Willis, E.M.; Koeser, A.K.; Clarke, M.; Hansen, G.; Hilbert, D.R.; Lusk, M.G.; Roman, L.A.; Warner, L.A. Greening Development: Reducing Urban Tree Canopy Loss through Incentives. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 2023, 128184, doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2023.128184.
Willis, E.M.; Koeser, A.K.; Clarke, M.; Hansen, G.; Hilbert, D.R.; Lusk, M.G.; Roman, L.A.; Warner, L.A. Greening Development: Reducing Urban Tree Canopy Loss through Incentives. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 2023, 128184, doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2023.128184.
Willis, E.M.; Koeser, A.K.; Clarke, M.; Hansen, G.; Hilbert, D.R.; Lusk, M.G.; Roman, L.A.; Warner, L.A. Greening Development: Reducing Urban Tree Canopy Loss through Incentives. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 2023, 128184, doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2023.128184.
Willis, E.M.; Koeser, A.K.; Clarke, M.; Hansen, G.; Hilbert, D.R.; Lusk, M.G.; Roman, L.A.; Warner, L.A. Greening Development: Reducing Urban Tree Canopy Loss through Incentives. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 2023, 128184, doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2023.128184.
Abstract
Development and redevelopment are important drivers of tree removal and canopy loss in urban landscapes. Local ordinances are often used to curtail tree removal, but punitive regulations alone may not be enough to reduce urban tree canopy loss in land development. In Florida (US), efforts to balance trees and development have so far focused on fees and fines, but with a recent backlash against tree regulations and the fast pace of urban growth, we explored the possible role of incentives in urban tree policies. We interviewed 20 land developers across Florida to understand their perspectives on current barriers and potential incentives for tree preservation and planting. We collected data from developers, whose perspectives on tree preservation are often unknown or overlooked, despite their significant role in tree planting, removal, and retention in and around cities. Our results show that major barriers to tree preservation and planting include requirements to grade sites for stormwater management, site constraints, and monetary costs. Most developers did not know of any existing incentives beyond intrinsic motivations but said that financial incentives would be most appealing to them. Top incentive suggestions include increasing building density, reducing impact fees and tax liability, and changing tree mitigation policies. Another promising finding is that developers are willing to work with regulators to find solutions that benefit both parties. Future research should consider evaluating the level of support and viability of different incentives by gathering feedback from policymakers, land developers, and the public.
Keywords
By-laws; Construction; Ordinance; Regulations; Tradeoffs; Tree preservation
Subject
Environmental and Earth Sciences, Sustainable Science and Technology
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
,
,
