3erd6HDSfx5WTltD87P9vkZLZjPoCS_6Ggm4DSUELy0puIE1ywQoaceIzQizKTZWykRcq8uPmmg2cA","authors":{"content":[{"#name":"author-group","$":{"id":"ag0005"},"$$":[{"#name":"author","$":{"id":"au0005","author-id":"S1618866722001601-8eac470ea2383749f39b3ac57aa45aba"},"$$":[{"#name":"given-name","_":"Xinyang;College of Resources and Environment, Shandong Agricultural University, Tai’an 271018, China;Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department / Tropical Research and Education Center, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Homestead, FL 33031, USA;General Education Department, Taishan College of Science and Technology, Tai’an 271000, China;Dezhou Natural Resources Bureau & Forestry Bureau, Dezhou 25300, China;Department of Landscape Architecture, School of Architecture, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510641, China;State Key Laboratory of Subtropical Building Science, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510641, China;Guangzhou Municipal Key Laboratory of Landscape Architecture, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510641, China;Environmental Geography Group, Institute for Environmental Studies, VU University, De Boelelaan 1087, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research (WSL), Zürcherstrasse 111, CH-8903 Birmensdorf, Switzerland

摘要: The success of urban forest management strategies is dependent on public support for and engagement with urban trees. Satisfaction with urban trees and their management, and the level of trust people have in urban tree managers, are useful for understanding public opinions. Yet these concepts, and the mechanisms leading to the formation of public opinions remain poorly explored in the literature. Here we explore how satisfaction with urban trees and with urban tree management, and trust in the agencies responsible for urban tree management, are explained by cognitive factors (values, beliefs, and knowledge) and socio-ecological contextual factors (tree presence/canopy cover, cultural diversity, and socioeconomic status) using an online survey of 16 local government areas in south-eastern Australia. Analyses of 2367 responses revealed that people’s opinions about trees in general (values and beliefs) were overwhelmingly positive, while their opinions about more contextualised measures such as satisfaction and trust were more mixed. Two distinct pathways that influence satisfaction were identified: one linked to beliefs about having trees in cities, and another one linked to trust in urban tree management. At the local government level, satisfaction was negatively associated with a measure of cultural diversity and very low levels of tree canopy cover, but not with socioeconomic disadvantage. Satisfaction with local trees could be improved by increasing the quality of ecological function of trees, such as habitat provision and tree diversity. Community engagement could also improve satisfaction and trust, particularly perceived procedural fairness of decision-making, reinforce positive beliefs about the outcomes of having trees in cities, and dispel negative beliefs. Engagement processes should recognise that people hold complex and diverse opinions about urban trees, and by incorporating these opinions into decision-making we can meet the increasingly complex and diverse expectations being placed on urban forests.