Investigation of the effect of green areas on urban air quality in a park in Erzurum with I-Tree Canopy
,
Abstract
Introduction: Urbanization, accelerated by the Industrial Revolution, has led to dense construction and a reduction in green areas. It is well-established that diminishing green spaces in cities contribute to declining air quality levels. Poor air quality poses one of the most significant direct threats to human health in urban environments. Increasing the presence of trees key components of ecosystems known for their role in mitigating air pollution can address this issue by reducing air pollution through particulate matter absorption and filtration, mitigating the urban heat island effect, regulating ozone levels, storing carbon, and improving airflow and distribution.
Materials and methods: This study calculated the economic benefits of green spaces by assessing the land cover distribution and carbon sequestration capacity of tree canopy cover in the 100th-Year National Garden, located in Erzurum, Turkey, using the i-Tree Canopy application. The v7.1 version of the i-Tree Canopy software was employed for this purpose.
Results: Results revealed that 0.13 ha of the area consisted of soil or bare ground, while 1.11 ha were covered by trees and shrubs. The study estimated that 398.23 kg of particulate matter were removed from the area, with a crown cover of 34.57%. The economic benefit derived from the trees’ contributions was valued at 185 U.S dollars.
Conclusion: Consequently, the i-Tree Canopy application, a freely available tool, is considered a valuable resource for broader applications, offering benefits for air quality improvement strategies in urban areas.
1. EEA. Air Quality in Europe. https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/air-quality-in-europe-2020-report 2020 (Access date: 10 September 2024).
2. Pace R, Guidolotti G, Baldacchini C, Pallozzi E, Grote R, Nowak D J, et al. Comparing I-Tree eco estimates of particulate matter deposition with leaf and canopy measurements in an urban mediterranean holm oak forest. Environmental Science & Technology. 2021; 55(10): 6613–6622. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c07679.
3. EPA. https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-national-summary. 2025; (Access date:16 March 2025)
4. Çiçek İ, Türkoğlu N, Gürgen G. Ankara’da hava kirliliğinin istatistiksel analizi. Fırat University Journal of Social Sciences. 2004; 14 (2): 1-18.
5. Tonyaloğlu, E, Atak BK. Impact of land cover change on urban tree cover and potential regulating ecosystem services: The case of Aydın/Turkey. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 2001; 193(11): 1–9
6. Ventera SZ, Hassanib A, Stangea E, Schneiderb P, Castellb N. Reassessing the role of urban green space in air pollution control . Envıronmental Scıences Earth, Atmospherıc, And Planetary Scıences. 2024; 121 (6): e2306200121.
7. Sharma R, Bakshi B.R, Ramteke, M, Kodamana H. Quantifying ecosystem services from trees by using i-tree with low-resolution satellite images. Ecosystem Services Journal. 2024; 67: 101611.
8. Gül A, Tuğluer M, Akkuş F.G. Urban street trees inventory and determination of carbon sequestration capacity. Turkish Journal of Forest Science. 2018; 5(2): 516-535.
9. Riondato E, Pilla F, Basu A.S, Basu, B. Investigating the effect of trees on urban quality in Dublin by combining air monitoring with i-Tree Eco model. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2020; 61: 102356.
10. Schwarz K, Fragkias M, Boone CG, Zhou W, McHale M, Grove JM, et al. Trees grow on Money: urban tree canopy cover and environmental justice. PLoS One. 2015; DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0122051.
11. Kaspar J, Kendal R, Sore S, Random L. Random point sampling to detect gain and loss in tree canopy cover in response to urban densification. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 2017; 24: 26-34.
12. Ghorbankhani Z, Zarrabi MM, Ghorbankhani M. The significance and benefits of green infrastructures using I-Tree canopy software with a sustainable approach. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 2024; 26: 14893–14913.
13. Nowak DJ, Hirabayash S, Bodine A, Greenfield E. Tree and forest effects on air quality and human health in the United States. Environmental PollutionVolume. 2014; 193: 119-129.
14. Kesgin B, Nurlu, E. Land Cover Changes on the Coastal Zone of Candarli Bay, Turkey Using Remotely Sensed Data. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 2009; 157: 89-96.
15. Myeong S, Nowak DJ, Duggin MJ. A Temporal Analysis of Urban Forest Carbon Storage Using Remote Sensing. Remote Sensing of Environment. 2006; 101(2): 277-282.
16. Atak BK, Erdogan N, Ersoy E, Nurlu E. Analysing the Spatial Urban Growth Pattern by Using Logistic Regression in Didim District. Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology 2014; 15(4): 1866-1876.
17. Blackman R, Yuan F. Detecting Long-term Urban Forest Cover Change and Impacts of Natural Disasters Using High-resolution Aerial Images and LIDAR Data. Remote Sensing. 2020; 12(11): 1820.
18. Nowak DJ. Understanding i-Tree: 2021 summary of programs and methods. General Technical Report NRS-200-2021. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station. 2021; https://doi.org/10.2737/NRS-GTR-200-2021.
19. Selim S, Dönmez B, Kılçık A. Determination of the optimum number of sample points to classify land cover types and estimate the contribution of trees on ecosystem services using the I-Tree Canopy tool. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. 2022; 19: 565-852.
20. Doğan D, Zengin M, Özdede S, Yılmaz F.Ç. Determining the Qualification of Green Areas in Urban Areas and Their Contributions to Air Quality with I-Tree Canopy the Case of Denizli Central County and City Centre. Turkish Journal of Agriculture-Food Science and Technology. 2023; 11(11): 2146-2154.
21. I-Tree. Legacy Tools. Online; 2024 [https://www.itreetools.org/tools/legacy-tools].
22. Körmeçli PŞ. Evaluation of the air pollution reducing effect by urban parks: The case of Altınpark, Ankara. Artvin Coruh University Journal of Forestry Faculty. 2023; 24 (2): 23-30.
23. Lindgren BW, McElrath GW. Introduction to Probability and Statistics. Macmillan, London, U.K. 1969.
24. Omodior O, Eze P, Anderson K R. Using i-Tree Canopy vegetation cover subtype classification to predict peri-domestic tick presence. Ticks and Tick-borne Diseases. 2021; 12(3): 101684.
25. Jacobs B, Mikhailovich N, Delaney C. Benchmarking Australia's urban tree canopy: An i-Tree assessment. Institute for Sustainable Futures. 2014.
26. Tonyaloğlu E, Atak BK. Impact of land cover change on urban tree cover and potential regulating ecosystem services: The case of Aydın/Turkey. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 2021: 193(11),1–9.
27. Hepcan ÇC, Hepcan Ş. Assessing Air Quality Improvement as a Regulating Ecosystem Service in the Ege University Housing Campus. Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Ege University. 2017;54(1):113-120. https://doi.org/10.20289/zfdergi.299257
28. LeBrasseur R. Linking human wellbeing and urban greenspaces: Applying the SoftGIS tool for analyzing human wellbeing interaction in Helsinki, Finland. Frontiers in Environmental Science.2022; Vol. 10.
29. Nowak DJ, Crane DE, Stevens JC. Air pollution removal by urban trees and shrubs in the United States. Urban For. Urban Green. 2006; 4: 115e123.
30. McDonald AG, Bealey WJ, Fowler D, Dragosits U, Skiba U. Smith RI, Nemitz E. Quantifying the effect of urban tree planting on concentrations and depositions of PM10 in two UK conurbations. Atmosfer Environment. 2007; 41 (38): 8455-8467.
31. Tiwary A, Sinnett D, Peachey C, Chalabi Z, Vardoulakis S, Fletcher T, Leonardi G, Grundy C, Azapagic A, Hutchings TR. An integrated tool to assess the role of new planting in PM10 capture and the human health benefits: a case study in London. Environ. Pollution. 2009; 157: 2645–2653.
32. Tallis Tallis M, Taylor G, Sinnett D, Freer-Smith P. Estimating the removal of atmospheric particulate pollution by the urban tree canopy of London, under current and future environments. Landscape Urban Plann. 2011; 103, 129–138.
33. Nowak DJ, Hirabayashi S, Bodine A, Hoehn R. Modeled PM2.5 removal by trees in ten U.S. cities and associated health effects. Environ. Pollution. 2013; 178: 395e402.
34. Anderson V, Gough WA. Nature-Based Resilience: A Multi-Type Evaluation of Productive Green Infrastructure in Agricultural Settings in Ontario. Canada. Atmosphere. 2021;12(9):1183. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12091183
35. Tian Y. Climate Action-Salt Lake City. MUP Capstone. 2021.
36. Baró F, Chaparro L, Gómez-Baggethun E, Langemeyer J, Nowak D, Terradas J. Contribution of ecosystem services to air quality and climate change mitigation policies: The case of urban forests in Barcelona, Spain. AMBIO. 2014; 43: 466–479.
37. Jayasooriya VA, Muthukumaran S, Perera B. Green infrastructure practices for improvement of urban air quality. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 2017; 21: 34–47.
38. Selmi W, Weber C, Rivière E, Blond N, Mehdi L, Nowak D. Air pollution removal by trees in public green spaces in Strasbourg city, France. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 2016; 17, 192–201.
