11.07.2015 Views

Review of Urban Forestry Research in the Nordic Countries - SNS

Review of Urban Forestry Research in the Nordic Countries - SNS

Review of Urban Forestry Research in the Nordic Countries - SNS

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

4. Comparison <strong>of</strong> results with <strong>the</strong> 2005 CARe-FOR-USsurveyProjects per countryThe research survey <strong>in</strong>cluded detailed <strong>in</strong>formation on 67 projects from four <strong>Nordic</strong> countries,<strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g that quite some research is carried out. The researchers are aware <strong>of</strong> a significantnumber <strong>of</strong> additional relevant projects that relate to urban forestry, but for which no detailed<strong>in</strong>formation could be collected, and thus <strong>the</strong> present survey does not provide a comprehensiveoverview.Current results can be compared, at least partly, with <strong>the</strong> CARe-FOR-US 2005 survey, whichlisted 70 projects for Denmark (18), F<strong>in</strong>land (23), Norway (19) and Sweden (10). In <strong>the</strong> 2005survey projects from Estonia and Latvia were also <strong>in</strong>cluded, but <strong>the</strong>se countries did notcontribute to <strong>the</strong> present survey (as <strong>the</strong>y <strong>in</strong>formed about an absence <strong>of</strong> relevant research).In Figure 4.1 <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> projects per country <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> two CARe-FOR-US surveys iscompared.353025Nr <strong>of</strong> projects2015102005200950Denmark F<strong>in</strong>land Norway SwedenFig. 4.1. Comparison <strong>of</strong> number <strong>of</strong> urban forestry projects per <strong>Nordic</strong> country <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> CARe-FOR-US 2005 and 2009 surveys.The figure shows that considerably more projects have been listed for Sweden <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> latestsurvey, whereas F<strong>in</strong>land and Norway contribute with significantly less research projects. Thelatter could signalise a decrease <strong>in</strong> project activity, but could also be due to lack <strong>of</strong> responseor different decisions on which project to <strong>in</strong>clude. In Norway, for example, a ‘pre-survey’ wasundertaken amongst all relevant universities and o<strong>the</strong>r research organisations to obta<strong>in</strong> anoverview <strong>of</strong> relevant research with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> wider frame <strong>of</strong> recreation and urban and peri-urbangreen spaces (72 projects <strong>in</strong> all). From this pre-survey <strong>the</strong> most relevant project leaders wereselected and sent a CARe-FOR-US project form. The results from this exercise <strong>in</strong>dicate that adef<strong>in</strong>ition <strong>of</strong> what is ‘urban forestry’ is critical for which projects are <strong>in</strong>cluded (or not) at <strong>the</strong>national level.14

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!