Ranking · 2000–2020
Cities gaining forest
Where forest grew within 10 km of a city centre between 2000 and 2020, net of what was lost — 2,301 cities, ranked by hectares gained and by share.
Of the 5,423 cities measured, the forest around 2,301 grew between 2000 and 2020 by more than it shrank. Đồng Xoài gained the most: about 7,190 ha net within 10 km of its centre.
Top 100 by net forest gained within 10 km
All 5,423 cities (CSV)| # | City | Net gain | Change | Forest 2020 | Gained / lost |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Đồng Xoài, Vietnam | +7,190 ha | +44% | 23,500 ha | 10,200 ha / 2,970 ha |
| 2 | Cai Lậy, Vietnam | +3,610 ha | +42% | 12,300 ha | 3,610 ha / 4 ha |
| 3 | Tocoa, Honduras | +3,230 ha | +17% | 22,600 ha | 4,850 ha / 1,620 ha |
| 4 | Olathe, United States | +3,080 ha | +44% | 10,000 ha | 3,320 ha / 240 ha |
| 5 | Mengzi, China | +3,080 ha | +117% | 5,700 ha | 3,230 ha / 154 ha |
| 6 | Minhang, China | +3,010 ha | +183% | 4,640 ha | 3,010 ha / under 1 ha |
| 7 | Xinqiao, China | +2,790 ha | +170% | 4,430 ha | 2,790 ha / 2 ha |
| 8 | Songjiang, China | +2,690 ha | +155% | 4,420 ha | 2,690 ha / 3 ha |
| 9 | Changzheng, China | +2,600 ha | +184% | 4,010 ha | 2,600 ha / under 1 ha |
| 10 | Langfang, China | +2,580 ha | +225% | 3,720 ha | 2,580 ha / 2 ha |
| 11 | Dezhou, China | +2,440 ha | +213% | 3,590 ha | 2,450 ha / 11 ha |
| 12 | Shanghai, China | +2,430 ha | +210% | 3,590 ha | 2,430 ha / under 1 ha |
| 13 | Lincang, China | +2,420 ha | +15% | 19,000 ha | 2,770 ha / 351 ha |
| 14 | Longshan, China | +2,330 ha | +63% | 6,050 ha | 2,390 ha / 62 ha |
| 15 | Teixeira de Freitas, Brazil | +2,320 ha | +68% | 5,740 ha | 2,940 ha / 616 ha |
| 16 | Shivamogga, India | +2,270 ha | +27% | 10,800 ha | 2,320 ha / 46 ha |
| 17 | Jiading, China | +2,270 ha | +157% | 3,710 ha | 2,270 ha / 4 ha |
| 18 | Hāthazāri, Bangladesh | +2,240 ha | +19% | 13,900 ha | 2,500 ha / 257 ha |
| 19 | El Progreso, Honduras | +2,240 ha | +14% | 18,700 ha | 2,760 ha / 522 ha |
| 20 | Nawābganj, Bangladesh | +2,230 ha | +58% | 6,080 ha | 2,240 ha / 7 ha |
| 21 | Feicheng, China | +2,230 ha | +66% | 5,600 ha | 2,240 ha / 11 ha |
| 22 | Bhadrāvati, India | +2,220 ha | +17% | 15,400 ha | 2,250 ha / 38 ha |
| 23 | Qingpu, China | +2,210 ha | +161% | 3,580 ha | 2,210 ha / 1 ha |
| 24 | Chơn Thành, Vietnam | +2,200 ha | +12% | 20,100 ha | 8,160 ha / 5,970 ha |
| 25 | Sishui, China | +2,190 ha | +166% | 3,510 ha | 2,190 ha / under 1 ha |
| 26 | Dachang, China | +2,170 ha | +223% | 3,150 ha | 2,170 ha / under 1 ha |
| 27 | Zhujing, China | +2,120 ha | +162% | 3,430 ha | 2,120 ha / 1 ha |
| 28 | Botucatu, Brazil | +2,070 ha | +27% | 9,870 ha | 2,380 ha / 311 ha |
| 29 | Butembo, Democratic Republic of the Congo | +2,070 ha | +12% | 19,600 ha | 2,920 ha / 850 ha |
