打印

作者

Charity Nyelele;Charles N. Kroll;David J. Nowak

来源

URBAN FORESTRY & URBAN GREENING,Vol.75,Issue1,Article 127703

语言

英文

关键字

作者单位

Graduate Program in Environmental Science, 321 Baker Lab, State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA;Department of Earth System Science, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697, USA;Department of Environmental Resources Engineering, 424 Baker Lab, State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA;USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, 5 Moon Library, State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA;Graduate Program in Environmental Science, 321 Baker Lab, State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA;Department of Earth System Science, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697, USA;Department of Environmental Resources Engineering, 424 Baker Lab, State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA;USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, 5 Moon Library, State University of New York, College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA;College of Land Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China;Key Laboratory of Land Quality, Ministry of Land and Resources, Beijing, 100193, China;College of Resources and Environmental Science, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China;Department of Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Design & Architecture, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 Serdang, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia;Department of Design, Faculty of Arts, Hebei University of Economics and Business, 47 Xuefu Road, 050061 Shijiazhuang City, Hebei Province, China;Faculty of Social and Economic Studies, J. E. Purkyně University in Ústí nad Labem, Czech Republic;University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Institute for Landscape Development, Recreation and Conservation Planning, Vienna, Austria;Biodiversity and Landscape, TERRA Research Centre, Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech, University of Liège, Gembloux 5030, Belgium;Plants and Ecosystems, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk 2610, Belgium;University of North Carolina Wilmington, Department of Environmental Sciences, 601 South College Rd., Wilmington, NC 28403, USA;North Carolina State University, Department of Forestry, Forest Soils, Watershed, and Wetlands Hydrology, 121 Peele Hall, Raleigh, NC 27695, USA;Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of Connecticut, United States;USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, NYC Urban Field Station, United States;Forestry, Horticulture, and Natural Resources, New York City Department of Parks and Recreation, United States;Baltimore Green Space, United States;Morton Arboretum, United States;School of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida, United States;Project Manager, Fairmount Park Conservancy, United States;Institute for the Environment and Sustainability, University of California, Los Angeles, United States;USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Baltimore Field Station, United States;US National Park Service, National Capital Region Inventory & Monitoring Network, United States;Center for Environmental Sciences and Engineering, University of Connecticut, United States;Department of Geography & Environmental Systems, University of Maryland Baltimore County, United States;Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, Purdue University, United States;Division of Research and Conservation, Longwood Gardens, United States;Department of Plant Science and Landscape Architecture, University of Maryland, College Park, United States

摘要

Different models as well as planting prioritization and optimization schemes based upon diverse ecological, social, and economic goals and preferences have been used to develop more efficient and effective tree planting schemes. We compare tree planting prioritization scenarios identified from i-Tree Landscape’s priority planting index to optimal scenarios identified from a spatially explicit multi-objective decision support framework at the census block group level in the Bronx, NY. We explore four scenarios with varying objectives considering populations below the poverty line, avoided runoff, and PM2.5 air pollutant removal monetary benefits. Results show that when prioritizing single objectives (e.g., PM2.5 air pollutant removal) using the same per area of tree canopy benefits from the spatially distributed modeling of ecosystem services, the two approaches recommend similar block groups for additional tree cover. Scenarios considering multiple objectives, however, result in different optimal solutions, with the decision support framework generally recommending more block groups for increased tree cover than i-Tree Landscape’s methodology. When the per area of tree canopy benefits from i-Tree Landscape are used as input in the i-Tree Landscape prioritization scenarios and the spatially distributed benefits used in the decision support framework scenarios, different optimal solutions are identified between the two approaches across all four scenarios, with i-Tree Landscape recommending fewer block groups for increased tree cover. Such a comparison will help inform the development of flexible multi-objective decision support tools to guide future greening initiatives towards prioritizing planting locations that maximize multiple objectives, as well as areas to preserve urban forests.