Modern Urban Forestry for Modern Cities: Technology Challenges and Opportunities for the Remote Sensing of Urban Forests

LITERATURE CITED

1. ↵
   1. Agisoft

   . 2021. Features. St. Petersburg (Russia): Agisoft LLC. [Accessed 2021 June 4]. https://www.agisoft.com/features/professional-edition
2. ↵
   1. Agrawal A,
   2. Choudhary A

   . 2016. Perspective: Materials informatics and big data: Realization of the “fourth paradigm” of science in materials science. APL Materials. 4(5):053208. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4946894

   OpenUrl
3. ↵
   1. Akbari H,
   2. Cartalis C,
   3. Kolokotsa D,
   4. Muscio A,
   5. Pisello AL,
   6. Rossi F,
   7. Santamouris M,
   8. Synnef A,
   9. Wong NH,
   10. Zinzi M

   . 2016. Local climate change and urban heat island mitigation techniques—The state of the art. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management. 22(1):1–16. https://doi.org/10.3846/13923730.2016.1111934

   OpenUrl
4. ↵
   1. Allen M,
   2. Voogt J,
   3. Christen A

   . 2018. Time-continuous hemispherical urban surface temperatures. Remote Sensing. 10(1):3. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10010003

   OpenUrl
5. ↵
   1. Alonzo M,
   2. McFadden JP,
   3. Nowak DJ,
   4. Roberts DA

   . 2016. Mapping urban forest structure and function using hyperspectral imagery and lidar data. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 17:135–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2016.04.003

   OpenUrl
6. ↵
   1. Alonzo M,
   2. Roth K,
   3. Roberts D

   . 2013. Identifying Santa Barbara’s urban tree species from AVIRIS imagery using canonical discriminant analysis. Remote Sensing Letters. 4(5):513–521. https://doi.org/10.1080/2150704X.2013.764027

   OpenUrl
7. ↵
   1. Altermatt F

   . 2010. Tell me what you eat and I’ll tell you when you fly: Diet can predict phenological changes in response to climate change. Ecology Letters. 13(12):1475–1484. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01534.x

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
8. ↵
   1. Anchang JY,
   2. Prihodko L,
   3. Ji W,
   4. Kumar SS,
   5. Ross CW,
   6. Yu Q,
   7. Lind B,
   8. Sarr MA,
   9. Diouf AA,
   10. Hanan NP

   . 2020. Toward operational mapping of woody canopy cover in tropical savannas using Google Earth Engine. Frontiers in Environmental Science. 8:4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2020.00004
9. ↵
   1. Arlula

   . 2021. Ultimo (NSW, Australia): Arlula Pty Ltd. [Accessed 2021 August 5]. https://arlula.com
10. ↵
    1. Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (AMPO)

    . 2019. National framework for regional vehicle connectivity and automation planning. Washington (DC, USA): AMPO. 117 p. [Accessed 2021 June 12]. http://www.ampo.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/2019-AMPO-Framework-11.pdf
11. ↵
    1. Baines O,
    2. Wilkes P,
    3. Disney M

    . 2020. Quantifying urban forest structure with open-access remote sensing data sets. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 50:126653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126653
12. ↵
    1. Beniston M

    . 2014. European isotherms move northwards by up to 15 km year⁻¹: Using climate analogues for awareness-raising. International Journal of Climatology. 34(6):1838–1844. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3804

    OpenUrl
13. ↵
    1. Berland A,
    2. Lange DA

    . 2017. Google Street View shows promise for virtual street tree surveys. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 21:11–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2016.11.006

    OpenUrl
14. ↵
    1. Bogdanchikov A,
    2. Zhaparov M,
    3. Suliyev R

    . 2013. Python to learn programming. 2013 International Conference on Science & Engineering in Mathematics, Chemistry and Physics (ScieTech 2013); 2013 January 24–25; Jakarta, Indonesia. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 423:012027. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/423/1/012027
15. ↵
    1. Both C,
    2. van Asch M,
    3. Bijlsma RG,
    4. van den Burg AB,
    5. Visser ME

    . 2009. Climate change and unequal phenological changes across four trophic levels: Constraints or adaptations? Journal of Animal Ecology. 78(1):73–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2008.01458.x

