Values of urban forestry in my study

I have been snowed by tonnes of readings these two weeks. Let me make up my mind here before I meet my supervisor tomorrow.

Value of ecosystem services and products basically is defined as a complex set of ecological, economic and socio-cultural benefits. While policy makers and scientists often speak of ecological and to a lesser extent economic values of certain environmental goods when defending their environmental policies or management practices, hardly there is a complete understanding of the socio-cultural importance in the estimation of their total values. The 'life-support' functions are too narrowly defined as non-human construct.
Urban forestry is an example of this. We know a lots about its contributions to the physical environment, like air purification, but how it interacts with individuals and the human society at large is seldom addressed in a scientific, systematic way. This is particularly the case in Hong Kong. The literature predominantly focused on the influences of individuals' socio-economic characteristics on their attitude and perceived values to green space. The implications of spatial factors seem to be unnoticed. Where the individuals live, what are the physical and social structures of their communities and what they do there should be another set of factors that lead to the variations in their attitude and perceived values. The spatial differences should be able to further explain why some people rate ecological benefits of urban forestry higher while the others more appreciate its contributinos to the people's interaction, society and culture, given that this socio-cultural component of value varies greatly across different spatical scale. We need to go deeper when investigating the ways that such values are formed and change.

Previous studies show that age is a key determinant of people attitude. Middle-age and old people tend to rate urban green space higher, compared to the youngster who have more alternatives like go shopping and karaoke. This links to the memories from the communties where they grew (like city or rural areas) and the fact that green space provides a commonplace for doing exercises in morning and social activities with other members of the community which are, however, not the cup of tea for the new generation. Other observations include greater concerns by married people with children.

One more point to add; Hong Kong is an exceptionally compact city that gives a different context comparing to other Western countries. For example, it is common to have a place where the poorest and richest people live in the same community and within walking distance. That means they have to share some infrastructures including green space. There may be a concern of safety or hygiene for, for example, those middle class who have children and hope to give them a desirable place for mild outdoor activities with their fellow classmates. The new private resident blocks very close to the Temple Street in Mongkok may offer an example to this view. Compact city, of course, is a source of poor air quality and noise problem, especially in the city centers like Mongkok and Wanchai. So the ways the residents there view the benefits of urban trees that can mitigate these problems may probably differ from those living in rural or suburb areas.