Woodlands across Swedish urban gradients: Status, structure and management implications

Abstract More than 70% of the European population live in urban areas, and the level of urbanisation is steadily increasing. As a result urban and peri-urban woodlands are decreasing due to infill development within cities and sprawl (or expansion) outside cities, respectively. However, comparative assessments of urban woodland resources at international and national levels are lacking. We used GIS analyses to quantify the proportion of urban woodlands in 100 Swedish cities with >10 000 inhabitants. Field surveys were used to measure vegetation structure in 474 urban woodlands across an urban gradient in a subset of 34 cities. Our results showed that the proportion of the city area comprised of urban woodland varied between 1 and 40% with an average of 20%. Commuter cities close to the largest cities and cities with stable populations had higher proportion of urban woodland than cities with large population increase. Urban and peri-urban woodlands cover an area larger than the total area of protected forests in Sweden and had higher amounts of dead wood than typical non-protected forests. Thus, these woodlands are potential areas supporting conservation of species depending on dead wood. Commuter cities are expected to have a large population increase in the upcoming years, which may lead to further fragmentation of urban woodlands in these cities. Management greatly affected the vegetation structure in woodlands across the urban gradient, and decision makers and urban planners need to be informed about the ecological consequences of different management actions.

[1]  L. Gustafsson,et al.  Threatened Plant, Animal, and Fungus Species in Swedish Forests: Distribution and Habitat Associations , 1994 .

[2]  E. Tomppo,et al.  The Finnish National Forest Inventory , 1995 .

[3]  Veerle Van Eetvelde,et al.  Holistic aspects of suburban landscapes: visual image interpretation and landscape metrics , 2000 .

[4]  J. L. Morrison,et al.  Can Urban Parks Provide Habitat For Woodpeckers? , 2005 .

[5]  G. Quinn,et al.  Experimental Design and Data Analysis for Biologists , 2002 .

[6]  I. Kowarik,et al.  Wild urban woodlands : new perspectives for urban forestry , 2005 .

[7]  Clas Florgård Long-term changes in indigenous vegetation preserved in urban areas. , 2000 .

[8]  L. Tyrväinen,et al.  Ecological and aesthetic values in urban forest management , 2003 .

[9]  A. Lindhagen Forest recreation in Sweden. Four case studies using quantitative and qualitative methods. , 1996 .

[10]  S. Lehvävirta,et al.  Barriers against wear affect the spatial distribution of tree saplings in urban woodlands , 2004 .

[11]  G. Fry,et al.  A model for quantifying and predicting urban pressure on woodland , 2006 .

[12]  Chan-Ryul Park,et al.  Relationship between species composition and area in breeding birds of urban woods in Seoul, Korea , 2000 .

[13]  S. Pickett,et al.  Forest-Landscape Structure along an Urban-To-Rural Gradient* , 1995, The Professional Geographer.

[14]  José I. Barredo,et al.  Are European Cities Becoming Dispersed? A Comparative Analysis of 15 European Urban Areas , 2006 .

[15]  Clas Florgård Preserved and remnant natural vegetation in cities: A geographically divided field of research , 2007 .

[16]  A. Lindhagen,et al.  Forest recreation in 1977 and 1997 in Sweden: changes in public preferences and behaviour , 2000 .

[17]  Timo Pukkala,et al.  Prediction of the amenity of a tree stand , 1988 .

[18]  B. Øyen,et al.  Urban woodland management - the case of 13 major Nordic cities. , 2005 .

[19]  Carlo Lavalle,et al.  Towards an Urban Atlas: Assessment of Spatial Data on 25 European Cities and Urban Areas , 2002 .

[20]  U. Mörtberg,et al.  Red-listed forest bird species in an urban environment — assessment of green space corridors , 2000 .

[21]  Abdul Khakee,et al.  Urban comprehensive planning – identifying barriers for the maintenance of functional habitat networks , 2006 .

[22]  Cecil C. Konijnendijk,et al.  Adapting forestry to urban demands - role of communication in urban forestry in Europe. , 2000 .

[23]  T. Ahti,et al.  Vegetation zones and their sections in northwestern Europe , 1968 .

[24]  David N. Cole,et al.  Wildland Recreation: Ecology and Management , 1990 .

[25]  M. Mönkkönen,et al.  Long‐Term Effects of Forestry on Birds of the Eastern Canadian Boreal Forests: a Comparison with Fennoscandia , 2001 .

[26]  C. Konijnendijk A decade of urban forestry in Europe , 2003 .

[27]  L. Tyrväinen The amenity value of the urban forest: an application of the hedonic pricing method , 1997 .

[28]  D. Gee,et al.  Making sustainability accountable : eco-efficiency, resource productivity and innovation : proceedings of a workshop on the occasion of the Fifth Anniversary of the European Environment Agency (EEA), 28-30 October 1998 in Copenhagen , 1999 .

[29]  J. Falck,et al.  Urban forestry in Sweden from a silvicultural perspective: a review , 2000 .

[30]  Peter Fredman,et al.  On the distance to recreational forests in Sweden , 2000 .

[31]  S. Lehvävirta,et al.  Natural regeneration of trees in urban woodlands , 2002 .

[32]  M. Hermy,et al.  Management of Urban Woodland and Parks — Searching for Creative and Sustainable Concepts , 2005 .

[33]  S. Croci,et al.  Avifauna homogenisation by urbanisation: Analysis at different European latitudes , 2006 .

[34]  D. Stanners,et al.  Europe's environment : the Dobrís assessment , 1995 .

[35]  Per Angelstam,et al.  Ecological diversity of birds in relation to the structure of urban green space , 2006 .

[36]  U. Mörtberg Landscape Ecological Analysis and Assessment in an Urbanising Environment - forest birds as biodiversity indicators , 2004 .

[37]  Angela Lee,et al.  Perspectives on … Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc , 1997 .

[38]  R. Ribe The aesthetics of forestry: What has empirical preference research taught us? , 1989 .

[39]  V. Gundersen,et al.  Management of urban recreational woodlands: The case of Norway , 2006 .