The social and economic value of cultural ecosystem services provided by urban forests in North America: A review and suggestions for future research
Introduction
Cities are where billions of us live – and cities are growing. They are social, financial and educational centres that attract increasing numbers of residents around the world. This trend towards urbanization is particularly strong in Canada and the United States of America (U.S.), where approximately 80 percent of the population now lives in urban areas (McPhearson et al., 2013). As cities grow, urban forests can play a role in maintaining quality of life for urban residents by providing various ecosystem services, including improving the urban environment (Goddard et al., 2009, Gómez-Baggethun and Barton, 2013, Landry and Chakraborty, 2009, Morimoto, 2011, Savard et al., 2000); supporting good physical, mental, and social health (de Vries et al., 2003, Groenewegen et al., 2006, Hartig, 2008, Maas et al., 2006, Mitchell and Popham, 2008, Mitchell and Popham, 2007); and providing economic benefits (Anderson and Cordell, 1988, Anderson and Cordell, 1985, Morales, 1980, Payne and Strom, 1975, Schroeder, 1989, Wolf, 2009). To maximize these benefits through urban forest planning and management, the costs and benefits of urban forests must be understood and managed by urban planners, city managers and decision makers, and even private citizens, during land use planning and city building processes (Livesley et al., 2016, Vandermeulen et al., 2011). Urban forest planning and management is most effective when the services and costs of urban forests are understood and can be compared directly with other city infrastructure and services during budget analysis and priority setting (Jim and Chen, 2008). Urban foresters, planners, academics, communities, and governments all have opportunities to create liveable environments that promote environmental sustainability, human health, and economic productivity.
In recent years, the public and various levels of government in Canada and the U.S. have become increasingly aware of the importance of urban forests and the benefits they provide, leading to renewed investment in urban forests by municipalities such as Phoenix (City of Phoenix, 2009, Harnik, 2010), Toronto (City of Toronto Parks, Forestry and Recreation, Urban Forestry, 2013), and Vancouver (City of Vancouver et al., 2014, Poudyal et al., 2009). As cities and other levels of government invest in urban forests in Canada and the U.S., they will need guidance on how to evaluate the benefits and costs of urban forests to prioritize urban forest investments.
While much work has been done to quantify some of the values of urban forests in North America, evaluations to date tend to focus on regulating services such as microclimatic improvements and carbon sequestration (Alexander and DePratto, 2014, Alexander and McDonald, 2014, McPherson et al., 1997, Nowak, 1994). The benefits of urban forests are more complex and wide-ranging than suggested by evaluations completed to date (Livesley et al., 2016). This paper goes beyond previous assessments to present a review and synthesis of relevant and accessible research on valuing the cultural ecosystem services of urban forests, an emerging area of ecosystem services research that is of key importance to human well-being in cities (Livesley et al., 2016, Wolf et al., 2015). It is the authors’ hope that this review will expand the understanding of the value of urban forest services and support including the full range of urban forest values in urban forest planning and management.
It is important to note that this review does not seek to measure the costs of managing and maintaining urban forests. These costs are highly context-specific and will vary by municipality and region. Rather, this paper focuses on the value of urban forest services and highlights knowledge gaps in how to evaluate these services. By clarifying the evaluation of services, this analysis highlights areas for further research and may help municipalities include such evaluations during their own management planning and budgeting processes.
Section snippets
Ecosystem services
Within the context of urban forests, the term “ecosystem services” refers to the benefits provided to humans through functional processes and interactions with the surrounding environment and local ecology (Livesley et al., 2016). Urban forest ecosystem services are highly interrelated. For example, access to urban green space can provide recreation opportunities, which in turn can provide physical health benefits and increased social cohesion (Konijnendijk et al., 2013). Despite this
Results
Urban residents experience a wide range of cultural ecosystem services provided by urban greenery. Cultural ecosystem services include some more measurable services such as health outcomes and direct economic benefits, while other cultural ecosystem services are more intangible and experiential, such as spiritual experiences, education, and aesthetics. The nature of cultural ecosystem services makes them difficult to define and measure; valuing cultural ecosystem services is still an emerging
Discussion: gaps and future research
A review of our findings highlights key gaps in the research on the evaluation of urban forest benefits. Understanding is particularly limited in the areas of (1) social health; and (2) community economic development, offering important opportunities for future research in these fields (Table 1). While this review found relatively few studies that quantified the value of cultural ecosystem services in the area of tourism, the majority of tourism research reviewed included financial estimates of
Conclusion
This paper describes the social and economic values of several important cultural ecosystem services associated with urban forests based on a growing body of literature. Some ecosystem services, such as the effects of urban trees on property values, have been the focus of extensive research over the past 40 years and their value is relatively well understood (Anderson and Cordell, 1988, Anderson and Cordell, 1985, Morales, 1980, Payne and Strom, 1975, Schroeder, 1989). Recently, researchers
Authors’ contribution
LN co-led study design, performed the literature search and quality assessment, and drafted the manuscript.
NH, SB, and JC participated in study design, literature search, and application of inclusion criteria.
SS was project leader, co-led on study design and supervised the review.