    OpenUrlPubMed
16. ↵
    1. Boucher T

    . 2016. Using cloud computing to untangle how trees can cool cities. Cool Green Science. Arlington County (VA, USA): The Nature Conservancy. [Accessed 2021 June 4]. https://blog.nature.org/science/2016/11/18/using-cloud-computing-to-untangle-how-trees-can-cool-cities
17. ↵
    1. Bradshaw T

    . 2020 June 9. Planet Labs to expand earth imaging as rocket-launch costs fall. Financial Times. [Accessed 2021 June 3]. https://www.ft.com/content/1070bb0e-4899-48b9-9321-c4571f74c8ac
18. ↵
    1. Brandt L,
    2. Derby Lewis A,
    3. Fahey R,
    4. Scott L,
    5. Darling L,
    6. Swanston C

    . 2016. A framework for adapting urban forests to climate change. Environmental Science & Policy. 66:393–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.06.005

    OpenUrl
19. ↵
    1. Bronson K,
    2. Knezevic I

    . 2016. Big Data in food and agriculture. Big Data & Society. 3(1):1–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716648174

    OpenUrlCrossRef
20. ↵
    1. Buja I,
    2. Sabella E,
    3. Monteduro AG,
    4. Chiriacò MS,
    5. De Bellis L,
    6. Luvisi A,
    7. Maruccio G

    . 2021. Advances in plant disease detection and monitoring: From traditional assays to in-field diagnostics. Sensors. 21(6):2129. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21062129

    OpenUrlPubMed
21. ↵
    1. Calma J

    . 2020. Google launches new tool to help cities stay cool. The Verge. [Accessed 2021 May 28]. https://www.theverge.com/2020/11/18/21573081/google-new-tool-hot-cities-trees-climate-change-temperature
22. ↵
    1. Chapin T,
    2. Stevens L,
    3. Crute J

    . 2017. Here come the robot cars. Planning. 83(4):15–21.

    OpenUrl
23. ↵
    1. Cheng Z,
    2. Nitoslawski S,
    3. Konijnendijk van den Bosch C,
    4. Sheppard S,
    5. Nesbitt L,
    6. Girling C

    . 2021. Alignment of municipal climate change and urban forestry policies: A Canadian perspective. Environmental Science & Policy. 122:14–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.04.005

    OpenUrl
24. ↵
    1. Chun B,
    2. Guldmann JM

    . 2018. Impact of greening on the urban heat island: Seasonal variations and mitigation strategies. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems. 71:165–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2018.05.006

    OpenUrl
25. ↵
    1. City and County of Denver

    . 2021. TreeKeeper. [Accessed 2021 June 5]. Denver (CO, USA): City of Denver. https://denverco.treekeepersoftware.com
26. ↵
    1. City of Melbourne

    . 2020. Explore Melbourne’s Urban Forest. Melbourne (Australia): City of Melbourne. [Accessed 2021 June 4]. http://melbourneurbanforestvisual.com.au
27. ↵
    1. Compostella J,
    2. Fulton LM,
    3. De Kleine R,
    4. Kim HC,
    5. Wallington TJ

    . 2020. Near- (2020) and long-term (2030–2035) costs of automated, electrified, and shared mobility in the United States. Transport Policy. 85:54–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2019.10.001

    OpenUrl
28. ↵
    1. Corburn J

    . 2009. Cities, climate change and urban heat island mitigation: Localising global environmental science. Urban Studies. 46(2):413–427. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098008099361

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
29. ↵
    1. Daly C,
    2. Widrlechner MP,
    3. Halbleib MD,
    4. Smith JI,
    5. Gibson WP

    . 2012. Development of a new USDA Plant Hardiness Zone Map for the United States. Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology. 51(2):242–264. https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JAMC2536.1

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
30. ↵
    1. Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG)

    . 2018. Denver Regional Aerial Photography Project. Denver (CO, USA): DRCOG. [Accessed 2021 June 4]. https://drcog.org/services-and-resources/data-maps-and-modeling/denver-regional-aerial-photography-project
31. ↵
    1. de With S

    . 2020 April 15. LIDAR: Peek into the Future with iPad Pro. LUX. [Accessed 2021 June 11]. https://lux.camera/lidar-peek-into-the-future-with-ipad-pro
32. ↵
    1. Díaz-Yáñez O,
    2. Mola-Yudego B,
    3. Timmermann V,
    4. Tollefsrud MM,
    5. Hietala AM,
    6. Oliva J

    . 2020. The invasive forest pathogen Hymenoscyphus fraxineus boosts mortality and triggers niche replacement of European ash (Fraxinus excelsior). Scientific Reports. 10:5310. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-61990-4
33. ↵
    1. Dierbach C

    . 2014. Python as a first programming language. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges. 29(6):153–154.

