You are on page 1of 6

Homogeneity of Tree Planting in Nurtured Landscape

Ismail Said
Department of Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Built Environment
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310, Skudai, Johor
b-ismail@utm.my

This article is published in LA Malaysia Landscape Architecture Issue 3, 2004

Development of man environment modifies the natural landform and its vegetative
covers. The modification is essential to give space for buildings and infrastructures in the
development of housing, commercial, institution, recreation and roadway. Severe
modifications on the landform and vegetation are predominantly done to the natural
landscapes for the development of man-made landscapes. This can be seen in the removal
of vegetative cover and large scale grading on landform, for example, in many terracing
housing projects throughout the nation. Natural waterways, lakes and valleys are filled
with graded earth to maximize the land area for the dwelling units and roadways. Once
the buildings and roadways are completed, only then trees and smaller plants are planted
for two purposes, namely, aesthetic and provision of shade for the residents and vehicles.
All too common in the man-made landscape scene, similar trees are planted in the
housing, commercial, institution, recreation areas and roadways by the local authorities or
municipalities in this country. This landscape can be classified as nurtured landscape that
requires constant maintenance for the plants growth and their form. Hence, intensive
maintenance works such as fertilizing, pruning, watering and weeding are done to
achieve the desired character. In contrast, plant species in the forests are sustained by the
natural forces (rain, temperature, sunlight, and air) forming into varied shapes, colors and
textures that fascinate people to see and then experience into the landscape (Ulrich,
1983).

Presently, some of the common tree species that one would encounter in housing,
commercial, institution and recreation areas, and roadways are kelat paya, merawan, kayu
manis, angsana, and raintree (Eugenia, Hopea, Cinnamomum, Pterocarpus, Samanea)
throughout the nation urban centers including Johor Bahru, Bandar Melaka, Kuala
Lumpur, Ipoh, Alor Setar in Peninsular Malaysia, and Kuching and Miri in Sarawak and
Kota Kinabalu in Sabah (Figure 1.0). The outlook of the nurtured landscape is a
homogenous built environment lacking of variety or diversity in form, texture, and color.
In urban design and cultural geography perspectives such environment is lacking of sense
of place (Lynch, 1962) and in environmental psychology perspective it has no sense of
place identity (Proshansky and Fabian, 1987). Residents or dwellers living in this
landscape would have difficulty to generate sense of affiliation (Moore, 1986), sense of
place bonding, or sense of attachment (Chawla, 1992). To children, homogenous
landscape is a sterile setting in which difficult for them to create their own favorite place
such as hideouts or dens (sorok-sorok). The favorite place provides a space for the
children to socialize (Moore and Young, 1978), to feel sense of security, privacy and
control with friends or peers (Korpela et al., 2001), and to manipulate natural elements
through play activities (Olds, 1989). Adults may recall their childhood memories of the
favorite place in the village landscapes that offer different and varied of elements such as
water bodies, variety of tree species, and animals. The village landscape is also a nurtured
landscape but with heterogeneous and complex characters that enough to generate
curiosity and fascination to children, and perhaps, adults. One would recall the place to
catch spiders and place them in matchboxes or to slingshot bulbuls in a chenderai tree
when laden with ripe fruits. The homogenous urban landscapes are planned and designed
by planners or landscape architects devoid of variety of character; a landscape of
sameness. This is the landscape where people could not perceive differences in sameness
(Olds, 1987) or where there is plenty of familiarity without change (Prescott, 1993).

The homogeneity of the urban landscape can be easily observed from planting of kelat
paya, presently, the favorite tree species dominating the landscape of parks and gardens,
roadside plantings, and even botanical gardens. One could easily notice its dense foliage,
a multicolored of olive green and red, along main streets in large and small towns planted
on ground and occasionally in large pots. It occupies the commercial and residential
streets, cemeteries, urban parks and playgrounds, lakes and ponds, and house gardens: a
ubiquitous element. The same species are seen in many resorts including coastal and hill
types. This swamp tree species is even planted in oriental-themed garden at Bukit Tinggi,
Pahang; located in moist, cool, and windy conditions on an elevation of 3000 feet. This
condition is far different from is original niche that is the lowland, swamp forest.
Ecologically, the tree would not benefit the animal species of the highland because of the
sudden introduction of the lowland plant species into the hill habitat. This is a planning
flaw that landscape architectural practice that we must take action to put back to correct
design and planning considerations based on ecological or cultural principles.

Another example of the homogeneity of tree planting is the planting of merawan (Hopea
odorata) on the roadways. One can easily notice this species along the North-south
Highway in Peninsular Malaysia, planted in linear layout at regular intervals. It can be
seen along rural roads leading to FELDA settlements in Pahang. Ironically, the trees are
planted on the road shoulders beside rubber trees or oil palms that serve little significant
since the latter has dominated the rural landscape scene. Similarly, the same species is
planted on local road shoulder in many terracing housing communities, perhaps, for
shade. The practice of repetitive-planting scheme results to dominancy of few tree forms.
The trees would not become place-markers because they are redundant; seeing similar
form throughout the landscape. Thus people could not identify them as references for
place recognition and perhaps orientation. Possibly, the scheme creates little chance for
people to get affiliation with the landscape contents as what being continuously practice
by villagers with their orchard trees. Repetitive-planting scheme of this kind could not
give direct gains to the local people such as rubber trees or oil palms that have
contributed to the livelihood of rural settlers. The planting belongs to the public; not a
property to a person or family that people would care with affection. Therefore, the
current tree-planting scheme in Malaysia nurtured landscape lacks in variety, both in
species and composition.

