A young tree, planted by a non-profit organization in
Detroit, Michigan, in front of damaged homes in 2015.
residents. My first reaction was, "Who wouldn't
want a tree?" My experience up to this point had
engrained in me that beneficial experiences with
trees were inevitable, rather than a result of one's
birth in a particular place and social structure.
I spent the next four years immersed in field research
in Detroit, conducting interviews with residents,
city officials, and the non-profit organization's
staff, board members, and volunteers. I collected
data while participating in tree-planting events,
community meetings and events, organizational
meetings, fundraising events, and any other events
that could shed light on the historical, political, and
community context of this tree-planting initiative.
I found that the organization's approach to "com-
munity engagement" left little to no room to
understand or integrate knowledge of historical
trauma experienced by residents into the process
of planting and caring for trees—creating a road-
block to gaining residents' trust and participation in
the tree-planting program.
13,14
For example, some
staff members acknowledged but downplayed the
importance of residents' historical trauma and how
the tree-planting program could contribute to it by
not allowing residents to be involved in determining
goals of tree-planting, species to plant, or follow-up
maintenance protocols and responsibilities. As this
staff member said, "… this wouldn't be necessarily
be an enduring long-term negative impact, but when
community engagement is not done thoroughly or
effectively, people may feel like the tree that was
planted in front of their house was something else
that was done to them, instead of for them."
A board member for the organization went on to
say that the organization was "Just constantly >>
urban-forestry.com 19
