330 should be explored in future research, building on past studies that show how the natural envi- ronment can increase social contacts (Coley et al. 1997; Kweon et al. 1998; Kim and Kaplan 2004). Other recent research in New Haven, which took place during the same time period, comple- ments the survey results presented here to describe and contextualize the relationships between socioeconomic characteristics and tree requesters (Locke and Baine 2014). Addresses represent- ing street tree requests from the autumn 2007 through autumn 2011 were analyzed for socio- economic patterns. There was a positive correla- tion between rentership levels (at the U.S. Census block group scale) and tree request density. No correlation was found between the density of street tree requests and median household income or race. This shows that the URI free street tree pro- gram serves renting communities and communi- ties across the entire range of household incomes found within the City of New Haven. Some stew- ardship groups may conserve existing tree canopy, while others work to establish or create it (Romo- lini et al. 2013), and different supporting strat- egies might be needed in these different cases. The survey respondents—mostly homeown- ers—were thus not representative of all street tree requesters, rather, they are a select subset, defined in part by high rates of home ownership. The survey results presented here suggest that for this sub-population, motivations for tree requests are driven by a desire for beauty and to replace removed trees. Respondents also reported valuing the abstract concept of the environment, commu- nity and aesthetics, as distinct from more tangible ecosystem services, and the belief that trees will improve property values. In-depth interviews would be necessary to elucidate why residents conceptually grouped environment, community, and aesthetics. The survey likely missed renters as well as participants without internet access. It is possible that other benefits of trees, and other means of communicating those benefits, would be effective with other subpopulations and/or demographic groups. For example, among sur- vey respondents, the availability of free street trees was predominantly communicated through neighbors, which underscores the importance of neighborhood- or community-based outreach ©2015 International Society of Arboriculture Locke et al.: Why Opt-in to a Planting Program? strategies that increase social contacts. Future research regarding tree requesters in this and other urban forestry programs could employ in- depth interviews and/or surveys sent more imme- diately after tree planting. The write-in responses that did not correspond to the preset categories could be added to future assessments. In this study, three respondents indicated they requested the tree because they are not physically able to plant a tree on their own. Three others said they value trees for the traffic calming effects. These findings present an opportunity to strengthen future research designed to understand who elects to participate in free-tree programs and why they opt-in to such programs, which can facilitate out- reach and engagement for specific subpopulations. Although the New Haven results presented here are representative of one case, the questions, methods, and approach implemented here are readily extensible to other programs. Such base- line studies could permit cross-site comparisons with diverse programs in other cities to better understand participation in free-tree programs more broadly and to evaluate outreach strat- egy effectiveness in light of resident perceptions and values. This avenue of research could lead to more successful tree planting initiatives that meet the needs of different residents. This could be accomplished through a better matching of pro- grammatic planting objectives, outreach strate- gies, and residents’ motivations, capacities, and interests informed through ongoing evaluations. CONCLUSION The goals of this study were to understand how residents learned about urban forestry programs (and free trees made available by URI in particu- lar), describe who requests free street trees through this program, and assess why they requested a tree. Addressing these questions is necessary due to the explosion of interest in urban forestry programs among policy makers and funders, as well as the central role of residents and volunteers in urban forest stewardship. Survey respondents mostly learned about the opportunity from their neighbors; were primarily long-term residents of New Haven; and requested a street tree to replace a removed tree, because they value the aesthetics, and to a lesser extent, the environmental benefits. Future re-
November 2015
| 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
