1

Trends in forest terminologyTrends in forest terminologyUrban forestryUrban forestry

Trends in forest terminologyTrends in forest terminologyUrban forestryUrban forestry

Michèle Kaennel DobbertinSwiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL

IUFRO Working Party 6.03.02

Renate PrüllerSilvaVoc Special Project on multilingual forest terminology

IUFRO

Michèle Kaennel DobbertinSwiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL

IUFRO Working Party 6.03.02

Renate PrüllerSilvaVoc Special Project on multilingual forest terminology

IUFRO

Trends in forest terminology - Urban forestryTrends in forest terminology - Urban forestry

• Terminological resources at IUFRO

• SilvaVoc and Working Party 6.03.02

• Common guidelines

• Urban forestry: an analytical presentation of definitions

• Methodology

• Results

• Exploration of related concepts

• Overview

• Community forest(ry)

• Urban green(ing) – urban forest(ry)

• Conclusions and recommendations

• Terminological resources at IUFRO

• SilvaVoc and Working Party 6.03.02

• Common guidelines

• Urban forestry: an analytical presentation of definitions

• Methodology

• Results

• Exploration of related concepts

• Overview

• Community forest(ry)

• Urban green(ing) – urban forest(ry)

• Conclusions and recommendations

Two complementary initiativesTwo complementary initiatives

SilvaVoc

• A service within the IUFRO Secretariat

• A clearing-house for terminological resources in forestry

• A partner in discussions with other international bodies

SilvaVoc

• A service within the IUFRO Secretariat

• A clearing-house for terminological resources in forestry

• A partner in discussions with other international bodies

WP 6.03.02

• A unit within the IUFRO Structure

• A “network within the network”

• A self-defined programme of activities based on the commitment of volunteers

WP 6.03.02

• A unit within the IUFRO Structure

• A “network within the network”

• A self-defined programme of activities based on the commitment of volunteers

SilvaVocSilvaVoc

• Information and documentation

• On-line Bibliography of dictionaries and glossaries

• Cooperation with the IUFRO Structure

• Editorial activities

• On-line terminological database SilvaTerm (English, French, Spanish, German, Italian, Portuguese, Hungarian, Swahili, Japanese)

• Information and documentation

• On-line Bibliography of dictionaries and glossaries

• Cooperation with the IUFRO Structure

• Editorial activities

• On-line terminological database SilvaTerm (English, French, Spanish, German, Italian, Portuguese, Hungarian, Swahili, Japanese)

WP 6.03.02 “Trends in forest terminology”WP 6.03.02 “Trends in forest terminology”

• On-line Directory of experts

• Electronic discussion groups (B. Haddon, Canada)

• Old-growth forests, natural forests, primary forests

• Reforestation, afforestation, deforestation

• Low forest cover

• Forest health

• Terminological awareness (J. Helms, USA)

• On-line Directory of experts

• Electronic discussion groups (B. Haddon, Canada)

• Old-growth forests, natural forests, primary forests

• Reforestation, afforestation, deforestation

• Low forest cover

• Forest health

• Terminological awareness (J. Helms, USA)

Common guidelinesCommon guidelines

• Show terminological differences

• Apply descriptive rather than prescriptive principles

• Include all languages (in so far it is technically possible)

• Benefit to and from the cooperation with IUFRO forest experts

• Show terminological differences

• Apply descriptive rather than prescriptive principles

• Include all languages (in so far it is technically possible)

• Benefit to and from the cooperation with IUFRO forest experts

Can urban forest(ry) be defined?Can urban forest(ry) be defined?

