The face of the future: the United States and Sweden share the same goals for the environment. We can learn from each other's means of getting there - Perspectives

American Forests, Wntr, 2003 by Cheryl Kollin

Flying into Stockholm, Sweden, I could see why it's called a green and blue city. Where Lake Malaren meets the Baltic Sea lies a beautiful and spacious city filled with green space. Built across 14 islands, Stockholm gained its well-deserved reputation for forward-thinking urban planning beginning in the 1930s when it sought to adapt its buildings to its landscape. The resulting green infrastructure of parks, natural areas, community gardens, lakes and waterways, treed residential areas, and undeveloped land account for 47 percent of this city of 83 square miles and 750,000 people.

I had been invited to Stockholm for an information exchange on urban ecosystems while speaking at a greenways conference in St. Petersburg, Russia, part of the U.S. State Department's Sustainable Development speaker's project. I explained the urban ecosystem analysis work AMERICAN FORESTS is doing throughout the U.S. to urban planners in Stockholm and also in Copenhagen and Tallin, and learned about their unique sustainable development efforts.

I was particularly curious to see how Sweden, a socialistic country plans and protects its urban forests and how Swedish attitudes, policies, planning, and design differ from ours. I found similar environmental goals but uniquely different methods of coping with dwindling tree cover while contending with growth pressures and the urban ills of traffic congestion, air and water pollution, diminishing open space, and city dwellers who are increasingly less connected to nature.

LIFEBLOOD OF A CITY

In the early 20th century, Stockholm's city fathers bought forestland outside the city limits both for future expansion and for recreation. These green wedges of land and water started well outside the city and narrowed as they grew closer, separated by transportation routes radiating out from Stockholm. Many cities throughout Europe have these designated greenbelts, areas dedicated to recreational and ecological use.

More than 90 percent of Stockholmers use city parks and natural areas during the year, 45 percent on a weekly basis. In fact, outdoor recreation is considered "a fundamental and inalienable right." No matter where you live in Stockholm, you're no more than a half-mile from a park of at least 12 acres, designed with safe and convenient access.

Fortunately for Stockholmers, with so much lush green space, their parks offer much more than just recreation. Water filters through trees, vegetation, and soil before slowly seeping into the ground, allowing it to enter streams with fewer pollutants. In new construction projects, landscape architect Clas Florgard told me, Sweden foregoes specific regulations for stormwater management to allow room for innovative ideas--but makes developers liable for any damages that result.

Regardless of where they live, most city dwellers the world over appreciate the beauty of green space, although many don't recognize its ecological value or the threat from urban growth. As director of urban forestry for AMERICAN FORESTS' Urban Forest Center, I'm working to help change that mindset.

In Salem, Oregon, for example, city officials built public support for urban subwatersheds by explaining their benefits on the municipal website. AMERICAN FORESTS created a "green data layer" for Salem that distinguishes tree cover from impervious surfaces and quantifies the benefits of their green infrastructure. City planners will use this information to determine the effectiveness of their tree-related programs and set thresholds for tree preservation and replanting. Planners envision using this layer of data to make decisions on streamside setbacks, riparian corridor protections, and other natural resource planning.

TWO COUNTRIES, TWO APPROACHES

Americans take a very capitalistic approach to green space, one driven by economics and the bottom line. Because city managers and decisionmakers always want to know cost and value, AMERICAN FORESTS developed its CITYgreen software to allow local communities to calculate the ecological and economic value of green infrastructure. The green layer that's created fits seamlessly into local governments' GIS data. Planners and urban foresters throughout the U.S. use this so they can apply the information to local issues.

Swedes, on the other hand, emphasize green structures' ability to provide outdoor recreation and contribute to physical and mental well-being. There is a traditional acceptance of the social and health values reaped from easily accessible recreational areas, and citizens are taxed to provide for outdoor recreation along with their other social programs: education, health care, and retirement.

While we might envy their altruistic efforts, my Swedish colleagues were green-eyed at the role our nonprofits (called nongovernmental organizations or NGOs) play in advocating environmental policies and action. Unlike the U.S., where nonprofits and special interest groups drive change, Sweden's NGO's function primarily as information sources, with national priorities driven by the socialistic government.