| 30 | Chuxiong, China | +1,980 ha | +23% | 10,600 ha | 2,220 ha / 235 ha |
| 31 | Longjing, China | +1,970 ha | +21% | 11,400 ha | 2,360 ha / 395 ha |
| 32 | Wuhu, China | +1,960 ha | +75% | 4,570 ha | 1,960 ha / 4 ha |
| 33 | Shunyi, China | +1,890 ha | +138% | 3,270 ha | 1,900 ha / 7 ha |
| 34 | Severodvinsk, Russia | +1,890 ha | +25% | 9,410 ha | 2,000 ha / 113 ha |
| 35 | Gazipur, Bangladesh | +1,860 ha | +18% | 11,900 ha | 1,940 ha / 84 ha |
| 36 | Arzamas, Russia | +1,820 ha | +16% | 13,000 ha | 1,930 ha / 103 ha |
| 37 | Barrie, Canada | +1,800 ha | +21% | 10,400 ha | 2,060 ha / 265 ha |
| 38 | Pingyin, China | +1,790 ha | +140% | 3,070 ha | 1,800 ha / 4 ha |
| 39 | Trà Vinh, Vietnam | +1,760 ha | +21% | 10,100 ha | 1,820 ha / 61 ha |
| 40 | Luodian, China | +1,760 ha | +137% | 3,040 ha | 1,760 ha / 4 ha |
| 41 | Kon Tum, Vietnam | +1,750 ha | +18% | 11,700 ha | 5,010 ha / 3,260 ha |
| 42 | Arkhangel’sk, Russia | +1,740 ha | +27% | 8,140 ha | 1,950 ha / 209 ha |
| 43 | Kaiyuan, China | +1,730 ha | +28% | 8,020 ha | 1,960 ha / 232 ha |
| 44 | Ŭllyul, North Korea | +1,720 ha | +19% | 10,700 ha | 1,800 ha / 79 ha |
| 45 | Maijdi, Bangladesh | +1,700 ha | +12% | 16,200 ha | 1,730 ha / 31 ha |
| 46 | Kunshan, China | +1,700 ha | +153% | 2,820 ha | 1,700 ha / 1 ha |
| 47 | Nanjing, China | +1,700 ha | +31% | 7,150 ha | 1,740 ha / 42 ha |
| 48 | Shāntipur, India | +1,690 ha | +21% | 9,830 ha | 1,720 ha / 27 ha |
| 49 | Ann Arbor, United States | +1,680 ha | +12% | 15,300 ha | 1,840 ha / 153 ha |
| 50 | Bijie, China | +1,680 ha | +11% | 17,100 ha | 1,940 ha / 262 ha |
| 51 | Solikamsk, Russia | +1,640 ha | +10% | 18,000 ha | 1,860 ha / 223 ha |
| 52 | Overland Park, United States | +1,640 ha | +9.2% | 19,400 ha | 1,780 ha / 140 ha |
| 53 | Bến Tre, Vietnam | +1,620 ha | +8.1% | 21,700 ha | 1,720 ha / 97 ha |
| 54 | Tengyue, China | +1,620 ha | +8.4% | 20,800 ha | 2,580 ha / 959 ha |
| 55 | Cần Giuộc, Vietnam | +1,610 ha | +86% | 3,490 ha | 1,630 ha / 23 ha |
| 56 | Puthia, Bangladesh | +1,600 ha | +14% | 12,900 ha | 1,610 ha / 7 ha |
| 57 | Nay Pyi Taw, Myanmar | +1,590 ha | +34% | 6,300 ha | 1,880 ha / 287 ha |
| 58 | Kanggye, North Korea | +1,580 ha | +11% | 15,500 ha | 2,640 ha / 1,070 ha |
| 59 | Mianyang, China | +1,570 ha | +25% | 7,840 ha | 1,590 ha / 21 ha |
| 60 | Talca, Chile | +1,570 ha | +122% | 2,850 ha | 1,770 ha / 206 ha |
| 61 | Toruń, Poland | +1,560 ha | +14% | 13,100 ha | 2,260 ha / 705 ha |
| 62 | Hòa Thành, Vietnam | +1,560 ha | +22% | 8,650 ha | 2,280 ha / 725 ha |
| 63 | Komsomolsk-on-Amur, Russia | +1,540 ha | +21% | 8,990 ha | 1,790 ha / 250 ha |
| 64 | Jining, China | +1,520 ha | +155% | 2,500 ha | 1,520 ha / under 1 ha |
| 65 | Nancy, France | +1,520 ha | +14% | 12,400 ha | 1,660 ha / 141 ha |
| 66 | Qujing, China | +1,510 ha | +55% | 4,230 ha | 1,600 ha / 91 ha |
