This year again, local leaders gathered their neighbours, built connections, and restored nature in projects big and small. The movement continues to expand, and we're pleased to share just some of these impacts in our 2025 Impact Report.
Ready to rally your crew and make a visible difference in your local park? This guide walks you through everything you need to host a successful community clean-up in Toronto
Discover ways to help you host events in your local parks during extreme heat events.
Explore key findings from five years of the Canadian City Parks Report, highlighting significant trends, issues, and practices shaping urban parks across the country.
A guidance and resources to measure the impact of your park work on community health and wellbeing, integrating a social equity lens.
The 6th Montreal Park People Forum is back on September 17 under the theme “Remembering, Looking Forward, and Taking Action for Urban Parks".
By donating to Park People, you’ll support vibrant parks for everyone.
This case study is part of the 2020 Canadian City Parks Report, showcasing inspiring projects, people, and policies from across Canada that offer tangible solutions to the most pressing challenges facing city parks.
________
With climate change and biodiversity loss increasing stress on ecosystems, engaging residents in urban conservation is more important now than ever.
The question becomes how to reach people in their busy lives, respect traditional knowledge, and bring more people into the conversation about conservation.
In order to reach people, we need to articulate biodiversity in a way that is meaningful for them, said Jennifer Pierce, a biodiversity researcher at the University of British Columbia.
She recommended starting from questions such as “how does biodiversity relate to their lives. To what they value?” This may mean dropping the solely environmentally focused arguments and connecting biodiversity to other top-of-mind issues for people.
As we noted in our story on neighbourhood-scale urban biodiversity projects, one of the benefits of local initiatives is how they can make biodiversity tangible and relevant. Recent research has also shown how people’s exposure to local nature can positively impact their involvement in wider environmental issues.
By leveraging people’s attachment to their own home or neighbourhood—and by showing them how native plant gardens and rain gardens could, for example, save them money like Guelph’s rebate program does—more people can be brought into the conversation.
Another way to reach people is by working with youth. Schools are a great cross-section of society, Ryerson University Associate Professor Nina-Marie Lister said. Students can bring back messages of the importance of biodiversity to their parents, the same way that they did with recycling in the 1980s. “It was kids that pressured their parents to recycle,” Lister said. “They led by example.”
Joce Two Crows Tremblay is an Earth Worker with the Indigenous Land Stewardship Circle in Toronto who works directly with street-involved youth and urban Indigenous populations planting and tending Indigenous species in local parks and public spaces.
These gardens are an important way of connecting with the land, traditions and ceremony—ties which have been severed through the colonization process.
“For the 50% of Indigenous populations that are now living in urban settings, parks are often our only place to connect with the land,” explained Tremblay. “A lot of healing happens by just getting your hand in the ground.”
Tremblay’s work extends to compiling research and educating about less-invasive management practices with a keen awareness of how colonial thinking is often re-enacted in how we manage species and landscapes.
Introducing new ways of thinking needs constant effort, and reinforcement of intentions through all layers of staff, as Tremblay learned when one of their Three Sisters gardens was accidentally mowed down. It is as important for the staff cutting the grass as it is for management to understand efforts to increase biodiversity and reconciliation work in parks.
How little we embed Indigenous knowledge and land management practices into our biodiversity work “is an enormous gap, and it’s also an irresponsible gap,” Lister argued.
She pointed out that while city staff have good intentions with biodiversity strategies and are aware of the need for more Indigenous involvement, they also recognize that many Indigenous organizations and communities are often stretched to capacity.
“It’s long been recognized that patterns of colonization and colonial history are repeated and entrenched through the way we build our landscape,” Lister said. “And we know that there needs to be, in Lorraine Johnson’s words, an unsettling of the garden.”
While not looking specifically at city parks, the importance of Indigenous land stewardship practices was highlighted by a 2019 University of British Columbia study which found biodiversity was highest on Indigenous-managed lands—finding a 40% greater number of unique species.
Getting to a place of collective care can be challenging. Some people may “love a place to death” while others may be ignorant of sensitive ecosystems, dumping trash or allowing their dog to run around.
