Green Spaces Issue
URBAN FORESTRY IN A MULTICULTURAL
SOCIETY
by Mark Johnston1 and Lia
D.Shimada2
Abstract. The increasingly
multicultural character of modern urban
society creates challenges and
opportunities for the urban forester. For
the urban forestry strategy to respond
effectively to contemporary social
issues, it must include policies and
programs that promote social inclusion
and the involvement of disadvantaged
ethnic communities. This can be
accomplished through a distinct community
strategy. Although the fundamental
principles of community involvement still
apply, their application needs to reflect
the multicultural diversity of the
individual city or neighborhood. The
education, consultation, and
participation elements of the community
strategy are delivered through a wide
range of events and activities
specifically designed to promote social
inclusion and the engagement of ethnic
communities.
Key Words. Urban forestry;
social benefits; multicultural societies;
disadvantaged communities; social
inclusion; community strategies.
The populations of cities around the
world are becoming increasingly
multicultural in character (Knox and
Pinch 2000). This is not a new
phenomenon; immigration has played a
major role in the history of many cities,
particularly in North America (Berkin et
al. 1995). However, over the past century
the world has changed enormously.
Globalization in the economic, political,
and cultural spheres has dramatically
changed the scale and character of
immigration and has radically altered the
population composition and dynamics of
the modern city. Many cities now attract
large numbers of new residents from other
countries and continents, with languages
and cultures quite different from those
of the host nation. War and political
strife in troubled parts of the world
continue to lead to new influxes of
refugees and asylum seekers.
Many cities are becoming increasingly
polarized into distinct neighborhoods of
different social class and culture (Knox
and Pinch 2000). Residents from similar
back-grounds tend to cluster together for
mutual support and protection, and to
preserve group identity and culture.
Immigrants often arrive with limited
financial resources and tend to settle in
depressed, inner-city neighborhoods
characterized by a poor physical
environment. High unemployment, poor
health, and low levels of education and
literacy frequently accompany such
neighborhoods, which are sometimes
considered breeding grounds for violence,
crime, and an organized gang culture.
In the popular media, the problems
faced by multicultural societies tend to
receive the most coverage. Ethnic
communities and host communities can both
see their identities, traditions, and
economic prospects as threatened by the
other (Giddens 2001). These fears breed
intolerance, discrimination, and racism,
and have a cancerous effect on community
relations. In many cities over the past
few decades, explosive urban riots
sparked by racial tensions have shattered
community relations and shaken the
complacency of governments that have
failed to address the underlying causes
of this conflict (Keith 1992; Saltzstein
2003). In the climate of fear and
suspicion that now pervades many urban
areas, it is easy to forget the positive
contribution of successive waves of
immigration to the economy and life of
the nation (Brown and Hanna 1996).
The challenges and opportunities of
the multicultural society should concern
everyone, from governments to
individuals. Urban foresters must also
address these issues if they are to
operate successfully within the context
of the modern city. They can do this only
if they have an aware-ness and
appreciation of the complexities of
contemporary social issues.
THE LANDSCAPE OF THE MULTICULTURAL
CITY
As well as understanding the social
dynamics of the multicultural city, urban
foresters also need to be aware of the
social character of their landscapes. In
cities throughout the world, the density
and health of the urban forest in
residential areas often coincide with the
economic status of the people who live
there. In the poorer neighborhoods, there
are frequently few trees, private
gardens, or public open space. Communal
open space between high-rise flats and
tenements is often just a broad expanse
of mown grass with hardly a tree in
sight. These neighborhoods often have a
high proportion of residents from ethnic
backgrounds.
A sense of territoriality and
well-being can play a major role in how
members of different ethnic groups
perceivetheir local landscape (Burgess
1995; Loukaitou-Sideris 1995). Is it
viewed as safe and familiar or as
potentially threatening? High levels of
crime, anti-social behavior, and racial
harassment may discourage residents from
putting themselves in what they regard as
exposed positions in public open space or
woodland. The most vulnerable in the
community, such as the elderly, women,
and young children, are likely to have
heightened concerns about safety. In
cities marked by racial tensions and
frequent conflict between different
community groups, the demarcation of
entire neighborhoods into distinct
territories can be quite pronounced
(Johnston 1994, 1995).
Perception of public open spaces
naturally influences the ways in which
they are used (Burgess 1995;
Loukaitou-Sideris 1995). The level of use
is not just a function of perceived
safety but also reflects attitudes
regarding recreational and aesthetic
value. Perceptions of the benefits of
urban trees and landscape can vary
considerably among different ethnic
groups (Fraser and Kenney 2000). Urban
landscapes are often quite uniform in
character, usually reflecting the
horticultural and landscape traditions of
the host culture (Rishbeth 2002). While
ethnic influences have enriched the
music, food, and fashion of modern urban
society, they have found little
expression in its public open spaces.
The under-representation of ethnic
minorities in the urban environmental
movement has been widely observed (Ricard
1993; Iles 1998; Fraser and Kenney 2000;
BTCV 2002). Many reasons may account for
this. Residents of urban ethnic
communities may consider the environment
less of a priority compared to more
pressing social or economic concerns.
Other reasons may include lack of time or
opportunities to participate, a sense of
alienation from the surroundings, or a
sense of feeling marginalized from
mainstream community action. One
significant barrier to involvement may be
a popular perception of the environmental
movement as being elitist, cliquish, and
dominated by people who are white and
middle class.
URBAN FORESTRY AND SOCIAL
INCLUSION
The urban forestry movement has a
tradition of caring about social issues.
This is not surprising, since the aim of
urban forestry is to improve the quality
of life for urban residents. The planting
and management of trees is simply the
means to that end, and not the end in
itself (Johnston 1985). While the
sociological benefits of urban trees and
forests are now widely recognized, their
practical implications often receive
limited consideration in the delivery of
urban forestry programs.
The urban forestry movement in the
United States hasshown some interest in
promoting social inclusion among ethnic
communities (Berry 1991; Parris 1991;
Sando 1991; Ricard 1993; Iles 1998).
There has also been a considerable amount
of relevant research in the fields of
leisure, outdoor recreation, and the use
of parks and open spaces (Pincetl 2002).
However, there has been virtually no
coverage of the subject in the British
urban forestry literature. In Britain,
interest has come mainly from
environmentalists and landscape
professionals. Initially, a significant
influence in promoting this interest was
the example of cultural gardens created
in the Lower East Side of Manhattan (New
York City) in the 1980s (Johnston 1989a).
As governments throughout the world
become more aware of the need to promote
social inclusion among ethnic
communities, the urban forestry movement
must respond or run the risk of losing
political influence and social relevance.
Programs that embrace the entire
population not only attract the support
of the whole community, but also the
support of central and local government
as it pursues this agenda.
While effective urban forest
management depends on a good knowledge of
the trees and woodlands, urban foresters
should also be familiar with the social
complexities of the communities they
serve. Urban forestry is as much about
people as it is about trees, and
knowledge of the trees is only half of
the equation (Johnston 1989b). A detailed
survey of the urban forest should be
accompanied by a social survey that
focuses on the composition and dynamics
of the local population. As with the tree
survey, this should be updated regularly.
Basic demographic, economic, and social
data for different administrative
districts can be obtained from the most
recent government census, and then
supplemented by information and data from
local sources.
Resources for urban forestry programs
should be directed primarily at those
areas where they are most needed. This
principle is readily applied to the trees
for which maintenance work is scheduled
according to the most immediate
priorities. However, it is often
forgotten when it comes to the people who
live and work in the forest. Urban
foresters have a responsibility to give
priority to disadvantaged communities
that are currently gaining the least
benefit from the urban forest. While they
may pride themselves in “state of
the art” programs in the leafy and
affluent residential districts, less
fortunate areas should not be overlooked.
Social class or cultural background
should not regulate access to the
benefits of the urban forest. If an urban
forestry strategy is to respond
effectively to contemporary social
issues, it must include policies and
programs that promote social inclusion.
While this paper focuses on
disadvantaged ethnic communities, these
are not the only socially excluded groups
in urban society. Urban foresters also
need to respond to the needs of other
marginalized groups, such as women, the
disabled, the elderly, and the
unemployed.
COMMUNITY STRATEGIES AND ETHNIC
COMMUNITIES
Any urban forest strategy should also
include a community strategy that focuses
on engaging local communities and
ensuring maximum benefit from their
involvement. Although the importance of
having an urban forestry strategy is now
widely recognized, the idea of including
a specific community strategy is still
very new, let alone any reference within
it to engaging with ethnic communities.
In developing a community strategy for
multicultural areas, the fundamental
principles of community involvement still
apply. However, their application should
reflect the distinct multicultural
characteristics of the individual city or
neighborhood.
Promoting the involvement of ethnic
communities in the delivery of public
services must be firmly on the public
authority's policy agenda. The drive to
ensure that this happens should include
initiatives from central government in
the form of legislation and statutory
codes of practice for public authorities
(CRE 2002). Then, local politicians and
senior managers must be genuinely
committed to these policies and not just
indulging in “tokenism” to give
the appearance of doing something
positive. If relevant policies and
programs are to be developed and
appropriate re-sources allocated,
commitment must come from the top of the
public authority, which will then be
reflected in the activities and culture
of the whole organization.
A community strategy as it relates to
ethnic communities should have two
strands. Developing a multicultural
approach is not just about engaging with
people from ethnic backgrounds; it is
also about educating and involving the
host community and making it more
receptive to other cultures. These dual
strands reflect the two vital aspects of
ethnic identity: how people see
themselves and how others see them. The
strategy should focus on promoting
positive attitudes and perceptions among
the whole community. The aim is to
encourage people to work together toward
a shared vision of an inclusive society
that will benefit everyone. Within the
community strategy, work with schools and
youth groups should be given a high
priority.
To be effective, the community
strategy must include far more than just
“fine words” about the need to
promote social inclusion. It should also
include a detailed management plan with
recognized performance indicators or
benchmarks. As with any management plan,
actual performance should then be
regularly measured and monitored.
Initially, measurements of performance
may have to be quantitative to obtain
some indication of progress, but these
should also move eventually toward
qualitative indicators (Johnston 2001).
The strategy must include measures
designed to promote the community's own
ability to get involved. The emphasis
should be on capacity building and not
just on provision. While expertise and
resources from the public authority may
be generally available, ethnic
communities may have difficulty accessing
them. Training schemes and other
initiatives should be organized to focus
on building a community's capacity to
develop, acquire, and gain access to the
skills required to plan and manage
projects. However, resident involvement
in urban forestry projects does not
necessarily lead to empowerment; a
successful outcome depends on many
different factors (Westphal 2003).
A community program should include a
balance of education, consultation, and
participation strategies that are
specifically designed to deliver it
(Johnston 1989b). If any of these
elements are not represented, the impact
of the program will be limited.
EDUCATION AND INFORMATION
The most difficult task in delivering
any community strategy is to generate
sufficient interest to motivate residents
to become involved (Johnston 1989b). Of
course, those with keen interest in trees
and the environment will welcome the
chance. However, for the majority of
urban residents, trees have little
significance in their everyday lives and
it is often unrealistic to expect an
immediate response. Stimulating interest
requires a long-term strategy of
education and information. This can be
done through a variety of media, such as
advisory and promotional materials about
trees and tree care; environmental
education projects for schools and youth
groups; informal lectures to community
groups; “open days” at the
urban forestry unit's operational base;
and exhibitions and displays in community
centers, schools, libraries, and other
civic buildings.
In delivering an education strategy
for multicultural areas, the design and
promotion of these educational events and
activities must take into account the
need to promote a socially inclusive
image. A multicultural interpretation of
the urban forest is an essential part of
this strategy. While the landscape may be
uniform in character, the range of plants
that grow there is invariably
multicultural, with different species of
trees from around the world. An effective
way of introducing the whole community to
the multicultural nature of the urban
forest is through guided “tree
walks” around parks and streets.
Trees that originate from the countries
of origin of ethnic communities can be
highlighted. The informal nature of these
guided walks also allows a valuable
opportunity for social interaction among
the participants.
The use of language is a particularly
important issue in the delivery of
education and information programs in
multicultural communities. For basic
practical reasons, the urban forester
often needs to be able to communicate
multi-lingually. This is simply the most
effective way of getting information
across to the greatest number of people.
From administrative forms to educational
leaflets, urban foresters must be
conscious of when they should adopt a
multilingual approach. Access to
interpretive facilities should be an
essential part of the resources available
to the urban forestry team.
Apart from its role in effective
communications, language is also an
integral part of the culture and identity
of human communities (Giddens 2001). By
using the language of ethnic communities
in educational literature and other
program materials, urban foresters can
confirm, reinforce, and demonstrate
respect for this cultural identity.
On the subject of language, it is
worth mentioning that some terms in the
environmental vocabulary can have
unintended but nonetheless damaging
connotations for ethnic communities.
Perhaps the most common example is the
use of the terms “native” and
“alien” to describe the origin
of plants (Fenton 1986). Even in an urban
context, some professionals have adopted
a philosophy that “natives are
good” and “aliens are
bad.” Not only is this an
inappropriate classification for plants
in the urban environment, but these terms
can easily be construed as offensive.
Less insensitive and more appropriate
terms can and should be used (Wong, no
date).
Media coverage of the urban forestry
program can do much to shape public
perception of it. While the media
ultimately decide how and what they chose
to report, every effort should be made to
encourage the promotion of a socially
inclusive image. Television, radio, and
newspaper coverage can all be used to
show that people from ethnic backgrounds
can and do get involved in its community
events and activities.
CONSULTATION
Consultation with the local community
about issues relating to the urban forest
is essential to establish the perceptions
and preferences of different groups
(Johnston 1989b). However, this exercise
can be difficult with ethnic communities
that feel marginalized from mainstream
community activity. Additional efforts
beyond the norm should be made to
encourage the expression of views and
opinions. Public meetings should be held
at appropriate community centers and
staffed by an interpreter, preferably
from within the community. Policy
documents should be available in
multilingual versions to encourage
comprehensive feed-back. Local tree
committees, which act as a forum for
discussion about urban forestry issues,
should include representatives from the
larger community organizations.
While it is important to ensure that
consultation exercises are socially
inclusive, the precise level of
consultation needs to be considered
carefully. There is a danger of
“overconsulting” about trees
with all communities living in
economically depressed and neglected
neighborhoods. Disadvantaged ethnic
communities may feel they are being
“overdosed” on a subject that
is not that significant in comparison to
jobs, housing, crime, racism, etc. In
some cases, there may be a reaction
against the urban forestry program if
this is seen as just an excuse to avoid
tackling the more important issues
(Johnston 1986). Therefore, it is vital
to link the benefits of urban trees with
these more pressing economic and social
issues on the residents' agenda.
PARTI CIPATION IN PRACTICAL EVENTS
AND ACTIVITIES
A major aim of the community strategy
is to connect people with their trees and
green spaces, both physically and
psychologically. For residents from
ethnic communities that feel alienated
from their immediate surroundings, this
connection can be built by encouraging
them to participate in specially designed
open-air events and activities.
An excellent way to encourage an
ethnic community to identify more closely
with its public open spaces is to hold a
multicultural festival in a local park.
These festivals include a wide range of
activities, such as music, dance,
theater, and informal sports, designed to
appeal to all age groups. These
entertaining and relaxing events give a
favorable impression of the park and may
encourage residents to visit it on a more
regular basis. A festival also allows all
sections of the local community to come
together to celebrate cultural diversity
and interact socially. In neighborhoods
where one ethnic group forms a major
proportion of the population, the theme
of the festival can focus specifically on
that culture. For these events, there may
be advantages in arranging them to
coincide with special days in the
cultural or religious calendar. A time of
general celebration for the community is
likely to attract more interest in the
event. However, when organizing any event
or activity, it is also important to be
aware of constraints that may come from
specific cultural preferences or
religious beliefs.
Projects that link the arts and the
environment allow for cultural expression
within the context of an environmental
message, and are thus particularly
appropriate for ethnic communities. The
British organization Common Ground has
pioneered a range of imaginative
projects. For instance, on Tree Dressing
Day, local residents and school children
decorate and celebrate the living trees
in parks, gardens, playgrounds, and other
open spaces (Common Ground 1993). This is
actually a modern echo of an ancient
custom in many religions and cultures
(Altman 2002).
Community tree planting schemes are an
invaluable way to allow local residents
to make personal imprints on their
landscape. This can be particularly
significant in neighbor-hoods where there
are few private gardens. Involving
residents in the design and establishment
of these schemes promotes awareness and
appreciation of the trees and may also
reduce the risk of vandalism (Johnston
1985). For ethnic communities, the
benefits are further enhanced if some of
the species of trees come from their own
country of origin. Site conditions will
obviously limit the scope for tree
selection, but urban foresters and city
planners can often accommodate a wide
range of appropriate trees. This idea of
promoting cultural identification with
the trees and landscape can be extended
to the creation of cultural gardens.
These are entire gardens in which the
plants and landscape design reflect a
distinct cultural theme, giving the
community a familiar, friendly, and
culturally expressive neighborhood open
space that is distinctly its own
(Johnston 1989a; Agyeman 1995). Cultural
gardens can be designed, established, and
maintained by the residents themselves on
derelict and vacant sites and also within
established parks, open spaces, and
school grounds.
Involving residents in the design of
planting schemes is also an opportunity
to address concerns about crime and
safety in public open spaces. Recent
research has shown that barren open
spaces that are devoid of vegetation are
no safer than green ones. Carefully
designed planting schemes on inner-city
housing estates can not only create a
more liveable environment but can
actually reduce crime levels and promote
safety (Kuo and Sullivan 2001; Kuo 2003).
Some species of trees have important
cultural and religious significance for
different ethnic communities (Altman
2002). The symbolism of these trees can
be woven into events and activities to
heighten their impact and increase their
appeal. Trees can also be powerful
symbols of peace, reconciliation, and
hope. Tree-related events and activities
that focus on these aspirations can be
especially appropriate in areas marked by
racial tensions and conflict (Johnston
1994, 1995).
In efforts to involve different ethnic
communities, refugees and asylum seekers
are often overlooked. They may experience
particular difficulties assimilating into
society and identifying with their new
surroundings. They often arrive
traumatized from their recent experiences
and are housed in temporary accommodation
with the constant fear of relocation or
deportation. As part of the Environments
for All initiative, a project in Scotland
is doing its best to address this issue.
It takes groups of asylum seekers on day
trips to plant trees in the beautiful
setting of the Scottish mountains and
lakes (Goodwin 2002). The project allows
participants to mix socially in a
relaxing setting away from their
stressful urban environment, and it
creates an opportunity to contribute to
the host country through practical
environmental work.
PROGRAM STRUCTURE AND SUPPORT
Any program of sustained community
involvement will benefit greatly from a
network of volunteers to support and
deliver it. These volunteer networks,
such as the national tree warden program
in Britain and the citizen forester
program in the United States, can provide
a vital link between the public authority
and the local community. The volunteers
can represent the views and wishes of the
community and act as a catalyst in
generating community involvement in the
urban forestry program. In a
multicultural city, efforts should be
made to recruit a mix of volunteers that
reflects the ethnic diversity of the
population. In many programs, the
volunteers' area of operation is their
own local neighborhood. In areas where
the majority of residents are from a
particular ethnic community, there may be
distinct advantages in recruiting
volunteers from within the community. Not
only are these volunteers likely to have
a good “inside” knowledge of
the community, including linguistic
fluency, they could also play a vital
role in gaining the community's
acceptance and support for the program.
As much as possible, the urban
forestry program should aim to work with
existing groups within the ethnic
communities. Again, this is important
with any community strategy, but
particularly with ethnic community groups
that may feel marginalized or ignored by
public authorities. By recognizing and
working through these groups, an urban
forestry program not only can strengthen
its role in the community, but can also
gain valuable advice and access to
important contacts.
Promoting social inclusion in the
urban forestry pro-gram need not be a
burden on existing resources; instead, it
can be an opportunity to attract new
funding. In pursuing this, urban
foresters must be prepared to “think
outside the box” of traditional
sources of funding for trees and
environmental projects. Social inclusion
is an issue that is moving rapidly up the
political agenda in many countries. In
turn, this is being reflected in the
amount of funding available for these
projects from government agencies and
charitable bodies. The omission of tree
projects in their funding criteria does
not mean they are ineligible. The funding
body may simply be unaware that urban
forestry programs can be an excellent way
of promoting social inclusion. Funding
should also be sought from the private
sector. Sponsorship proposals could be
targeted initially at businesses that
might be the most receptive. Examples
might include local companies that hire a
large proportion of their employees from
ethnic backgrounds, or successful
business people who might want to support
projects within their own communities.
