The status and trend on the urban tree canopy research

Shengtai Xuebao/ Acta Ecologica Sinica

Volumn 33, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 23-32

  Jia, Baoquan ^a,b,c   Wang, Cheng ^a,b,c   Qiu, Erfa ^a,b,c   Qie, Guangfa ^a,b,c  

^a RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF FORESTRY   (China)

^b Research Institute of Forestry   (China)

^c State Forestry Administration   (China)

Author keywords

Status and trend; Urban forest; Urban tree canopy (UTC)

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; FOREST MANAGEMENT; GREENSPACE; HABITAT CONSERVATION; LIDAR; REMOTE SENSING; URBANIZATION;

EID: 84875538310     PISSN: 10000933     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5846/stxb201204220577     Document Type: Article

References (80)

1. Antrop M. Changing patterns in the urbanized countryside of Western Europe. Landscape Ecology, 2000, 15(3): 257-270.
2. United Nations. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2009 Revision. New York, 2010.
3. United Nations. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2007 Revision. New York, 2007.
4. Guo JP, Zhang YX. Urban landscape and the focuses in urban landscape ecological research. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2004, 20(2): 44-46.
5. Li BC. Problems of municipal ecological environment and the sustainable development in China. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2006, 20(2): 1-6.
6. Su WZ, Yang GS, Zhen F. Ecological land fragmentation and its connectivity with urbanization in the Yangtze River Delta. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2007, 62(12): 1309-1317.
7. Jia BQ, Wang C, Qiu KB. Potential analysis of urban ecological land in Wuhan city. Urban Environment and Urban Ecology, 2010, 23(5): 10-13.
8. Cook EA. Urban landscape networks: an ecological planning framework. Landscape Research, 1991, 16(3): 7-15.
9. Nadenicek DJ. Nature in the city: Horace Cleveland's aesthetic. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1993, 26(1/4): 5-15.
10. Mazzotti FJ, Morgenstern CS. A scientific framework for managing urban natural areas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1997, 38(3/4): 171-181.
11. Mandelker DR. Green Belts and Urban Growth: English Town and County Planning in Action. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1962.
12. Jim CY. A planning strategy to augment the diversity and biomass of roadside trees in urban Hong Kong. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1999, 44(1): 13-32.
13. Fuller RA, Gaston KJ. The scaling of green space coverage in European cities. Biology Letters, 2009, 5(3): 352-355.
14. Dallimer M, Tang ZY, Bibby PR, Brindley P, Gaston KJ, Davies ZG. Temporal changes in greenspace in a highly urbanized region. Biology Letters, 2011, 7(5): 763-766.
15. The Industrial Standard of the People's Republic of China. CJJ/ T85-2002 Standard for classification of urban green space. Beijing: China Architecture & Building Press, 2002.
16. Wang J Q, Wu Z M, Wu W Y. Analysis of urban tree canopy cover in Pudong New District of Shanghai. Journal of Anhui Agricultural University, 2011, 38(5): 726-732.
17. Zhu YJ, Wang C, Jia BQ, Su J. Landscape pattern gradient on tree canopy in the central city of Guangzhou, China. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2011, 31(20): 5910-5917.
18. Zhu YJ, Wang C, Jia BQ, Su J. Canopy-Based Greening Pattern in the Urban Region of Guangzhou. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2011, 47(7): 65-72.
19. USDA Forest Service. Urban Natural Resources Stewardship. About the Urban Tree Canopy Assessment. 2008.
20. McPherson E G. Evaluating the cost effectiveness of shade trees for demand-side management. The Electricity Journal, 1993, 6(9): 57-65.
21. Sarkovich M. Personal communication on November 3, 2006 re Sacramento Shade decline and non-participant survey key findings (8/27/97). Demand-Side Specialist, Sacramento Municipal Utility District, Sacramento, CA.
22. Nowak D J. Understanding the structure. Journal of Forestry, 1994, 92(10): 42-46.
23. Poracsky J, Lackner M. Urban Forest Canopy Cover in Portland, Oregon, 1972-2002: Final Report. Portland, OR: Geography Department, Portland State University, 2004: 38.
24. Sanders R A. Some determinants of urban forest structure. Urban Ecology, 1984, 8(1/2): 13-27.
25. Kenney A D, van Wassenaer P J E, Satel A L. Criteria and indicators for strategic urban forest planning and management. Arboriculture and Urban Forestry, 2011, 37(3): 108-117.