However, as research by Mount Royal University’s Don Carruthers Den Hoed has found, how a place is framed—the name we give it and the narrative we embed in it—can impact people’s understanding of its importance. Humans are constantly looking for cues that suggest how we should act or what a place is for.
Carruthers Den Hoed pointed to one study where by telling people they were going to a park, people perceived it as a restorative place before they even got there. Even by naming something a “park” or a “sensitive landscape” we frame it in such a way that it affects how people relate to it.
Another research study set up by Carruthers Den Hoed included a “blind taste test” of nature. He brought participants to the same place through different ways: one group saw a park sign, one saw no sign, and another connected with Indigenous elders who talked about the place’s spiritual significance.
Carruthers Den Hoed found that people’s perception of the space—the importance and the level of care needed—was affected by the narrative of the place they were presented with, whether through signage or story. As a result, he noted it’s important to think about what the amenities, signage, and management of a park says about its significance and purpose.
Here are some of the creative practices that cities and communities are using to involve people in the preservation and enhancement of urban biodiversity.
LEVERAGE THE POWER OF ART.
DON’T BE AFRAID TO BE QUIRKY.
TURN NATURE INTO A LEARNING LABORATORY.
DEMYSTIFY WILDLIFE.
MAKE IT ACCESSIBLE.
Take a walk in a park. It’s something many of us intuitively do when we’re feeling anxious, which, as COVID-19 courses through our lives, is a growing collective emotional state. Nature is even something doctors have begun prescribing. But are all parks created equal in their benefits to our psychological well-being?
Pioneering research from the 1990s showed how exposure to nature—even getting a glimpse of it out of a window—could reduce stress, improve concentration, and help us heal faster. However, this research often painted nature with a broad brush: green space was green space whether it was a wild space or a treed lawn.
Recent research has been going deeper by exploring people’s response to different natural environments. Studies have looked at the length of time spent in biodiverse areas (the longer time the greater the positive effect), the types of vegetation present (bright flowers were stimulating, green plantings were soothing), and whether the presence of park furniture like benches reduced the well-being impacts of natural areas (it didn’t).
Overall, the research has found that people report a greater sense of well-being in areas that they perceive to be more biodiverse—a finding that has deep implications for how we plan and engage people in urban biodiversity.
The importance of access to nature and biodiversity for our mental health becomes even more urgent in light of COVID-19. As the pandemic increased stress and severed personal support networks for many, half of Canadians reported worsening mental health and the Canadian Mental Health Association warned of a potential “echo pandemic” of mental illness.
People were left trying to balance government direction to “stay home” with a desire to get some fresh air and clear their heads. A global survey of 2,000 people found mental and physical health were key drivers of public space use during the pandemic. The same survey found that people took refuge in places close to home, highlighting the pressing need to ensure natural areas are equitably distributed throughout our cities.
The benefits of biodiversity are often couched in environmental impacts and ecosystem services—the work that natural areas do to help clean the air, provide food, mitigate flooding, control extreme temperatures, and more. Viewing nature as green infrastructure is critical, but it misses how these same spaces are also psychological infrastructure.
“The intersection of the richness of life on earth with human well-being is now well established in science and is fast becoming an imperative in design and planning practice,” said Nina-Marie Lister, Associate Professor and Director of the Ecological Design Lab at Ryerson University, who added that the area is a “new frontier.”
“Never before have our parks and public green spaces been more important to city dwellers, especially in terms of the mental health and wellness benefits of urban nature,” she said. “From birdsong to sunshine, wildflowers and shady walks, we now know that the ability to safely access the outdoors is a critical necessity—and a vital prescription for wellness.”
“The sooner we recognize that we take psychological solace being in nature, the better we are able to protect nature for our own well-being,” she added.
Don Carruthers Den Hoed, a researcher at Mount Royal University who also manages the Canadian Parks Collective for Innovation and Leadership, has conducted his own studies on the connection between biodiversity and well-being. He argued that the well-being narrative can be a “doorway” through which to get more people involved in conversations about parks and biodiversity, noting the Canadian Index of Well-being as a model for how to talk about the multiple benefits of parks.
Understanding how parks contribute to Index areas like leisure and environment are a “no-brainer,” Carruthers Den Hoed said. But what about democratic engagement and community vitality? Through the Index, cities can make the case that volunteer stewardship programs aren’t just about natural restoration work, he said, but also about strengthening community vitality and well-being.
The impacts of well-being and biodiversity often depend as much on people’s perceptions as on actual levels of biodiversity present in a natural area.
For example, one 2012 study found people reported high levels of well-being in areas they perceived to be more natural, even if their perception did not align with actual levels of biodiversity.
This leads to an opportunity, the researchers pointed out. Closing the gap between perception and reality through natural education and stewardship initiatives could “unlock win-win scenarios” that “can maximize both biodiversity conservation and human well-being.”
In other words, the more we improve the biodiversity of our city and provide people ways to learn and steward these areas, the more people are able to appreciate natural spaces and the better they will feel as a result.
Robin Wall Kimmerer wrote of this reciprocal relationship between land stewardship and human well-being in her book, Braiding Sweetgrass, which weaves together Indigenous knowledge and natural science.
“Restoring land without restoring relationship is an empty exercise,” she wrote. “It is relationship that will endure and relationship that will sustain the restored land. Therefore, reconnecting people and the landscape is as essential as reestablishing proper hydrology or cleaning up contaminants. It is medicine for the earth.”
Lister views the public health and well-being impacts of biodiversity as a “missed opportunity” in Canada. “For a country rich in biodiversity, we are behind on protection strategies that can improve human well-being. I think it’s an urgent necessity to put biodiversity and health together in our public policies.”
Carruthers Den Hoed pointed out that park managers often speak about the spiritual benefits of nature and yet “that’s not mentioned in any management plans. It’s one of the really important values people come to nature for and yet it’s just kind of shuffled to the side of the table.”
Our review of Canadian biodiversity strategies found that while they mention the human well-being benefits of biodiversity, they do so often only in general terms rather than in policy or recommended actions.
However, that doesn’t mean cities aren’t thinking about the connection between biodiversity and public health. Recognizing the scientific link between mental health and biodiversity, Vanessa Carney, Calgary’s Landscape Analysis Supervisor, said that one of the goals of the city’s work mapping ecological networks “is to help find ways to expand Calgarians’ access to park spaces to include more easily accessible nature experiences.”
The well-being benefits of experiencing biodiversity and nature raise important questions about equitable access to these spaces—especially given rising mental health pressures due to COVID-19.
As health researcher Nadha Hassen found, racial and socioeconomic inequities in access to quality green spaces can be a determinant of mental health outcomes. “In urban settings, neighbourhoods with low-income, newcomer, and racialized populations tend to have lower access to available, good quality green spaces compared to other groups that are higher income or white,” she wrote.
Equity is a “massive piece of work,” Carruthers Den Hoed noted. Indeed, equity is a missing lens from many biodiversity strategies. He argued that equity should not just be about access (do people have nearby nature to enjoy?), but about inclusion (how involved are people in shaping those natural spaces?).
“Where’s the equity focusing on the decision-making, the employment, the economic benefits of the things that are happening in that park?” Carruthers Den Hoed said. “That’s where I think the most interesting work will go.”
Park People, Canada’s national city parks advocacy organization, is extremely concerned that efforts to scrap the Vancouver Board of Parks and Recreation will take away from much-needed work to meet the park needs of the city’s communities.
“There are major challenges facing our parks,” said Masheed Salehomoum, Park People’s Manager, Vancouver.
“Maintenance budgets are falling behind, new park development is challenged to keep up with growth, changes in park use and changes in our climate are putting severe strain on our park system. Blowing up the century-old structure of how we deliver vital park services will result in a complex, lengthy and ultimately distracting process.”
Masheed Salehomoum
A debate was opened during the recent election on the future of the Park Board, but Mayor Sim firmly closed the door on that debate and committed to keeping the Board. Now, there is an effort for the Council to vote on this issue with only one week’s notice. Restructuring and amalgamating park services in other Canadian cities has resulted in many years of disruption and confusion, taking a toll on park staff who are already pressed to deliver services. Park People believes the primary focus should remain to safeguard Vancouver’s parks and to ensure they remain accessible, well-maintained, and vibrant spaces for all.
