Demand for urban forests in United States cities

Landscape and Urban Planning

Volumn 84, Issue 3-4, 2008, Pages 293-300

  Zhu, Pengyu ^a,b   Zhang, Yaoqi ^a  

^a AUBURN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Economic development; Population growth; United States; Urban forests; Urban land value

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; LAND USE; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; POPULATION STATISTICS; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT;

POTENTIAL FACTORS; UNITED STATES; URBAN FOREST AREA; URBAN FORESTS; URBAN LAND VALUE;

URBAN PLANNING;

DEMAND ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS; INCOME DISTRIBUTION; INVESTMENT; POPULATION GROWTH; URBAN FORESTRY;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 38849182278     PISSN: 01692046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.09.005     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. American Forests, 2002. Urban Ecosystem Analysis for the Washington, DC Metropolitan Area: An Assessment of Existing Conditions and a Resource for Local Actions. Retrieved 10/05/2005, from: http://www.americanforests.org/downloads/rea/AF_WashingtonDC2.pdf.
2. Anderson L.M., and Cordell H.K. Residential property values improve by landscaping with trees. South. J. Appl. Forest. 9 (1985) 162-166
3. Anderson L.M., and Cordell H.K. Influence of trees on residential property values in Athens, Georgia (U.S.A.): a survey based on actual sales prices. Landsc. Urban Plann. 15 (1988) 153-164
4. Bender B., Gronberg T.J., and Hwang H.-S. Choice of functional form and the demand for air quality. Rev. Econ. Stat. 62 4 (1980) 638-643
5. Bergstrom T.C., and Goodman R.P. Private demands for public goods. Am. Econ. Rev. 63 (1973) 280-296
6. Borcherding T.E., and Deacon R.T. The demands for the services of non-federal governments. Am. Econ. Rev. 62 (1972) 891-901
7. Bradley G. Urban Forest Landscapes: Integrating Multidisciplinary Perspectives (1995), University of Washington Press, Seattle
8. Brasington D.M., and Hite D. Demand for environmental quality: a spatial hedonic analysis. Region. Sci. Urban Econ. 35 1 (2005) 57-82
9. Chenoweth R.E., and Gobster P.H. The nature and ecology of aesthetic experiences in the landscape. Landsc. J. 9 (1990) 1-18
10. Clark T.N., Iloyd R., Wong K., and Jain P. Amenities drive urban growth. J. Urban Affairs 24 5 (2002) 493-515
11. Cook D.I. Trees, solid barriers, and combinations: alternatives for noise control. In: Hopkins G. (Ed). Proceedings of the National Urban Forestry Conference (1978), USDA Forest Service, SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry, New York 330-339
12. Crompton J.L. Parks and Economic Development (2001), American Planning Association, Chicago, IL
13. Davis, M.A., Palumbo, M., 2005. The Price of Land in 46 U.S. Cities. Federal Reserve Board, unpublished.
14. Davis M.A., and Heathcote J. The Price and Quantity of Residential Land in the United States (2004), Federal Reserve Board of Governors and Georgetown University
15. Dwyer J.F., McPherson E.G., Schroeder H.W., and Rowntree R.A. Assessing the benefits and costs of the urban forest. J. Arboricult. 18 5 (1992) 227-234
16. Dwyer J.F., Nowak D.J., Noble M.H., and Sisinni S.M. Connecting People with Ecosystems in the 21st Century and Assessment of Our Nation's Urban Forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-490 (2000), U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, PNRS, Portland, OR
17. Dwyer M.C., and Miller R.W. Using GIS to assess urban tree canopy benefits and surrounding greenspace distributions. J. Arboricult. 30 1 (1999) 102-106
18. Escobedo F.J., Nowak D.J., Wagner J.E., De la Maza C.L., Rodri{dotless}guez M., Crane D.E., and Hernandez J. The socioeconomics and management of Santiago de Chile's public urban forests. Urban Forest. Urban Green. 4 (2006) 105-114
19. Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act. Act of Aug. 17, 1974. 88 Stat. 476, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1600-1614.