    OpenUrl
34. ↵
    1. Doick KJ,
    2. Buckland A,
    3. Clarke TK

    . 2020. Historic urban tree canopy cover of Great Britain. Forests. 11(10):1049. https://doi.org/10.3390/f11101049

    OpenUrl
35. ↵
    1. Duan Q,
    2. Tan M,
    3. Guo Y,
    4. Wang X,
    5. Xin L

    . 2019. Understanding the spatial distribution of urban forests in China using Sentinel-2 images with Google Earth Engine. Forests. 10(9):729. https://doi.org/10.3390/f10090729

    OpenUrl
36. ↵
    1. Dwyer JF,
    2. Nowak DJ,
    3. Noble MH,
    4. Sisinni SM

    . 2000. Connecting people with ecosystems in the 21st century: An assessment of our nation’s urban forests. Portland (OR, USA): USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-490. 483 p. https://doi.org/10.2737/PNW-GTR-490
37. ↵
    1. EcoBot Inc

    . 2021. Ecobot Wetland Delineation App Homepage. [Accessed 2021 June 4]. https://ecobotapp.com
38. ↵
    1. Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI)

    . 2009. Singapore manages urban forests using GIS. Redlands (CA, USA): ESRI. [Accessed 2021 June 11]. https://www.esri.com/news/arcnews/spring09articles/isstate-manages.html
39. ↵
    1. Escobar Villanueva JR,
    2. Iglesias Martínez L,
    3. Pérez Montiel JI

    . 2019. DEM generation from fixed-wing UAV imaging and LiDAR-derived ground control points for flood estimations. Sensors. 19(14):3205. https://doi.org/10.3390/s19143205

    OpenUrlPubMed
40. ↵
    1. European Space Agency (ESA)

    . 2021. The Copernicus Open Access Hub. Paris (France): ESA. [Accessed 2021 June 11]. https://scihub.copernicus.eu
41. ↵
    1. Fahey T,
    2. Pham H,
    3. Gardi A,
    4. Sabatini R,
    5. Stefanelli D,
    6. Goodwin I,
    7. Lamb DW

    . 2021. Active and passive electro-optical sensors for health assessment in food crops. Sensors. 21(1):171. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21010171

    OpenUrl
42. ↵
    1. Ferrucci D,
    2. Levas A,
    3. Bagchi S,
    4. Gondek D,
    5. Mueller E

    . 2013. Watson: Beyond Jeopardy! Artificial Intelligence. 199-200: 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2012.06.009

    OpenUrl
43. ↵
    1. Fitzpatrick MC,
    2. Dunn RR

    . 2019. Contemporary climatic analogs for 540 North American urban areas in the late 21st century. Nature Communications. 10:614. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-08540-3
44. ↵
    1. Freemark Y,
    2. Hudson A,
    3. Zhao J

    . 2019. Are cities prepared for autonomous vehicles? Journal of the American Planning Association. 85(2):133–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2019.1603760

    OpenUrl
45. ↵
    1. Galle NJ,
    2. Halpern D,
    3. Nitoslawski S,
    4. Duarte F,
    5. Ratti C,
    6. Pilla F

    . 2021. Mapping the diversity of street tree inventories across eight cities internationally using open data. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 61:127099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127099
46. ↵
    1. GitHub

    . 2021. Physical Oceanography Distributed Active Archive Center for ECCO resources. [Accessed 2021 June 10]. https://github.com/podaac/ECCO
47. ↵
    1. Google Earth Engine

    . 2021. Forest Cover and Loss Estimation. [Updated 2021 July 19; Accessed 2021 June 11]. https://developers.google.com/earth-engine/tutorials/community/forest-cover-loss-estimation
48. ↵
    1. Gordon J,
    2. Templeton B

    . 2015. A step-by-step guide to taking urban forest inventory measurements. Starkville (MS, USA): Mississippi State University Extension Service. Publication 2882. 24 p. [Accessed 2021 June 2]. https://extension.msstate.edu/sites/default/files/publications/publications/p2882.pdf
49. ↵
    1. Grizonnet M,
    2. Michel J,
    3. Poughon V,
    4. Inglada J,
    5. Savinaud M,
    6. Cresson R

    . 2017. Orfeo ToolBox: Open source processing of remote sensing images. Open Geospatial Data, Software and Standards. 2:15. [Accessed 2021 June 11]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40965-017-0031-6
50. ↵
    1. Gülçin D,
    2. Konijnendijk van den Bosch CC

    . 2021. Assessment of above-ground carbon storage by urban trees using LiDAR data: The case of a university campus. Forests. 12(1):62. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12010062

    OpenUrl
51. ↵
    1. Ha P,
    2. Chen S,
    3. Du R,
    4. Dong J,
    5. Li Y,
    6. Labi S

    . 2020. Vehicle connectivity and automation: A sibling relationship. Frontiers in Built Environment. 6:590036. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2020.590036
52. ↵
    1. Haaland C,
    2. Konijnendijk van den Bosch C

    . 2015. Challenges and strategies for urban green-space planning in cities undergoing densification: A review. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 14(4):760–771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2015.07.009

    OpenUrl
53. ↵
    1. Hansen MC,
    2. Potapov PV,
    3. Moore R,
    4. Hancher M,
    5. Turubanova SA,
    6. Tyukavina A,
    7. Thau D,
    8. Stehman SV,
    9. Goetz SJ,
    10. Loveland TR,
    11. Kommareddy A,
    12. Egorov A,
    13. Chini L,
    14. Justice CO,
    15. Townshend JRG

    . 2013. High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science. 342(6160):850–853. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1244693

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
54. ↵
    1. Harris Geospatial Solutions Inc

    . 2021. ENVI Homepage. Broomfield (CO, USA): L3Harris. [Accessed 2021 June 1]. https://www.l3harrisgeospatial.com/Software-Technology/ENVI
55. ↵
    1. Hey T

    . 2010. The big idea: The next scientific revolution. Harvard Business Review. 88(11):56–63. https://hbr.org/2010/11/the-big-idea-the-next-scientific-revolution

    OpenUrlPubMed
56. ↵
    1. Hohn N,
    2. Fleming O,
    3. Zhang R

    . 2021. This AI technique could use a digital version of Earth to help fight climate change. New York (NY, USA): World Economic Forum. [Accessed 2021 June 4]. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/06/could-the-combo-of-a-digital-twin-and-reinforcement-learning-tackle-climate-change
57. ↵
    1. IBM Corporation

    . 2020. IBM + Cloudera. Armonk (NY, USA): IBM Corporation. 12 p. [Accessed 2021 August 2]. https://www.ibm.com/downloads/cas/EV7V0MGB
58. ↵
    1. Jensen RR,
    2. Hardin PJ,
    3. Hardin AJ

    . 2012. Classification of urban tree species using hyperspectral imagery. Geocarto International. 27(5):443–458. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2011.638989

    OpenUrl
59. ↵
    1. Jones HG,
    2. Vaughan RA

    . 2010. Remote sensing of vegetation: Principles, techniques, and applications. Oxford (UK): Oxford University Press. 384 p.
60. ↵
    1. Jones TM

    . 2017. International commercial drone regulation and drone delivery services. Santa Monica (CA, USA): RAND Corporation. [Accessed 2021 June 12]. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1718z3.html
61. ↵
    1. Kamilaris A,
    2. Kartakoullis A,
    3. Prenafeta-Boldú FX

    . 2017. A review on the practice of big data analysis in agriculture. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture. 143:23–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2017.09.037

    OpenUrl
62. ↵
    1. Kaspar J,
    2. Kendal D,
    3. Sore R,
    4. Livesley SJ

    . 2017. Random point sampling to detect gain and loss in tree canopy cover in response to urban densification. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 24:26–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.03.013

    OpenUrl
63. ↵
    1. Kattenborn T,
    2. Schmidtlein S

    . 2019. Radiative transfer modelling reveals why canopy reflectance follows function. Scientific Reports. 9:6541. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-43011-1
64. ↵
    1. Kelly AE,
    2. Goulden ML

    . 2008. Rapid shifts in plant distribution with recent climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 105(33):11823–11826. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0802891105