The Park Board is working on some Canadian-leading initiatives, from park equity efforts in VanPlay to ongoing decolonization work through initiatives like the Local Food Systems Action Plan. Let’s not lose momentum for that important work in pursuing better parks and stronger communities. Let’s prioritize the needs of the people over structural changes and ensure that Vancouver’s parks continue to thrive, providing solace and joy to all who enjoy them.
Green City looks at how parks, once thought of as places of relief from the urban condition, should be viewed as integral with city form, helping to make our cities more sustainable and resilient in the face of climate change. The paper is a refreshing and accessible discussion of how parks have shaped the relationship between nature and society, and calls for a new approach that links good environmentalism and good urbanism through park systems.
“New tools, techniques, and ways of understanding nature in the city are required. Parks, once thought of as places of relief from the urban condition, should be viewed as integral with city form, and as having important roles to play in sustaining life, in addition to providing places for recreation, entertainment, and aesthetic enjoyment. Parks and parks systems are part of our very survival, providing countless environmental functions and giving cities greater resilience to withstand the unpredictability and extremes of climate that are now more common and catastrophic.”
Beverly A. Sandalak, Landscape architect & Planner
A new approach linking good environmentalism and good urbanism through park systems.
It’s become a familiar urban experience. Heavy rain, flash floods, rising water levels, and, ultimately, flooded parks, streets, and homes. With climate change leading to extreme weather—both hot, dry periods and heavy rain—it’s imperative that we design our urban environments to mitigate these impacts.
In this report, Park People explores the challenges and opportunities facing city parks in Canada by offering inspiration, best practices, and key strategies for moving forward.
“Green infrastructure at its core is about creating spaces that help manage stormwater, but these projects also bring a host of other benefits—from habitat creation to providing new spaces for people to gather. Much like parks, the benefits of green infrastructure are deep and layered, touching on the environment, economic, and social.”
Challenges and opportunities facing city parks in Canada
Toronto has amazing parks. There are more than 1,500 of them and 80 square kilometres of parkland and natural spaces in the city. Half of the people in the city visit a park at least once a week and almost 14% visit a park every day.
But our parks are not as good as they could be.
Executive Director Dave Harvey used his Fellowship with the Metcalf Foundation to research and write this report on improving our parks. This paper identifies a number of problems facing Toronto’s parks and explores opportunities and recommendations to overcome them.
The report was very well received and became the inspiration for launching Park People.
“We’ve taken our parks for granted, neglected the need for improvements, and they are languishing. […] Toronto’s parks are fertile ground for fresh new thinking.”
Explore opportunities and recommendations to address issues in Toronto parks
This case study is part of the 2021 Canadian City Parks Report, showcasing Inspiring projects, people, and policies from across Canada that offer tangible solutions to the most pressing challenges facing city parks.
______
Climate change is all encompassing. It impacts how we grow food, how we get around, and how we build our homes. Our city parks are no different.
As we outline elsewhere in this report, there are many ways parks help mitigate and adapt to climate change. For example, park vegetation can help pull carbon from the air, reduce temperatures during heat waves, and soak up excess rainfall to avoid floods during extreme weather events.
But climate change also places stress on our green spaces, increasing the chances they will be damaged during a storm and altering the growing climate of plants. Indeed, 84% of cities said that protecting against climate change and extreme weather damage was a challenge.
Ensuring parks can provide important climate resilience benefits means making changes to how we plan, design, and maintain green spaces so they adapt and thrive in a changing climate. These changes ripple across everything from how we plan park systems to the aesthetics of park landscapes to the equipment used to cut the grass.
More and more Canadian cities are planning for climate change adaptation—whether through new climate action plans, climate actions embedded in park system master plans, or both. This year, 72% of cities reported having a climate action plan in place, an increase from last year due both to the inclusion of new cities in the 2021 report and a slew of new climate action plans approved in 2020.
Some of this planning work is in its early stages. For example, while almost all Canadian park system master plans reference climate change, many of the recommendations are for further work to create guidelines that can better integrate climate resiliency standards into park planning.
