Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
Modelling features of the Green Urban Scenarios (GUS) framework representing an urban forest as a complex system. Adopted from a complex systems science perspective (Newman 2011). The figure highlights the role of location-specific conditions on the growth of trees, the impact of externalities such as pollutants from neighbouring industries, the heterogeneity among trees, and the variance in growth trajectories of an individual tree versus the tree population as a whole.
- Figure 2.
Change model in complexity that combines science, practice, and policy adopted from Cynefin framework (Snowden 2000) as an overarching methodology for Green Urban Scenarios framework. The figure depicts how data collection is connected to digital twin representation and scenario analysis with designated parameters, which in return may inform practitioners or policymakers to allocate financial and other resources for creating and maintaining urban forests.
- Figure 3.
Green Urban Scenarios (GUS) framework architecture diagram.
- Figure 4.
ABM diagram: the state graph showing the agents’ interactions, decision-making, and adaptation processes.
- Figure 5.
Precipitation-evaporation dynamic. Panels (a) to (c) depict stages, and panel (d) presents a hypothetical baseline on the process of water run-off in the absence of trees.
- Figure 6.
Results from maintenance scenarios.
- Figure 7.
Results from species-related experiments.
- Figure 8.
Model dynamics and emergence.
- Figure 9.
Potential sources of errors or uncertainties.
Tables
- Table 1.
Validation: water impact of European ash (Fraxinus excelsior). The table shows the output for several selected trees, while the entire table includes 109 trees provided by the i-Tree report. In addition, Δ(PET)i = PET(i-Tree)i – PET(GUS)i is calculated, taking into account all 109 trees, and the following results are obtained: Δ(PET)mean = −0.195, Δ(PET)median = 0.181, along with f-test statistics = −1.301 and P-value = 0.196, not rejecting the null hypothesis Δ(PET) = 0. PET (potential evapotranspiration); DBH (diameter at breast height); BAI (bark area index); LAI (leaf area index); PAI (plant area index).
Plot ID Leaf area (m2) DBH (cm) Height (m) Crown width (m) Under-canopy area (m2) BAI LAI PAI PET (m3/yr) − i-Tree PET (m3/yr) − GUS 131 36 2.4 8.5 10.0 1.0 0.8 2.7 3.1 5.8 0.1 0.1 198 26 2.0 7.0 11.5 1.0 0.8 2.4 2.5 4.9 0.1 0.1 37 1 9.1 7.5 6.0 2.0 3.1 0.2 2.9 3.0 0.3 0.4 ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ 198 20 131.8 19.5 14.0 6.0 28.3 0.1 4.7 4.8 4.1 4.0 131 74 12.2 8.8 10.0 2.0 3.1 0.4 3.9 4.2 0.4 0.4 11 3 116.4 16.6 10.0 6.0 28.3 0.1 4.1 4.2 3.7 3.7
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- No citing articles found.