Building the neighborhood for the trees: Illuminating win–wins for housing densification and nature

IF 2.8 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Max R. Lambert, Simone Des Roches, Daniel A. Auerbach, Braeden Van Deynze, Syler Behrens, Robin Hale, Kenneth B. Pierce
{"title":"Building the neighborhood for the trees: Illuminating win–wins for housing densification and nature","authors":"Max R. Lambert,&nbsp;Simone Des Roches,&nbsp;Daniel A. Auerbach,&nbsp;Braeden Van Deynze,&nbsp;Syler Behrens,&nbsp;Robin Hale,&nbsp;Kenneth B. Pierce","doi":"10.1111/csp2.70085","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Housing deficits are pervasive because of multiple factors including insufficient new construction, rising costs, restrictive zoning, and income inequality. Policies to address housing deficits—both through housing densification or sprawl—have varied implications for ecosystem processes, biodiversity, and human well-being. Communities that achieve a given housing density while minimizing ecosystem degradation have been termed “brightspots.” Building on the brightspot concept, we use tree and housing data for western Washington, USA to assess tree:housing “brightening” and “dimming” relationships through time. Our analysis highlights three brightening or dimming pathways: (1) housing density increases with little or no tree cover loss, (2) modest housing density increases with modest or large tree cover losses, and (3) little to no change in housing with tree cover losses. Most neighborhoods show small changes in the tree:housing relationship. While dimming was about three times as common as brightening, most brightening occurred in existing urban areas, emphasizing that housing densification can and does occur while maintaining tree canopy. Our work illustrates policies and pathways to meet housing needs while reducing harm to natural systems and improving human well-being.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"7 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.70085","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Science and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/csp2.70085","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Housing deficits are pervasive because of multiple factors including insufficient new construction, rising costs, restrictive zoning, and income inequality. Policies to address housing deficits—both through housing densification or sprawl—have varied implications for ecosystem processes, biodiversity, and human well-being. Communities that achieve a given housing density while minimizing ecosystem degradation have been termed “brightspots.” Building on the brightspot concept, we use tree and housing data for western Washington, USA to assess tree:housing “brightening” and “dimming” relationships through time. Our analysis highlights three brightening or dimming pathways: (1) housing density increases with little or no tree cover loss, (2) modest housing density increases with modest or large tree cover losses, and (3) little to no change in housing with tree cover losses. Most neighborhoods show small changes in the tree:housing relationship. While dimming was about three times as common as brightening, most brightening occurred in existing urban areas, emphasizing that housing densification can and does occur while maintaining tree canopy. Our work illustrates policies and pathways to meet housing needs while reducing harm to natural systems and improving human well-being.

Abstract Image

为树而建社区:为住宅密度和自然照明双赢
由于新建筑不足、成本上升、限制性分区和收入不平等等多种因素,住房赤字普遍存在。解决住房短缺的政策——无论是通过住房密集化还是扩张——对生态系统过程、生物多样性和人类福祉有着不同的影响。在达到一定住房密度的同时尽量减少生态系统退化的社区被称为“亮点”。在亮点概念的基础上,我们使用美国华盛顿西部的树木和住房数据来评估树木:住房“变亮”和“变暗”的关系。我们的分析强调了三种增亮或变暗的途径:(1)房屋密度增加,但树木覆盖损失很少或没有;(2)房屋密度适度增加,但树木覆盖损失适度或很大;(3)房屋密度几乎没有变化,但树木覆盖损失不大。大多数社区在这棵树中表现出微小的变化:住房关系。虽然调光的频率大约是调光的三倍,但大多数调光发生在现有的城市地区,这强调了在保持树冠的同时,住房密度可以而且确实发生了。我们的工作阐明了在满足住房需求的同时减少对自然系统的危害并改善人类福祉的政策和途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Conservation Science and Practice
Conservation Science and Practice BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
6.50%
发文量
240
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信