• Over the years, much time has been spent (and perhaps wasted) in trying to define urban forestry. (G.W. Grey, 1996)

• The term urban forestry is applied to many different situations in a variety of countries; not surprisingly this has led to imprecise definition. (B.G. Hibberd, 1995)

• To date the term ‘urban forest’ is little used in Europe, nor in Sweden in particular. (R. Gustavsson et al., 1999)

• Over the years, much time has been spent (and perhaps wasted) in trying to define urban forestry. (G.W. Grey, 1996)

• The term urban forestry is applied to many different situations in a variety of countries; not surprisingly this has led to imprecise definition. (B.G. Hibberd, 1995)

• To date the term ‘urban forest’ is little used in Europe, nor in Sweden in particular. (R. Gustavsson et al., 1999)

• As in all relatively new professions, a lot of effort has been spent trying to define Urban Forestry. (G. Kuchelmeister, 1996)

• As in all relatively new professions, a lot of effort has been spent trying to define Urban Forestry. (G. Kuchelmeister, 1996)

Urban forestry: an analytical presentation of definitionsUrban forestry: an analytical presentation of definitions

Methodology

• A corpus of 90 printed and on-line documents, mostly in English, was searched for explicit or embedded definitions of “urban forest” or “urban forestry”

• A questionnaire was sent to all authors of papers and posters at this Conference

• The 55 resulting sources (=texts + pers. comm.) were analysed for presence or absence of semantic elements of definitions:

What is an urban forest?

Where is the urban forest?

What are the objectives of urban forestry?

What are the benefits and values of urban forest(ry)?

Methodology

• A corpus of 90 printed and on-line documents, mostly in English, was searched for explicit or embedded definitions of “urban forest” or “urban forestry”

• A questionnaire was sent to all authors of papers and posters at this Conference

• The 55 resulting sources (=texts + pers. comm.) were analysed for presence or absence of semantic elements of definitions:

What is an urban forest?

Where is the urban forest?

What are the objectives of urban forestry?

What are the benefits and values of urban forest(ry)?

Results1. What is an urban forest?Results1. What is an urban forest?

CanadaBritish Columbia

Ontario

Europe

Croatia Denmark

Germany

HungaryIcelandIreland

NetherlandsSloveniaSweden

Iran

Asia-Pacific RegionIndia

fore

sts,

fo

rest

eco

syst

em

all

(re

late

d)

veg

eta

tion

/ o

rga

nis

ms

Sahel

sin

gle

tre

es,

gro

up

s o

f t

ree

s, w

oo

dy

veg

eta

tion

city

pa

rks,

gre

en

law

ns,

gre

en

spa

ce

wo

od

lan

ds

North America

Developing countries

Finland

USA

n.d.

n.d.

United Kingdom

• Mentioned in 81% of the analysed sources.

• In Europe, (tree-)related vegetation and organisms are not mentioned.

• In developing countries, the urban forest tends to include mostly trees and parks.

• “Woodlands” do not seem to belong to the North-American urban forest.

• Mentioned in 81% of the analysed sources.

• In Europe, (tree-)related vegetation and organisms are not mentioned.

• In developing countries, the urban forest tends to include mostly trees and parks.

• “Woodlands” do not seem to belong to the North-American urban forest.

Results2. Where is the urban forest?Results2. Where is the urban forest?

with

in c

ities

arou

nd c

ities

/ pe

ri-u

rban

, sub

-urb

an a

reas

/ ur

ban

frin

ges

North America

CanadaOntario

Europe

DenmarkHungaryIcelandIreland

ItalyNetherlands

SloveniaSweden

Developing countries

Asia-Pacific RegionIndia

Sahel

clos

e to

urb

an a

reas

tow

ns, v

illag

es /

smal

l com

mun

ities

areas

urban(ized)

n.d.

USA

n.d.

United Kingdom

• Mentioned in 65% of the analysed sources.

• In North-America vs. Europe and developing countries, the urban forest includes green space (or forest) in small communities.

• In North-America vs. Europe and developing countries, the urban forest is not located “close to” urban areas.

• Mentioned in 65% of the analysed sources.

• In North-America vs. Europe and developing countries, the urban forest includes green space (or forest) in small communities.

• In North-America vs. Europe and developing countries, the urban forest is not located “close to” urban areas.

Results3. What is urban forest(ry) good for?Results3. What is urban forest(ry) good for?

• Mentioned in only 62% of the analysed sources.

• Grey blocks: generic typology of benefits.

