Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Formulaic Expert Method to Integrate Evaluation and Valuation of Heritage Trees in Compact City

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Urban trees serve important environmental, social and economic functions, but similar to other natural endowments they are not customarily depicted in monetary terms. The needs to augment protection, funding and community support for urban greening call for proper valuation. Heritage trees (HTs), the cream of urban-tree stock, deserve special attention. Existing assessment methods do not give justice to outstanding trees in compact cities deficient in high-caliber greenery, and to their social-cultural-historical importance. They artificially separate evaluation from valuation, which should be a natural progression from the former. Review of tree valuation methods suggested the formula approach to be more suitable than contingent valuation and hedonic pricing, and provided hints on their strengths and weaknesses. This study develops an alternative formulaic expert method (FEM) that integrates evaluation and valuation, maximizes objectivity, broadly encompasses the key tree, tree-environment and tree-human traits, and accords realistic monetary value to HTs. Six primary criteria (dimension, species, tree, condition, location, and outstanding consideration) branched into 45 secondary criteria, each allocated numerical marks. Each primary criterion was standardized to carry equal weight, and a tree's maximum aggregate score is capped at 100. A Monetary Assignment Factor (MAF) to consign dollar value to each score unit was derived from three-year average per m2 sale price of medium-sized residential flats. The applicability of FEM was tested on selected HTs in compact Hong Kong. The aggregate score of a tree multiplied by MAF yielded monetary value, which was on average 66 times higher than the result from the commonly-adopted Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers method. The computed tree values could be publicized together with multiple tree benefits to raise understanding and awareness and rally support to protect HTs. The property-linked FEM could be flexibly applied to other cities, especially to assess HTs in compact developing cities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • American Forests: 2002, CITYgreen: Calculating the Value of Nature 5.0 User Manual, American Forests, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, L. M. and Cordell, H. K.: 1988, ‘Influence of trees on residential property values in Athens, Georgia (U.S.A.): A survey based on actual sales prices’, Landscape Urban Plann. 15, 153–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arboricultural Association: 1994, Amenity Valuation of Trees and Woodlands, Romsey, Hants, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asociacion Espańola de Parques y Jardines Publicos: 1999, Metedo Para Valoracion de Arboles y Arbustos Ornamentales. Norma Granada, Madrid, Spain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, G. C. and Murray, T. G.: 1982, ‘A monetary evaluation of trees in Ireland’, Irish Landscape J. 1, 5–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beijing Landscape Bureau: 1999, Old and Commemorative Trees of Beijing, Beijing Press, Beijing, China (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolitzer, B. and Netusil, N. R.: 2000, ‘The impact of open spaces on property values in Portland, Oregon’, J. Environ. Manage. 59, 185–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolund, P. and Hunhammar, S.: 1999, ‘Ecosystem services in urban areas’, Ecol. Econ. 29, 293–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, D.: 2001, Our Remarkable Trees: A Selection of Northern Ireland's Special Trees, Millennium Tree Campaign, Belfast, Northern Ireland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, E.: 2002, ‘Measuring urban compactness in UK towns and cities’, Environ. Plan. B: Planning Design 29, 219–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Correll, M. R., Lillydahl, J. H. and Singell, L. D.: 1978, ‘The effects of greenbelts on residential property values: Some findings on the political economy of open space’, Land Econ. 54, 207–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., Limburg, K., Naeem, S., O'Neill, R. V., Paruelo, J., Raskin, R. G., Sutton, P. and van den Belt, M.: 1997, ‘The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital’, Nature 387, 253–260.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers: 2000, Guide for Plant Appraisal, 9th edition, International Society of Arboriculture, Champaign, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Des Rosiers, F., Thériault, M., Kestens, Y. and Villeneuve, P.: 2002, ‘Landscaping and house values: an empirical investigation’, J. Real Estate Res. 23, 139–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dombrow, J., Rodriquez, M. and Sirmans, C. F.: 2000, ‘The market value of mature trees in single-family housing markets’, Appraisal J. 68, 39–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer, J. F., Peterson, G. L. and Darragh, A. J.: 1983, ‘Estimating the value of urban forests using the travel cost method’, J. Arboriculture 9, 182–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fausold, C. J. and Lilieholm, R. J.: 1999, ‘The economic value of open space: a review and synthesis’, Environ. Manage. 23, 307–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenech, A., Foster, J., Hamilton, K. and Hansell, R.: 2003, ‘Natural capital in ecology and economics: an overview’, Environ. Monit. Assessment 86, 3–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flook, R.: 1996, A Standard Tree Evaluation Method (STEM). Tahunanui, Nelson, New Zealand.