Trends in urban forestry practices, programs, and sustainability: Contrasting a pennsylvania, U.S., study

William F. Elmendorf, Vincent J. Cotrone, Joseph T. Mullen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Scopus citations

Abstract

Previous studies provided criteria and guidelines both for measuring and increasing the sustainability of urban forests. These studies have also provided evidence that difficulties existed in completing important practices (e.g., inventories, street tree ordinances, management plans), which contribute to both better urban forest programs and sustainability. In a recent study of both small town tree commissions and programs in northeastern Pennsylvania U.S., there was a marked difference between tree commission members' attitudes toward urban forestry practices and the successful completion of them. Focus groups composed of tree commission members were used to gather information on why these differences existed. Our northeastern Pennsylvania study provided evidence that local tree commissions had difficulties completing urban forestry practices for a number of reasons, including a lack of volunteer time and a need for additional support and assistance. The study also showed that small town tree commissioners viewed and defined urban forest sustainability much more practically than has been expressed in the extant literature. Questions continue about how well local urban forestry practices support sustainable urban forest programs and resources.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)237-247
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Arboriculture
Volume29
Issue number4
StatePublished - Jul 1 2003

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Forestry
  • Ecology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Trends in urban forestry practices, programs, and sustainability: Contrasting a pennsylvania, U.S., study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this