Many cities barking up the wrong tree with their planting

ONE CITY after another has been busy planting trees in the hope of being recognized as a “forest city”. However, journalists have found that some cities have been doing it in the wrong way and the “green leap forward” is just extravagance. Beijing Youth Daily comments:

There are three main problems with some cities’ pursuit of being a “forest city”. First, the cities plant trees intensively in a few concentrated places, which is rather luxurious. Second, some cities blindly buy expensive trees that do not suit the local climate. Third, some cities plant trees but prohibit ordinary residents from using the forest areas for recreation, even though the trees are purchased with taxpayers’ money.

Worse, some cities reportedly cut down the trees only a few years after planting them. All these tendencies go against the original intention for creating “forest cities”, which was to encourage local municipal governments to plant more trees in order to protect the ecological environment and improve the quality of life of residents.

And, of course, there are huge profit chains hidden behind the tree planting. It costs money to buy the trees, plant them, trim them, process the off cuts, remove old ones and plant new ones. In that process, not only is taxpayers’ money wasted, there is also room for illegal gains.

All these issues mean the situation must be changed. Greener cities are needed, but planting trees should serve to improve the living environment for residents. It is necessary to let local residents have a bigger say in the types of trees that are planted and where to plant them, as well as monitor the process so that the planted trees will serve their purpose and taxpayers’ money is not wasted or misappropriated.