Arboriculture & Urban Forestry 39(3): May 2013 • a lack of knowledge and interest in economic incentives and cost–benefit analyses; • • complex administrative arrangements, involving three tiers of government; and the city’s watersheds and drainages that not considered on a system-wide scale, resulting in fragmented respon- sibilities. This paper attempts to demonstrate that these links and gaps impinge negatively on the management of the urban forest. The arguments presented here suggest the need for a much more integrated policy and management approach to address the water needs of Adelaide. Urban foresters are uniquely positioned to lead and to support these initia- tives. Developing more effective, integrated urban forestry policies involves an array of difficult choices. Some policy choices result in inefficient resource use because many es- sential benefits and services of urban trees are not priced. As policy interests shift and community expectations con- flict, difficult management challenges are created, requiring innovative, science-informed strategies that better integrate urban trees into community development efforts and balance eco- nomic, social, and environmental needs among local interests. Tarran (2009b) presents a compelling case in that by drawing on theory and methods of natural and social sci- ences in an integrated manner, the emerging urban ecol- ogy discipline will lead to better ways of managing set- tlements where people live, work, and play. Part of this new management regime includes greater attention to supporting ecosystem functions that influence the qual- ity of life. In Adelaide, the PDP emphasized to pub- lic policy managers how and where water flows across the landscape. However, the policy community pays less attention to understanding how capturing and changing storm- water flow impacts the benefits provided by urban forests, or how urban forests could substitute for this infrastructure. Making use of urban forest benefits requires local governments to search for practical management strat- egies that deal coherently with the contributions of trees to urban development. In addition, there is a need to search for organizational structures that make bet- ter use of these contributions. The science, policy roles, and management of urban forestry (i.e., the knowledge, concepts, institutions, and practices through which mul- tiple and competing demands for trees are managed), is changing as well. The changes are emerging as awareness grows of how local communities control and depend on trees and urban forests, prompting efforts to strengthen local stakes in urban forestry and street tree manage- ment, programs, and activities (Killicoat et. al. 2002). An important message of this paper is that Adelaide’s for- ests need to be better recognized as an integral part of the urban economy. Urban development strategies, from storm- water management to urban infill strategies, need to include the capital values of forests in policy design and program evaluations to understand the consequences of modifying tree stocks, qualities, and distributions. Urban trees need to be more widely acknowledged as both productive capital stocks and as components of public infrastructural systems. LITERATURE CITED Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology. 2011. Climate Data Online. Accessed 09/23/2011. Brack, C.L. 2002. Pollution mitigation and carbon sequestration by an urban forest. Environmental Pollution 116:S195–S200. Brindal, M., and R. Stringer. 2009. The Value of Urban Trees: Environ- mental Factors and Economic Efficiency. 10th National TREENET Symposium. National Wine Centre, Adelaide, TREENET. Connellan, G. 2008. Strategies for Urban Trees in an Uncertain Environ- ment. The 9th National TREENET Symposium: 1–9. Correy, A. 1992. Landscape design dilemma: Australian native trees and solar access conflict. Landscape Australia 2:101–104, 169. Dwyer, J.F., E.G. McPherson, H.W. Schrodeder, R.A. Rowntree. 1992. Assessing the benefits and costs of the urban forest. Journal of Arbo- riculture 18:227–234. Falkenmark, M. 2003. Freshwater as Shared between Society and Eco- systems: From Divided Approaches to Integrated Challenges. Philo- sophical Transactions: Biological Sciences 3581440:2037–2049. Fisher, P. 2009. Why we need the Urban Forest Urban Magazine, Urban Development Institute of Australia. Gómez-Muñoz M., A. Porta-Gándara, and J.L. Fernandez. 2010. Effect of tree shades in urban planning in hot-arid climatic regions. Land- scape and Urban Planning 94(3–4):149–157. Government of South Australia. 1929. Sewerage Act of 1929. South Aus- tralia. Version: 4.9.2006. Government of South Australia. 2004a. Natural Resources Management Act. South Australia. Government of South Australia. 2004b. Water Proofing Adelaide: Exploring the Issues - a discussion paper. Adelaide, South Australia. Government of South Australia. 2009. Water for Good. Accessed 05/18/2011. Government of South Australia. 2010. The Thirty Year Plan for Metro- politan Adelaide DPLG. Adelaide: 224. Government of South Australia. 2011. Waterworks Regulations 2011 under the Waterworks Act 1932. Grafton, R.Q., and M.B. Ward 2008. Prices versus rationing: Marshal- lian surplus and mandatory water restrictions. Economic Record 84: S57–S65. Kazemi, F., S. Beecham, and J. Gibbs, J. 2011. Streetscape biodiversity and the role of bioretention swales in an Australian urban environ- ment. Landscape and Urban Planning 101(2):139–148. Killicoat P., E. Puzio, and R. Stringer. 2002. The Economic Value of Trees in Urban Areas: Estimating the Benefits of Adelaide’s Street Trees. Proceedings TREENET Symposium, 94-106, University of Adelaide. Kirkpatrick, J.B., G.D. Daniels, and A.G. Davison. 2011. Temporal and spatial variation in garden and street trees in six eastern Australian cities. Landscape and Urban Planning 101(3):244–252. Ladson, A.R., C.J. Walsh., and T.D. Fletcher. 2006. Improving stream health in urban areas by reducing runoff frequency from impervious surfaces. Australian Journal of Water Resources 10(1):23–33. Laurenson, S., A. Kunhikrishnan, N.S. Bolan, R. Naidu, J. McKay, and G. Keremane. 2010. Management of recycled water for sustainable production and environmental protection: A case study with Northern Adelaide Plains recycling scheme. International Journal of Environ- mental Science and Development 1(2):177–180. May, P. 2009. Can Street Trees Survive Drought? The answer lies in the soil! The 10th National Street Tree Symposium 2009:105–108. 107 ©2013 International Society of Arboriculture
May 2013
| Title Name |
Pages |
Delete |
Url |
| Empty |
Search Text Block
Page #page_num
#doc_title
Hi $receivername|$receiveremail,
$sendername|$senderemail wrote these comments for you:
$message
$sendername|$senderemail would like for you to view the following digital edition.
Please click on the page below to be directed to the digital edition:
$thumbnail$pagenum
$link$pagenum
Your form submission was a success. You will be contacted by Washington Gas with follow-up information regarding your request.
This process might take longer please wait
