Urban Trees Aren't Just Nice, Scientists Say -- They're Mandatory

Urban trees are no longer being framed as optional amenities; scientists argue cities should make urban forestry mandatory. In an essay published today in the journal PLOS Climate and led by ecologist Manuel Esperon-Rodriguez of Bangor University in the United Kingdom, dozens of researchers say mayors focused on cutting municipal greenhouse gas emissions are overlooking “low-hanging fruit” in expanding tree cover. They point to cooling benefits that can lower temperatures, stormwater absorption that can reduce flooding and related economic damages, and habitat support for animals. The paper also highlights pollution absorption for improved air quality and broader public benefits from parks and urban farms. The authors call for dedicated funding and maintenance, stressing that planting alone is not enough because young vegetation is vulnerable to pests and stress. They cite a reported claim that each dollar invested in parks and recreation can yield $3 in local economic benefits annually.