UDTR Global Rights of Nature Radar

Priorities, concerns, and potential compromises amongst urban forest stakeholders: international lessons from Aotearoa New Zealand

Identification

Public canonical key

doi:10.1007/s11252-025-01801-8

Authors

Thomas F. Carlin · Tim D. Barnard · Toby Chapman · Justin A. Morgenroth · Daniel Rex Richards · Robyn Simcock · Jonathon Avery · Zoe Avery · Yvette L. Dickinson · Kate Elliot · Claire Freeman · D. G. Hayes · Yolanda van Heezik · Kelly Hertzog · Rebecca Kiddle · Brent Martin · William Melville · Tipene Merritt · Colin Douglas Meurk · Tamara Mutu · Mirjam Schindler · Alison H. Slade · David Spencer · Margaret C. Stanley · David J. Stejskal · Mason Walker · Christopher Walsh · Sylvia Tapuke

Reported year

2025

Reported language

en

Source type

article

First detected

2026-11-09T19:04:47.758296+00:00

Last metadata observation

2026-11-09T19:04:47.758296+00:00

Last HTTP verification

Not checked

Institutions reported by the source

Auckland Council · Auckland University of Technology · Bioeconomy Science Institute · Christchurch City Council · City of Melbourne · Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research · Scion · Te Wānanga o Aotearoa · University of Auckland · University of Canterbury · University of Otago · Victoria University of Wellington · Wellington City Council

Reported affiliation countries

AU · NZ

Documentary abstract — original language

Abstract Urban forests provide numerous benefits including habitat for wildlife, improving human health, purifying air and water, and preventing and mitigating the effects of climate change. The need to protect and improve our urban forests will only increase as populations increase and cities densify and expand over time. However, urban forest establishment and maintenance is challenging due to a lack of effective policies, delays, lack of communication, inappropriate targets, and lack of recognition, disunity, or resourcing amongst stakeholders. Here we present the results from a joint urban forest symposium-workshop that sought to determine the priorities and challenges of different stakeholder groups in New Zealand, including arborists, ecologists, non-ecologist researchers, indigenous peoples, and planners. We synthesise these lessons as recommendations to improve urban forest planning, design, establishment, and minimise conflicts between stakeholder groups. While the highest priorities of each stakeholder group are fairly distinct, there are high levels of overlap in the general priorities and challenges they face in working towards advancing those priorities. We suggest a 3-phase framework to deliver progress that broadly considers (1) data collection, (2) policy development, and (3) resource development. We suggest this framework should be supported by continual monitoring and data sharing, an increased investment in green employment and education, and further recognition of urban foresters, indigenous communities, and ecologists. We suggest that an inclusive approach based on a shared understanding of forest values and removing barriers is most likely to result in long-term success.

Identifiers

OPENALEX

W4414564654

DOI

10.1007/s11252-025-01801-8

HANDLE

10092/109070 · 2292/73948

Documentary context

Documentary family

Scholarship

Source-reported types

article

Jurisdictions studied — explicit sources

NZ

Natural entities mentioned

Forest

Entity mentions are not evidence of legal recognition. Jurisdiction studied is separate from author affiliation country.

Sources

OpenAlex · Record 1 · Record 2 · Record 3 · Record 4

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-025-01801-8
• Handle · https://hdl.handle.net/10092/109070
• Handle · https://hdl.handle.net/2292/73948
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W4414564654

Documented bibliographic relations

Source-declared references and links; they do not establish legal support or UGLC qualification. Up to 20 outgoing references are displayed.

• openalex:w1178327149 · CITES
• openalex:w1973079470 · CITES
• openalex:w1999621300 · CITES
• openalex:w2003883054 · CITES
• openalex:w2017168918 · CITES
• openalex:w2027137256 · CITES
• openalex:w2030516572 · CITES
• openalex:w2046360842 · CITES
• openalex:w2054054553 · CITES
• openalex:w2066131315 · CITES
• openalex:w2067057451 · CITES
• openalex:w2120580292 · CITES
• openalex:w2126711314 · CITES
• openalex:w2143880927 · CITES
• openalex:w2159659225 · CITES
• openalex:w2165306679 · CITES
• openalex:w2165859552 · CITES
• openalex:w2178422341 · CITES
• openalex:w2184582409 · CITES
• openalex:w2192714632 · CITES

0 incoming references within the detected corpus

Documentary status

Relevance pending

Library

This identity is not yet included in the Legal Library.