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrod, H. W.: 1950, Genius Loci and Other Essays. Clarendon, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gatrell, J. D. and Jensen, R. R.: 2002, ‘Growth through greening: developing and assessing alternative economic development programmes’, Appl. Geogr. 22, 331–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geoghegan, J.: 2002, ‘The value of open spaces in residential land use’, Land Use Policy 19, 91–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godefroid, S. and Koedam, N.: 2003, ‘How important are large vs. small forest remnants for the conservation of the woodland flora in an urban context?’, Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 12, 287–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grey, G. W.: 1996, The Urban Forest: Comprehensive Management, Wiley, New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, K. and Dixon, J. A.: 2003, ‘Measuring the wealth of nations,’ Environ. Monit. Assess. 86, 75–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helliwell, D. R.: 2000, The Amenity Value of Trees and Woodlands, revised edition, Arboricultural Association, Romsey, Hants., UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jim, C. Y.: 1990, Trees in Hong Kong: Species for Landscape Planting, Hong Kong University Press, Hong Kong.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jim, C. Y.: 1994a, Champion Trees in Urban Hong Kong, Hong Kong Flora and Fauna Series, Urban Council, Hong Kong.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jim, C. Y.: 1994b, Urban Tree Survey 1994: Roadside Trees Managed by the Urban Council, Volume II: Survey Results and Recommendations, Urban Council, Hong Kong.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jim, C. Y.: 1998a, Champion Trees in Urban Hong Kong, revised edition, Hong Kong Flora and Fauna Series, Urban Council, Hong Kong.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jim, C. Y.: 1998b, ‘Old stone walls as an ecological habitat for urban trees in Hong Kong’, Landscape Urban Planning 42, 29–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jim, C. Y.: 2000, Trees in Major Urban Parks in Hong Kong: Census Results and Management Recommendations, Leisure and Cultural Services Department, Hong Kong.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jim, C. Y.: 2002a, ‘Heterogeneity and differentiation of the tree flora in three major land uses in Guangzhou City, China’, Ann. Forest Sci. 59, 107–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jim, C. Y.: 2002b, ‘Planning strategies to overcome constraints on greenspace provision in urban Hong Kong’, Town Plan. Rev. 73, 127–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jim, C. Y.: 2005a, ‘Floristics, performance and prognosis of historical trees in the urban forest of Guangzhou city (China)’, Environ. Monit. Assess. 102, 285–308.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jim, C. Y.: 2005b, ‘Monitoring the performance and decline of heritage trees in urban Hong Kong’, J. Environ. Manage. 74, 161–172.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jim, C. Y. and Liu, H. T.: 2000, ‘Statutory measures for the protection and enhancement of the urban forest in Guangzhou City, China’, Forestry 73, 311–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jim, C. Y. and Liu, H. T.: 2001, ‘Species diversity of three major urban forest types in Guangzhou City, China’, Forest Ecol. Manage. 146, 99–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuo, F. E. and Sullivan, W. C.: 2001, ‘Environment and crime in the inner city: Does vegetation reduce crime’, Environ. Behav. 33, 343–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindsey, G. and Knaap, G.: 1999, ‘Willingness to pay for urban greenway projects’, Am. Plan. Assoc. J. 65, 297–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loeb, R. E.: 1992, ‘Will a tree grow in Brooklyn?’, J. Forestry 90, 20–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luttik, J.: 2000, ‘The value of trees, water and open space as reflected by house prices in the Netherlands’, Landscape Urban Plan. 48, 161–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matlack, G. R.: 1997, ‘Four centuries of forest clearance and regeneration in the hinterland of a large city’, J. Biogeography 24, 281–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May, D. M.: 1990, Big Trees of the Midsouth Forest Survey, Research Note SO-359, U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Southern Experiment Station, New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGarry, P. J. and Moore, G. M.: 1988, ‘The Burnley method of amenity tree evaluation’, Austr. J. Arboriculture 1, 19–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • McPherson, E. G., Simpson, J. R., Peper, P. J. and Xiao, Q. F.: 1999, ‘Benefit-cost analysis of Modesto's Municipal Urban Forest’, J. Arboriculture 25, 235–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, R. W.: 1997, Urban Forestry: Planning and Managing Urban Greenspaces, 2nd edition, Prentice Hall, New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, A. F., Hallett, V. E. and White, J. E.J.: 1990, Champion Trees in the British Isles, Forestry Commission, Field Book 10, HMSO, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moll, G.: 1987, ‘Improving the health of the urban forest part I’, Am. Forests 93 (11/12), 61–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morales, D., Boyce, B. N. and Favretti, R. J.: 1976, ‘The contribution of trees to residential property value: Manchester, Connecticut’, Valuation 23, 26–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morancho, A. B.: 2003, ‘A hedonic valuation of urban green areas’, Landscape Urban Plan. 66, 35–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nature and Ecology Photography Association: 2000, The Precious Trees of Taipei County, Taipei, Taiwan, China (in Chinese).

