“The evaluation of ecosystem services of Tbilisi green

infrastructure - The Case study of urban parks of

Tbilisi ”
By Ph.D. student: Levan Alpaidze, Urban Studies, Tbilisi State University, 2021
Goal of the research: studying the importance of urban parks for the city
and for the well-being of Tbilisi inhabitants

This research and study visit is funded and sponsored by

SHOTARUSTAVELI NATIONAL SCIENTIFIC FOUNDATION OF GEORGIA
 Urban Ecosystem Services
Research Brief:
In our study, we implemented for the first time in a Southern Caucasus city, the i-
Tree Eco model to quantify the main ecosystem services provided by urban forests.
Trees in two parks in Tbilisi, Expo Park (694 trees) and Red Park (1027 trees), have
been measured and a model simulation was performed for the year 2018.
This analysis highlights the key role of urban forests in improving the environmental
sustainability of the city of Tbilisi and provides important decision support for tree
species selection in this geographic area with the aim of maximizing the benefits
trees can supply to cities.

If we speak about the vision of this research, we believe that the understanding and the study of the
urban ecosystem services is necessary for imagining such a city, where:

- the pollution levels of air, water and soil and the noise levels are minimal;
- the patterns of distribution of its buildings and the gray infrastructure are harmonized with its green
spaces….
- and all mentioned –above supports the social links, cohesion and the health of its dwellers, provides
the safe living environment, availability of urban resources to all, supports the economic
development and well-being and informs the urban planning.
 Urban Ecosystem Services

This study aims to research and study the following:

• Structural and functional analysis of the park trees and the services they provide to the
urban environment, as:
• Air purification - the removal of the air pollutants (CO,NO2, SO2,O3, andPM10, PM2.5),
• Carbon sequestration and storage (in trees, otherplants),
• Storm-water avoided runoff and water flow regulation and the runoff mitigation,
• Disservices: tree bio-emissions,
• Condition and distribution of trees at the research sites, by species/genus, the leaf cover
and the biomass of thetrees,
• Importance of studying and utilizing existing tree species for enhancing particular
ecosystem services
 • Urban Ecosystem Services

https://www.itreetools.org
The research methodology:

• Study generally has the analytical, climate-related and socio-ecological character;

analyzing the urban ecosystems services of parks and their benefits to the
environment.
• Research employed the method of i-Tree Eco V6, elaborated by the US Federal Forest
Service of United States department of Agriculture (USDA).
• For the operationalization of the method we have used and input the following data into
the system:
• Local (Tbilisi) meteorological data integrated in the i-Tree platform (hourly temperature,
wind data, Tbilisi, Airport station Lochini); Precipitation data and air pollution data (O3, CO,
NO2, SO2, PM10/2.5), both hourly, along with general physical-geographical parameters has
been sent to the system for integration.
• The field data (tree data) from the urban parks has been collected and also been sent to i-
Tree portal for further integration.
• Field data : unique identifier for each tree, the tree specimen/genus, GPS coordinates for
each tree (from selected sites), status of the tree grown naturally or planted), tree height
(total and to the live crown), height to the crown base, tree diameter at breast height (DBH),
• tree canopy spread (east-west and north-south), tree canopy percent missing and the
percent of leaf area die-back.
 Urban EcosystemServices
Study area: Parks’ location: in densely populated
Two (2) urban parks in Tbilisi, Georgia: urban areas of Tbilisi
1) Vaso Godziashvili Park (aka „Red Park“), total area: 3.3 ha Air pollution: both parks have
2) Expo Georgia Park, total area: 3.2 ha operating automatic air pollution
monitoring stations in proximity
History: Expo Georgia: 1958; Red Park:
1965
Field work: carried out in May-
September 2018 (full-leaf season).
Field work method: according the
manual of i-tree Eco V6
Materials and research object -
complete inventory: 694 trees in Expo
Georgia Park and 1,027 trees in Red
Park
Brief introduction
• Tbilisi is situated in the terraces of the valley of river Mtkvari (Kura) on the elevations of 410-770 m a.s.l,
squeezed between two mountain gorges.
• Tbilisi population: 1.1 million inh. (2019); Total area Tbilisi municipality: 502 sq. km
• Tbilisi climate: humid subtropical climate (Köppen climate classification: Cfa) with considerable continental
and semi-arid influences.
• According 1988 survey data Tbilisi had 18.8 million trees; 15.1 million bushes, or non-arboreal vegetation.
• From those, 6 730 569 were the conifer species; and 12 128 500 – deciduous trees.
• The major tree species: Plane tree/Platanus, Ash, maple, Linden/Tilia, cottonwood, acacia, European
horse-chestnut, cedar, cypress Mediterranean, pine and other –

