786caeefb13016
The Miyawaki method presents a stark alternative to the recommendations of the International Society of Arboriculture, with many benefits.
Maybe people want a Miyawaki forest in a city to help with runoff, air quality, and temperature regulation.
On the other hand, maybe people prefer sparsely placed trees which don't obscure their views of road signs and intersections, or provide shade over a lawn for congregation.
So I think the current consensus is something like: help forests migrate faster than their natural rate, but don't wormhole species across the planet.
The biodiversity should increase a little bit as local fauna habituate and immigrate to the forest, bringing with them propagules from other native species, so humans don't have to do all the work.
Specific benefits of the Miyawaki method are that it can dovetail well with common urban practices. A small forest can grow next to concrete buildings, roads and sidewalks, and offer all the common "green building" benefits such as fire suppression, improved thermal regulation, and runoff absorption. Of course, there will be wildlife as well. Some people consider it a nuisance for whatever reason.
M.R. Hari in Kerala has done some experiments with "eccentrifying" (my word, not his) Miyawaki forests into types such as a edible- or flower- dominated forests, which the mix of such species is slightly increased, but not enough to disrupt the ecological balance. I recommend his YouTube channel 'Crowd Foresting' for many examples of what these forests can look like (in his particular location).