Data and Methods Comparing Social Structure and Vegetation Structure of Urban Neighborhoods in Baltimore, Maryland

Authors: Morgan Grove, J.1; Cadenasso, Mary2; Burch, William3; Pickett, Steward4; Schwarz, Kirsten4; O'Neil-Dunne, Jarlath5; Wilson, Matthew6; Troy, Austin7; Boone, Christopher8

Source: Society and Natural Resources, Volume 19, Number 2, Number 2/February 2006 , pp. 117-136(20)

Publisher: Routledge, part of the Taylor & Francis Group

Key:
Free Content - Free Content
New Content - New Content
Subscribed Content - Subscribed Content
Free Trial Content - Free Trial Content

Abstract:

Recent advances in remote sensing and the adoption of geographic information systems (GIS) have greatly increased the availability of high-resolution spatial and attribute data for examining the relationship between social and vegetation structure in urban areas. There are several motivations for understanding this relationship. First, the United States has experienced a significant increase in the extent of urbanized land. Second, urban foresters increasingly recognize their need for data about urban forestry types, owners and property regimes, and associated social goods, benefits, and services. Third, previous research has focused primarily on the distribution of vegetation cover or diversity. However, little is known about (1) whether vegetation structure varies among urban neighborhoods and (2) whether the motivations, pathways, and capacities for vegetation management vary among households and communities. In this article, we describe novel data and methods from Baltimore, MD, and the Baltimore Ecosystem Study (BES) to address these two questions.

Keywords: Baltimore; landcover; LTER; remote-sensing; social structure; urban ecology; vegetation

Document Type: Research article

DOI: 10.1080/08941920500394501

Affiliations: 1: USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, Bington, Vermont, USA 2: Hixon Center for Urban Ecology, School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA 3: School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA 4: Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Millbrook, New York, USA 5: Spatial Analysis Lab, Rubenstein School of the Environment and Natural Resources, University of Vermont, Bington, Vermont, USA 6: School of Business Administration and the Gund Institute for Ecological Economics, University of Vermont, Bington, Vermont, USA 7: Aiken Center, Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources, University of Vermont, Bington, Vermont, USA 8: Department of Geography, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio, USA

The full text electronic article is available for purchase. You will be able to download the full text electronic article after payment.

$45.09 plus tax      Refund Policy

 

OR

Back to top

Key:
Free Content - Free Content
New Content - New Content
Subscribed Content - Subscribed Content
Free Trial Content - Free Trial Content
Share this item with others: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Page Help Click here for Page Help
Shopping cart
Tools
Sign in






Need to register?
Sign up here
Text size: A | A | A | A