This February 10-13, 2025, in Fredericton, NB, we will gather over 300 municipal leaders, staff, and sustainability champions from across Canada to share solutions that strengthen our communities and accelerate climate action. @FCM_online

Implications: 1) Select species resistant to high temperatures, drought, and water logging; select for wood firmness, strong roots, resistant to pest/disease 2) Improve watering and planting standards 3) Improve growing conditions (drainage, soil volumes) 4) Pest management

Findings: Exposure = drought, heat stress, and wind, and pest and diseases (exacerbated). Sensitivities = species adaptations to temperature (cold, hot) and precipitation (dry, wet); age-class sensitivities (young and newly planted trees)

Our #participatory approach allowed us to systematically evaluate exposure, sensitivities, and adaptative capacities. We 1) captured things that cannot be quantified 2) involved local experts 3) integrated social-ecological themes 4) assessed vulnerability @ ecosystem level

Key point: cities must assess the vulnerability of urban forests/trees to climate change: it will tell us which elements will thrive, which decline, and what adaptation measures to take. We did this 10 years ago in 3 #Canadian cities: @CityOfHalifax @cityofsaskatoon #London

Context: climate change is a top concern of urban forestry (, but many cities still do not address climate adaptation (. We are stuck at the level of “using trees to mitigate impacts". "Making trees resilient" remains elusive.

4) Participatory = structured mind games based on discussions and guided by questions. Strengths: capturing what cannot be quantified (social issues); many stakeholders, not just “experts”; integrate social & ecological; vulnerability at ecosystem level, not just species.

3) Cost-benefit = the costs of not adapting to climate change vs. the benefits. Needs tree monetary valuation data exist. Strengths: bottom-line: how much money will we save? Quantifies the costs of climate change, inc.: maintaining trees; responding to tree damage; liabilities.

2) Species vulnerability models = Great when there’s data. Match climate projections with preferred tree habitat. Quantifies vulnerability and visualizes it (maps). Strengths: knowing which tree species are more vulnerable and by how much can help make better decisions

1) Expert-opinion models = Great in the absence of data. It involves giving a rating sheet to an expert and generating an index of vulnerability. Usually done for individual species. Strengths: uses local knowledge rather than extrapolating from elsewhere.

How to do this?. There are many methods, each responding to specific needs. The strongest methods mix many techniques, including the following (by no means this is a complete list! Just a selection of popular techniques):

Key point: cities must assess the vulnerability of urban forest to climate change. Why? Because it will tell you which elements will thrive, which decline, and what adaptation measures to take. It’ll bring climate change to the forefront of urban forestry.

Context: climate change is a top concern of urban forestry #Canada, but we are stuck at the level of “using urban trees to #mitigate #climate #impacts; “making urban forests #resilient remains elusive.

New #publication #research on how people think about #urban #forests #trees, comparing two very different #cities #Toronto and #Melbourne, various perceptions, and validated sampling and measures. #environmental #psychology #geography #ecology

With: JJung AStDenis PDuinker @coreygbassett @tenleyconway @UofT @UQAM @DalhousieU @UBCForestry @UBC

We highlight the collaborative nature of this work, involving many scientists and academics from various backgrounds.

We point to management trade-offs, such as increasing tree abundance but not addressing biodiversity, community, or climate change vulnerability issues. UFMPs are powerful management tools for a #climate #resilient and #sustainable future in #cities

Key findings: 1) increasing tree abundance and tree maintenance dominate content; 2) not much has changed over time; 3) smaller cities mention more tree maintenance, possibly because they are still dealing with traditional urban forestry issues