Multiple benefits and values of trees in urban landscapes in two towns in northern South Africa
- Shackleton, Sheona E, Chinyimba, Abby, Hebinck, Paul, Shackleton, Charlie M, Kaoma, Humphrey
- Authors: Shackleton, Sheona E , Chinyimba, Abby , Hebinck, Paul , Shackleton, Charlie M , Kaoma, Humphrey
- Date: 2015
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/180874 , vital:43658 , xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.12.004"
- Description: Cities and towns can be conceptualised as complex social-ecological systems or landscapes that are composed of different spatial elements. Trees in urban landscapes provide a variety of tangible and intangible benefits (ecosystem services) that may be valued differently across diverse households and individuals. Here, we consider how the benefits and values of trees to urban residents vary across public and private spaces in three low income neighbourhoods in two medium-sized towns in northern South Africa. We find that the most asset poor residents in informal settlements derive significant benefits from the provisioning services offered by trees in natural green spaces on the ‘urban periphery’; in particular they value supplies of wood for energy, whilst also recognising the importance of regulating services such as shade. Trees in such spaces help these immigrants cope with a lack of infrastructure, services and disposable income after their move to the city. In new, low-cost housing neighbourhoods, the importance of trees in providing shade and shelter in gardens is emphasised due to the hot and dusty nature of these settlements, while residents in older township neighbourhoods make more mention of the aesthetic value of trees in private spaces as well as the fruits they provide. In all neighbourhoods, attitudes towards trees in public spaces were mixed because of their perceived association with crime, although low income households did make extensive use of tree products from natural areas. The relevance of the results for urban planning and greening in low income areas is discussed.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2015
- Authors: Shackleton, Sheona E , Chinyimba, Abby , Hebinck, Paul , Shackleton, Charlie M , Kaoma, Humphrey
- Date: 2015
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/180874 , vital:43658 , xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.12.004"
- Description: Cities and towns can be conceptualised as complex social-ecological systems or landscapes that are composed of different spatial elements. Trees in urban landscapes provide a variety of tangible and intangible benefits (ecosystem services) that may be valued differently across diverse households and individuals. Here, we consider how the benefits and values of trees to urban residents vary across public and private spaces in three low income neighbourhoods in two medium-sized towns in northern South Africa. We find that the most asset poor residents in informal settlements derive significant benefits from the provisioning services offered by trees in natural green spaces on the ‘urban periphery’; in particular they value supplies of wood for energy, whilst also recognising the importance of regulating services such as shade. Trees in such spaces help these immigrants cope with a lack of infrastructure, services and disposable income after their move to the city. In new, low-cost housing neighbourhoods, the importance of trees in providing shade and shelter in gardens is emphasised due to the hot and dusty nature of these settlements, while residents in older township neighbourhoods make more mention of the aesthetic value of trees in private spaces as well as the fruits they provide. In all neighbourhoods, attitudes towards trees in public spaces were mixed because of their perceived association with crime, although low income households did make extensive use of tree products from natural areas. The relevance of the results for urban planning and greening in low income areas is discussed.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2015
Low-cost housing developments in South Africa miss the opportunities for household level urban greening
- Shackleton, Charlie M, Hebinck, Paul, Kaoma, Humphrey, Chishaleshale, Mwale, Chinyimba, Abby, Shackleton, Sheona E, Gambiza, James, Gumbo, Davison
- Authors: Shackleton, Charlie M , Hebinck, Paul , Kaoma, Humphrey , Chishaleshale, Mwale , Chinyimba, Abby , Shackleton, Sheona E , Gambiza, James , Gumbo, Davison
- Date: 2014
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/180967 , vital:43677 , xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.10.002"
- Description: Most developing countries of the world are experiencing large-scale migration from rural to urban areas. Many new migrants end up in low-cost or informal areas and slums with attendant environmental concerns. One dimension of improved urban sustainability is the provision of green spaces and trees. Whilst many countries have urban greening programmes for public spaces and streets, few have considered the status and potential contribution of trees from resident's own gardens. This paper reports firstly on the policy environment for urban forestry and greening in South Africa and secondly on the maintenance, use and appreciation of trees on private homesteads of residents of new and older low-income suburbs as well as informal housing areas from three small towns in South Africa. In particular we examine if the most recent centrally planned and built low-income housing schemes (called RDP suburbs in South Africa) have considered and incorporated plans or spaces for urban greenery in peoples’ homesteads. We found that broad environmental and sustainability concerns and statements are common in urban development and housing policies, but specific guidelines for implementation are generally absent. More specifically, urban forestry and tree planting are rarely mentioned in the broader land use and environmental policies other than the national forest act and subsequent regulations, but even there it is relatively superficial. In the study towns the prevalence, density and number of species of trees was lowest in the new RDP suburbs relative to the township and informal areas. Consequently, the contribution of tree products to local livelihoods was also lower in the RDP areas. Yet there were no differences in the level of appreciation of the value and intangible benefits of trees between residents from the three different suburbs. This shows that the failure to plan for and accommodate trees in new low-cost housing developments is missing an opportunity to improve overall urban sustainability and liveability and constraining the potential flows of tangible and intangible benefits to urban residents. Making opportunities for such in older suburbs is challenging because of space limitations and cost implications of retrospective provisions, but incorporation into plans for new low-cost housing development should be possible.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2014
- Authors: Shackleton, Charlie M , Hebinck, Paul , Kaoma, Humphrey , Chishaleshale, Mwale , Chinyimba, Abby , Shackleton, Sheona E , Gambiza, James , Gumbo, Davison
- Date: 2014
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/180967 , vital:43677 , xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.10.002"
- Description: Most developing countries of the world are experiencing large-scale migration from rural to urban areas. Many new migrants end up in low-cost or informal areas and slums with attendant environmental concerns. One dimension of improved urban sustainability is the provision of green spaces and trees. Whilst many countries have urban greening programmes for public spaces and streets, few have considered the status and potential contribution of trees from resident's own gardens. This paper reports firstly on the policy environment for urban forestry and greening in South Africa and secondly on the maintenance, use and appreciation of trees on private homesteads of residents of new and older low-income suburbs as well as informal housing areas from three small towns in South Africa. In particular we examine if the most recent centrally planned and built low-income housing schemes (called RDP suburbs in South Africa) have considered and incorporated plans or spaces for urban greenery in peoples’ homesteads. We found that broad environmental and sustainability concerns and statements are common in urban development and housing policies, but specific guidelines for implementation are generally absent. More specifically, urban forestry and tree planting are rarely mentioned in the broader land use and environmental policies other than the national forest act and subsequent regulations, but even there it is relatively superficial. In the study towns the prevalence, density and number of species of trees was lowest in the new RDP suburbs relative to the township and informal areas. Consequently, the contribution of tree products to local livelihoods was also lower in the RDP areas. Yet there were no differences in the level of appreciation of the value and intangible benefits of trees between residents from the three different suburbs. This shows that the failure to plan for and accommodate trees in new low-cost housing developments is missing an opportunity to improve overall urban sustainability and liveability and constraining the potential flows of tangible and intangible benefits to urban residents. Making opportunities for such in older suburbs is challenging because of space limitations and cost implications of retrospective provisions, but incorporation into plans for new low-cost housing development should be possible.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2014
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »