College of Social and Behavioral Science
95 Valuing Trees in the Urban Environment
Vincent Otter Vispo and Matthew Fry
Faculty Mentor: Matthew Fry (Environmental & Sustainability Studies, University of Utah)
Abstract
Trees provide many benefits to cities, but urban forestry programs are often under supported. To understand why, we asked key stakeholders how they approach valuing trees. We found that the current system is incomplete and leads to economically inefficient outcomes. This project is in its very early stages, and we hope to have a more comprehensive review of approaches and possible solutions in the future.
Introduction
Money might not grow on trees, but in an urban environment the return on investment for planting and properly caring for a tree means that they are valuable indeed. Trees provide ecosystem services like removing pollution, reducing energy use, capturing stormwater, and reducing urban heat island effects (see for example Nowak 2017). They increase property values and reduce crime (Dimke, Sydnor, and Gardner 2013; Donovan and Prestemon 2012). Perhaps most dramatically, a growing body of literature shows the huge health benefits of trees to people living near them (Donovan et al. 2022). Given these services it might be hoped that cities would invest in trees to increase the wellbeing of their citizens. All too often, however, urban forestry is the last department to receive funding – or the first to see its budget cut when times are tight. The causes for this mismatch between benefits and investment are complex. This study examines one potential cause: a disjointed valuation system that fails to fully account for the benefits of urban trees. While non-market valuations are by nature imprecise – and municipal policy makers must also consider cultural, emotional, and socio-economic elements tied to trees – current methods lead to inefficient outcomes.
Methods
During summer 2024, we talked with over fifty individuals involved in urban forestry, from city arborists and urban foresters to tree care professionals, nonprofit executives, and state officials. Contact with potential participants was made initially through publicly available phone numbers or emails on government websites and in subsequent rounds through snowball sampling. Interviews were conducted on Zoom, which was set to transcribe the conversations. This research is only a small element of a much larger project. While many topics were covered with participants, we consistently asked them how the valuation of public trees came up in their work.
Results
How cities value their trees can generally be split into two broad categories. The first, which is codified and meant to be legally defensible, are appraisals based on the replacement cost method. This approach is generally used when developers wish to remove trees or to assess damages – for example when a drunk driver hits a tree, or someone decides to improve their view without obtaining a permit. Appraisals are co