All authors assisted with the manuscript and read and approved the final manuscript.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Acknowledgements
We thank Stephen Mitchell, Harry Nelson, Sara Gergel, Gary Bull and Howie Harshaw, for valuable feedback on the manuscript. This review was partially funded by the Canadian Forest Service.
References (142)
- et al.
Influence of trees on residential property values in Athens, Georgia (U. S. A.): a survey based on actual sales prices
Landsc. Urban Plan.
(1988) - et al.
The influence of green space on community attachment of urban and suburban residents
Urban For. Urban Green.
(2012) - et al.
Who benefits from access to green space? A case study from Sheffield
UK. Landsc. Urban Plan.
(2007) - et al.
Neighborhood greenness and 2-year changes in body mass index of children and youth
Am. J. Prev. Med.
(2008) - et al.
Ecosystem services in urban areas
Ecol. Econ.
(1999) - et al.
Demand for environmental quality: a spatial hedonic analysis
Reg. Sci. Urban Econ.
(2005) - et al.
Go greener, feel better? The positive effects of biodiversity on the well-being of individuals visiting urban and peri-urban green areas
Landsc. Urban Plan.
(2015) - et al.
Green space, health inequality and pregnancy
Environ. Int.
(2012) - et al.
Trees in the city: valuing street trees in Portland
Oregon. Landsc. Urban Plan.
(2010) - et al.
Urban trees and the risk of poor birth outcomes
Heal. Place
(2011)
Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning
Ecol. Econ.
Landscape planning and stress
Urban For. Urban Green.
The impact of the physical and urban environment on mental well-being
Public Health
Restoration and stress relief through physical activities in forests and parks
Urban For. Urban Green.
Green space, psychological restoration, and health inequality
Lancet
Place identity: symbols of self in the urban fabric
Landsc. Urban Plan.
Reaching for a sustainable, resilient urban future using the lens of ecosystem services
Ecol. Econ.
A dose of nature: tree cover, stress reduction, and gender differences
Landsc. Urban Plan.
The role of nature in the context of the workplace
Landsc. Urban Plan.
Employees’ reactions to nearby nature at their workplace: the wild and the tame
Landsc. Urban Plan.
Benefits and well-being perceived by people visiting green spaces in periods of heat stress
Urban For. Urban Green.
Moderating effect of forest cover on the effect of proximity to chemical facilities on property values
Landsc. Urban Plan.
Workplace greenery and perceived level of stress: benefits of access to a green outdoor environment at the workplace
Landsc. Urban Plan.
The value of trees, water and open space as reflected by house prices in the Netherlands
Landsc. Urban Plan.
Social contacts as a possible mechanism behind the relation between green space and health
Heal. Place
Using contingent valuation to estimate the willingness of tourists to pay for urban forests: a study in Savannah
Georgia. Urban For. Urban Green
Shades of Green: measuring the value of urban forests in the housing market
J. For. Econ.
Walking in wild and tended urban forests: the impact on psychological well-being
J. Environ. Psychol.
Effect of exposure to natural environment on health inequalities: an observational population study
Lancet
Psychological effects of forest environments on healthy adults: Shinrin-yoku (forest-air bathing, walking) as a possible method of stress reduction
Public Health
Do green areas affect health? Results from a Danish survey on the use of green areas and health indicators
Heal. Place
Concrete evidence & geographically weighted regression: a regional analysis of wealth and the land cover in Massachusetts
Appl. Geogr.
Measuring environmental effects on property values without hedonic regressions
J. Urban Econ.
Ecosystems and Human Well-being: a Framework for Assessment
Special Report Urban Forests: the Value of Urban Forests in Cities Across Canada
Urban Forests: the Value of Trees in the City of Toronto
Residential property values improve by landscaping with trees
South. J. Appl. For.
Green qualities in the neighbourhood and mental health – results from a longitudinal cohort study in Southern Sweden
BMC Public Health
Værdisætning af statslig skovrejsning (Valuation of state afforestation)
Dansk Skovbrugs Tidsskr.
Urban-fringe afforestation projects and taxable hedonic values
Urban For. Urban Green.
Economic impact analysis of tree festivals: the case of the national cherry blossom festival, wWashington, D.C.
The Blue – Grey Transition: Heritage in the Reinvention of the Tourism Resort
Chicago, Offering Big Incentives, Will Be Boeing’s New Home
Choice of functional form and the demand for air quality
Rev. Econ. Stat.
Demands for public goods
Am. Econ. Rev.
The demand for the services of non-federal governments
Am. Econ. Rev.
A systematic review of evidence for the added benefits to health of exposure to natural environments
BMC Public Health
The Economics of Biophilia: Why Designing with Nature in Mind Makes Financial Sense
Retailing, Sustainability and Neighbourhood Regeneration
Cited by (144)
How do residents perceive ecosystem service benefits received from urban streets? A case study of Guangzhou, China
2024, Journal of Cleaner ProductionUnderstanding the intricate tradeoffs among ecosystem services in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei urban agglomeration across spatiotemporal features
2023, Science of the Total EnvironmentThe ecosystem disservices of trees on sidewalks: A study based on a municipality urban tree inventory in Central Italy
2023, Urban Forestry and Urban Greening