This doesn’t mean that cities aren’t building climate-resilient parks, but that they may be one-off projects—like a rain garden installed in a park to help reduce flood risk—rather than formalized changes to how all parks are designed and redeveloped.
That is beginning to change, however.
Consider Mississauga’s new Climate Change Action Plan, which calls for integrating climate change considerations into park development standards. The city’s Climate Change Supervisor Leya Barry said that the city was already doing this work on a park-by-park basis, but “some things that were championed by an individual [city staff person] may lose momentum and attention if that individual leaves or takes a different role.” Standardizing climate resilient planning in parks will help institutionalize practices and ensure continuity.
Holistic plans that formalize practices across an entire city can also help cement a new way of doing things and build partnerships between different city departments like parks, transportation, and water.
Vancouver’s Rain City Strategy, for example, coordinates green infrastructure improvements—like rain gardens, bioswales, and retention areas—across streets, parks, and developments to meet a goal of capturing 90% of rainfall. In reporting on why the strategy was so important, park staff noted that “without comprehensive policy, green infrastructure projects have mainly been staff-led pilot initiatives…rather than an integral part of city capital programs.”
Similarly, Kitchener approved a citywide policy that directs all private and public development to mitigate stormwater runoff by capturing the first 12.5 mm of rainfall where it falls, rather than allowing it to run into underground pipes. This attention to managing rainfall is shown in innovative practices at the recently completed RBJ Schlegel Park, which manages all rainfall onsite and reuses water from the splash pad for park irrigation.
Lastly, in Brampton, the recently approved Eco Park Strategy helps guide the development of a resilient, connected park system, grounded in values such as naturalization, ecological integrity, and recognizing social and cultural value. The city is developing an EcoPark toolkit that will provide guidelines for both city park development and community members, such as adopt-a-park groups, on how to implement the strategy’s goals in specific projects. The city is already putting the plan into practice, using an Eco Park lens to re-naturalize the concrete banks of the Jefferson, Jordan & Jayfield channel.
Depending on where you are and the time of year, climate change in Canada is bringing warmer, wetter, and drier conditions. This impacts the types of plants and trees best suited for parks, necessitating a shift to more climate-resilient species and opening the door in some cities for species that wouldn’t have grown there otherwise.
Edmonton’s climate adaptation plan, for example, notes that by 2050, the city’s growing season length could increase by 22 days, which will shift what plantings grow best. While Regina park staff indicated that a changing climate has created an opportunity to plant new tree species.
These shifts will alter the landscape of our parks in different ways. For example, displays of native wildflowers instead of annuals in park gardens. But it also means changes to one of the most ubiquitous landscapes found in parks: the lawn.
Manicured lawns aren’t going away—they’re key for sports and lounging around—but cities are moving towards naturalizing some of these spaces, shifting them to so-called “low mow meadows.”
Moving away from a grass monoculture can boost biodiversity and increase the climate benefits of parks. For example, studies have shown a diversity of plants helps keep spaces cooler than a grass lawn. And as Edmonton city staff noted, “increased naturalization results in less need for mowing,” which reduces emissions from trimming equipment. To increase this practice, Edmonton city staff said they have adjusted the city’s landscape standards to focus on naturalization opportunities “in unprogrammed, low use spaces or spaces where there is environmental benefit to naturalize” Similarly, in Brampton, the city’s 2019 Landscape Development Guidelines promote climate-resilient plantings and include planting density requirements for parks.
Shifting to more naturalized landscapes requires engaging the public, addressing expectations about aesthetics and concerns about wildlife.
“We’ve created an expectation that there will be tight mown grass and formalized flower gardens,” Vancouver Park Board Senior Planner Chad Townsend said. The Park Board, however, is transitioning more spaces to low-mow meadows. A recently approved pilot will see 37 hectares in 18 city parks converted to more naturally managed landscapes.
“It is difficult to manage change for people who are used to a different aesthetic,” Townsend said. “For some, it’s unkempt and messy in comparison, but that’s what naturally managed areas look like.”
Simple signs may help. Townsend said the Park Board will create pathways through some of the meadows, placing signage that welcomes people to use them. Similarly, in Toronto’s Meadoway—a project that is naturalizing a 16km hydro corridor—the Toronto Region Conservation Authority installed signs to educate people about the new meadows and why they may look different than other park landscapes.
Managing expectations also extends to parks that are continually damaged in increasingly strong storms, such as Vancouver’s beloved Stanley Park seawall.
“The first reaction is to just fix what has been quote unquote broken,” Townsend said, adding that “the public expectation is pretty much [that] you’ll find a way to keep those cedars growing, or find a way to keep the ponds full and keep repairing that wall.”
It’s a challenge to think long-term as opposed to “putting a patch on what has been damaged,” he said. He argued, however, that it’s important to strike a balance between forward-thinking actions to create more climate-resilient parks and appreciating public expectations for well-loved park spaces.
The question becomes whether the city fortifies itself against sea level rise or accepts that some parks will flood at times and design them to accommodate, Townsend said.One way Vancouver is tackling this is by inviting the public into a conversation about the impacts of sea level rise through a program called Sea2City that brings attention to how waterfront parks may be impacted. The program includes elements like installing signs calling attention to future high water marks in waterfront parks, and a “Conversations in Canoes” video series with a range of experts.
Despite the major challenge climate change poses, it’s not all about city-led actions. As we pointed out in last year’s Canadian City Parks Report, local actions in small spaces can have far-reaching impacts.
As Nature Canada’s Policy Manager Michael Polanyi argued, neighbourhood-based projects can be “proof of concept,” using success stories to pave the way for larger projects and policy change across the city.
“Initiatives to plant trees in parks or start community gardens or distribute rain barrels in a neighbourhood or try and restore a small wetland—I think those are important in terms of engaging people, in terms of raising awareness, in terms of showing support and energy behind local initiatives which get politicians excited and on board,” he said.
Neighbourhood-level projects also highlight changes needed to reduce barriers that exist in a city in promoting more resilient practices. “When residents try to do something at the local level, you [notice] barriers—whether it’s lack of funding or a ridiculous permit system you have to go through or a by-law that’s in the way.” Polanyi said.
Polanyi also pointed out that “cities are often the modelers of wider change.” For example, local advocates were critical to the enactment of pesticide bans, which started at the municipal level and then moved up to provincial laws.
“Often working at the neighbourhood level, getting something happening at the city level, is the way that change happens,” he said.
After three years without air conditioning, my partner and I finally bought one. Before that, we would sit in front of fans, or, even better, plunge into the Don Valley ravine to beat the summer heat. It was there, leafy trees above me, that I would find relief.
I thought about this as I watched British Columbians deal with an extreme heat event. I know from growing up in Vancouver that few people have air conditioners, which made me think about the role parks play in heat crises–and who has access to life-saving trees and green space.
It’s no secret that our cities are getting hotter due to climate change and that Canada is warming faster than the rest of the world. By building concrete cities, we’ve created “urban heat islands” that absorb the sun’s heat, keeping temperatures hot into the night.
This extreme heat is uncomfortable, but also deadly. More than 700 people died during BC’s recent heat wave. In 2018, 66 people died in a Montreal heat wave. People who lived in neighbourhoods deemed urban heat islands were twice as likely to die.
This will only get worse. As we outlined in our recent Canadian City Parks Report, Health Canada notes that by the middle of the 21st century the number of days with temperatures over 30 degrees will double in Canadian cities. A 2018 study found that, depending on mitigation measures, Canada could see a rise of 45% to 455% in heat-related deaths between 2031 and 2080. If that’s not a national health crisis, I’m not sure what is.
Green spaces are fundamental to reducing the urban heat island effect. We all know the bliss of standing under a shady tree, but vegetation also helps cool cities through evapotranspiration. This is basically when plants sweat, cooling the air around them.
Not every park is the same. A review by the David Suzuki Foundation found that size, (bigger parks extended benefits), shape (irregular-shaped parks increase cooling effects), and connectivity (closer together parks were cooler) have big impacts on the heat-mitigating powers of parks.Even plantings make a difference. Sorry to the lawn lovers, but densely planted naturalized meadows are better at cooling than grass. This makes projects like Vancouver’s recent low-mow meadows, which naturalize park lawns to support biodiversity, an important climate resilience project.