• Naturally grown forests around Tbilisi include the following species:

• Deciduous: რცხილა/Hornbeam (Carpinus) , ჯაგრცხილა /Oriental hornbeam (Carpinus orientalis),
მუხა/Oak (Quercus iberica), წიფელი/Beech tree (Fagus), იფანი/Ash (Fraxinus), თელა/Elm
(Ulmus), ვერხვი/ Cottonwood (Populus) .
• Conifers: უთხოვარი (Taxus baccata), ნაძვი/Spruce, მრავალნაყოფა ღვია/Juneper (Juniperus polycarpos),
• შავი ღვია/ stinking juniper(Juniperus foetidissima Willd), Other Junipers, შავი და კავკასიური
ფიჭვი/ Black and Caucasian Pines (Pinea Negra, Pinea Sosnowskyi)

Land use type 1987 2016

Area (km2) % of total Area (km2) % of total

Water spaces 12.87 2.45 14.22 2.86
Built spaces 118.54 23.63 190.97 37.53
Agricultural lands 41.51 8.26 16.67 3.29
Green spaces 146.21 29.12 117.86 23.45
Other spaces 183.46 36.54 162.98 32.88

Table 1. Changes in Land use, Tbilisi Municipality, 1987-2016 (Gadrani, L. et al. 2018).
 Urban Ecosystem Services Study results

Climate and air pollution data (2018) Tbilisi

• average daily temperature was 15.3 °C

• a minimum at the end of December (-0.6 °C)
and a maximum in July (31.2 °C).
• mean Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR)
was 330.1 W m-2, with a lowest value in
December (77.5 W m-2) and highest in June
(572.5 W m-2).
• Precipitation was distributed relatively evenly (a
monthly average of 33 mm) though having
seasonal features.
• with maximums in June, August, and November
(73.2, 64.4, 63 mm, respectively), and a lower
value in February (6.2 mm)

7
 Results:
The average CO concentration in 2018 was 388 µg m-3
(0.388 mg -3 ) with higher values in winter months (max Air pollution results
value = 1712.5 µg m-3). Int’l standard for CO: 10 mg m-3
(10,000 µg m-3 , 8-hour average).

SO2 showed average values of 7 µg m-3 with frequent

peaks during the year up to 30.4 µg m-3. Max.
concentration in some days of Winter months.
In Georgia and EU the SO2 standard is : 350 µg/m3, 1 h,
or 125 µg/m3 , 24 h. WHO standard max.: 20 μg/m3 24 h

The concentration of PM2.5 and PM10 was relatively

constant throughout the year (15.8 and 40.3 µg m-3 on
average, respectively) with highest values in December
(70.8 and 196.9 µg m-3, respectively). With abnormal
PM10 concentration (177.9 µg m-3 ) at 27.07.2018 due to
Dust storm from Iran and Azerbaijan. (EU & Georgia
Standard: PM2.5 25 µg m-3; for PM10 - 40 µg m-3 /
annual average).

O3 annual mean was 33.8 µg m-3 with higher values in

spring and summer (max value = 78.8 µg m-3). Standard
max. norm for O3 concentration in EU & Georgia is : 120
µg/m3 , 8 h mean.

NO2 shows an opposite trend with higher values in

winter months (75.7 µg m-3) and an annual average of Air quality norm for Nitrogen dioxide (NO2) in EU
34.5 µg m-3. A peak (108.8 µg m-3), as with PM10, on & Georgia is: 200 µg/m3 , 1 h and 40µg/m3 a year
July 27, 2018 (Dust storm). average.
8
Urban forests Table 2. . Dominant species in Red Park with a relative number, canopy cover, leaf area,
and basal area greater or equal to 1%, 300 m2, 1000 m2, and 0.3 m2.
In the Red Park, there are 52
different tree species. Species Number Canopy Leaf Basal
Most common: trees Cover area (m2) area
(N°) (m2) (m2)
-Mediterranean Cypress
(Cupressus sempervirens) -12.1%
of total tree population. Italian cypress (Cupressus sempervirens L.) 125 2265.5 9496.2 6.3
-Pomegranate (Punica granatum)
Oriental arborvitae (Platycladus orientalis (L.) Franco) 79 406.5 1105.1 0.4
- 7.9 % of total.
-Blue Arizona Cypress (Cupressus Deodar cedar (Cedrus deodara (Roxb.) G. Don) 61 2327.2 10895.5 10.7
arizonica) - 7.7% and – Oriental European ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) 60 595.1 1749.2 1.1
planetree (Platycladus orientalis)
- 7.7%. White ash (Fraxinus americana L.) 41 475.4 1631.4 0.3

Bigleaf linden (Tilia platyphyllos Scop.) 32 306.5 1028.3 0.4

The overall tree density in RED
Japanese pagoda tree (Styphnolobium japonicum (L.) 30 844.5 2679.2 2.2
Park is 312 trees/ha with a tree
Schott)
cover of 44.3%.
Oriental planetree (Platanus orientalis L.) 23 1462.4 8757.8 3.3
Dominant species in terms of
canopy cover, leaf area, and White mulberry (Morus alba L.) 17 612.4 2768.4 1.2
basal area are: White poplar (Populus alba L.) 15 1478.1 6942.2 5.6
- Deodar cedar (Cedrus
deodara), TOT urban forest
1030 14625 55917.6 32.7
- Mediterranean cypress TOT dominant species
483 10773.6 47053.3 31.5
- White poplar (Populus alba),
Relative number of dominant species (%)
and Oriental planetree 46.9 73.7 84.1 96.3
 Table 3. Dominant species in Expo Georgia park with a relative number, canopy cover,
Urban Forests leaf area, and basal area at least 1%, 300 m2, 1000 m2, and 0.3 m2, respectively.

The Expo Georgia Park Species Number Canopy Leaf Basal

encompasses 62 different trees (N°) cover (m2) area (m2) area (m2)
species.
Italian cypress (Cupressus sempervirens L.) 116 3311.3 17373.0 10.3
The most dominant species of
the Expo Georgia Park are: Deodar cedar (Cedrus deodara (Roxb.) G. 58 3726.7 14477.1 20.9

-Cupressus sempervirens (16.7% Don)

of total), Horse chestnut (Aesculus hippocastanum L.) 54 1090.5 5883.6 1.3
-Cedrus deodara (8.4%), and Japanese privet (Ligustrum japonicum 47 909.3 3307.8 0.6
-Aesculus hippocastanum Thunb.)
(7.8%). Oriental planetree (Platanus orientalis L.) 23 1142.3 6913.0 2.9
Blue spruce (Picea pungens Engelm.) 13 297.0 1930.8 0.9
The overall tree density in Expo White ash (Fraxinus americana L.) 12 616.5 4454.9 1.3
Park is about 217 trees/ha with White mulberry (Morus alba L.) 11 399.9 1629.4 0.9
a tree cover of 55.8%. 11 621.4 3401.2 1.6
Little leaf linden (Tilia cordata Mill.)
European ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) 7 713.9 2983.2 3
Dominant species in terms of
canopy cover, leaf area, and TOT urban forest
basal area are : 694 17866.4 79992.2 53.6
TOT dominant species
- deodar cedar (Cedrus
deodara), 352 12828.8 62354 43.7
- Italian cypress (Cupressus TOT (%)
sempervirens), 50.7 71.8 78.0 81.5
- oriental planetree (Platanus
orientalis), and
- horse chestnut (Aesculus
hippocastanum) 10
 Figure 2. Major species of Expo Georgia and Red Park (both, Tbilisi, Georgia) by Carbon storage and Carbon sequestration), 2018

Carbon storage and sequestration

Trees are estimated to store 126.5 and 198.4 t of carbon in Red and Expo Parks, respectively.
- Cedrus deodara (27%), Cupressus sempervirens (24.6%), and Populus alba (15.8%) are the species that accumulated
the most carbon in Red Park. In Expo Park Cedrus deodara (33.8%) and Cupressus sempervirens (20%) store more than
half of the total carbon

The Gross carbon sequestration is about 4.7 and 4.6 t of carbon per year for Red and Expo Parks, respectively. As for
carbon sequestration, Cedrus deodara (23.4%), Cupressus sempervirens (19.1%), and Populus alba (11.3%) in Red Park;

Cupressus sempervirens (29%) and Cedrus deodara (25.6%) in Expo Park, are the species that sequester more than
half of the total carbon per year 11
Figure 3. Volatile Organic Compounds emissions, Red Park and Expo Georgia Park, Tbilisi, 2018.

Pollution removal by trees in Red Park and Expo Georgia

Park (CO, NO2, O3, PM2.5, და SO2 - (Tbilisi, 2018)

- In 2018 , the trees in RED PARK and EXPO Georgia Park

have removed 90.3 and 119.6 kg of listed pollutants
from the air, respectively
- Pollutant removal per tree is higher in Tbilisi (6.1 and
6.7 g/m2, in red Park and Expo Park, respectively) than
in Munich (5.3 g/m2) or Strasbourg (5.1 g/m2) yet
lower than in in London (8.7 g/m2) and US average (7.5
Figure 4. Pollution removal by trees in Red Park and Expo
g/m2).
Georgia Park (CO, NO2, O3, PM2.5, and SO2 (Tbilisi, 2018)

- VOC emitted by trees in the RED Park: 69.9 (45.9 kg of

isoprene and 24 kg of monoterpenes) and Expo
Georgia Park: 55.7 kg (20 kg of isoprene and 35.7 kg of
monoterpenes)

12
Hydrology Effects of Tbilisi parks
- Trees in Red and Expo Parks, in 2018, transpired 3,039.6
and 3,334.2 m3 of water, respectively, with highest values
in July (651.8 m3 for Red Park and 715.6 m3 for Expo
Park).

- The annual avoided runoff was 200.5 m3 in Red Park and

269.5 m3 in Expo Park, with highest values in Summer,
particularly in June (28.6 and 37.5 m3 for Red and Expo
Parks, respectively) (Fig. 5).

- These values are high in terms of efficiency considering

the total precipitation of 397.6 mm in 2018. In the same Figure 5. Transpiration and Avoided water Runoff by trees in
range of London (32.6 m3 ha-1 yr-1), but lower than Kyoto Red Park and Expo Georgia Park (in m3), Tbilisi, 2018
(130.3 m3 ha-1 yr-1) (where the amount of precipitation is
also higher (1,770 mm per annum).

If we consider the particular ecosystem services provided by the urban trees in

Tbilisi parks, we may state that
- In Carbon sequestration, the most effective varieties are: Deodar cedar (Cedrus - In terms of removal of PM
deodara), Mediterranean cypress (Cupressus sempervirens) and White poplar 2.5 from the air, the most
(Populus alba). effective tree species were:
- In terms of avoided runoff, the most effective are the following tree species: White 1. Platycladus orientalis; 2.
Ash (Fraxinus americana), Blue Spruce (Picea pungens) and Small-leaved Linden Cedrus deodara;
(Tilia cordata).
- The most pollutants from the air remove the following tree species: White Ash
(Fraxinus americana), Blue Spruce (Picea pungens) and Small-leaved Linden (Tilia
cordata).
- In VOC emissions, the less emitting varieties were the following tree species:
Maples, Ashes, and Lindens.
 General conclusions

• Urban green infrastructure and parks play significant role in improving the air quality in cities. The
mitigate the climate change affects and contribute to urban environment and human well-being.

• Locally, ecosystem services, produced by green infrastructure, positively affect the living environment
and comfort the living conditions in cities.

• The positive features of green spaces and ecosystem services are well known yet not fully considered
and acknowledged in planning policies and land-use decisions in regional or local levels.

• In present research we have tried to demonstrate the importance of trees of Tbilisi urban parks and
their benign influence on the living environment.

• For this research, first time in Georgia, we have employed the i-Tree tool, which is successfully used in
more than hundred countries.

• In order to properly utilize the ecosystem services provided by the urban trees, it is necessary to study
the ecosystem services for correct selection of tree species for future afforestation and forest
restoration projects. This will may well inform the green urban policies and sustainable development of
cities.

Dziękuję za uwagę!
Thank You!