Local Government Perceptions of Urban Forestry

  • Daniel D. McLean
  • Ryan R. Jensen
  • Paul M. Hightower
  • Sister Alma Mary Anderson


Green Space Urban Forest Policy Learning Tree Canopy Cover Deep Core 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. CNN. 2003. Big cities creating huge tree deficit. http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/science/09/18/cities.trees.reut/index.html.Google Scholar
  2. Center for Urban Forest Research. 2003. Surviving the budget crisis. Urban Forest Research, Spring. Davis, CA: Center for Urban Forest Research. Pacific Southwest Research Station. USDA Forest Service. Pp. 1–3.Google Scholar
  3. Dwyer, J. F., Nowak, D. J., Noble, M. H., Sisinni, S. M. 2000. Connecting People with Ecosystems in the 21st Century: An Assessment of Our Nation’s Urban Forests. Washington, D. C.: USDA Forest Service. 125 p.Google Scholar
  4. Fiorino, D. J. 2001. Environmental policy as leading: A new view of an old landscape. Public Administration Review 61: 322–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gatrell, J. D. & Worsham, J. 2002. Policy spaces: Applying Lefebvrian politics in neo-institutional spaces. Space and Policy 6: 337–342.Google Scholar
  6. Macie, E. A. & Hermansen, L. A. 2003. Human Influences on Forest Ecosystems. Atlanta, GA: USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, General Technical Report SRS-55. 160 p.Google Scholar
  7. McLean, D. D., & Jensen, R. R. 2004a. Community leaders and the urban forest: Modeling a paradigm of knowledge and understanding. Society and Natural Resources (in press)Google Scholar
  8. McLean, D. D., & Jensen, R. R. 2004b. “Urban forest meaning: A constructivist perspective of competing paradigms of community leader knowledge.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers (under review).Google Scholar
  9. Nowak, D.J., M.H. Noble, S.M. Sisinni, and J.F. Dwyer. 2001. “Assessing the US urban forest resource.” Journal of Forestry 99: 37–42.Google Scholar
  10. Nonaka, I. 1994. A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organizational Science 5: 14–37.Google Scholar
  11. Polanyi, M. 1967. Science and Reality. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 18.Google Scholar
  12. Poirier, M. W. 1988. Michael Polanyi and the question of “objective” knowledge. Philosophy Today 42: 312–326.Google Scholar
  13. Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (eds) 1993. The advocacy coalition framework: Assessment, revisions, and implications for scholars and practitioners. in Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (eds), Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  14. Southern Urban Forestry. 2001. Urban Forestry: A Manual for the State Forestry Agencies in the Southern Region. Unit: Benefits and Costs of the Urban Forest. http://www.urbanforestrysouth.org/pubs/ufmanual/benefits/index.htmGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel D. McLean
    • 1
  • Ryan R. Jensen
    • 2
  • Paul M. Hightower
    • 3
  • Sister Alma Mary Anderson
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Recreation and Sport ManagementIndiana State UniversityTerre Haute
  2. 2.Department of Geography, Geology, and AnthropologyIndiana State UniversityTerre Haute
  3. 3.Department of CommunicationIndiana State UniversityTerre Haute
  4. 4.Department of ArtIndiana State UniversityTerre Haute

Personalised recommendations