20. Gorman J. Residents' opinions on the value of street trees depending on tree allocation. J. Arboricult. 30 1 (2004) 36-43
21. Heisler G.M. Effects of individual trees on the solar radiation climate of small buildings. Urban Ecol. 9 (1986) 337-359
22. Johnson C.W. Planning for avian wildlife in urbanizing areas in America desert/mountain valley environments. Landsc. Urban Plann. 16 (1988) 245-252
23. Kaplan R. The role of nature in the context of the workplace. Landsc. Urban Plann. 26 1-4 (1993) 193-201
24. Kuo F.E. The role of arboriculture in a healthy social ecology. J. Arboricult. 29 3 (2003) 148-155
25. Kweon B.S., Sullivan W.C., and Wiley A.R. Green common spaces and the social integration of inner-city older adults. Environ. Behav. 30 6 (1998) 832-858
26. McPherson E.G. Modeling residential landscape water and energy use to evaluate water conservation policies. Landsc. J. 9 (1990) 122-134
27. McPherson E.G., Simpson J.R., Peper P.J., and Xiao Q. Benefit-cost analysis of modesto's municipal urban forest. J. Arboricult. 25 5 (1999) 235-248
28. Meier A.K. Measured cooling savings from vegetative landscapes. In: Vine E., Crawley D., and Centolella P. (Eds). Energy Efficiency and the Environment: Forging the Link (1991), American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Washington, DC 321-334
29. Morales D.J. The contribution of trees to residential property value. J. Arboricult. 1 (1980) 109-112
30. Nowak D.J. Atmospheric carbon-reduction by urban trees. J. Environ. Manage. 37 3 (1993) 207-217
31. Nowak D.J., and McPherson E.G. Quantifying the impact of trees: the Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project. Unasylva 173 44 (1993) 39-44
32. Nowak D.J., Rowntree R.A., McPherson E.G., et al. Measuring and analyzing urban tree cover. Landsc. Urban Plann. 36 (1996) 49-57
33. Oke T.R. The micrometeorology of the urban forest. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. 324 Series B (1989) 335-349
34. Orland B., Vining J., and Ebreo A. The effect of street trees on perceived values of residential property. Environ. Behav. 24 3 (1992) 298-325
35. Palmquist R.B. Estimating the Demand for Air Quality from Property Value Studies (1982), Department of Economics, North Carolina State University, Mimeo
36. Payne B.R., and Strom S. The contribution of trees to the appraised value of unimproved residential land. Valuation 22 2 (1975) 36-45
37. Perkins G.M. The demand for local public goods: elasticities of demand for own price, cross prices, and income. Natl. Tax J. 30 (1977) 411-422
38. Rowntree R.A., and Nowak D.J. Quantifying the role of urban forests in removing atmospheric carbon dioxide. J. Arboricult. 17 10 (1991) 269-275
39. Sanders R.A. Urban vegetation impacts on the hydrology of Dayton, Ohio. Urban Ecol. 9 (1986) 361-376
40. Santerre R.E. Spatial differences in the demands for local public goods. Land Econ. 61 (1985) 119-128
41. Schroeder H.W. Environment, behavior and design research on urban forests. In: Zube E.H., and Moore G.T. (Eds). Advances in Environment, Behavior and Design (1989), Plenum, New York 87-117
42. Smith W.H. Air Pollution and Forests (1981), Springer, New York
43. Thompson R., Hanna R., Noel J., and Piirto D. Valuation of tree aesthetics on small urban-interface properties. J. Arboricult. 25 5 (1999) 225-233
44. Tyrvainen L. Economic valuation of urban forest benefits in Finland. J. Environ. Manage. 62 (2001) 75-92
45. Ulrich R.S. View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science 224 (1984) 420-421
46. USDA Forest Service, 1989. Draft 1990 RPA Program. Washington, DC, 186 pp.
47. Wolf K.L. Business district streetscapes, trees and consumer response. J. Forest. 103 8 (2005) 396-400
48. Zabel J.A., and Kiel K.A. Estimating the demand for air quality in four US cities. Land Econ. 76 2 (2000) 174-194
49. Zhu P., and Zhang Y. Demand for urban forests and economic welfare: evidence from the Southeastern U.S. cities. J. Agric. Appl. Econ. 38 2 (2006) 279-285