IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i12p7079-d835071.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Location, Location, Location: Modelling of Noise Mitigation by Urban Woodland Shows the Benefit of Targeted Tree Planting in Cities

Author

Listed:
  • David H. Fletcher

    (UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Environment Centre Wales, Deiniol Road, Bangor LL57 2UW, UK)

  • Joanne K. Garrett

    (European Centre for Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter TR1 3HD, UK)

  • Amy Thomas

    (UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Environment Centre Wales, Deiniol Road, Bangor LL57 2UW, UK)

  • Alice Fitch

    (UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Environment Centre Wales, Deiniol Road, Bangor LL57 2UW, UK)

  • Phil Cryle

    (eftec, Economics for The Environment Consultancy, 3rd Floor, 4 City Road, London EC1Y 2AA, UK)

  • Simon Shilton

    (Acustica Ltd., 3000 Aviator Way, Manchester M22 5TG, UK)

  • Laurence Jones

    (UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Environment Centre Wales, Deiniol Road, Bangor LL57 2UW, UK)

Abstract

Noise pollution from road traffic is ubiquitous in modern cities and is the second greatest environmental risk to health in Western Europe. Urban woodland can provide substantial noise mitigation if located properly, yet such considerations are often absent from the urban planning process. Current approaches for quantifying this important ecosystem service (ES) do not account adequately for important spatial factors and are unable to identify effectively the best locations to place new woodland for noise mitigation. We present new methods, in which we exploit the concept of least-cost-distance, to map and value the mitigating effect of urban woodland, and to identify optimal locations to place new woodland. Applying these methods, we show that urban woodland currently provides Birmingham City (UK) with over GBP 3.8 million in noise mitigation benefits, annually. We also show that our new ‘opportunity’ mapping methods effectively identify the best locations for new woodland, achieving close to a maximum service with less than a quarter of the additional woodland needed to achieve it. This has important implications for the design and implementation of urban tree planting for noise mitigation, and these methods can be adapted for other ES, allowing consideration of multiple service outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • David H. Fletcher & Joanne K. Garrett & Amy Thomas & Alice Fitch & Phil Cryle & Simon Shilton & Laurence Jones, 2022. "Location, Location, Location: Modelling of Noise Mitigation by Urban Woodland Shows the Benefit of Targeted Tree Planting in Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-15, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:12:p:7079-:d:835071
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/12/7079/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/12/7079/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cimburova, Zofie & Berghauser Pont, Meta, 2021. "Location matters. A systematic review of spatial contextual factors mediating ecosystem services of urban trees," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    2. van Etten, Jacob, 2017. "R Package gdistance: Distances and Routes on Geographical Grids," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 76(i13).
    3. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    4. Holt, Alison R. & Mears, Meghann & Maltby, Lorraine & Warren, Philip, 2015. "Understanding spatial patterns in the production of multiple urban ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 33-46.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Toby Roberts & Ian Williams & John Preston & Nick Clarke & Melinda Odum & Stefanie O’Gorman, 2023. "Ports in a Storm: Port-City Environmental Challenges and Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-24, June.
    2. Tate, Christopher & Tran, Ngan & Longo, Alberto & Barry, John & Taylor, Tim & O'Neill, Ciaran & Hunter, Ruth, 2024. "Economic evaluations of urban green and blue space interventions: A scoping review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Goran Krsnik & Sonia Reyes-Paecke & Keith M. Reynolds & Jordi Garcia-Gonzalo & José Ramón González Olabarria, 2023. "Assessing Relativeness in the Provision of Urban Ecosystem Services: Better Comparison Methods for Improved Well-Being," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    2. Karen T. Lourdes & Chris N. Gibbins & Perrine Hamel & Ruzana Sanusi & Badrul Azhar & Alex M. Lechner, 2021. "A Review of Urban Ecosystem Services Research in Southeast Asia," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, January.
    3. De Valck, Jeremy & Beames, Alistair & Liekens, Inge & Bettens, Maarten & Seuntjens, Piet & Broekx, Steven, 2019. "Valuing urban ecosystem services in sustainable brownfield redevelopment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 139-149.
    4. Suchocka, Marzena & Heciak, Jakub & Błaszczyk, Magdalena & Adamczyk, Joanna & Gaworski, Marek & Gawłowska, Agnieszka & Mojski, Jacek & Kalaji, Hazem M. & Kais, Karolina & Kosno-Jończy, Joanna & Heciak, 2023. "Comparison of Ecosystem Services and Replacement Value calculations performed for urban trees," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    5. Larondelle, Neele & Lauf, Steffen, 2016. "Balancing demand and supply of multiple urban ecosystem services on different spatial scales," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 18-31.
    6. Gaodi Xie & Wenhui Chen & Shuyan Cao & Chunxia Lu & Yu Xiao & Changshun Zhang & Na Li & Shuo Wang, 2014. "The Outward Extension of an Ecological Footprint in City Expansion: The Case of Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-16, December.
    7. Balzan, Mario V & Caruana, Julio & Zammit, Annrica, 2018. "Assessing the capacity and flow of ecosystem services in multifunctional landscapes: Evidence of a rural-urban gradient in a Mediterranean small island state," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 711-725.
    8. P. Hlaváčková & D. Šafařík, 2016. "Quantification of the utility value of the recreational function of forests from the aspect of valuation practice," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(8), pages 345-356.
    9. Alexander V. Rusanov, 2019. "Dacha dwellers and gardeners: garden plots and second homes in Europe and Russia," Population and Economics, ARPHA Platform, vol. 3(1), pages 107-124, April.
    10. Hui, Ling Chui & Jim, C.Y., 2022. "Urban-greenery demands are affected by perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices, and socio-demographic and environmental-cultural factors," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    11. Monika Kopecká & Daniel Szatmári & Konštantín Rosina, 2017. "Analysis of Urban Green Spaces Based on Sentinel-2A: Case Studies from Slovakia," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-17, April.
    12. Veerkamp, Clara J. & Schipper, Aafke M. & Hedlund, Katarina & Lazarova, Tanya & Nordin, Amanda & Hanson, Helena I., 2021. "A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    13. Ahmet Tolunay & Çağlar Başsüllü, 2015. "Willingness to Pay for Carbon Sequestration and Co-Benefits of Forests in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, March.
    14. Vasileios A. Tzanakakis & Andrea G. Capodaglio & Andreas N. Angelakis, 2023. "Insights into Global Water Reuse Opportunities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-30, August.
    15. Massoni, Emma Soy & Barton, David N. & Rusch, Graciela M. & Gundersen, Vegard, 2018. "Bigger, more diverse and better? Mapping structural diversity and its recreational value in urban green spaces," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 502-516.
    16. Somajita Paul & Harini Nagendra, 2017. "Factors Influencing Perceptions and Use of Urban Nature: Surveys of Park Visitors in Delhi," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-23, April.
    17. Bo Yang & Ming-Han Li & Shujuan Li, 2013. "Design-with-Nature for Multifunctional Landscapes: Environmental Benefits and Social Barriers in Community Development," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-26, October.
    18. Dennis, Matthew & James, Philip, 2017. "Ecosystem services of collectively managed urban gardens: Exploring factors affecting synergies and trade-offs at the site level," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 17-26.
    19. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    20. Donatella Valente & María Victoria Marinelli & Erica Maria Lovello & Cosimo Gaspare Giannuzzi & Irene Petrosillo, 2022. "Fostering the Resiliency of Urban Landscape through the Sustainable Spatial Planning of Green Spaces," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-13, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:12:p:7079-:d:835071. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.