234 cies in levels of tree stress existed between the Boy Scout volunteers and experts. The under- graduate volunteers varied with experts in terms of measuring tree size (e.g., diameter at breast height). These disagreements indicated a need to prioritize the necessary levels of precision in order to affect changes in management practice. Roman et al. (this issue †) also discussed vol- unteer data quality, within a larger case study of an evolving citizen science young tree monitoring program in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S. That program, Tree Checkers, has volunteers assessing recently planted tree survival, vigor, and stew- ardship within their neighborhoods, while also reminding residents to do tree care. The program has changed over the years to improve data manage- ment and quality, as well as allow mobile data col- lection. The authors discuss how shifting program goals led to additional emphasis on data quality to report reliable program performance outcomes. Sorensen et al. (this issue) focus on volun- teer stewardship motivation. In particular, these authors analyzed public perception of and engage- ment with coastal restoration projects in Jamaica Bay, New York, New York, U.S., drawing upon interviews with park users where restoration plots were sighted. Motivations varied by neighborhood, suggesting highly localized stewardship identities. Not surprisingly, motivation also varied by con- servation issue/need. These authors suggest that civic engagement in environmental stewardship can be mediated by tailored framing of needs and desired outcomes to the local community. Likewise emphasizing community engage- ment, Barker et al. (this issue †) describe the use of citizen science in Oakville, Ontario, Canada. The program aimed to enhance public aware- ness concerning emergent pests and diseases in the town, and ultimately increase advocacy for the urban forest. Youth volunteers were cen- tral to the program, and the authors offer sug- gestions for youth recruitment and engagement. de Guzman et al. (this issue †) analyze the use of community-based social marketing in order to spur resident engagement in street tree stewardship. Working in Huntington Park, Los Angeles, California, U.S., they used focus groups and door-to-door surveys to examine barriers and drivers of residential tree stew- ©2018 International Society of Arboriculture Roman et al.: Civic Science in Urban Forestry ardship. They then compare the effectiveness of active, in-person outreach (i.e., speaking with residents and demonstrating tree care) and passive outreach (i.e., outreach materials left at doorstep), and found improved tree health and increased soil moisture at sites with active outreach as compared to both baseline conditions and passive outreach outcomes. Taken together, the articles in this and the prior special issue indicate a substantial engage- ment of the field of urban forestry with civic science. Both practitioners and researchers are building new knowledge in this growing area of scholarship, particularly around ways to most effectively harness and amplify the interest, capacity, and care of urban trees by the public. Going forward, practitioners may want to con- sider their volunteer base more broadly both in terms of who is willing to engage and ways to specifically tailor engagement to the multiple identities that comprise urban communities. In addition, we recommend that data quality assess- ments be tailored specifically to project goals in an effort to ensure minimum levels of precision with maximal levels of engagement. Volunteer- based assessments can be powerful resources when they are integrated with the interests of community members and urban forest manag- ers. We also echo the future needs for civic sci- ence research and practice that we previously identified in Roman et al. (2018): enabling data democratization through technological tools, identifying ways to engage marginalized and under-represented groups in civic science, and supporting transdisciplinary dialogue and collaborations across research and practice. Acknowledgments. We repeat our deep appreciation to the following individuals, repeating our acknowledgements from Roman et al. (2018): “We thank all the presenters and partici- pants at the May 2016 symposium, “Citizen Science & Urban Forestry: Research & Practice.” We are especially grateful to the scholars and professionals who joined us after the symposium for a workshop to discuss new directions for citizen science in urban forestry: G. Abrams, D. Boyer, D. Dentice, A. DiSalvo, J. Henning, J. Greenfeld, S. Lerman, S. Low, M. Maslin, J. Sand- ers, P. Silva, and A, Sorensen. Our discussion of future research needs in this paper builds on that workshop. We also appreciate the sponsors of the symposium: the USDA Forest Service Phila- delphia Field Station, the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society, and Azavea.”
November 2018
| Title Name |
Pages |
Delete |
Url |
| Empty |
Ai generated response may be inaccurate.
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.
Downloading PDF
Generating your PDF, please wait...
This process might take longer please wait
