2022 / Urban

Diversity in Public Perceptions of Urban Forests and Urban Trees: A Critical Review

Citation

Ordóñez Barona, C., Wolf, K., Kowalski, J. M., Kendal, D., Byrne, J. A., & Conway, T. M. (2022). Diversity in public perceptions of urban forests and urban trees: A critical review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 226, 104466. doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2022.104466

Link to file

Cities around the world are trying to include more voices in decisions about urban forests (the trees that line streets and fill parks). But research on how people actually feel about those trees is scattered and hard to compare. To get a clearer picture, the authors reviewed 178 studies on people’s perceptions of urban forests and urban trees, using text-analysis tools and other assessment methods.

What they found is that the research lacks diversity in places, methods, people, and the kinds of responses being measured. Most studies take place in a single city and ask about trees in general or trees in parks. Most rely on convenience sampling, like surveys and on-the-spot interviews with whoever happens to walk by. Few studies include people from diverse demographic, ethnic, or cultural backgrounds. And most focus on the benefits people believe trees provide, rather than the full range of feelings people might have. The exception was studies about values, which did capture a wider mix of responses.

Many studies were also unclear about exactly what kind of perception they were measuring. The authors suggest that future research should be more specific about what is being perceived, how it is being perceived, and who is perceiving it. Building more diversity into study design, they argue, would give cities better information for keeping urban forests healthy and resilient.

Abstract

Across the world, planning and decision-making for urban forests increasingly seeks to include diverse perspectives. Yet, research on people’s perceptions of urban forests and urban trees is fragmented. To integrate and critically analyse this body of research, we conducted a review of empirical studies about people’s perceptions of urban forests and urban trees. We analysed 178 relevant studies with a focus on the diversity of places, methods, people, and perception response, using text analysis algorithms in Leximancer and established epistemological and methodological content assessment frameworks. The mixed-methods-assessment-tool (MMAT) was also used to assess method quality. Findings show current literature inadequately considers diversity of places, methods, people, and perception responses. Although multiple countries are represented, studies are usually limited to a single city and address perceptions of urban trees generally or trees in parks. Convenience sampling dominates, through predetermined, survey- and intercept-based data collection techniques. Few studies have investigated the perceptions of demographically, ethnically, or culturally diverse people. Most studies focused on the positive perceptions people hold (i.e., perceptions of benefits; beliefs about the positive consequences of urban trees), rather than the diversity of perceptions that may exist. The exception is studies that focused on values, which do report more diverse perception responses. Studies often lack conceptual clarity about the specific type of perception response being investigated. Future research must consider what is being perceived, how is it being perceived, and who is perceiving it, with more clarity. There should be more emphasis on incorporating diversity in study design to better inform urban forest sustainability and resilience.