This pertinent problem in the nurtured landscape can be changed through proper design
and planning considerations based on three aspects: ecological system, sensitivity to
people’s needs, and place making. Introducing more indigenous tree species would
generate varied form that would later signify the character of a place. Appanah and
Weinland (1993 p.153) suggested more than 70 species of indigenous light hardwood
species including sesendok, mersawa, bintagor, kedondong, medang kemangi, and nyatoh
puteh for silviculture practice, and likely suitable for planting in recreational areas and
roadside. Sesendok can reach to 40m with stout and columnar bole and its flowers are
borne in erect spike protruding above the leaves. The fruits are round or occasionally
bilobed and borne annually providing food for many birds and arboreal mammals. PLUS
Sendirian Berhad has planted kempas saplings in year 2000 as street planting at exit road
in Kampong Kempas, Johor Bahru. After three years of proper maintenance the saplings
have grown to small trees and marking a character to the roadway.

Likewise, tree planting for roadways and parks in residential neighborhood should be of
fruit species, possibily from families of Garcinia (e.g. mangosteen), Mangifera (e.g.
mango), and Nephelium (e.g. rambutan). Mass or repetitive planting of fruit trees could
create an orchard-home setting. This is a setting that has place attachment whereby
people would feel the sense of belonging to the living environment. For example, the
residents of Taman Merlimau in Melaka planted varieties of mango tree in front of their
low-cost dwellings. The landscape becomes vibrant in month of April to May when the
trees borne fruits of varied shapes that distinctively differentiated the community from
others (Ismail, 2001). The efforts of the residents are remarkable since they can exchange
the fruits with their neighbors as well as characterized the physical ambience of the living
community. Social contribution of fruit tree planting is also demonstrated at another
neighborhood, Taman Skudai Kiri in Johor, whereby the neighbors collectively planted
and maintained a row of breadfruit (sukun) along a local road. Joy and satisfaction are
achieved during the harvesting of the fruit. This is the significant of public/local
participation in the development of residential landscape. The tree serves as a bond to get
the residents together and serves their needs and sensitivity. Sadly, all of the breadfruit
trees were destroyed giving space for the widening of the road. This is a clear sign of the
local authority ignoring the needs and sensitivity of the locals.

Planting similar tree species throughout various landuse would obviously limit the
diversity of shrubs and herbs and animals to thrive in the ecosystem. Shade-tolerant
species such as gingers, ferns and herbaceous shrubs depend on the filtration capacity of
sunlight by the tree canopy (Whitmore, 1984). Some herbaceous plants such as ferns
survive with low light as low as 2000 lux but flowering shrubs such as ixoras require
more than 20,000 lux of illumance. Planting of one tree species would allow too much or
too little light to reach the ground. Thus planting of sparse canopied trees such as petai
(Parkia speciosa) offer enough light for some flowering shrubs whereas dense canopied
trees such as petaling (Ochanostachys amentacea) provide shade for ferns. Reciprocally,
increasing the number of tree species would increase the animal population because more
shelter and food are provided (Whitmore, 1984). Consequently, this condition increase
the complexity of the ecosystem; a sign of diversity.

In summary, the practice of landscape architecture such as tree planting in the built
environment ought to consider the ecological impact to the environment for both people
and animals. Planting a variety of plant species is a fundamental to create a diverse
landscape character. In addition, the practice must take account on the cultural values of
the locals in introducing the tree species into their community. The trees should give
tangible and intangible benefits to the residents that would generate sense of place and
sense of belonging to their living environments.

References
Appanah, S. and Weinland, G. (1993). Planting Quality Timber Trees in Peninsular
Malaysia, Forest Research Institute Malaysia, Kepong.

Chawla, L. (1992). Childhood Place Attachments. In Altman, I. and Low, S.M. (Eds.)
Place Attachment. New York and London: Plenum Press, pp.63-86.

Corner, E.J. (1952). Wayside Trees of Malaya, 2ndEd., Government Printing Office,
Singapore.

Ismail Said (2001), Pluralism in Terrace Housing Community Through Ethnic Gardens,
Jurnal Teknologi, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, No.35, December, pp. 41-53.

Korpela, K. (2001). Children’s Environment. In Bechtel, R.B. and Churchman, A.,


Handbook of Environmental Psychology, New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Lynch, K. (1962). Image of the City, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Moore, R.C. (1986). Childhood’s Domain: Play and place in child development,
Croom Helm, London.

Moore, R.C. & Young, D. (1978). Childhood Outdoors: Toward a Social Ecology of the
Landscape, Children and the Environment, In I. Altman and J.F. Wohlwill, Children and
the Environment, Plenum Press, New York, 1980.

Olds, A.R. (1989). Psychological and Physiological Harmony in Child Care Center
Design, Children’s Environment Quarterly, Vol.6, No.4, pp.8-16.

Prescott, E. (1987). The Physical Environment and Cognitive Development in Child-care


Centers. In Weinstein, C.S., David, T.G. (Eds.), Spaces for Children, New York: Plenum
Press, pp.73-87.

Proshansky, H.M. and Fabian, A.K. (1987). The Development of Place Identity in the
Child. In Weinstein, C.S. and David, T.G. (eds.) Space for Children, New York: Plenum
Press. pp. 21-39.

Ulrich, R. (1983). Aesthetic and Affective Responses to Natural Environment. In I.


Altman and J.F. Wohlwill, Human Behavior and Environment: Behavior and the Natural
Environment, Vol.6, New York: Plenum Press
.
Smith, R.L. and Smith, T.M (2001). Ecology and Field Biology, 6th Ed., New York:
Cummings.

Whitmore, T.C. (1984). Tropical Rain Forest of the Far East, Cambridge University
Press.
Figure 1.0: Raintrees dominating roadway leading to a city center in Malaysia

Figure 2.0: Mango trees dominating the scene of a low-cost housing


neighborhood at Taman Merliamu, Melaka

You might also like