Ítem
Solo Metadatos

Appraisal of urban trees using twelve valuation formulas and two appraiser groups

Mostrar el registro sencillo de la publicación
dc.creatorPonce-Donoso M.spa
dc.creatorVallejos-Barra Ó.spa
dc.creatorEscobedo F.J.spa
dc.date.accessioned2020-05-25T23:57:41Z
dc.date.available2020-05-25T23:57:41Z
dc.date.created2017spa
dc.description.abstractMonetary valuation using urban tree appraisals can be performed with formulas, a common practice in many countries. This study compares twelve parametric type formulas: Amenity Valuation of Tree and Woodlands (Helliwell), Standard Tree Evaluation Method (STEM), French Method, Italian Method, Tedesco, Norma Granada, Trunk Replacement Formula (CTLA), Burnley Method, Danish Method, Swiss Method, and two Chilean formulas used in Municipalities of Concepción, La Pintana, and Maipú (COPIMA Method), and Peñalolén Method. Formulas were then applied to 30 trees located in Santiago, Talca and Concepción, Chile. Researchers used eight appraisers divided into two groups, according to senior-level and junior-level experience. Statistical differences were determined using the Kruskal-Wallis test of non-parametric variance, while Fisher's least significant difference test was used to identify homogeneous groups. The results show a wide dispersion of values that were high for 'emblematic' trees and low for young or low-vigor trees. Formula, type of appraisers, and inter-appraiser differences formed nine, two, and three groups, respectively. The lowest-appraised trees were obtained using the Danish and French Method, while the highest values were obtained with the Burnley, Helliwell, and STEM formulas. Although there were differences in tree value according to the type of appraiser, when comparing difference among appraisers, researchers found these were not due to experience level. Given the wide range of values found, the study authors cannot recommend any specific formula(s) for assessing urban trees, as results will depend on the variables of interest used in the formulas and their intended application and use. © 2017 International Society of Arboriculture.eng
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.issn19355297
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.urosario.edu.co/handle/10336/22722
dc.language.isoengspa
dc.publisherInternational Society of Arboriculturespa
dc.relation.citationEndPage82
dc.relation.citationIssueNo. 2
dc.relation.citationStartPage72
dc.relation.citationTitleArboriculture and Urban Forestry
dc.relation.citationVolumeVol. 43
dc.relation.ispartofArboriculture and Urban Forestry, ISSN:19355297, Vol.43, No.2 (2017); pp. 72-82spa
dc.relation.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85016200744&partnerID=40&md5=557db98db1c950d6bee29a13f93819acspa
dc.rights.accesRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.accesoAbierto (Texto Completo)spa
dc.source.instnameinstname:Universidad del Rosariospa
dc.source.reponamereponame:Repositorio Institucional EdocURspa
dc.subject.keywordForest inventoryspa
dc.subject.keywordParameterizationspa
dc.subject.keywordTreespa
dc.subject.keywordUrban forestryspa
dc.subject.keywordValuationspa
dc.subject.keywordBio biospa
dc.subject.keywordChilespa
dc.subject.keywordConcepcion [bio bio]spa
dc.subject.keywordMaulespa
dc.subject.keywordMetropolitanaspa
dc.subject.keywordSantiago [metropolitana]spa
dc.subject.keywordTalcaspa
dc.subject.keywordArboriculturespa
dc.subject.keywordParametric formulasspa
dc.subject.keywordTree assessmentspa
dc.subject.keywordTree valuationspa
dc.subject.keywordUrban forest benefitsspa
dc.titleAppraisal of urban trees using twelve valuation formulas and two appraiser groupsspa
dc.typearticleeng
dc.type.hasVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.spaArtículospa
Archivos
Colecciones
Artículos