Perception of Urban Trees by Polish Tree Professionals vs. Nonprofessionals

Abstract

Sustainable urban forests require tree acceptance and support. Two groups of respondents, professionals (working in urban green areas) and individuals (with no professional connection with trees) revealed their attitudes towards trees by assessing statements in a survey questionnaire. Similar general attitude from professionals and nonprofessionals towards the examined benefits and harms related to urban trees was observed. Tree benefits were perceived as much more important than the annoyance they might cause. However, 6% of nonprofessionals found only negative aspects in trees, proving to be arboriphobes. No arboriphobes and no “Tree sceptics” were among the professionals. Around 40% of the respondents in the two groups found the number of trees in the surrounding areas too low. The nuisance caused by trees was seen as more disturbing by younger and lower-educated professionals. Women tended to assess trees as more attractive and as having a stronger influence on socioeconomic contributions than men. Men dominated the “Tree indifferent” group. The attractiveness of trees and their impact on socioeconomic contributions were related to the place of residence and the level of education among the nonprofessionals. The level of education of the nonprofessionals was also connected to being clustered into one of the four abovementioned groups of respondents. A majority of medium and big city dwellers as well as a minority of villagers were in the “Tree liking” cluster.

Assessment and Mapping Green Areas Ecosystem Services and Socio-Demographic Characteristics in Turin Neighborhoods (Italy)

“…Furthermore, at the urban level, the theme of the perception and attitude that citizens have towards green areas and trees is fundamental, especially for the design and management of new green areas. Although some specific studies have investigated the theme of the perception of safety in urban green areas [77] and the attitudes of professionals and nonprofessionals towards urban trees [83], more studies should focus on the management and aesthetic perception of urban green areas emphasizing the difference in perception between different genders [84].…”

Transit versus Nature. Depreciation of Environmental Values of the Road Alleys. Case Study: Gamerki-Jonkowo, Poland

“…However, alleys are often a reason for public complaint. Road users are afraid of fallen trees, broken branches, and leaning tree trunks which puts pressure on local 2 of 24 authorities to cut trees down along the roads and streets [5,6], although the benefits of trees outweigh the annoyances they pose on the whole [7].…”

“…Diverse functions such as environmental protection, economic development, and social equity might be an integral part of alleyway management systems [1]. Despite the important contribution to ecosystem services and the general positive attitude towards trees by people (i.e., urban dwellers often declare their willingness to pay higher taxes for investment in green infrastructure [7,54]), trees are not always accepted due to safety considerations or proximity to road infrastructure [15,55].…”

Transit verus Nature. Value Depreciation of Road Alleys. Case study: Gamerki-Jonkowo, Poland

“…Alleys have the potential to serve as green infrastructure and to enhance urban sustainability [1,4], but they are often a reason for public complaint. Road users are afraid of fallen trees, broken branches and leaning tree trunks which eventually causes pressure to cut trees down along the roads and streets [5,6], although the benefits of trees outweigh the annoyances they pose on the whole [7]. Anthropogenic changes in landscape have bilateral character and they can lead to its impoverishment (simplification) or enrichment (diversification) [8].…”

“…Despite the important contribution to ecosystem services and general positive attitude to trees by people (i.e. urban dwellers often declare their willingness to pay higher taxes for investment in green infrastructure [7,34]), trees are not always accepted because of the safety considerations or proximity to infrastructure [15,35].…”