• Economic benefits are secondary in European countries.

• Difficult to analyse definitions containing only generic typology of benefits -> what can non-specialists and new comers understand behind these definitions?

• Mentioned in only 62% of the analysed sources.

• Grey blocks: generic typology of benefits.

• Economic benefits are secondary in European countries.

• Difficult to analyse definitions containing only generic typology of benefits -> what can non-specialists and new comers understand behind these definitions?

Canada

n.d.

IcelandIreland

SloveniaSweden

Egypt

Asia-Pacific RegionIndia

Indonesia

economicenvironmental

Finland

United Kingdom

n.d.

Sahel

Germanyla

ndsc

ape

desi

gn

aest

hetic

/ sc

enic

val

ue

recr

eatio

n / o

utdo

or a

ctiv

ities

(mic

ro-)

clim

ate

cont

rol

air

pollu

tion

and

nois

e co

ntro

l

was

te(w

ater

) re

cycl

ing

fuel

/ bu

ildin

g m

ater

ial

biod

iver

sity

con

serv

atio

n

n.d.

USA

North America

Europe

Developing countries

sociological

publ

ic h

ealth

/ hu

man

wel

l-be

ing

woo

d pr

oduc

tion

non-

woo

dy p

rodu

cts

shel

ter

Related concepts: overviewRelated concepts: overview

• Methodology

• Concepts related to UF were listed from corpus and answers to questionnaire

• Subjective interpretation of definitions was made and frequency of occurrence of various elements was highlighted in order to reveal trends.

• Coverage of the concepts was presented using similar elements as in overall analytical representation.

• Questions

• Can synonyms be identified?

• Can generic terms be identified?

• Do other terms need clarification in this context, e.g. urban/urbanized areas, rural, peri-urban, town, woodlands, community forest(ry)?

• Methodology

• Concepts related to UF were listed from corpus and answers to questionnaire

• Subjective interpretation of definitions was made and frequency of occurrence of various elements was highlighted in order to reveal trends.

• Coverage of the concepts was presented using similar elements as in overall analytical representation.

• Questions

• Can synonyms be identified?

• Can generic terms be identified?

• Do other terms need clarification in this context, e.g. urban/urbanized areas, rural, peri-urban, town, woodlands, community forest(ry)?

Related concepts: overviewRelated concepts: overview

Partici-pation

Tree

s

Woo

dla

nds

Oth

er

Op

en s

pac

e

In c

itie

s

aro

und

rura

l ar

eas

Rec

reat

ion

Food

/wo

od s

upp

ly

Orn

ame

nt

Env

iron

me

nt

Pu

blic

Priv

ate

Urban forest(ry)Urban green(ing) urban greenery urban green space public greenArboricultureUrban gardeningGreen belt park belt agricultural belt woodland beltGreenwaysTown forestUrban agriculture(Urban) social forestryCommunity forest(ry)

Owner-ship

Structuralelements

Location Purpose

Related concepts:Community forest(ry)Related concepts:Community forest(ry)

“The notion of community is a fundamental idea with a myriad of definitions surrounding the concept.” (W.F. Elmendorf)

“The notion of community is a fundamental idea with a myriad of definitions surrounding the concept.” (W.F. Elmendorf)

Related concepts:Community forest(ry)Related concepts:Community forest(ry)

Community:

1 A group of people who reside in a specific locality, share government, and often have a common cultural and historical heritage.

2 A locality inhabited by such a group.

3 A social, religious, occupational, or other group sharing common characteristics or interests: the business community.

4 The public; society.

5 Joint possession, enjoyment, liability, etc.: community of property.

(Random House Webster’s College Dictionary, 1992)

Community:

1 A group of people who reside in a specific locality, share government, and often have a common cultural and historical heritage.

2 A locality inhabited by such a group.

3 A social, religious, occupational, or other group sharing common characteristics or interests: the business community.

4 The public; society.

5 Joint possession, enjoyment, liability, etc.: community of property.

(Random House Webster’s College Dictionary, 1992)

Related concepts:Community forest(ry)Related concepts:Community forest(ry)

• Community is diversely defined (if at all).