  • Pakenham, T.: 1997, Meetings with Remarkable Trees, Random House, New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, B. R. and Strom, S.: 1975, ‘The contribution of trees to the appraised value of unimproved residential land’, Valuation 22, 36–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Randall, C. E. and Clepper, H.: 1977, Famous and Historic Trees, American Forestry Association, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rating and Valuation Department: 2004, Hong Kong Property Review 2004. Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Hong Kong.

    Google Scholar 

  • Read, H.: 2000, Veteran Trees: A Guide to Good Management, English Nature, Peterborough, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, M. J., Bilyard, G. R., Link, S. O., Ulibarri, C. A., Westerdahl, H. E., Ricci, P. F. and Seely, H. E.: 1998, ‘Valuation of ecological resources and functions’, Environ. Manage. 22, 49–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shenzhen Municipal Government: 1997, Old and Commemorative Trees of Shenzhen Special Economic Zone, Urban Management Office, Xianhu Botanical Garden, and City Management Research Institute, Shenzhen, China (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sukopp, H., Hejný, S. and Kowarik, I. (eds.): 1990, Urban Ecology: Plants and Plant Communities in Urban Environments, SPB Academic, The Hague, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun, G. Q. (ed.): 2002, Old and Commemorative Trees, Greening Management and Advisory Station, Municipal Government of Shanghai, Shanghai, China (in Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, R., Hanna, R., Noel, J. and Piirto, D.: 1999, ‘Valuation of tree aesthetics on small urban-interface properties’, J. Arboriculture 25(5), 225–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyrväinen, L. and Miettinen, A.: 2000, ‘Property prices and urban forest amenities’, J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 39, 205–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyrväinen, L. and Väänänen, H.: 1998, ‘The economic value of urban forest amenities: An application of the contingent valuation method’, Landscape Urban Plan. 43, 105–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, R. S.: 1984, ‘View through a window may influence recovery from surgery’, Science 224, 420–421.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, G.: 2002, ‘Comparing formula methods of tree appraisal’, J. Arboriculture 28(1), 11–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, E. O.: 1984, Biophilia, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geography, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong

    C. Y. Jim

Authors
  1. C. Y. Jim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Y. Jim.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jim, C.Y. Formulaic Expert Method to Integrate Evaluation and Valuation of Heritage Trees in Compact City. Environ Monit Assess 116, 53–80 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-006-7245-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-006-7245-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation