Search

Global enthusiasm for nature in cities is at high point. Australia is no exception, where there is a great deal of policy momentum and research interest in urban greening. The challenges presented by increasing urban heat associated with climate change, greater awareness of the potential social, physical and psychological benefits of exposure to ecologies for people, and recognition of cities as vital habitats for more-than-humans are central tenants of urban greening enthusiasm. Yet, there is a need for a more critical lens on urban greening in Australia. One that interrogates the purported normative, apolitical and instrumental benefits of greening, to position greening within a trajectory of the power relations, settler-colonialism, socio-ecological processes and capital flows that constitute the urban. This editorial introducing the special issue on urban greening politics explores how different conceptions of urban natures – green space, urban forestry and green infrastructure – have been put to work, before outlining the potential of 'urban greening' as the terminology for a more politically sensitive and process-orientated framing. The editorial concludes with a summary of the contributions to the special issue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Urban greening is about bringing vegetation into cities in ways that produce flourishing urban ecologies whilst also making cities more liveable for human inhabitants. We focus here on greening that is done through the maintenance or establishment of gardens, parks, urban forests and informal spaces. We argue that in contexts with established property law systems, such as Australia, making urban ecologies through greening is shaped heavily by relations of property tied to land. This includes constraining the extent to which urban greening can contribute to socio-ecologically just cities. We suggest that progressing greening that is more attentive to the geographies and temporalities of more-than-human life requires us to trouble the hold of property over greening. To do this we explore the possibilities opened up by the lens of urban commons/commoning. We engage with the emerging concept of more-than-human commoning as a way of attuning urban greening to nonhuman agency and affordances. We also grapple with the risk of obscuring or concealing difference between humans in the way commoning makes room for more-than-humans, especially in the context of settler-colonialism. We conclude by calling for a more overt politics of urban greening that encompasses diverse human and more-than-human experiences of the city. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social capital has the potential to influence the success of biodiverse carbon plantings in the face of uncertainty amongst rural landholders about the need or efficacy of efforts to address climate change through tree planting. We conducted 17 face-to-face semi-structured interviews with landholders in Victoria, Australia who voluntarily participate in biodiverse carbon plantings on their land, focusing in particular on the role of social capital for understanding how ‘early adopters' can advocate for programs locally. The interviews revealed the importance of social networks and the profound impact of trusted peers on the diffusion of carbon planting schemes. These social capital dimensions are especially important for shapingongoing participationand the ways in which participants become active agents in trusted relationships that influence the participation of others. Our results suggest that the positive impact of social networks can counteract doubts about the validity of climate adaptation responses such as carbon planting, and enable landholders to connect the program with their existing stewardship motivations. The ability for early adopters of the program todemonstratethe physical materialisation of their plantings to others was vital to this process. We propose that targeting champions and trusted peers in local communities could accelerate the proliferation of biodiverse carbon planting schemes. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]