Practical advice and support for
developing social inclusion in
environmental initiatives is available
from a variety of sources (see Some
Useful Web Sites, below). Central and
local government agencies have specialist
staff that can advise on individual
projects or organize training and
awareness courses. This assistance is
also available from non-governmental
organizations that are already working in
the field. In Britain, the Black
Environment Network has extensive
experience with involving different
ethnic communities in a wide range of
environmental initiatives and is keen to
pass on this experience to new projects
(Wong 2003).
Universities and colleges that offer
courses in urban forestry must include
the subject of social inclusion in their
curricula. The new master's degree in
urban forestry offered by the University
of Central Lancashire in association with
Myerscough College has recognized the
importance of this issue in the
management of the urban forest. It has
two modules that give considerable
emphasis to contemporary social issues
such as social inclusion, and there are
opportunities for students to gain
practical experience working with ethnic
communities and other marginalized
groups.
Lastly, efforts should be made to
ensure that the composition of the urban
forestry workforce reflects the ethnic
diversity of the local community. There
also needs to be recognition of this
diversity by accommodating cultural
differences in the workplace (Fonseca
2002). Not only is this often a legal
requirement to comply with fair
employment and equal opportunities
legislation, it is fundamental to the
promotion of a socially inclusive image.
A recent study conducted throughout the
United States has shown that ethnic
minorities are significantly
under-represented in the urban forestry
workforce (Kuhns et al. 2002).
CONCLUSIONS
Urban foresters must respond to the
challenges and opportunities of the
multicultural society. An awareness of
the sociological benefits of urban trees
and forests should be accompanied by an
urban forestry strategy that effectively
addresses contemporary social issues such
as social inclusion and the needs of
disadvantaged ethnic communities. This
can be achieved through a community
strategy that incorporates education,
consultation, and participation elements
specifically designed to promote the
involvement of distinct ethnic groups. A
long-term aim of the strategy should be
to encourage these residents to plan and
manage their own community projects and
initiatives.
LITERATURE CITED
Agyeman, J. 1995. People, Plants and
Places. Southgate. Publishers, Crediton,
Devon, UK. 48 pp.
Altman, N. 2002. Sacred Trees:
Spirituality, Wisdom and Well-Being.
Sterling Publishing, London, England. 200
pp.
Berkin, C., C. Miller, R. Cherny, and
J. Gormly. 1995. Making America: A
History of the United States. Houghton
Mifflin, New York, NY. 500 pp.
Berry, R. 1991. Celebrating diversity
in urban forestry, pp 233–235. In
Proceedings of the Fifth National Urban
Forest Conference. American Forests,
Washington, DC.
British Trust for Conservation
Volunteers (BTCV). 2002. Environments for
All. Baseline review of BTCV's work with
disadvantaged communities by Black
Environment Network. British Trust for
Conservation Volunteers, Wallingford,
Oxfordshire, UK. 16 pp.
Brown, M., and J. Hanna (Eds.). 1996.
Roots of the Future— Ethnic
Diversity in the Making of Britain.
Commission for Racial Equality, London,
England. 133 pp.
Burgess, J. 1995. Growing in
Confidence. Understanding People's
Perception of Urban Fringe Woodland. CCP
457. Countryside Agency, Cheltenham,
England. 41 pp.
Commission for Racial Equality (CRE).
2002. Statutory Code of Practice on the
Duty to Promote Race Equality. Commission
for Racial Equality, London. England. 76
pp.
Common Ground. 1993. Tree Dressing Day
Times. Common Ground, London, England. 8
pp.
Fenton, J. 1986. Alien or native? ECOS
7(2):20–30.
Fonseca, M. 2002 Cultural differences
in the workplace. Arborist News
11(1):21–22.
Fraser, E.D., and W.A. Kenney. 2000.
Cultural background and landscape history
as factors affecting perceptions of the
urban forest. J. Arboric.
26(2):106–112.
Giddens, A. 2001. Sociology (4th ed.).
Polity Press, Cambridge, UK. 750 pp.
Goodwin, K. 2002. Plant a tree, end
isolation. The Big Issue 28
November–4 December:29–31
Iles, J.K. 1998. Inclusive urban and
community forestry programs: Using all of
your community's cultural resources. J.
Arboric. 24(6):316–320.
Johnston, M. 1985. Community forestry:
A sociological approach to urban
forestry. Arboric. J. 9:121–126.
———. 1986. Community
forestry: A question of priorities.
Arboric. J. 10:95–100.
———. 1989a. Glimpse of
green in the Big Apple. Hortic. Week
206(21):32–33.
———. 1989b. Involving the
public. In Hibbert, B. (Ed.). Urban
Forestry Practice. Forestry Commission
Handbook 11. HMSO, UK.
———. 1994. Signposts to
Peace. Hortic. Week 216(19):28–31.
———. 1995. The Forest of
Belfast: Healing the environment and the
community. Arboric. J. 19:53–72.
———. 2001. A review of the
Black Country Urban Forest Millennium
Programme, 1995–2001. Arboric. J.
26: 111–139.
Keith, M. 1992. Race, Riots and
Policing: Lore and Disorder in a
Multi-Racist Society. UCL Press, London.
England. 280 pp.
Knox, P., and S. Pinch. 2000. Urban
Social Geography: An Introduction (4th
ed.). Pearson Education, Harlow, UK. 479
pp.
Kuhns, M., H. Bragg, and D. Blahna.
2002. Involvement of women and minorities
in the urban forestry profession. J.
Arboric. 28(1):27–31.
Kuo, F. 2003. The role of
arboriculture in a healthy social
ecology. J. Arboric. 29(3):148–155.
Kuo, F.E., and W.C. Sullivan. 2001.
Environment and crime in the inner city:
Does vegetation reduce crime? Environ.
Behav. 33(3):343–367.
Loukaitou-Sideris, A. 1995. Urban form
and context: Cultural differentiation in
the uses of urban parks. J. Plann. Educ.
Res. 14:89–102.
Parris, L.R. 1991. The Hispanic
perspective, pp 227–229. In
Proceedings of the Fifth National Urban
Forest Conference. American Forests,
Washington, DC.
Pincetl, S. 2002. Race, class,
ethnicity and park and open space use: A
literature review pointing to a need to
reconceptualization. White paper,
Sustainable Cities Program, University of
California. 24 pp.
Ricard, R.M. 1993. How important are
minorities to tree programs? University
of Connecticut Community Forestry Fact
Sheet. West Hartford, CT. 3 pp
Rishbeth, C. 2002. The Landscape of
the Global Village. Landsc. Design
310:27–30.
Saltzstein, A. 2003. Governing
America's Urban Areas. Wadsworth,
Belmont, CA. 360 pp.
Sando, J. 1991. The Native American
viewpoint, pp 230– 232. In
Proceedings of the Fifth National Urban
Forest Conference. American Forests,
Washington, DC.
Westphal, L. 2003. Urban greening and
social benefits: A study of empowerment
outcomes. J. Arboric. 29(3):137–147.
Wong, J. (no date). The `Native and
Alien' Issue—A discussion paper.
Black Environment Network, Llanberis,
Wales, UK. 5 pp.
———. 2003. Power to the
People. Landsc. Design 322:28–31.
SOME USEFUL WEB SITES
Black Environment Network www.ben-network.org.uk
British Trust for Conservation
Volunteers, Environments for All www.btcv.org.efa
Commission for Racial Equality www.cre.gov.uk
Common Ground www.commonground.org.uk
Human Environment Research Laboratory www.herl.uiuc.edu
Learning Through Landscapes www.ltl.org.uk
Social Exclusion Unit, Office of the
Deputy Prime Minister www.socialexclusionunit.gov.uk
The Runnymede Trust www.runnymedetrust.org
1 *Arboriculture Programme, Myerscough
College, Preston, PR3 0RY, U.K.
mjohnston@myerscough.ac.uk
2 Department of Environmental Health,
Harvard School of Public Health ,
665 Huntington Avenue, Building 1-1410,
Boston, MA 02115, U.S.
*Corresponding author.
Download
Guidance Paper 9
Green Spaces |
Features
|
