Interactive mapping of urban tree benefits using Google Fusion Tables and API technologies

Urban Forestry and Urban Greening

Volumn 13, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 742-755

  Bowie, Gregory D ^a   Millward, Andrew A ^a   Bhagat, Nikesh N ^a  

^a RYERSON UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

City trees; Non profit organization (NGO); Urban forestry; Visualization; Web map

Indexed keywords

EID: 84922598038     PISSN: 16188667     EISSN: 16108167     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ufug.2014.06.002     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Anderson G., Moreno-Sanchez R. Building web-based spatial information solutions around open specifications and open source software. Trans. GIS 2003, 7:447-466.
2. Baranski B., Foerster T., Scaffer B., Lange K. Matching INSPIRE quality of service requirements with hybrid clouds. Trans. GIS 2011, 15:125-142.
3. Beaudette D.E., O'Geen A.T. Soil-web: an online soil survey for California, Arizona and Nevada. Comput. Geosci. 2009, 35:2119-2128.
4. Brack C.L. Pollution mitigation and carbon sequestration by an urban forest. Environ. Pollut. 2002, 116:S195-S200.
5. Carver A., Unger D., Parks C. Modeling energy savings from urban shade trees: an assessment of the CITYgreen energy conservation module. Environ. Manage. 2004, 34:650-655.
6. Gartner Inc. Gartner Says Cloud Application Infrastructure Technologies Need Seven Years to Mature 2009, Press Release, Available at: http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/871113 (retrieved 17.06.13).
7. Gatrell J.D., Jensen R.R. Growth through greening: developing and assessing alternative economic development programs. Appl. Geogr. 2002, 22:331-350.
8. Gonzalez H., Halevy A., Jensen C.S., Langen A., Madhavan J., Shapley R., Shen W. Google fusion tables: data management, integration and collaboration in the cloud. Proceedings of the 1st ACM Symposium on Cloud Computing 2010, 175-180.
9. Gonzalez H., Halevy A.Y., Jensen C.S., Langen A., Madhavan J., Shapley R., Shen W., Goldberg-Kidon J. Google fusion tables: web-centered data management and collaboration. Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Management of Data 2010, 1061-1066.
10. Greene C.S., Millward A.A., Ceh B. Who is likely to plant a tree? The use of public socio-demographic data to characterize client participants in a private urban forestation program. Urban Forest. Urban Green. 2011, 10:29-38.
11. Halevy A., Shapely R. Google Fusion Tables 2009, Available at: http://googleresearch.blogspot.com/2009/06/google-fusion-tables.html (retrieved 01.02.13).
12. Halevy A., Shapley R. Google Fusion Tables Celebrates One Year of Data Management 2010, Available at: http://googleresearch.blogspot.com/2010/06/google-fusion-tables-celebrates-one.html (retrieved 28.03.13).
13. Hudson-Smith A., Batty M., Crooks A., Milton R. Mapping for the masses: accessing Web 2.0 through crowd sourcing. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 2009, 27:524-538.
14. i-Tree i-Tree ECO User's Manual v.4.1.0 2011, Available at: http://itreetools.org/resources/manuals/i-Tree%20Eco%20Users%20Manual.pdf (retrieved 15.09.12).
15. Langen A., Madhaven J., Shapley R. Google Fusion Tables API 2009, Available at: http://googlecode.blogspot.com/2009/12/google-fusion-tables-api.html (retrieved 12.01.13).
16. Livni J. Shape Escape 2010, Available at: http://porcupinealley.com/2010/dec/20/shape-escape/ (retrieved 18.11.12).
17. Lowe J. Spatial on a shoestring: leveraging free Open Source Software. Geospat. Solut. 2002, 12:42-45.
18. Lu M., Agrawal D., Dai B., Tung A. Schema-as-you-go: on probabilistic tagging and querying of wide tables. Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data 2011.
19. Marston S., Zhi L., Bandyopadhyay S., Zhang J., Ghalsasi A. Cloud computing - the business perspective. Decis. Support Syst. 2011, 51:176-189.
20. McPherson E.G., Nagendra E.G., Nowak D., Heisler G., Grimmond S., Souch C., Grant R., Rowntree R. Quantifying urban forest structure, function, and value: the Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project. Urban Ecosyst. 1997, 1:49-61.
21. Millward A.A., Sabir S. Benefits of a forested urban park: what is the value of Allan Gardens to the city of Toronto, Canada?. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2011, 100:177-188.
22. Nath S., Liu J., Zhao F. SensorMap for wide-area sensor webs. Computer 2007, 40:90-93.
23. Pothier A.J., Millward A.A. Valuing trees on city-centre institutional land: an opportunity for urban forest management. J. Environ. Plan. Manage. 2013, 56:1380-1402.
24. Sanders R.A. Some determinants of urban forest structure. Urban Ecol. 1984, 8:13-27.
25. Shen W. Introducing New Fusion Tables API 2012, Available at: http://googleresearch.blogspot.ca/search/label/Fusion%20Tables (retrieved 22.01.13).
26. Thornhill M., Adb-Elrahman A., Andreu M. Urban forest inventory using open access web mapping services and photogrammetric solution. Geoinformatics 2009 Conference 2009.
27. Tyrväinen L. The amenity value of the urban forest: an application of the hedonic pricing method. Landsc. Urban Plan. 1997, 37:211-222.
28. Xiao Q., McPherson G.E. Rainfall interception by Santa Monica's municipal urban forest. Urban Ecosyst. 2002, 6:291-302.
29. Yang C., Goodchild M., Huang Q., Nebert D., Raskin R., Xu Y., Bambacus M., Fay D. Spatial cloud computing: how can the geospatial sciences use and help shape cloud computing. Int. J. Digit. Earth 2011, 4:305-329.
30. Yeung K.W., Hall G.B. Spatial Database Systems: Design, Implementation and Project Management 2007, Springer, Dordrecht.
31. Zicari R.V. Google Fusion Tables. Interview with Alon Y. Halevy 2011, Available at: http://www.odbms.org/blog/2011/08/google-fusiontables-interview-with-alon-y-halevy/ (retrieved 15.01.13).