IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i11p1197-d673238.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Community Green Inequity: A Fine-Scale Assessment of Beijing Urban Area

Author

Listed:
  • Yuyang Zhang

    (School of Architecture, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China)

  • Qilin Wu

    (Tsinghua Urban Planning and Design Institute, Beijing 100085, China)

  • Lei Wu

    (Beijing Zhongcheng Youwei Technology Co., Ltd., Beijing 100085, China)

  • Yan Li

    (School of Architecture, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China)

Abstract

Green space exposure is beneficial to the physical and mental health of community residents, but the spatial distribution of green space is inequitable. Due to data availability, green equality or justice studies typically use administrative units as contextual areas to evaluate green spaces exposure, which is macro-scale and may lead to biased estimates as it ignores fine-scale green spaces (e.g., community gardens, lawns), that community residents are more frequently exposed to. In this study, we used the community as the unit of analysis, considered the green exposure of community residents in their daily social and physical activities, obtained data on three types of green spaces including fine-scale green spaces in the communities, surrounding large-scale parks and streetscape images. We propose a series of metrics for assessing community green equity, including a total of 11 metrics in three major categories of morphology, visibility and accessibility and applied them to 4544 communities in Beijing urban area. Through spatial visualization, spatial clustering, radar plots, and correlation analysis, we comprehensively analyzed the equity of green space at the community scale, identified the cold and hot spots of homogeneity, and then analyzed the equity of green space among regions under the urbanization process. The measurement results of these metrics showed that there are large differences and complementarities between different categories of metrics, but similarities exist between metrics of the same category. The proposed methodology represents the development of a green space evaluation system that can be used by decision makers and urban green designers to create and maintain more equitable community green spaces. In addition, the large-scale, comprehensive and fine-scale green space measurement of this study can be combined with other studies such as public health and environmental pollution in the future to obtain more comprehensive conclusions and better guide the construction and regeneration of green spaces.

Suggested Citation

  • Yuyang Zhang & Qilin Wu & Lei Wu & Yan Li, 2021. "Measuring Community Green Inequity: A Fine-Scale Assessment of Beijing Urban Area," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-16, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:11:p:1197-:d:673238
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/11/1197/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/11/1197/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dominique Moran & Phil I. Jones & Jacob A. Jordaan & Amy E. Porter, 2020. "Does Nature Contact in Prison Improve Well-Being? Mapping Land Cover to Identify the Effect of Greenspace on Self-Harm and Violence in Prisons in England and Wales," Annals of the American Association of Geographers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 111(6), pages 1779-1795, December.
    2. Schaeffer, Y. & Tivadar, M., 2019. "Measuring Environmental Inequalities: Insights from the Residential Segregation Literature," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Yves Schaeffer & Mihaï Tivadar, 2019. "Measuring environmental inequalities: insights from the residential segregation literature [Mesurer les inégalités environnementales: perspectives issues de la littérature sur la ségrégation réside," Post-Print hal-02610105, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhiming Li & Xiyang Chen & Zhou Shen & Zhengxi Fan, 2022. "Evaluating Neighborhood Green-Space Quality Using a Building Blue–Green Index (BBGI) in Nanjing, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-18, March.
    2. Yilun Cao & Yuhan Guo & Mingjuan Zhang, 2022. "Research on the Equity of Urban Green Park Space Layout Based on Ga2SFCA Optimization Method—Taking the Core Area of Beijing as an Example," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-20, August.
    3. Olga Tzanni & Paraskevas Nikolaou & Stella Giannakopoulou & Apostolos Arvanitis & Socrates Basbas, 2022. "Social Dimensions of Spatial Justice in the Use of the Public Transport System in Thessaloniki, Greece," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-26, November.
    4. Qinyu Cui & Yiting Huang & Guang Yang & Yu Chen, 2022. "Measuring Green Exposure Levels in Communities of Different Economic Levels at Different Completion Periods: Through the Lens of Social Equity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-26, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Guoxiang Li & Rong Zhang & Suling Feng & Yuqing Wang, 2022. "Digital finance and sustainable development: Evidence from environmental inequality in China," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(7), pages 3574-3594, November.
    2. Neier, Thomas, 2023. "The green divide: A spatial analysis of segregation-based environmental inequality in Vienna," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    3. Penghu Zhu & Boqiang Lin, 2022. "Vanishing Happiness: How Does Pollution Information Disclosure Affect Life Satisfaction?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-19, August.
    4. Gosztonyi, Ákos & Demmler, Joanne C. & Juhola, Sirkku & Ala-Mantila, Sanna, 2023. "Ambient air pollution-related environmental inequality and environmental dissimilarity in Helsinki Metropolitan Area, Finland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:11:p:1197-:d:673238. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.