Area of recommendations | Specific recommendations |
Overall recommendations |
Policies and planning | Nordic cities and other municipalities have a long tradition of urban greening. In the face of urban densification, climate change, and biodiversity loss, this tradition is under threat, however, as there is a risk that urban areas can become less green and with that also more vulnerable and less liveable and healthy. Awareness about this risk needs to be raised and actions have to be taken to counteract it. Linked to the above, it is important to secure that green space and trees are not removed in urban regeneration programs or densification strategies implemented to create higher urban attractivity and to support security in socio-economic vulnerable areas. Sufficient canopy cover and green spaces need to be provided in new developments to avoid creating the vulnerable neighbourhoods of the future. Climate change and predicted warmer, dryer and wetter climate, and more frequent extreme weather events will affect our Nordic cities and areas without trees and green space will be more exposed and vulnerable. To maximise their socioeconomic benefits, trees need to be integrated into broader urban planning and development policies. Tree-planting initiatives should be aligned with housing, transportation, and public health strategies for greater impact. Children, the elderly, the sick, or otherwise vulnerable are particularly in need of green infrastructure and proximity to high-quality public green spaces, partly because they are more sensitive to the effects of air pollution and heat, and partly because they often spend a large proportion of their time close to their homes or various institutional settings. Implementation of the 3+30+300 principle should be seen within the wider international and national policy context. The new Nature Restoration Law of the European Union, for example, sets minimum requirements for urban tree canopy cover and share of public green space.
|
Funding and investment | Public investment in urban forestry, as well as incentives for private landowners to plant and maintain trees, are crucial. Cities may implement tax breaks or grants for greening efforts. Although funding and investment were not specifically addressed by the project, there is no doubt that sound urban forestry and urban greening programs require sufficient funds, including for longer-term management.
|
Tree protection and management | We need to retain and care for existing trees in the urban landscape. This is especially important for older trees since these provide more ecosystem services than smaller trees. Protective measures should be taken for street and city trees near construction, both above and below ground, so that trees can get older and provide more ecosystem services. Important trees that are in need of, and suitable for, root zone renovation in order to improve growing conditions for existing city trees should be identified and properly cared for. Nordic municipalities should allocate more resources into surveying and monitoring their tree populations. The more data collected the better policies regarding tree diversity they could produce and implicate.
|
Tree selection and planting | Just planting as many trees as possible, no matter where, no matter what species, should be avoided. It is important to consider, for example, future climate conditions and biodiversity concerns. You are in this for the long run, plant trees with ample space to become a large tree. Better a few good trees that have a real chance to grow older and larger than many smaller ones. Make sure you plant a variety of species for a sustainable and resilient urban forest cover.
|
Tree diversity, including the use of native and exotic species | Striving for a more diverse tree population is important for climate change mitigation and adaptation. Not all Nordic municipalities currently have a sufficiently diverse urban forest and thus become vulnerable to climate change, current and emergent pests and diseases, and the like. Tree diversity can be increased by planting new species instead of the more common species within the city, for example based on species suitability under future climate scenarios. Further, within tree species, diversity makes the populations less vulnerable to changes in the environment and increases their adaptive potential. Diversity also relates to a good age distribution in the urban forest, so that a healthy canopy can be maintained. In parks and woodland, the presence of dead wood can also support biodiversity. Diversity is also important to mitigate ecosystem disservices like pollen allergens and tree diversity is positive for the diversity of flora, fauna, and fungi dependent on different species. Moreover, tree selection should include both the positive and more challenging characteristics of trees, also in the longer term. It should be ensured that new trees are chosen not only for the existing climate, but for the future climate as well. The number of trees planted solely for ornamental purposes should, in many cases, be reduced in favour of trees intended to provide shade, as temperature regulation and other climate-related benefits of trees have become a priority. The use of exotic trees should be conducted with much care. There is a great need for being cautious regarding the risk of invasive species being introduced where they can spread and compete with local flora and habitats. Using non-native plants can also affect pollinator communities.
|
Community engagement | |
3+30+300-specific recommendations |
Overall 3+30+300 approach and implementation | It is essential to formulate a clear, long-term vision for the trees and green spaces in the municipality (or at a different scale) and then see how 3+30+300 can help you deliver this vision. This principle is a great starting point, as it has a decent evidence base, is increasingly tested and implemented, and serves as an international benchmark. Moreover, it provides a simple metric or guideline that combines the importance of visible green, surrounding green, and recreational green. One needs to always integrate 3+30+300 in a wider policy and planning context, with other guidelines, metrics, etc. 3+30+300 is not only for tree and green space plans and policies. Try to integrate into plans and policies for health, climate action, biodiversity, social justice, education, etc. However, work context-specific and see what is realistic and desirable. Consider how appropriate 3+30+300 implementation is to local contexts. In some cases, adding more trees to areas can be seen as less appropriate and conflicting e.g., with local habitats. Don’t forget local communities and their wishes. Find ways to engage them in 3+30+300 implementation. Do not request a new development to be 3+30+300-compliant from the start, as this is impossible (unless the development is in an area where substantial existing vegetation can be maintained). Trees take time to grow. An alternative might be that you request it to be 3+30+300-compliant in 20 years for instance. Learn from others, as more municipalities – including those in the Nordic Region – are gaining experience with implementing the principle. Undertake gap analyses and set priorities for 3+30+300 implementation where needs are highest, for example in the vicinity of kindergartens, schools, care facilities, and other types of social institutions, as well as in areas with a high proportion of children and elderly people.
|
Assessment and monitoring | It is important to carry out an initial 3+30+300 assessment of your municipality, neighbourhood, or other area. You can overlay 3+30+300 maps with other relevant maps, such as the socio-demographic neighbourhood characteristics and climate maps shown in this report, but also for example, mobility maps, presence of underground infrastructure, and the like. A gap analysis tells you where to prioritise and start first, given limited budgets. A gap analysis can take different forms and can focus on the municipality as a whole but also on specific neighbourhoods as well as land-use or building types (for example, schools, hospitals, and elderly homes). The individual 3, 30, and 300-components allow you to know if your effort should go into creating a park, creating more street trees or creating better support/policy for trees on private territory. As a follow-up: through time you could monitor if your efforts have been effective. Moreover, you can link the monitoring of your 3+30+300 scores to (changes in) different ecosystem services, such as cooling and public health gains. Various assessment tools, including i-Tree, can assist with this and sometimes also provide insights into economic costs and benefits. Important to note is that 3+30+300 should be seen as a minimum level. This is especially important in the Nordic context as the cities here in general score high on one or several of the parts of the rule. Our good conditions and long history of preserving and safeguarding urban green space is a strength and should not be taken for granted. Don’t get discouraged by a drop in one of the three components. There could be good reasons for that, for example a replacement of certain tree species by others that are more climate-resilient or functional (and which can lead to e.g., a temporary drop in canopy cover).
|