39. Nowak DJ, Hoehn R, Crane DE, Stevens JC, Walton JT. Assessing Urban Forest Effects and Values: Washington D.C.'s Urban Forest. USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station Resource Bulletin NRS-1. Newtown Square, PA. 2006; 24 p.
40. Wu J, Wang Y, Qiu S. Using the modified i-Tree Eco model to quantify air pollution removal by urban vegetation. Science of The Total Environment. 2019; 688: 673-683.
2. Pace R, Guidolotti G, Baldacchini C, Pallozzi E, Grote R, Nowak D J, et al. Comparing I-Tree eco estimates of particulate matter deposition with leaf and canopy measurements in an urban mediterranean holm oak forest. Environmental Science & Technology. 2021; 55(10): 6613–6622. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c07679.
3. EPA. https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-national-summary. 2025; (Access date:16 March 2025)
4. Çiçek İ, Türkoğlu N, Gürgen G. Ankara’da hava kirliliğinin istatistiksel analizi. Fırat University Journal of Social Sciences. 2004; 14 (2): 1-18.
5. Tonyaloğlu, E, Atak BK. Impact of land cover change on urban tree cover and potential regulating ecosystem services: The case of Aydın/Turkey. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 2001; 193(11): 1–9
6. Ventera SZ, Hassanib A, Stangea E, Schneiderb P, Castellb N. Reassessing the role of urban green space in air pollution control . Envıronmental Scıences Earth, Atmospherıc, And Planetary Scıences. 2024; 121 (6): e2306200121.
7. Sharma R, Bakshi B.R, Ramteke, M, Kodamana H. Quantifying ecosystem services from trees by using i-tree with low-resolution satellite images. Ecosystem Services Journal. 2024; 67: 101611.
8. Gül A, Tuğluer M, Akkuş F.G. Urban street trees inventory and determination of carbon sequestration capacity. Turkish Journal of Forest Science. 2018; 5(2): 516-535.
9. Riondato E, Pilla F, Basu A.S, Basu, B. Investigating the effect of trees on urban quality in Dublin by combining air monitoring with i-Tree Eco model. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2020; 61: 102356.
10. Schwarz K, Fragkias M, Boone CG, Zhou W, McHale M, Grove JM, et al. Trees grow on Money: urban tree canopy cover and environmental justice. PLoS One. 2015; DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0122051.
11. Kaspar J, Kendal R, Sore S, Random L. Random point sampling to detect gain and loss in tree canopy cover in response to urban densification. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 2017; 24: 26-34.
12. Ghorbankhani Z, Zarrabi MM, Ghorbankhani M. The significance and benefits of green infrastructures using I-Tree canopy software with a sustainable approach. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 2024; 26: 14893–14913.
13. Nowak DJ, Hirabayash S, Bodine A, Greenfield E. Tree and forest effects on air quality and human health in the United States. Environmental PollutionVolume. 2014; 193: 119-129.
14. Kesgin B, Nurlu, E. Land Cover Changes on the Coastal Zone of Candarli Bay, Turkey Using Remotely Sensed Data. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 2009; 157: 89-96.
15. Myeong S, Nowak DJ, Duggin MJ. A Temporal Analysis of Urban Forest Carbon Storage Using Remote Sensing. Remote Sensing of Environment. 2006; 101(2): 277-282.
16. Atak BK, Erdogan N, Ersoy E, Nurlu E. Analysing the Spatial Urban Growth Pattern by Using Logistic Regression in Didim District. Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology 2014; 15(4): 1866-1876.
17. Blackman R, Yuan F. Detecting Long-term Urban Forest Cover Change and Impacts of Natural Disasters Using High-resolution Aerial Images and LIDAR Data. Remote Sensing. 2020; 12(11): 1820.
18. Nowak DJ. Understanding i-Tree: 2021 summary of programs and methods. General Technical Report NRS-200-2021. Madison, WI: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station. 2021; https://doi.org/10.2737/NRS-GTR-200-2021.
19. Selim S, Dönmez B, Kılçık A. Determination of the optimum number of sample points to classify land cover types and estimate the contribution of trees on ecosystem services using the I-Tree Canopy tool. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. 2022; 19: 565-852.
20. Doğan D, Zengin M, Özdede S, Yılmaz F.Ç. Determining the Qualification of Green Areas in Urban Areas and Their Contributions to Air Quality with I-Tree Canopy the Case of Denizli Central County and City Centre. Turkish Journal of Agriculture-Food Science and Technology. 2023; 11(11): 2146-2154.
21. I-Tree. Legacy Tools. Online; 2024 [https://www.itreetools.org/tools/legacy-tools].
22. Körmeçli PŞ. Evaluation of the air pollution reducing effect by urban parks: The case of Altınpark, Ankara. Artvin Coruh University Journal of Forestry Faculty. 2023; 24 (2): 23-30.
23. Lindgren BW, McElrath GW. Introduction to Probability and Statistics. Macmillan, London, U.K. 1969.
24. Omodior O, Eze P, Anderson K R. Using i-Tree Canopy vegetation cover subtype classification to predict peri-domestic tick presence. Ticks and Tick-borne Diseases. 2021; 12(3): 101684.
25. Jacobs B, Mikhailovich N, Delaney C. Benchmarking Australia's urban tree canopy: An i-Tree assessment. Institute for Sustainable Futures. 2014.
26. Tonyaloğlu E, Atak BK. Impact of land cover change on urban tree cover and potential regulating ecosystem services: The case of Aydın/Turkey. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 2021: 193(11),1–9.
27. Hepcan ÇC, Hepcan Ş. Assessing Air Quality Improvement as a Regulating Ecosystem Service in the Ege University Housing Campus. Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Ege University. 2017;54(1):113-120. https://doi.org/10.20289/zfdergi.299257
28. LeBrasseur R. Linking human wellbeing and urban greenspaces: Applying the SoftGIS tool for analyzing human wellbeing interaction in Helsinki, Finland. Frontiers in Environmental Science.2022; Vol. 10.
29. Nowak DJ, Crane DE, Stevens JC. Air pollution removal by urban trees and shrubs in the United States. Urban For. Urban Green. 2006; 4: 115e123.
30. McDonald AG, Bealey WJ, Fowler D, Dragosits U, Skiba U. Smith RI, Nemitz E. Quantifying the effect of urban tree planting on concentrations and depositions of PM10 in two UK conurbations. Atmosfer Environment. 2007; 41 (38): 8455-8467.
31. Tiwary A, Sinnett D, Peachey C, Chalabi Z, Vardoulakis S, Fletcher T, Leonardi G, Grundy C, Azapagic A, Hutchings TR. An integrated tool to assess the role of new planting in PM10 capture and the human health benefits: a case study in London. Environ. Pollution. 2009; 157: 2645–2653.
32. Tallis Tallis M, Taylor G, Sinnett D, Freer-Smith P. Estimating the removal of atmospheric particulate pollution by the urban tree canopy of London, under current and future environments. Landscape Urban Plann. 2011; 103, 129–138.
33. Nowak DJ, Hirabayashi S, Bodine A, Hoehn R. Modeled PM2.5 removal by trees in ten U.S. cities and associated health effects. Environ. Pollution. 2013; 178: 395e402.
34. Anderson V, Gough WA. Nature-Based Resilience: A Multi-Type Evaluation of Productive Green Infrastructure in Agricultural Settings in Ontario. Canada. Atmosphere. 2021;12(9):1183. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos12091183
35. Tian Y. Climate Action-Salt Lake City. MUP Capstone. 2021.
36. Baró F, Chaparro L, Gómez-Baggethun E, Langemeyer J, Nowak D, Terradas J. Contribution of ecosystem services to air quality and climate change mitigation policies: The case of urban forests in Barcelona, Spain. AMBIO. 2014; 43: 466–479.
37. Jayasooriya VA, Muthukumaran S, Perera B. Green infrastructure practices for improvement of urban air quality. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 2017; 21: 34–47.
38. Selmi W, Weber C, Rivière E, Blond N, Mehdi L, Nowak D. Air pollution removal by trees in public green spaces in Strasbourg city, France. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 2016; 17, 192–201.
39. Nowak DJ, Hoehn R, Crane DE, Stevens JC, Walton JT. Assessing Urban Forest Effects and Values: Washington D.C.'s Urban Forest. USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station Resource Bulletin NRS-1. Newtown Square, PA. 2006; 24 p.
40. Wu J, Wang Y, Qiu S. Using the modified i-Tree Eco model to quantify air pollution removal by urban vegetation. Science of The Total Environment. 2019; 688: 673-683.
| Files | ||
| Issue | Vol 10 No 3 (2025): Summer 2025 | |
| Section | Original Research | |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.18502/japh.v10i3.19594 | |
| Keywords | ||
| Air quality; Erzurum; Green spaces; I-Tree canopy | ||
| Rights and permissions | |
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
How to Cite
1.
Esringu A, Karadağ R, Samancı O. Investigation of the effect of green areas on urban air quality in a park in Erzurum with I-Tree Canopy. JAPH. 2025;10(3):329-340.
