Thermal Comfort and Perceptions of the Ecosystem Services and Disservices of Urban Trees in Florence

Abstract

Modern urban lifestyles have most likely generated a loss of awareness of the bio-cultural benefits derived from the presence of trees and forests in cities. The present study aimed at understanding the level of awareness and the ability to express significant relationships, both positive and negative, on ecosystem services and disservices by the citizens of a Mediterranean city where thermal comfort during the summer period can be particularly problematic. A questionnaire consisting of multiple-choice and open-ended questions was disseminated to citizens of Florence, Italy. The open questions allowed respondents space to describe what they perceive are the benefits and disbenefits of urban trees. Meanwhile, geospatial and climate data were processed in order to check the vegetation and microclimate conditions of the city areas where the 592 respondents live. The vast majority of respondents felt Florence is unbearably hot in summer with 93% agreeing the city needs more trees, and shaded places were perceived as the most important feature of urban green space. The results reveal many positive and negative associations to different species of trees and bring out a rich mosaic of perceptions towards urban green spaces and the features they contain. People are generally aware of a wide range of the benefits trees provide to communities and a good knowledge of the microclimate modification properties was revealed. Many of the popular public tree genera in the city, such as Tilia, Platanus and Pinus were favoured by residents however there was some overlap with trees that provoke negative experiences, and this information can be useful to city planners aiming to maximise ecosystem services and minimise ecosystem disservices.

Determinants of spatial distribution of trees outside forests along urban-rural gradients: A review

“…Inconsistent results (Anglaaere et al, 2011;Arabomen et al, 2020;Basu et al, 2022;Bhebhe et al, 2023;Blanco et al, 2020;Chukwumaucheya, 2012;Collins et al, 2019;Deng et al, 2017;Di Cristofaro et al, 2020;Dorresteijn et al, 2017;Drew-Smythe et al, 2023;Fernandes et al, 2018;Gwedla & Shackleton, 2019;Jeong et al, 2023;Kičić et al, 2022;Kloster et al, 2021;Lamichhane & Thapa, 2012;Locke et al, 2015;Malik et al, 2021;Olive et al, 2013;Olivero-Lora et al, 2020;Pati et al, 2022;Rae et al, 2011;Rašković & Decker, 2015;Saldarriaga et al, 2020;Sambou et al, 2017;Smith & Sullivan, 2014;Speak & Salbitano, 2021;Suchocka et al, 2019;Wei et (Basu et al, 2022;Blanco et al, 2020;Collins et al, 2019;Dainese et al, 2017;Kičić et al, 2022;Ng et al, 2015;Saldarriaga et al, 2020;Sebek et al, 2016;Sibelet et al, 2017;Zhang et al, 2020) b. Provisioning value of tre...…”

Calling time on the imperial lawn and the imperative for greenhouse gas mitigation

“…While these pristine natural forests and dense shrublands may not be compared directly to the carbon storage potential of urban treescapes, some report almost as high stores of carbon from parks: up to 420 t ha −1 of above ground carbon in tropical Ghana (475 t C ha −1 roots included) (Nero et al, 2017) and up to 289 t ha −1 of above ground carbon in the cool temperate climate of Leicester, England (Davies et al, 2011) (Table 2). Residential trees in Florida are reported to store 63 t of above ground carbon per hectare, and in Leipzig, Germany, above ground carbon stored per hectare of tree cover in areas with multi-story houses is as high as 64 tonnes (Strohbach & Haase, 2012).…”

“…It is not surprising that shade trees are valued more in warm climates than in cold climates. For example, 93% of respondents in Florence thought the city needed more trees to provide shaded cool places (Speak & Salbitano, 2021). Nonetheless, tree cover has been found to raise winter temperatures in cold climates (Edmondson et al, 2016).…”

Performance assessment of the ecosystem services provided by urban Nature-based solutions: focus on rainwater management

“…The public opinion is increasingly in favor of city vegetablization, especially in the climate change context [67]. However, there can still be reticence to NBS implementation from citizens regarding disservices and disturbances that accompany NBS [68,69]. This reticence can influence public policies.…”