Measuring Urban Greenspace Distribution Equity: The Importance of Appropriate Methodological Approaches

被引:35
作者
Mears, Meghann [1 ]
Brindley, Paul [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sheffield, Dept Landscape Architecture, Western Bank, Floor 13,Arts Tower, Sheffield S10 2TN, S Yorkshire, England
基金
英国艺术与人文研究理事会; 英国自然环境研究理事会; 英国生物技术与生命科学研究理事会;
关键词
urban greenspace; equity mapping; inequality; geographic information systems; modifiable areal unit problem; unknown geographic context problem; PUBLIC-HEALTH; ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE; NATURAL-ENVIRONMENT; SPACE; ACCESS; PARKS; INEQUALITIES; SHEFFIELD; BENEFITS; CITIES;
D O I
10.3390/ijgi8060286
中图分类号
TP [自动化技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
Urban greenspace can provide physical and mental health benefits to residents, potentially reducing health inequalities associated with socioeconomic deprivation. The distribution of urban greenspace is an important social justice issue, and consequently is increasingly studied. However, there is little consistency between studies in terms of methods and definitions. There is no consensus on what comprises the most appropriate geographic units of analysis or how to capture residents' experience of their neighbourhood, leading to the possibility of bias. Several complementary aspects of distribution equity have been defined, yet few studies investigate more than one of these. There are also alternative methods for measuring each aspect of distribution. All of these can lead to conflicting conclusions, which we demonstrate by calculating three aspects of equity for two units of aggregation and three neighbourhood sizes for a single study area. We make several methodological recommendations, including taking steps to capture the relevant neighbourhood as experienced by residents accurately as possible, and suggest that using small-area aggregations may not result in unacceptable levels of information loss. However, a consideration of the local context is critical both in interpreting individual studies and understanding differing results.
引用
收藏
页数:20
相关论文
共 64 条
[11]   Everyday wild: Urban natural areas, health, and well-being [J].
Cheesbrough, Alison E. ;
Garvin, Theresa ;
Nykiforuk, Candace I. J. .
HEALTH & PLACE, 2019, 56 :43-52
[12]  
Crompton J. L., 2013, World Leisure Journal, V55, P333, DOI 10.1080/04419057.2013.836557
[13]   Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in urban green space accessibility: Where to intervene? [J].
Dai, Dajun .
LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING, 2011, 102 (04) :234-244
[14]  
Department for Communities and Local Government, 2011, NEIGHB STAT REL
[15]   Analyzing Objective and Subjective Data in Social Sciences: Implications for Smart Cities [J].
Erhan, Laura ;
Ndubuaku, Maryleen ;
Ferrara, Enrico ;
Richardson, Miles ;
Sheffield, David ;
Ferguson, Fiona J. ;
Brindley, Paul ;
Liotta, Antonio .
IEEE ACCESS, 2019, 7 :19890-19906
[16]   Creating a replicable, valid cross-platform buffering technique: The sausage network buffer for measuring food and physical activity built environments [J].
Forsyth, Ann ;
Van Riper, David ;
Larson, Nicole ;
Wall, Melanie ;
Neumark-Sztainer, Dianne .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEALTH GEOGRAPHICS, 2012, 11
[17]  
Fox J, 2011, NY TIMES BK REV, P22
[18]  
Grahn Patrik, 2003, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, V2, P001, DOI 10.1078/1618-8667-00019
[19]   Access and Equity in Greenspace Provision: A Comparison of Methods to Assess the Impacts of Greening Vacant Land [J].
Heckert, Megan .
TRANSACTIONS IN GIS, 2013, 17 (06) :808-827
[20]   Socioeconomic Inequalities in Green Space Quality and Accessibility-Evidence from a Southern European City [J].
Hoffimann, Elaine ;
Barros, Henrique ;
Ribeiro, Ana Isabel .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2017, 14 (08)