Urban street trees (USTs) have a range of values – some of which are easier to quantify than others. Focusing specifically on the UK context and using the Sheffield Tree Protests (2012–) as a case study, whilst confirming existing research as to the variety of values associated with their specifically ‘cultural’ services, the article argues that USTs have an additional potential form – what I call ‘civic-transformative value’. This form of value has at least three key characteristics. Firstly, it is place-based and communal; second, its form is ‘relational’; and finally, as intrinsically contingent, it is pluralistic in the sense that its civic-transformative potential is dependent on successfully integrating a range of other values. The article emphasises both the possibility and necessity of ‘convergence’ – that is, a pluralistic and pragmatic alliance of values which might help protect not only USTs, but other embattled sites of nature.
BallRHeafeyMKingD (2007) The private finance initiative in the UK. Public Management Review9(2): 289–310.
3.
BarkhamP (2016) A dawn raid, dissenters silenced: is this a war on trees?. The Guardian. 21st November. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/21/dawn-raid-war-on-trees-sheffield (accessed 21st June 2022).
CallicottJB (1986) On the value of Nonhuman species. In: NortonB (ed.) The Preservation of Species. Princeton, NJ: PUP, pp.138–172.
12.
Camacho-CervantesMSchondubeJECastilloA, et al. (2014) How do people perceive urban trees? Assessing likes and dislikes in relation to the trees of a city. Urban Ecosystems17(3): 761–773. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-014-0343-6.
ChanKai MSatterfieldTGoldsteinJ (2012) Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values. Ecological Economics74: 8–18.
15.
ChanKai MABalvaneraPBenessaiahK, et al. (2016) Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences113(6): 1462–1465. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1525002113.
ChenLLiuCZhangL, et al. (2017) Variation in tree species ability to capture and retain airborne fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Scientific Reports7(3206): 1–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-03360-1.
CooperT (2021) The Story of Sheffield. Cheltenham: The History Press.
20.
CostanzaRde GrootRBraatL, et al. (2017) Twenty years of ecosystem services: how far have we come and how far do we still need to go?Ecosystem Services28(A): 1–16.
21.
DaleALingCNewmanL (2008) Does place matter? Sustainable community development in three Canadian communities. Ethics, Place and Environment11(3): 267–281.
22.
DaweG (2011) Street trees and the urban environment. In: DouglasIGoodeDHouckMC, et al. (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Urban Ecology (1st ed.). London: Routledge, pp.424–449.
DwyerJShroederHWGobsterPH (1991) The significance of urban trees and forests: toward a deeper understanding of values. Journal of Arboriculture17(10): 276–284.
FrancoLSDanielleFFullerRA (2017) A review of the benefits of nature experiences: more than meets the eye. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health14(8): 864. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14080864
30.
FullerRADevine-WrightPWarrenPH, et al. (2007) Psychological benefits of greenspace increase with biodiversity. Biology Letters3: 390–394.
31.
Gómez-BaggethunEBartonDE (2013) Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning. Ecological Economics86: 235–245.
32.
GoodinRE (1992) Green Political Theory. Cambridge: Polity.
33.
GoodwinD (2017) The Urban Tree. London: Routledge.
GroteRSamsonRAlonsoR, et al. (2016) Functional traits of urban trees: air pollution mitigation potential. Frontiers of Ecology and the Environment14(10): 543–550.
37.
HauerRJWerberLPKonijnendijkCC (2017) The history of trees in the city. In: FerriniFKonijnendijkCCFiniA (eds) Routledge Handbook of Urban Forestry (2nd ed.). London: Routledge, pp. 17–32.
38.
HeydonJ (2020) Procedural environmental injustice in ‘Europe’s Greenest City’: A case study into the felling of Sheffield’s street trees. Social Sciences9: 1–20.
39.
IPBES (2022) Methodological Assessment Report on the Diverse Values and Valuation of Nature of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Bonn, Germany: IPBES secratariat.
40.
JohnsonM (2017) Street trees in Britain: A history. Oxford: Oxbow Books.
41.
JoyYBrengmanMWolfK (2010) The effects of urban retail greenery on consumer experience: reviewing the evidence from a restorative perspective. Urban for Urban Green9(1): 57–64.
42.
LightA (2002) Contemporary environmental ethics: from metaethics to public philosophy. Metaphilosophy33(4): 426–449.
MitchellR (2013) Is physical activity in natural environments better for mental health than physical activity in other environments?Social Science & Medicine91: 130–134.
48.
MoffatAJ (2016) Communicating the benefits of urban trees: a critical review. Arboricultural Journal38(2): 64–82.