26. Zipperer W C, Sisinni S M, Pouyat R V, Foresman T W. Urban tree cover: an ecological perspective. Urban Ecosystems, 1997, 1(4): 229-246.
27. Dwyer J F, McPherson E G, Schroeder H W, Rowntree R A. Assessing the benefits and costs of the urban forest. Journal of Arboriculture, 1992, 18(5): 227-234.
28. Nowak D J, Dwyer J F. Understanding the benefits and costs of urban forest ecosystems / / Kuser J E, ed. Urban and Community Forestry in the Northeast. 2nd ed. New York: Springer Science and Business Media, 2007: 25-46.
29. Nowak D J, Dwyer J F. Understanding the benefits and costs of urban forest ecosystems / / Kuser J E, ed. Handbook of Urban and Community Forestry in the Northeast. New York: Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers, 2000: 11-25.
30. U. S. Census Bureau. American Fact Finder: Census 2000. 2005.
31. Maas J, Verheij R A, Groenewegen P P, de Vries S, Spreeuwenberg P. Green space, urbanity, and health: how strong is the relation? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 2006, 60(7): 587-592.
32. Van den Berg A E, Hartig T, Staats H. Preference for nature in urbanized societies: stress, restoration, and the pursuit of sustainability. Journal of Social Issues, 2007, 63(1):79-96.
33. Fuller R A, Irvine K N, Devine-Wright P, Warren P H, Gaston K J. Psychological benefits of greenspace increase with biodiversity. Biology Letters, 2007, 3(4): 390-394.
34. Coley R L, Sullivan W C, Kuo F E. Where does community grow? The social context created by nature in urban public housing. Environment and Behavior, 1997, 29(4): 468-494.
35. Wolf K L. Trees in Business Districts: Positive Effects on Consumer Behavior! University of Washington: College of Forest Resources, 1998.
36. Bolund P, Hunhammar S. Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecological Economics, 1999, 29(2): 293-301.
37. Gilbert O L. The Ecology of Urban Habitats. London, UK: Chapman & Hall, 1989.
38. Luttik J. The value of trees, water and open space as reflected by house prices in the Netherlands. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2000, 48(3/ 4): 161-167.
39. O'Neil-Dunne J. A Report on the City of Des Moines Existing and Possibly Urban Tree Canopy. USDA Forest Service, 2009: 1-4.
40. Cappiella K, Schueler T, Wright T. Urban Watershed Forestry Manual Part 2 Conserving and Planting Trees at Development Sites. USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry, 2006.
41. Clark JR, Matheny NP, Cross G, Wake V. A model of urban forest sustainability. Journal of Arboriculture, 1997, 23(1): 17-30.
42. Dwyer MC, Miller RW. Using GIS to assess urban tree canopy benefits and surrounding greenspace distributions. Journal of Arboriculture, 1999, 25(2): 102-106.
43. American Forests. CITYgreen for Arcgis, 2004.
44. American Forests. Projected Environmental Benefits of Community Tree Planting: A Multi-Site Model Urban Forest Project in Atlanta. Washington, DC: American Forests, 2002a: 12.
45. American Forests. Urban Ecological Analysis for the Washington DC Metropolitan Area. Washington, DC: American Forests, 2002b: 16.
46. American Forests. Urban Ecological Analysis, Roanoke, Virginia. Washington, DC: American Forests, 2002c: 8.
47. USDA Forest Service. User's Manual for i-tree software Suite 2. 0. 2004.
48. He XY, Ning ZH. Advances in Urban Forest Ecology. Beijing: China Forestry Publishing House, 2002. http://en.cnki.com.cn/Article_en/CJFDTOTAL-STXZ200105013. htm
49. Pen Z H. Theory and Practice of Urban Forest Construction. Beijing: China Forestry Publishing House, 2006.
50. Zhang Y. Evaluation of Environmental Benefits of Urban Forest in China. Beijing: China Forestry Publishing House, 2010.
51. Xiao JW. The Service Functions and Valuation of the Urban Forest. Beijing: Economic Science Press, 2011.
52. Hu ZB, He XY, Chen W, Li YH, Li HM. Structure and ecological benefits of urban forest in Shenyang build-up area. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2003, 14(12): 2108-2112.
53. Zhang K, Zhang J Y, Chen Y X, Zhu Y M. Urban greenbelt eco-service value of Hangzhou City under effects of land use change: an evaluation with CITYgreen model. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2006, 17(10): 1918-1922.
54. Peng LH, Chen S, Liu YX, Wang J. Application of Citygreen model in benefit assessment of Nanjing urban greenbelt in carbon fixation and runoff reduction. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2007, 18(6): 1293-1298.
55. Liu CF, He XY, Chen W, Zhao G L, Li L, Xu W D. Ecological benefit evaluation of urban forests in Shenyang City based on QuickBird image and CITYgreen model. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2008, 19(9): 1865-1870.
