Access to trees and greenspaces is consistently low across English cities according to a new study led by the University.
Researchers used a recognised three-part framework for measuring tree and greenspace access in urban neighbourhoods in Leeds, Bradford, Wakefield, York, Manchester, Stoke-on-Trent and Plymouth, and found that at best, only 2% of buildings in any city region met all three components of the rule.
The 3-30-300 framework is a tool which is gaining popularity in Europe but not yet in the UK. It recommends that every house, school, and workplace has a view of three trees, that there is 30% canopy cover in each neighbourhood and that each building has a public greenspace within 300 metres.
We know how important urban trees and greenspaces are to people living in towns and cities, and the range of benefits they provide. It's vital that everyone can experience those benefits.
The team, made up of researchers from Leeds, University of Edinburgh, Forest Research, and the National Library of Scotland applied the framework to seven English cities, creating a baseline to help identify those neighbourhoods needing more work, and to monitor their progress. The study is published in the February edition of Urban Forestry & Urban Greening.
Lead author of the study Elle Smith, a post-graduate researcher in Leeds' School of Earth, Environment and Sustainability, said: "Many cities and urban areas are now setting targets to increase green infrastructure and in particular to plant more trees. This is often with the goal of mitigating the impacts of climate change.
"By aligning new tree and greenspace targets with the baseline identified in this study, we can make sure we improve access to the full range of benefits, from climate mitigation to improved health and wellbeing."
The study also compares performance in the seven English cities to 3-30-300 results from studies of other cities around the globe, finding that the English cities perform similarly at the three-tree component but worse at the 30% canopy cover and greenspace within 300 m components. The researchers say the results emphasise the poor performance of these English cities, not only in meeting the 3-30-300 thresholds, but in comparison with other cities where average performance is consistently better.
The team also analysed which types of trees were driving success at the three-tree and 30% components of the 3-30-300 framework. The results suggest that planting more trees in private gardens and preventing their removal, as well as creating more woodland, would be the key to future success.
Ambitious targets
In England, cities are already setting ambitious targets to meet and exceed the minimum standard of 20% recommended by The Urban Forestry and Woodland Advisory Committee Network.
Manchester aims to increase canopy cover from 18.8 % to 21.8 % by 2050, requiring approximately 64,000 additional large trees.
In York, the target is to attain 13% urban canopy cover by 2050, not meeting the 20% goal but increasing from a much lower baseline of 10.8% in 2022.
In Leeds, the canopy target is 33% by 2050, approximately doubling the 17% canopy cover recorded in 2020.
Co-author of the study Dr Hannah Walker, Urban Forest Research Scientist at Forest Research, added: "We know how important urban trees and greenspaces are to people living in towns and cities, and the range of benefits they provide. It's vital that everyone can experience those benefits.
"This work builds on the well-established metric of urban tree canopy cover and gives us more detailed insights into how the spatial distribution of trees and greenspaces has an effect on the provision of benefits, at city-wide and neighbourhood scales.
"It shows that increasing canopy cover across urban areas is still very important, and that there are priority areas in each city where local authorities can look to establish new trees where they are most needed. The roles of trees in private gardens in helping neighbourhoods score highly in the 3-30-300 rule is particularly interesting. This work gives us strong evidence for their importance in providing public benefits and should encourage us all to retain and maintain these existing trees."
