Strategies, policies, and heritage in the urban forest

The manual coppicing of trees has been a traditional form of woodland management in many places around the world and often practised for centuries. However, when landscapes are urbanised, such traditions are generally allowed to lapse, and woods are abandoned or else converted into various forms of forestry. The potential for urban coppicing has rarely been examined in detail beyond the reinstatement of limited areas of conservation coppicing. Indeed, the challenges for such management are significant and range from access to appropriate sites to the most basic issue of woodworkers making a liveable wage. In this context, the study by Coxhead and Slater (2022) into the potential for urban coppicing in Britain is most welcome. Indeed, Europe-wide reintroduction of active “coppice” management to ancient woodlands is largely reliant on the use of heavy machinery and not on craft workers. Such operations, hugely damaging to both biodiversity and woodland heritage, are erroneously badged as “sustainable”. To address such issues and indeed to promote management of trees and woods which is genuinely sustainable requires effective strategic thinking and the necessary resources. Observations and studies suggest that the prerequisites may be significantly lacking. Hand, Rix, Stokes, and Doick (2022) examined issues of woodland strategies and policies through an in-depth study of local authorities in England. In a wide-ranging review, they found a mix of forward-thinking strategic documents and ones dealing primarily with policy and implementation but without longer-term visions. However, what they also highlight is that many if not most local authorities are seriously under-resourced. With current political and economic climates, it is unlikely that this situation will improve, at least in the short term. I suggest, therefore, that these findings along with wider observations indicate a serious disconnect between central government and departmental statements and policies on trees, woodlands, urban environments, climate issues, and community-led actions to address these, and the reality on the ground. Local government services are at the heart of addressing matters such as climate change, climate resilience, and flood alleviation, but they lack the critical resources to bring about much-needed change. The third paper of this issue is by Khalilnezhad, Russo, and Jannatif (2022), and this raises a further matter of interest in urban zones of the origins and functions (now and historically) of botanical gardens and similar landscapes. Changing functions from food supply for edible purposes to ornamental gardens for leisure and pleasure triggers both challenges and opportunities for the present and the future. This is a theme which might be re-visited by future papers in the journal. Arboricultural Journal 2022, VOL. 44, NO. 4, 181–182 https://doi.org/10.1080/03071375.2022.2140546