Parks also provide places for people to build social connections. This can quickly become life-saving during a crisis, where people who may be isolated and more vulnerable to heat–like older adults–are able to draw on connections for help. As one study put it, the social connections afforded by parks “may be a lifeline in extreme temperatures.”
This highlights the importance of redressing inequities in high-quality green space access–another topic explored in Park People’s 2021 Canadian City Parks Report.
Multiple studies have shown that wealthier, often whiter, neighbourhoods are also greener. As Health Canada notes, neighbourhoods most affected by heat “disproportionately impact marginalized populations and residents of lower-income communities” who have less green space.
Even when trees exist, they are healthier in wealthier neighbourhoods. A Canadian study found neighbourhoods with high socioeconomic vulnerability had fewer trees and less resilient canopies.
As journalist Jen St. Denis pointed out, urban heat islands map onto areas of Vancouver based on income, with wealthier west side neighbourhoods greener and thus cooler than east side neighbourhoods.
Canadian cities are beginning to step up with more equity-focused plans that, with proper funding and implementation, could start to redress these inequities.
Vancouver’s recent parks master plan includes a mapping tool using indicators such as tree canopy coverage to prioritize green space investments. Ontario’s Peel Region has also done heat mapping, noting that this could be used to target improvements for vulnerable populations.
Meeting this challenge will require an all-hands-on-deck approach. It must involve parks departments, but also streets, city planning, and community organizations. Federal funding for green infrastructure and tree planting should contain equity guidance to ensure improvements are made in the areas that need them first.
If we all work together, we can create cooler, greener, more equitable cities.
This article first appeared on TorontoStar.com, July 7, 2021.
A retaining wall is a piece of infrastructure, but what about a waterfront park?
In recognition of the climate resilience benefits of green spaces, such as flood protection, many Canadian cities are moving more towards nature-based solutions that view parks as key pieces of green infrastructure.
According to researchers, nature-based solutions are “actions which are inspired by, supported by, or copied from nature” and include “enhancing, restoring, creating, and designing new ecological networks characterized by multi-functionality and connectivity.”
In other words, instead of pipes or concrete walls, we can build parks that mimic or enhance natural processes, like how a pond protects against flooding by holding water. These spaces then provide both climate resilience benefits and create space for recreation and natural habitat–something a pipe can’t do.
In order to position urban natural spaces as infrastructure, some Canadian researchers argue we must first understand the value these natural spaces provide to a functioning, resilient city in the face of climate change. This includes putting a financial value on the services a green space provides, such as the amount of carbon it absorbs or how it helps manage stormwater.
Not doing so risks reducing economic incentives for green space preservation or enhancement and undervaluing these spaces relative to other land uses, like roads, the authors of a Montreal-based study argue. To “curb this problem,” they say, we can “demonstrate the real economic contribution of natural capital to the wellbeing of communities and to consider the cost of erosion of these amenities.”
Some Canadian cities are hoping to do just that. New climate change plans in Calgary, Guelph, and Edmonton call for natural asset valuation studies. And the Municipal Natural Assets Initiative, a non-profit dedicated to “helping municipalities count nature,” has launched a new project with 22 Canadian municipalities, including Charlottetown, Kelowna, Surrey, Langley Township, Winnipeg, Mississauga, and Halifax.
The project includes working with cities to undertake an inventory of natural assets, which includes their location and condition. Doing so can help cities better plan for climate resilience by protecting and enhancing natural assets, such as woodlands, creeks, and other green spaces. As MNAI states: “natural assets can provide the same level of service as many engineered assets, and often at a much lower cost to the balance sheet and to the environment.”
This has caught the attention of advocates, such as Nature Canada Policy Manager Michael Polanyi. He sees this work as a way to better incorporate considerations for the services natural spaces provide into planning.
Making it clear “how reliant we are on the hidden services that are provided by nature does seem to be an impetus for changing approaches to decision-making,” Polanyi said. “Councillors and decision-makers are so focused on the economic side of things. Unless that’s made visible, it’s hard to make the case for investing in protection.”
