Trees for Better Communities: Economics & Livability Dr. Kathleen Wolf College of the Environment University of Washington January 2011
www.naturewithin.info
Ecosystem Services! intangible (vs. tangible products)! human life support! emerging/new markets
City Trees & Nature Ecosystem Services! Air pollutants reduction! Nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment interception! Carbon emissions reduction & sequestration! Urban heat-island cooling! Reduced bad ozone! Stormwater runoff reduction! Wildlife habitat
Image courtesy of the Center for Urban Forest Research
Image courtesy of the Center for Urban Forest Research
Image courtesy of the Center for Urban Forest Research
Image courtesy of the Center for Urban Forest Research
Why are city trees & urban greening important? human health, functioning, & well-being
Civic Nature A Competitive Advantage nature in cities beautification and aesthetics ecosystem services economic value
Richard Florida the Creative Class
NUCFAC 2009 Annual Report Trees & Nature Benefits messages health quality of life community advantage public values
Finding that study......
Research Reviews www.greenhealth.washington.edu first phase: June 2010 summaries complete: Dec 2010 additional products June 2012 16 sponsors: Univ of WA; USDA Forest Service, U&CF Program; ARRA
a treasure trove!
1,706 articles % distribution
City Trees & Nature Active Living
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 1985 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 1986 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 1987 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 1988 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 1989 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 1990 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 1991 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 1992 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 1993 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 1994 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 1995 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 1996 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 1997 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19%!20% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 1998 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19%!20% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 1999 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19%!20% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 2000 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19%!20% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 2001 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19% 20% 24%!25% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 2002 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19% 20% 24%!25% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 2003 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19% 20% 24%!25% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 2004 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19% 20% 24%!25% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 2005 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19% 20% 24% 25% 29%!30% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 2006 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19% 20% 24% 25% 29%!30% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 2007 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5 4 person) No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19% 20% 24% 25% 29%!30% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Obesity Trends* Among U.S. Adults 2008 (*BMI!30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5 4 person) doubling of U.S. obesity rate since 1980s No Data <10% 10% 14% 15% 19% 20% 24% 25% 29%!30% Source: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, CDC.
Age-adjusted % of adults aged!20 years who are obese, 2007 CDC s Division of Diabetes Translation. National Diabetes Surveillance System available at http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics MMWR 58:1259-1263, 2009
majority of Americans not active enough goal-30 minutes per day of moderate activity to reduce risk factors for chronic diseases "(heart, stroke, cancer, diabetes) significant costs to national health services" $168 billion medical costs 17% of all U.S. medical costs CDC 2010 46
parks, open spaces & trails
Nature, Human Health & Walkable Neighborhoods! Outcomes: Elderly People & Walking! less illness! lower mortality rate! Environments: Neighborhood Streets (Tokyo)! tree - lined! parks Takano, Nakamura, Watanabe. 2002. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health#
1,706 articles % distribution
Kaplan, R. 1993. Landscape and Urban Planning."
bottom line = $$ benefits of trees & nature the better office cubicle!
hospital healing gardens: cancer treatment, depression, reduced pain, grieving, dementia, schizophrenia health $$ savings Donovan et al. Health & Place increase in canopy cover = fewer low weight births
City Trees & Nature Property & Retail Markets! Residential real estate values - 3-7% with trees in yard! Residential real estate values - 5-20%, proximity to natural open space! Commercial property rental rates - 7%! Improved consumer environments in business districts - 9-12% product spending
Trees & Retail Environments Research
Trees & Shopper Environments Research Research Questions trees and visual quality? trees and consumer behavior? trees and product pricing? partners: U of Washington, NGOs, business organizations funded by USDA Forest Service
1. Place Perceptions" Place Character" Interaction with Merchants" Quality of Products 2. Patronage Behavior" travel time, travel distance" duration & frequency of visits" willingness to pay for parking" Place Marketing 3. Product Pricing" higher willingness to pay for all types of goods" higher in districts with trees 9-12%" Relationship Marketing"
ALPHA: Awaji Landscape Planning & Horticulture Academy
typical retail street in urban Japan
Namba Parks, Osaka view from nearby hotel
interior retail space ground level
small plazas, retail entry
passive nature experiences
Namba Parks: retail success & nature experience benefits
Green Roof - Chicago City Hall high-rise nature, preferred views energy savings, stormwater management 71
Summary city trees & nature = ecosystem services environmental services + human health & well being benefits to individuals/communities = economic value