Forests play a significant role in the livelihood of people living in rural Nepal. Thereby various policies, research and advocacy are centred on rural forestry. Innumerable writings have also focused on realising the significance of rural forests. This is understandable, as millions of lives dependent on forests, which render a range of ecosystem services that every individual benefits from in one way or the other. But urban forestry is something that has been conveniently overlooked. Most of us feel a dire need for it while flying above the Kathmandu Valley. The view strikes us as that of an ugly city with concrete buildings spread all over. Perhaps this is a normal phenomenon in an urbanising city. But can't urbanisation blend in a bit of greenery with development?  

Urban sprawl is most often complemented by a variety of inevitable problems, shrinking public space being the most prominent. It has not only come at the cost of  public wellness but has also stoked anger among people. A riot that took place a couple of months back due to a government decision to build a complex in a park in Turkey is just one manifestation of such public grievances. Creating new spaces may not always be possible but promoting urban forestry can, to some extent, address the problem of urban sprawl. Regulating air pollution, enhancing aestheticism and balancing ecological sustainability are some of the benefits that urban forestry offers. 

Evidence from elsewhere shows that urban forestry contributes to micro-climatic regulation and improves urban air quality. This is noteworthy from an urban health perspective. But very little has been explored on this regard in Nepal. In contrast, trees have been perceived as barriers to road expansion and as potential disasters during storms. The problem, however, is the unsustainable planning that our town planners have practiced for years. 

 

Forest policies in our country have overlooked urban forestry. It has only been observed from an aesthetic point of view, without any regard for the range of benefits it offers. Even the majority of NGOs that work on rural forestry have limited their activities to planting trees in urban centres on Environment Day. 

Urban forestry falls under the working area of various institutions, like the Municipality, the Department of Roads, District Development Committee, Nagar Bikas and District Forest Office. They, however, seem to be overwhelmed by other priorities. Also, the involvement of many institutions has made it easier to skirt one's responsibility. Urban forestry has thus become nobody's responsibility. Nonetheless, as a part of the public that enjoys greenery, we have green zones in the city on our wish lists. Still, cities with a dull landscape continue to grow and our wish for a green city remains unfulfilled. 

 

Let's take the example of the current road extension in Kathmandu. Roads are being widened and the level of excitement among Valley dwellers is high. But walking down dusty lanes is not a pleasing experience for pedestrians. Trees on the either side of the roadways would add some much needed aesthetic value to the city. As road widening is taking place in Kathmandu as we write this, it is the most  appropriate time to begin planting trees. Of course, scientific plantation would be necessary to ensure that tree species best suited for urban areas are planted. 

However, urban forestry need not merely be limited to roadside plantations. It can also be promoted in public places, schools and even in private home gardens. Such initiatives, though the level of implementation has yet to be evaluated, are praiseworthy. For instance, Kathmandu Metropolitan City has provisioned that all new households allocate space for two trees. Similarly, Nagar Bikas has a provision requiring the maintenance of at least 20 percent greenery in and around housing complexes, government offices, hospitals, cinema halls and star hotels and 15 percent in and around schools and colleges.

Though the prospects of urban forestry remain dim, a few initiatives can be worked out. First, urban forestry needs to be an integral part of landscape designing for both public and private construction. Second, the responsibilities of institutions working on urban forestry need to be made clear and a proper coordination mechanism should be put in place. Third, urban forestry should not be perceived solely as the government's responsibility. For synergy, it can be promoted through corporate social responsibility where private businesses and companies assume the responsibility of maintaining trees in their vicinity. Fourth, internalising the multiple benefits and functions of urban forestry, provisions in the national forest policies and legislations should be put in place. Finally, urban forestry needs to be a priority agenda of responsible institutions, including that of the political parties.