Some independent studies have worked to make some of these hidden services visible–at least in financial terms. A 2014 TD Economics report on the value of urban forests in Halifax, Montreal, and Vancouver, found financial savings in air quality, stormwater management, energy (heating and cooling costs), and carbon sequestration. This ranged from $2 in benefits for everyone $1 spent on trees in Montreal up to $13 in benefits in Halifax. A similar report focused on Toronto, found trees provide $80 million in benefits per year to Torontonians, which works out to about $125 per resident.
Cities are now working towards this type of evaluation themselves, expanding the calculations beyond trees to take into account the full spectrum of green spaces.
Mississauga’s Climate Change Supervisor Leya Barry said that a 2016 Insurance Bureau of Canada study looking at climatic events was a “catalyst” for the city’s climate change work. “It really painted a clearer picture of what’s going to happen if we don’t start being more intentional and considering these things more holistically.”
That study found the cost of one extreme ice storm event could cause up to $38 million in damages in Mississauga.
Mississauga then commissioned a climate risk assessment of three parks. While the process is usually used to evaluate hard infrastructure, such as bridges, Barry said the city wanted to include natural infrastructure to better understand the risk to the city’s green spaces. The study found the highest threats were from flooding, ice storms, heat, and wind–the last of which Barry said can do an enormous amount of damage to tree canopies.
However, assigning value to natural spaces such as stormwater facilities, parks, and even sports fields, can be a fraught process.
“It’s very difficult to think about natural assets strictly from a financial lens because…it doesn’t account for all the other benefits and services that asset provides,” Barry said. “If you’re saying I spent $400 on this tree, so therefore the replacement value of this tree is $400, that’s a real simplification and that’s kind of problematic.”
For example, Barry said the city’s not sure how cultural value will be included, but hopes it will be a consideration when the city gets to the valuation stage.
The challenge of putting a financial value on green spaces is one that other cities are struggling with as well.
How do we put a value on the social impact of parks and the connections with our neighbours? What about the aesthetic appreciation of sun filtering through leaves? Or the relaxation we feel walking in an urban forest? Should those even be considered in financial terms at all or does reducing parks to economic terms risk flattening the more intangible, yet critically important, benefits of parks?
Indeed, the challenges of using financial terminology to describe nature’s value is addressed in Saskatoon’s new Green Strategy, which was released in 2020 alongside the city’s Natural Capital Asset Valuation study. The latter received funding from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities’ Municipalities for Climate Innovation Program.
Saskatoon’s study detailed ecosystem services for valuation such as carbon sequestration, pollination, air quality and climate control, forage production, and mental and physical health. The study also included vulnerability assessments to key ecosystems, such as wetlands, grasslands, and forests.
While the valuation study also highlighted the cultural, heritage, and aesthetic importance of parks, it concluded that more work was required to acknowledge these values and that it was difficult to “express this value in financial terms.” One key learning was the importance of involving stakeholders who hold different views on the services ecosystems provide, such as cultural services, to inform the approach to the study.
City staff pointed out there is a “need to view nature and cultural spaces beyond their capital function,” adding that “many Indigenous worldviews see the land as sacred, and believe humans should not apply economic terminology to it. We shouldn’t lose sight of the intrinsic value of nature when applying an asset management approach.”
Join the Canadian City Parks Report’s authors, Jake Tobin Garrett, Adri Stark & Naomi Amberber, and Park People Board Chair Zahra Ebrahim, for a webinar to launch the 2021 Report. This Canadian City Parks Report launch webinar features:
The third annual report tracking the trends, challenges, and leading practices in 32 Canadian cities. This year’s report highlights new city park insights on how parks can foster more resilient, equitable cities—not only as we recover from COVID-19, but as we address another looming crisis: climate change.
The webinar is held in English; French subtitles are available.
Adri Stark is specialized in research and policy at Park People, and co-author of the annual Canadian City Parks Report.…
Zahra is a public interest designer and strategist focused on shifting power to people who are typically underrepresented in institutions…
Jake Tobin Garrett (he/him) is a writer, illustrator and public space policy and research consultant. He was previously Park People’s…