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
65. ↵
    1. Lehmann P,
    2. Ammunét T,
    3. Barton M,
    4. Battisti A,
    5. Eigenbrode SD,
    6. Jepsen JU,
    7. Kalinkat G,
    8. Neuvonen S,
    9. Niemelä P,
    10. Terblanche JS,
    11. Økland B,
    12. Björkman C

    . 2020. Complex responses of global insect pests to climate warming. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 18(3):141–150. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.2160

    OpenUrlCrossRef
66. ↵
    1. Li X

    . 2020. Examining the spatial distribution and temporal change of the green view index in New York City using Google Street View images and deep learning. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science. 48(7):2039–2054. https://doi.org/10.1177/2399808320962511

    OpenUrl
67. ↵
    1. Li X,
    2. Chen WY,
    3. Sanesi G,
    4. Lafortezza R

    . 2019. Remote sensing in urban forestry: Recent applications and future directions. Remote Sensing. 11(10):1144. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11101144

    OpenUrl
68. ↵
    1. Li X,
    2. Zhang C,
    3. Li W,
    4. Ricard R,
    5. Meng Q,
    6. Zhang W

    . 2015. Assessing street-level urban greenery using Google Street View and a modified green view index. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 14(3):675–685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2015.06.006

    OpenUrl
69. ↵
    1. Liu P

    . 2015. A survey of remote-sensing big data. Frontiers in Environmental Science. 3:45. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2015.00045
70. ↵
    1. Malone TW,
    2. Rus D,
    3. Laubacher R

    . 2020. Artificial intelligence and the future of work. Cambridge (MA, USA): Massachusetts Institute of Technology. MIT Work of the Future Research Brief RB17-2020. 39 p. [Accessed 2021 June 4]. https://workofthefuture.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/2020-Research-Brief-Malone-Rus-Laubacher2.pdf
71. ↵
    1. Manoli G,
    2. Fatichi S,
    3. Schläpfer M,
    4. Yu K,
    5. Crowther TW,
    6. Meili N,
    7. Burlando P,
    8. Katul GG,
    9. Bou-Zeid E

    . 2019. Magnitude of urban heat islands largely explained by climate and population. Nature. 573:55–60. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1512-9

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
72. ↵
    1. Martino N,
    2. Girling C,
    3. Lu Y

    . 2021. Urban form and livability: Socioeconomic and built environment indicators. Buildings and Cities. 2(1):220–243. http://doi.org/10.5334/bc.82

    OpenUrl
73. ↵
    1. Masson V,
    2. Lemonsu A,
    3. Hidalgo J,
    4. Voogt J

    . 2020. Urban climates and climate change. Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 45:411–444. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-012320-083623

    OpenUrlCrossRef
74. ↵
    1. Mauri A,
    2. Strona G,
    3. San-Miguel-Ayanz J

    . 2017. EU-Forest, a high-resolution tree occurrence dataset for Europe. Scientific Data. 4:160123. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.123
75. ↵
    1. McPherson EG,
    2. Maco SE,
    3. Simpson JR,
    4. Peper PJ,
    5. Xiao Q,
    6. VanDerZanden AM,
    7. Bell N

    . 2002. Western Washington and Oregon community tree guide: Benefits, costs, and strategic planting. Silverton (OR, USA): International Society of Arboriculture, Pacific Northwest Chapter. 84 p.
76. ↵
    1. McPherson EG,
    2. van Doorn N,
    3. de Goede J

    . 2016. Structure, function and value of street trees in California, USA. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 17:104–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2016.03.013

    OpenUrl
77. ↵
    1. Melillo JM,
    2. Richmond TC,
    3. Yohe GW

    . 2014. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment. Washington (DC, USA): US Global Change Research Program. 841 p. [Accessed 2021 June 2]. https://doi.org/10.7930/J0Z31WJ2
78. ↵
    1. Meunpong P,
    2. Buathong S,
    3. Kaewgrajang T

    . 2019. Google Street View virtual survey and in-person field surveys: An exploratory comparison of urban tree risk assessment. Arboricultural Journal. 41(4):226–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/03071375.2019.1643187

    OpenUrl
79. ↵
    1. Mohajerani A,
    2. Bakaric J,
    3. Jeffrey-Bailey T

    . 2017. The urban heat island effect, its causes, and mitigation, with reference to the thermal properties of asphalt concrete. Journal of Environmental Management. 197:522–538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.03.095

    OpenUrlPubMed
80. ↵
    1. Mohanty SP,
    2. Hughes DP,
    3. Salathé M

    . 2016. Using deep learning for image-based plant disease detection. Frontiers in Plant Science. 7:1419. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2016.01419
81. ↵
    1. Mohney D

    . 2020. Terabytes from space: Satellite imaging is filling data centers. Data Center Frontier. [Accessed 2021 June 1]. https://datacenterfrontier.com/terabytes-from-space-satellite-imaging-is-filling-data-centers
82. ↵
    1. Mühleisen M

    . 2018. The long and short of the digital revolution. Finance & Development. 55(2):4–8.

    OpenUrl
83. ↵
    1. Næss P,
    2. Saglie IL,
    3. Richardson T

    . 2019. Urban sustainability: Is densification sufficient? European Planning Studies. 28(1):146–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2019.1604633

    OpenUrl
84. ↵
    1. Näsi R,
    2. Honkavaara E,
    3. Blomqvist M,
    4. Lyytikäinen-Saarenmaa P,
    5. Hakala T,
    6. Viljanen N,
    7. Kantola T,
    8. Holopainen M

    . 2018. Remote sensing of bark beetle damage in urban forests at individual tree level using a novel hyperspectral camera from UAV and aircraft. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 30:72–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2018.01.010

    OpenUrl
85. ↵
    1. Ndung’u N,
    2. Signé L

    . 2020. The Fourth Industrial Revolution and digitization will transform Africa into a global powerhouse. In: Foresight Africa: Top priorities for the continent 2020–2030. Washington (DC, USA): Brookings Institution, Africa Growth Initiative. p. 61–66. [Accessed 2021 June 4]. https://www.brookings.edu/multi-chapter-report/foresight-africa-top-priorities-for-the-continent-in-2020
86. ↵
    1. Nitoslawski SA,
    2. Galle NJ,
    3. Konijnendijk van den Bosch C,
    4. Steenberg JWN

    . 2019. Smarter ecosystems for smarter cities? A review of trends, technologies, and turning points for smart urban forestry. Sustainable Cities and Society. 51:101770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101770
87. ↵
    1. Nowak DJ,
    2. Greenfield EJ

    . 2020. The increase of impervious cover and decrease of tree cover within urban areas globally (2012–2017). Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 49:126638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126638
88. ↵
    1. Nowak DJ,
    2. Hirabayashi S,
    3. Bodine A,
    4. Greenfield E

    . 2014. Tree and forest effects on air quality and human health in the United States. Environmental Pollution. 193:119–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2014.05.028

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
89. ↵
    1. Onukwugha E

    . 2016. Big data and its role in health economics and outcomes research: A collection of perspectives on data sources, measurement, and analysis. PharmacoEconomics. 34:91–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-015-0378-4

    OpenUrlPubMed
90. ↵
    1. Ordóñez C,
    2. Duinker PN

    . 2014. Assessing the vulnerability of urban forests to climate change. Environmental Reviews. 22(3):311–321. https://doi.org/10.1139/er-2013-0078

    OpenUrl
91. ↵
    1. Ozkan UY,
    2. Demirel T,
    3. Ozdemir I,
    4. Saglam S,
    5. Mert A

    . 2020. Examining LiDAR—WorldView-3 data synergy to generate a detailed stand map in a mixed forest in the north-west of Turkey. Advances in Space Research. 65(11):2608–2621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2020.02.020

    OpenUrl
92. ↵
    1. Parker DE

    . 2009. Urban heat island effects on estimates of observed climate change. WIREs Climate Change. 1(1):123–133. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.21

    OpenUrl
93. ↵
    1. Parker LE,
    2. Abatzoglou JT

    . 2016. Projected changes in cold hardiness zones and suitable overwinter ranges of perennial crops over the United States. Environmental Research Letters. 11(3):034001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/11/3/034001

    OpenUrl
94. ↵
    1. Phiri D,
    2. Simwanda M,
    3. Salekin S,
    4. Nyirenda V,
    5. Murayama Y,
    6. Ranagalage M

    . 2020. Sentinel-2 data for land cover/use mapping: A review. Remote Sensing. 12(14):2291. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12142291