| 67 | Comilla, Bangladesh | +1,490 ha | +14% | 11,900 ha | 1,610 ha / 118 ha |
| 68 | Jinshan, China | +1,490 ha | +117% | 2,770 ha | 1,490 ha / 1 ha |
| 69 | Kangnyŏng, North Korea | +1,490 ha | +73% | 3,530 ha | 1,500 ha / 7 ha |
| 70 | Belawan, Indonesia | +1,470 ha | +20% | 8,950 ha | 2,390 ha / 919 ha |
| 71 | Khairpur Mir’s, Pakistan | +1,460 ha | +62% | 3,820 ha | 1,460 ha / under 1 ha |
| 72 | Sanhe, China | +1,460 ha | +205% | 2,180 ha | 1,470 ha / 3 ha |
| 73 | Zoucheng, China | +1,460 ha | +152% | 2,420 ha | 1,460 ha / 1 ha |
| 74 | Efon-Alaaye, Nigeria | +1,450 ha | +6.5% | 23,800 ha | 2,340 ha / 887 ha |
| 75 | Hangzhou, China | +1,450 ha | +27% | 6,830 ha | 1,480 ha / 26 ha |
| 76 | Tobolsk, Russia | +1,440 ha | +13% | 12,600 ha | 1,710 ha / 272 ha |
| 77 | Ikot Ekpene, Nigeria | +1,440 ha | +6.8% | 22,600 ha | 2,180 ha / 735 ha |
| 78 | Jincheng, China | +1,440 ha | +29% | 6,460 ha | 1,490 ha / 47 ha |
| 79 | Mỹ Tho, Vietnam | +1,440 ha | +10% | 15,300 ha | 1,500 ha / 62 ha |
| 80 | Chikmagalūr, India | +1,440 ha | +9.2% | 17,100 ha | 1,560 ha / 121 ha |
| 81 | Yanzhou, China | +1,430 ha | +107% | 2,770 ha | 1,440 ha / 3 ha |
| 82 | Greater Sudbury, Canada | +1,410 ha | +23% | 7,450 ha | 1,570 ha / 165 ha |
| 83 | Ust’-Ilimsk, Russia | +1,410 ha | +6.9% | 21,900 ha | 1,660 ha / 249 ha |
| 84 | Marg‘ilon, Uzbekistan | +1,400 ha | +170% | 2,220 ha | 1,400 ha / under 1 ha |
| 85 | Thị Trấn Thuận Châu, Vietnam | +1,390 ha | +6.7% | 22,300 ha | 2,060 ha / 672 ha |
| 86 | Tanjungbalai, Indonesia | +1,390 ha | +6% | 24,500 ha | 3,000 ha / 1,610 ha |
| 87 | Guaratinguetá, Brazil | +1,370 ha | +19% | 8,520 ha | 1,550 ha / 177 ha |
| 88 | Monza, Italy | +1,360 ha | +25% | 6,810 ha | 1,390 ha / 31 ha |
| 89 | Zhangjiagang, China | +1,350 ha | +54% | 3,860 ha | 1,360 ha / 6 ha |
| 90 | Anning, China | +1,340 ha | +13% | 11,500 ha | 2,070 ha / 722 ha |
| 91 | Częstochowa, Poland | +1,340 ha | +12% | 12,300 ha | 1,710 ha / 372 ha |
| 92 | Mansfield, United Kingdom | +1,330 ha | +23% | 7,240 ha | 1,460 ha / 125 ha |
| 93 | Rybinsk, Russia | +1,320 ha | +15% | 10,100 ha | 1,610 ha / 289 ha |
| 94 | Miri, Malaysia | +1,320 ha | +22% | 7,170 ha | 2,840 ha / 1,530 ha |
| 95 | Suzhou, China | +1,290 ha | +70% | 3,160 ha | 1,300 ha / 9 ha |
| 96 | Chengdu, China | +1,280 ha | +82% | 2,850 ha | 1,300 ha / 21 ha |
| 97 | Changshu, China | +1,280 ha | +50% | 3,820 ha | 1,290 ha / 11 ha |
| 98 | Hailin, China | +1,280 ha | +26% | 6,260 ha | 1,350 ha / 73 ha |
| 99 | Fengxiang, China | +1,280 ha | +117% | 2,370 ha | 1,280 ha / 2 ha |
| 100 | Bobruysk, Belarus | +1,280 ha | +11% | 13,200 ha | 1,720 ha / 446 ha |
Cities less than 20 km apart share part of their 10 km circles, so a metro area where forest grew, such as Shanghai, can appear here several times.
