Income

• In Chicago, tree canopy has been found to be highest in neighborhoods where incomes are 3 to 4 times higher than the regional average.Iverson, L. R. & Cook, E. A. (2000). Urban forest cover of the Chicago region and its relation to household density and income. Urban Ecosystems, 4 (2), 105–124.

Education Levels

• A study of urban areas in Central Indiana showed that areas with lower levels of education also had lower amounts of canopy cover, while the areas with the highest levels of education had significantly more tree cover.Heynen, N. & Lindsey, G. (2003). Correlates of urban forest canopy cover: Implications for local public works. Public Works Management & Policy, 8 (1), 33–47.

Ethnicity

• In Miami, 71% of white people own their home versus renting, whereas 58% of black people and 61% of Hispanics own their home. The areas with higher home ownership saw more tree coverage.Flocks, J., Escobedo, F., Wade, J., Varela, S., & Wald, C. (2011). Environmental justice implications of urban tree cover in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Environmental Justice, 4 (2), 125–134.

 Historical Roots

• These relationships have historical roots, as tree cover that exists today was created by people living many decades ago. A study in Baltimore showed that socioeconomic characteristics from the 1960s predict today’s vegetation cover in residential neighborhoods.Boone, Christopher G.; Cadenasso, Mary L.; Grove, J. Morgan; Schwarz, Kirsten; Buckley, Geoffrey L. 2010. Landscape, vegetation characteristics, and group identity in an urban and suburban watershed: why the 60s matter. Urban Ecosystem. 13: 255-271.

Nonconforming Cities

• Not all cities follow this pattern. In Baltimore, proximity of black populations to parks reflects legacies of formal and informal segregation, while natural afforestation on vacant lands can be a sign of neglect rather than wealth.

Alexbhill.orgOsborn and Palmer Woods, one of Detroit’s most violent and one of Detroit’s wealthiest neighborhoods.