The Nature of Urban Living

The benefits provided by nature in our cities and towns tend to be overlooked, yet their importance is impossible to overstate. Countless studies quantify the increasing benefits that nature, in an urban context, contributes to community health and wellbeing. This should be considered as a critical element of all infrastructure planning. Rather than an adjunct ‘nice-to-have’, nature is as essential to urban lives as transport and roads yet is rarely discussed in these terms.  

The health benefits of time spent in nature are felt intuitively by all and this is backed by a growing body of empirical evidence. Our mental, physical, and emotional wellbeing are enhanced by time spent communing with nature, leading to a reduction in stress and the encouragement of greater physical activity.  Shared spaces where nature can thrive, like our parks and gardens, encourage community connectedness and social cohesion, and these benefits are especially vital in places where access to private open space is limited or non-existent. The growing field of therapeutic horticulture also demonstrates powerful social effects, particularly in regard to mental health.  

On a broader scale, the benefits are even greater. Although the urban environment is not ‘natural’, nature will thrive if we plan properly to accommodate it. This is crucial because nature is a highly effective climate mitigation tool, lowering urban temperatures by several degrees through shading, heat absorption and transpiration cooling. In turn, this reduces energy consumption. Outdoor spaces comprised of hard surfaces and lacking plants achieve the opposite of this. Along with buildings, roads, and pavements they increase heat in a phenomenon known as the ‘heat island’ effect. This is the increasing reality of urban life and the most effective way to mitigate heat islands (which are only going to intensify) is through adequate, well-designed nature spaces. 

Additionally, it should not be forgotten that nature in urban settings sustains a multitude of lifeforms other than our own. When well-designed, these spaces enhance urban biodiversity. While the urban environment is highly modified, greater biodiversity makes for a healthier and more resilient environment, one less exposed to climatic risk and requiring fewer interventions. 

Victoria has an internationally significant history of greening the urban environment. The scores of public gardens that sprang up as towns were established are now first-class examples of high-performing nature spaces. Built with social cohesion and public health front of mind, their value has only increased as urban intensity has swelled around them. Likewise, heritage gardens at places such as Rippon Lea and Como now provide the same social and environmental function in areas where opportunities to create new open space are extremely limited. Common to all these places is good planning, excellent design strategies, and a comprehensive understanding of the full benefits to be enjoyed by generations still to come.  

For such a fundamental component of liveable cities, you would expect the accommodation of nature to be central to our future urban planning. But is this the case?  

Addressing growing inequality in housing opportunities and the needs of future population growth have rightly become a key focus of government. The National Trust agrees that these are issues of primary importance which must be addressed. We also agree that proposed consolidation and densification of housing in cities and regional centres is preferable to endless urban sprawl. This approach, however, will have profound consequences if nature is not made central to the planning process. If poorly executed, this change will seriously diminish the legacy we have inherited and consign others to a life of poorer health and wellbeing outcomes.  

Recent announcements for 50 activity centres across middle and established suburbs indicate where this densification will be focused. While some (but by no means all) of these centres are considered ‘leafy,’ they have significantly lower percentages of public open space than inner-city areas. This makes sense given these suburbs were designed with higher levels of private open space (i.e. backyards). Densification and in-fill development of these suburbs will, without doubt, have a significant impact on the amount of nature across our city. Trees, for example, will be particularly hard-pressed to survive this process. Privately owned trees are an equal partner in our urban forest and many trees in these suburbs are now 50 – 100 years old. Not only do these provide exponentially more benefits than numerous younger trees, but there will also be precious little space to plant replacements on smaller blocks. This is already a reality on urban fringe sites, where small blocks and narrow nature strips result in estates devoid of shade. Planting more street trees, as some suggest, will not be sufficient to offset this loss and, at any rate, will take decades to play a significant environmental role. Despite years of ongoing advocacy from the Trust and various local governments, there remains no uniform, state-based approach to tree protection in Victoria. This is a serious gap in our future planning. 

When it comes to maintaining our current benchmarks, infrastructure reports clearly demonstrate that most of Melbourne already has no effective excess open space capacity to accommodate population growth over the next 30 years. If we are serious about mitigating the effects of a changing climate, the amount of nature provided in an urban context will need to increase, not go backwards. There is no single, simple method for delivering this. However, there is also no avoiding that we need more trees, more diverse plantings, and more of it publicly accessible to counteract the reduction in private open space.  

The cost to acquire, develop, and maintain the healthy spaces required to meet our future needs has been estimated at anywhere from 3-12 billion dollars. Significant money, but comparable or cheaper than most of the big future-proofing projects we are currently embarked on. Putting nature firmly on the future-proofing agenda is urgent. We must avoid a situation where; in solving the housing crisis, we create a new crisis – with consequences for millions of people for years to come. 

—Written by Justin Buckley, Executive Manager Gardens and Landscapes 

This article was originally published in the Autumn 2025 Members Magazine. Join today to enjoy three copies of our Member-only Magazine each year.