56. Chen L, Li P W, Li G C, Su D, Yuan X Z. Application of CITYGREEN model in air purification, carbon fixation and oxygen release by greenbelt system of Shenzhen City. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2009, 29(1): 272-282.
57. Nowak DJ, Rowntree RA, McPherson EG, Sisinni SM, Kerkmann ER, Stevens JC. Measuring and analyzing urban tree cover. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1996, 36(1): 49-57.
58. Nowak DJ, Crane DE, Stevens JC, Ibarra M. Brooklyn's urban forest. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-290. Newtown Square, PA: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, 2002: 107.
59. Rowntree RA. Forest canopy cover and land use in four eastern United States cities. Urban Ecology, 1984, 8(1/2): 55-67.
60. Myeong S, Nowak DJ, Hopkins PF, Brock RH. Urban cover mapping using digital, high-spatial resolution aerial imagery. Urban Ecosystems, 2001, 5(4): 243-256.
61. Zhang Y. Texture-integrated classification of urban treed areas in high-resolution color-infrared imagery. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 2001, 67(12): 1359-1365.
62. Irani FM, Galvin MF. Strategic Urban Forests Assessment. Baltimore, MD: Maryland Department of Natural Resources, 2002.
63. Wang SC. An analysis of urban tree communities using Landsat thematic mapper data. Landscape and Urban Planning, 1988, 15(1/2): 11-22.
64. Iverson LR, Cook EA. Urban forest cover of the Chicago region and its relation to household density and income. Urban Ecosystems, 2000, 4: 105-124.
65. Huang CQ, Yang LM, Wylie B, Homer C. A strategy for estimating tree canopy density using Landsat 7 ETM+ and highresolution images over large areas / / Third International Conference on Geospatial Information in Agriculture and Forestry. Denver, CO, 2001.
66. Zhu ZL. Forest Density Mapping in the Lower 48 States: A Regression Procedure. Research Paper SO-280. New Orleans, LA: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station, 1994: 11.
67. Dwyer JF, Nowak DJ, Noble MH, Sisinni SM. Connecting People with Ecosystems in the 21st Century: An Assessment of Our Nation's Urban Forests. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-490, 2000.
68. Galvin M, Grove J M, O'Neil-Dunne J. Urban tree canopy assessment and goal setting: case studies from four cities on the eastern coast USA / / Presented to the Joint ISA-IUFRO Urban Forestry Research Group Session at the 83rd Annual International Society of Arboriculture Conference. Honolulu, Hawaii, 2007. http://ncrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/jrnl/2008/ nrs_2008_walton_002.pdf
69. Homer C, Dewitz J, Fry J, Coan M, Hossain N, Larson C, Herold N, McKerrow A, Van Driel J N, Wickham J. Completion of the 2001 National Land Cover Database for the Coterminous, 2007. http:/ /www.epa.gov/mrlc/pdf/april-07-highlight.pdf
70. Walker J S, Briggs J M. An object-oriented approach to urban forest mapping in Phoenix. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 2007, 73(5): 577-583.
71. O'Neil-Dunne J. Urban Tree Canopy Assessment, 2007.
72. Moskal LM, Styers DM, Halabisk M. Monitoring urban tree cover using object-based image analysis and public domain remotely sensed data. Remote Sensing, 2011, 3(10): 2243-2262.
73. Kielbaso JJ. Trends and issues in city forests. Journal of Arboriculture, 1990, 16(3): 69-76.
74. Center for Watershed Protection and USDA Forest Service. Watershed Forestry Resource Guide. 2008.
75. American Forests. Urban Sprawl Information. 2002.
76. Bernhardt E A, Swiecki J T. Guidelines for Developing and Evaluating Tree Ordinances. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Urban and Community Forestry Program. Riverside, CA. 1999. http:/ /www.isa-arbor.com/education/resources/educ_TreeOrdinanceGuidelines.pdf
77. Zhou W, Troy A. An object-oriented approach for analysing and characterizing urban landscape at the parcel level. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 2008, 29(11): 3119-3135.
78. Platt RV, Rapoza L. An evaluation of an object-oriented paradigm for land use/ land cover classification. The Professional Geographer, 2008, 60 (1): 87-100.
79. Hay GJ, Castilla G, Wulder M A, Ruiz JR. An automated object-based approach for the multiscale image segmentation of forest scenes. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 2005, 7: 339-359.
80. Locke D, Goonan K, Romolini M. A Report on Methods for Prioritizing Areas to Increase Urban Tree Canopy in New York City. 2009. http://www. docstoc.com/docs/15697352/ A-Report-on-Methods-for-Prioritizing-Areas-to-Increase