Forest that grew the most, relative to its size
Net gain as a share of the forest standing in 2000, among cities with at least 500 ha of it then.
| City | Change | Forest 2000 | Forest 2020 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Langfang, China | +225% | 1,140 ha | 3,720 ha |
| Dachang, China | +223% | 975 ha | 3,150 ha |
| Dezhou, China | +213% | 1,150 ha | 3,590 ha |
| Hengshui, China | +210% | 605 ha | 1,880 ha |
| Shanghai, China | +210% | 1,160 ha | 3,590 ha |
| Sanhe, China | +205% | 714 ha | 2,180 ha |
| Baoshan, China | +202% | 513 ha | 1,550 ha |
| Changzheng, China | +184% | 1,410 ha | 4,010 ha |
| Minhang, China | +183% | 1,640 ha | 4,640 ha |
| Xinqiao, China | +170% | 1,640 ha | 4,430 ha |
| Marg‘ilon, Uzbekistan | +170% | 822 ha | 2,220 ha |
| Sishui, China | +166% | 1,320 ha | 3,510 ha |
| Daxing, China | +165% | 738 ha | 1,960 ha |
| Yishui, China | +163% | 674 ha | 1,770 ha |
| Tongzhou, China | +162% | 692 ha | 1,810 ha |
| Zhujing, China | +162% | 1,310 ha | 3,430 ha |
| Qingpu, China | +161% | 1,370 ha | 3,580 ha |
| Jiading, China | +157% | 1,450 ha | 3,710 ha |
| Songjiang, China | +155% | 1,730 ha | 4,420 ha |
| Jining, China | +155% | 983 ha | 2,500 ha |
| Kunshan, China | +153% | 1,110 ha | 2,820 ha |
| Zoucheng, China | +152% | 962 ha | 2,420 ha |
| Xintai, China | +148% | 739 ha | 1,830 ha |
| Ningbo, China | +148% | 774 ha | 1,920 ha |
| Pingyin, China | +140% | 1,280 ha | 3,070 ha |
| Puyang, Henan, China | +138% | 744 ha | 1,770 ha |
| Shunyi, China | +138% | 1,370 ha | 3,270 ha |
| Luodian, China | +137% | 1,280 ha | 3,040 ha |
| Mianzhu, Deyang, Sichuan, China | +130% | 659 ha | 1,520 ha |
| Xi’an, China | +129% | 538 ha | 1,230 ha |
| Tianjin, China | +128% | 702 ha | 1,600 ha |
| Baoding, China | +125% | 583 ha | 1,310 ha |
| Jiexiu, China | +123% | 617 ha | 1,370 ha |
| Talca, Chile | +122% | 1,280 ha | 2,850 ha |
| Qingnian, China | +122% | 769 ha | 1,710 ha |
| Changle, China | +122% | 584 ha | 1,290 ha |
| Fengxiang, China | +117% | 1,090 ha | 2,370 ha |
| Mengzi, China | +117% | 2,630 ha | 5,700 ha |
| Jinshan, China | +117% | 1,270 ha | 2,770 ha |
| Xingtai, China | +114% | 551 ha | 1,180 ha |
| Yanzhou, China | +107% | 1,340 ha | 2,770 ha |
| Tangshan, China | +106% | 709 ha | 1,460 ha |
| Sujiatun, China | +104% | 663 ha | 1,350 ha |
| Zhengzhou, China | +103% | 816 ha | 1,660 ha |
| Liaocheng, China | +over 99% | 685 ha | 1,370 ha |
| Heze, China | +98% | 618 ha | 1,220 ha |
| Laiwu, China | +97% | 1,150 ha | 2,270 ha |
| Linyi, China | +96% | 826 ha | 1,620 ha |
| Taicang, China | +91% | 1,220 ha | 2,330 ha |
| Suqian, China | +87% | 1,010 ha | 1,900 ha |
Questions about forest growing around cities
Which city has gained the most forest?
Đồng Xoài, Vietnam: the forest within 10 km of the centre grew from about 16,300 ha in 2000 to 23,500 ha in 2020, a net gain of about 7,190 ha.
How does a city gain forest?
Trees are planted, as woodland, plantations or orchards; forest grows back on farmland left idle; and young trees around a city grow past 5 m and start to count. The maps can't tell these apart, so a gain can be a new plantation as much as a returning natural forest.
What counts as forest here?
Land with trees at least 5 m tall in GLAD's maps of the world for 2000 and 2020, made at 30 m detail from Landsat imagery by the University of Maryland. Plantations, orchards and trees outside forests count. The gain is net: land that became forest, minus land that stopped being forest.
Why does this ranking stop in 2020?
Forest gained needs a map of where forest stood at both ends of the period, made the same way. GLAD's maps are for 2000 and 2020. The yearly tree cover loss figures elsewhere on Airleaf run to later years, but they record trees lost, not trees grown.