    OpenUrl
95. ↵
    1. PlanIT Geo

    . 2021. Treeplotter™ Canopy Software. Arvada (CO, USA): PlanIT Geo. [Accessed 2021 June 9]. https://planitgeo.com/treeplotter-canopy
96. ↵
    1. Poland T,
    2. McCullough D

    . 2006. Emerald ash borer: Invasion of the urban forest and the threat to North America’s ash resource. Journal of Forestry. 104(3):118–124. https://doi.org/10.1093/jof/104.3.118

    OpenUrlWeb of Science
97. ↵
    1. QGIS

    . 2021. QGIS: A Free and Open Source Geographic Information System. [Accessed 2021 June 11]. https://www.qgis.org/en/site
98. ↵
    1. R Foundation

    . 2021. What is R? [Accessed 2021 June 11]. https://www.r-project.org/about.html
99. ↵
    1. Roman LA,
    2. McPherson EG,
    3. Scharenbroch BC,
    4. Bartens J

    . 2013. Identifying common practices and challenges for local urban tree monitoring programs across the United States. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry. 39(6):292–299. https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.2013.038

    OpenUrl
100. ↵
     1. Rouse DC,
     2. Henaghan J,
     3. Coyner K,
     4. Nisenson L,
     5. Jordan J

     . 2018. Preparing communities for autonomous vehicles. Chicago (IL, USA): American Planning Association. 44 p. [Accessed 2021 May 29]. https://planning-org-uploaded-media.s3.amazonaws.com/document/Autonomous-Vehicles-Symposium-Report.pdf
101. ↵
     1. Roy BA,
     2. Alexander HM,
     3. Davidson J,
     4. Campbell FT,
     5. Burdon JJ,
     6. Sniezko R,
     7. Brasier C

     . 2014. Increasing forest loss worldwide from invasive pests requires new trade regulations. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 12(8):457–465. https://doi.org/10.1890/130240

     OpenUrl
102. ↵
     1. Safford H,
     2. Larry E,
     3. McPherson EG,
     4. Nowak DJ,
     5. Westphal LM

     . 2013. Urban forests and climate change. Washington (DC, USA): USDA Forest Service, Climate Change Resource Center. [Accessed 2021 May 31]. www.fs.usda.gov/ccrc/topics/urban-forests
103. ↵
     1. Satellite Imaging Corporation

     . 2021. Satellite Images for Environmental Monitoring. Houston (TX, USA): Satellite Imaging Corporation. [Accessed 2021 June 3]. https://www.satimagingcorp.com/applications/environmental-impact-studies
104. ↵
     1. Schewe J

     . 2020. Unwomanned systems in wetland delineations. Civil + Structural Engineer. 6:12. [Accessed 2021 June 11]. https://csengineermag.com/unwomanned-systems-in-wetland-delineations
105. ↵
     1. Schlemmer M,
     2. Gitelson A,
     3. Schepers J,
     4. Ferguson R,
     5. Peng Y,
     6. Shanahan J,
     7. Rundquist D

     . 2013. Remote estimation of nitrogen and chlorophyll contents in maize at leaf and canopy levels. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation. 25:47–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2013.04.003

     OpenUrlCrossRef
106. ↵
     1. Schwab K

     . 2016. The Fourth Industrial Revolution: What it means, how to respond. New York (NY, USA): World Economic Forum. [Accessed 2021 June 4]. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/the-fourth-industrial-revolution-what-it-means-and-how-to-respond
107. ↵
     1. Scranton K,
     2. Amarasekare P

     . 2017. Predicting phenological shifts in a changing climate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 114(50):13212–13217. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1711221114

     OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
108. ↵
     1. Segarra J,
     2. Buchaillot ML,
     3. Araus JL,
     4. Kefauver SC

     . 2020. Remote sensing for precision agriculture: Sentinel-2 improved features and applications. Agronomy. 10(5):641. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10050641

     OpenUrl
109. ↵
     1. Shojanoori R,
     2. Shafri H

     . 2016. Review on the use of remote sensing for urban forest monitoring. Arboriculture & Urban Forestry. 42(6):400–417. https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.2016.034

     OpenUrl
110. ↵
     1. Stagge JH,
     2. Kingston DG,
     3. Tallaksen LM,
     4. Hannah DM

     . 2017. Observed drought indices show increasing divergence across Europe. Scientific Reports. 7:14045. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-14283-2
111. ↵
     1. Staley DC,
     2. Haynie T,
     3. Anderson L

     . 2019 March 20. Final report: Spectral data analysis and applications for the urban forest of the city and county of Denver for the field season of 2018. Carmel (CA, USA): Arbor Drone LLC. https://arbordrone.net/s/Denver-EAB18-Final-Report-with-Appendices-WEB.pdf
112. ↵
     1. Stankevich SA,
     2. Lubskyi MS,
     3. Forgac A

     . 2019. Thermal infrared satellite imagery resolution enhancement with fuzzy logic bandpass filtering. 2019 International Conference on Information and Digital Technologies (IDT); 2019 June 25–27; Zilina, Slovakia. Piscataway (NJ, USA): Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. p. 428–432. https://doi.org/10.1109/DT.2019.8813438
113. ↵
     1. Stone P,
     2. Brooks R,
     3. Brynjolfsson E,
     4. Calo R,
     5. Etzioni O,
     6. Hager G,
     7. Hirschberg J,
     8. Kalyanakrishnan S,
     9. Kamar E,
     10. Kraus S,
     11. Leyton-Brown K,
     12. Parkes D,
     13. Press W,
     14. Saxenian A,
     15. Shah J,
     16. Tambe M,
     17. Teller A

     . 2016. Artificial intelligence and life in 2030. One hundred year study on artificial intelligence: Report of the 2015-2016 study panel. Stanford (CA, USA): Stanford University. [Accessed 2021 August 2]. http://ai100.stanford.edu/2016-report
114. ↵
     1. Thenkabail PS,
     2. Lyon JG,
     3. Huete A

     . 2018. Hyperspectral indices and image classifications for agriculture and vegetation. Boca Raton (FL, USA): CRC Press. 332 p. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315159331
115. ↵
     1. The Park People

     . 2021. What We Do. Denver (CO, USA): The Park People. [Accessed 2021 June 4]. https://theparkpeople.org/What-We-Do/Intro
116. ↵
     1. Tigges J,
     2. Lakes T

     . 2017. High resolution remote sensing for reducing uncertainties in urban forest carbon offset life cycle assessments. Carbon Balance and Management. 12:17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13021-017-0085-x
117. ↵
     1. Trimble Geospatial

     . 2020. Ecobot’s wetland delineation app gains speed with Trimble’s mapping & GIS partner program. Sunnyvale (CA, USA): Trimble, Inc. [Accessed 2021 June 4]. https://geospatial.trimble.com/blog/ecobots-wetland-delineation-app-gains-speed-trimbles-mapping-gis-partner-program
118. ↵
     1. United Nations Data Revolution Group

     . 2014. A world that counts: Mobilising the data revolution for sustainable development. Independent Expert Advisory Group Secretariat. [Accessed 2021 June 4]. https://www.undatarevolution.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/A-World-That-Counts.pdf
119. ↵
     1. Urban JM

     . 2020. Perspective: Shedding light on spotted lanternfly impacts in the USA. Pest Management Science. 76(1):10–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.5619

     OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
120. ↵
     1. Visser ME,
     2. Both C

     . 2005. Shifts in phenology due to global climate change: The need for a yardstick. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 272(1581):2561–2569. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2005.3356

     OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
121. ↵
     1. Werner D

     . 2019. Planet to offer higher resolution, more spectral bands. Space News. [Accessed 2021 June 3]. https://spacenews.com/planet-superdoves
122. ↵
     1. Wong NH,
     2. Tan CL,
     3. Kolokotsa DD,
     4. Takebayashi H

     . 2021. Greenery as a mitigation and adaptation strategy to urban heat. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment. 2:166–181. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-020-00129-5

     OpenUrl
123. ↵
     1. Woodall CW,
     2. Oswalt CM,
     3. Westfall JA,
     4. Perry CH,
     5. Nelson MD,
     6. Finley AO

     . 2010. Selecting tree species for testing climate change migration hypotheses using forest inventory data. Forest Ecology and Management. 259(4):778–785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2009.07.022

     OpenUrl
124. ↵
     1. Zhang B,
     2. Brack CL

     . 2021. Urban forest responses to climate change: A case study in Canberra. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 57:126910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126910