• Location is a significant element in Europe and in N.A.

• Participation is not essential in Europe.

• Benefits go to the community in developing countries.

• Ownership by the community is the main element in developing countries; it is not even mentioned in N.A. and Europe.

• Community is diversely defined (if at all).

• Location is a significant element in Europe and in N.A.

• Participation is not essential in Europe.

• Benefits go to the community in developing countries.

• Ownership by the community is the main element in developing countries; it is not even mentioned in N.A. and Europe.

Europe 60

Developing countries3

45

Communal forest(ry)

n.d.

Benefits

North-America36

5455

Europe3740

Developing countries5053

Africa 52Cameroun 49

Asia 594344

Nepal 2442

recr

ea

tion

al/e

nvi

ron

me

nta

l

Owner-ship

by

the

co

mm

un

ity

pu

blic

oth

er

n.d.

USA

United Kingdom

Indiam

an

ag

em

en

t b

y th

e c

om

mu

nity

urba

n(iz

ed)

area

s

rura

l are

as (

=sm

all c

.)

sha

red

by

the

co

mm

un

ity

1 2 3 4 pa

rtic

ipa

tion

ess

en

tial

Community forest(ry)

5

Community Locationdefinition #

Related concepts:Urban greening - urban forestryRelated concepts:Urban greening - urban forestry

• “Urban greening is a newer concept and field of study than urban forestry and shares this more people concentrated view.” (J. Park, Trees for Africa)

• “Today there is a consensus among practicians that the term urban forestry can be used interchangeably with urban greening.” (G. Kuchelmeister, Tree City, Germany)

• “Urban greening is a newer concept and field of study than urban forestry and shares this more people concentrated view.” (J. Park, Trees for Africa)

• “Today there is a consensus among practicians that the term urban forestry can be used interchangeably with urban greening.” (G. Kuchelmeister, Tree City, Germany)

Related conceptsUrban greening - urban forestryRelated conceptsUrban greening - urban forestry

• Confusion about the concept:• Is urban greening = urban forestry?• Is urban greening a part of urban forestry ?• Is urban forestry a part of urban greening ?

• Elements in definitions might allow better distinction:• Green - forest• Environmental aspects • People participation

• Confusion about the concept:• Is urban greening = urban forestry?• Is urban greening a part of urban forestry ?• Is urban forestry a part of urban greening ?

• Elements in definitions might allow better distinction:• Green - forest• Environmental aspects • People participation

Partici-pation

Tre

es

Wood

lands

Oth

er

Op

en s

pac

e

In c

itie

s

aro

und

rura

l are

as

Recre

ati

on

Fo

od/w

ood s

upp

ly

Orn

am

ent

Envir

onm

ent

Pu

blic

Priva

te

Urban forest(ry)Urban green(ing) urban greenery urban green space public green

Owner-ship

Structuralelements

Location Purpose

ConclusionsConclusions

• Urban forests can be anything from large peri-urban forests to virtual collections of street and park trees.

• Benefits of urban forest(ry) potentially meet the full range of human and environmental needs, but these needs have different priorities over the world.

• Related concepts and pseudo-synonyms increase the confusion.

• Urban forests can be anything from large peri-urban forests to virtual collections of street and park trees.

• Benefits of urban forest(ry) potentially meet the full range of human and environmental needs, but these needs have different priorities over the world.

• Related concepts and pseudo-synonyms increase the confusion.

RecommendationsRecommendations

• Pseudo-synonyms should be avoided.

• Conversely, concepts covering a scope too large throughout the world should be designated by different terms.

• Universal definitions will necessarily be vague. Geographical and cultural differences in use should instead be highlighted in widespread definitions.

• Pseudo-synonyms should be avoided.

• Conversely, concepts covering a scope too large throughout the world should be designated by different terms.

• Universal definitions will necessarily be vague. Geographical and cultural differences in use should instead be highlighted in widespread definitions.