Assessing City Greenness using Tree Canopy Cover: The Case of Yogyakarta, Indonesia

Rendy Bayu Aditya, Muhammad Ulul Lizamun Ningam
2021 Geography, Environment, Sustainability  
The study aims to measure the greenness of an Indonesia city using tree canopy cover data. Rapid physical development brings impacts to the loss of urban trees, which leads to the increase of flooding risk, local temperature and pollution level. To address the issues, a baseline assessment of urban tree canopy existence is necessary as inputs for effective urban environmental management policies. The methods used in this research include 1) remote sensing and spatial analysis, and 2) simple
more » ... titative analysis. Furthermore, three indicators are used in assessing the greenness, including 1) size of the canopy, 2) canopy cover percentage, and 3) canopy per capita. The results found that the city of Yogyakarta has a low level of greenness based on the canopy size in which covers only 467.37 ha or 14.38% of the total area. The second finding is Yogyakarta has an unequal distribution of canopy cover percentage in each district (kecamatan). The third finding is Yogyakarta City has a canopy per capita rate of 10.93 sq m/person. This number is below the UN recommendation of 15sq m / person. It indicates that residents have poor access to urban greenery. Additionally, the article discusses that the three indicators used have strength and weakness in measuring the level of greenness. Therefore, the assessment objectives must be taken into account. We recommend the use of each indicator as follows: 1) the canopy size is used as an initial inventory of the existence and distribution of the canopy, 2) the canopy cover percentage canopy percentage for measuring and comparing the level of greenness spatially and visually between areas, 3) the canopy per capita is used to measure the possibility of access and interaction of residents with the presence of a tree canopy. Cities' authority can use the information to measure the achievement of SDGs number 11, 13, or 15.
doi:10.24057/10.24057/2071-9388-2020-196 fatcat:w5cx6urnwvc57ambyq4i3dfzcy