49.
MouffeC (2013) Agnostics. London: Verso.
50.
MullaneyJLuckeTTruemanSG (2015) A review of benefits and challenges in growing urban street trees in paved urban environments. Landscape and Urban Planning134: 157–166.
NortonBSanbegD (2021) Relational values: a unifying idea in environmental ethics and evaluation?Environmental Values30(6): 695–714.
57.
NowakD (2017) Assessing the benefits and economic values of trees. In: FerriniFKonijnendijkCCFiniA (ed.) Routledge Handbook of Urban Forestry (2nd ed.). London: Routledge, pp. 152–173.
ProshanskyHM (1978) The city and self-identity. Environment and Behaviour10(2): 147–169.
65.
RadicchiAGrantM (2021) From noise to soundscape in the service of urban health. Cities and Health5(1-2): 15–19.
66.
RemmeRPFrumkinHGuerryAD, et al. (2021) An ecosystem service perspective on urban nature, physical activity, and health. PNAS118(22): 1–10. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2018472118 (accessed 22nd July 2022).
67.
RolstonHIII (2002) From beauty to duty: Aesthetics of nature and environmental ethics. In: BerleantA (ed) Environment and the Arts: Perspectives on Environmental Aesthetics. Aldershot: VT, pp. 127–141.
68.
RolstonHolmes III (1988) Environmental Ethics: Duties to and Values in The Natural World. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
69.
RotherhamI (2012) Thoughts on the politics and economics of urban street trees. Arboricultural Journal33(2): 69–75.
70.
RotherhamIFlindersM (2019) No stump city: The contestation and politics of urban street-trees – a case study of Sheffield. People, Place and Policy12(3): 188–203. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3351/ppp.2019.8283649746.
71.
RoySByrneJPickeringC (2012) A systematic quantitative review of urban tree benefits, costs and assessment methods across cities in different climatic zones. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening11(4): 351–363.
72.
SalmondJTadakiMVardoulakisS, et al. (2016) Health and climate related ecosystem services provided by street trees in the urban environment. Environmental Health15(1): 95–111. DOI: 10.1186/s12940-016-0103-6.
73.
SandlerR (2018) Environmental Ethics: From Theory to Practice. Oxford: OUP.
74.
SchroederHFlanniganJColesR (2006) Residents’ attitudes toward street trees in the UK and US communities. Arboriculture and Urban Forestry32(5): 236–246.
75.
SchumakerSATaylorRB (1983) Toward a clarification of people-place relationships: a model of attachment to place. In: FeimerNRGellerES (eds) Environmental Psychology: Directions and Perspectives. New York: Praeger, pp. 219–251.
SheppardSRJKonijnendijkCCCroyO, et al. (2017) Urban forest governance and community engagement. In: FerriniFKonijnendijkCCFiniA (ed.) Routledge Handbook of Urban Forestry (2nd ed.). London: Routledge, pp. 205–221.
84.
SpenceNHillLMorrisJ (2020) How the global threat of pests and diseases impacts plants, people, and the planet. Plants People Plant2(1): 5–13.
85.
SullivanWCKuoFEDePooterSF (2004) The fruit of urban nature: vital neighbourhood spaces. Environment and Behaviour36(5): 678–700.
86.
ToynbeePWalkerD (2020) The Lost Decade: 2010-2020, and What Lies Ahead for Britain. London: Faber.
87.
Turner-SkoffJCavenderN (2019) The benefits of trees for liveable and sustainable communities. Plants, People, Planet1(4): 323–335.
88.
UebelKMarseilleMDeanAJ, et al. (2021) Urban green soundscapes and their perceived restorativeness. People and Nature3(3): 756–769.
89.
UK National Ecosystem Assessment (2011) The National Ecosystem Assessment Technical Report. Cambridge: UNEP-WCMC.
90.
Van den BoschM (2017) Impacts on urban forests on physical and mental health and wellbeing. In: FerriniFKonijnendijkCCFiniA (eds) Routledge Handbook of Urban Forestry (2nd ed.). London: Routledge, pp. 82–95.
WilsonP (2013) A-Z of Tree Terms: A Companion to British Arboriculture. Lyminge: Ethelburga House.
93.
WolchJRByrneJNewellJ (2014) Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: the challenges of making cities “just green enough”. Landscape and Planning125: 234–244.
94.
YangWKangJ (2005) Soundscape and Sound Preferences in Urban Squares: A Case Study in Sheffield. Journal of Urban Design10(1): 61–80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13574800500062395.
