IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i11p3917-d178798.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analyzing the Level of Accessibility of Public Urban Green Spaces to Different Socially Vulnerable Groups of People

Author

Listed:
  • K M Atikur Rahman

    (School of Sociology and Political Science, Shanghai University, 99, Shangda Road, Shanghai 200444, China)

  • Dunfu Zhang

    (School of Sociology and Political Science, Shanghai University, 99, Shangda Road, Shanghai 200444, China)

Abstract

This study estimates the factors affecting socially vulnerable groups’ demand for and accessibility levels to green public spaces in Dhaka City, Bangladesh. Dhaka is a high-density city with one of the lowest levels of green space per capita in the world. Dhaka has just 8.5% of tree-covered lands, while an ideal city requires at least 20% of green space. Urban public green space provides a healthy environment to city dwellers as well as ecological soundness. This study aims to examine the effects of population density and size of a community area (Thana) on the social demand for and accessibility to green parks. To determine the socially vulnerable group demand index, this study used demographic data from the National Population and Housing Census 2011 conducted by the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. This study used geographical data extracted from Google Earth Pro to measure accessibility levels, and additionally analyzed geographical data with ArcGIS 10.0 and Google Earth Pro. We drew radius circles using Free Map Tools to measure time-distance weighted scores from community areas to urban green spaces. The results show that the large population size of socially vulnerable groups creates very high demand at the score of 0.61 for urban green public parks and small-sized, high-density community areas generate very good accessibility at 2.01% to green public spaces. These findings are highly useful to policymakers, urban planners, landscape engineers, and city governments to make a compact city sustainable, inclusive, and resilient. Moreover, the notion of a “smart city” might be a smart solution in order to manage Dhaka Megacity sustainably in this modern technological age.

Suggested Citation

  • K M Atikur Rahman & Dunfu Zhang, 2018. "Analyzing the Level of Accessibility of Public Urban Green Spaces to Different Socially Vulnerable Groups of People," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-27, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:11:p:3917-:d:178798
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/3917/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/3917/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. E Talen & L Anselin, 1998. "Assessing Spatial Equity: An Evaluation of Measures of Accessibility to Public Playgrounds," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 30(4), pages 595-613, April.
    2. Ronald K. Mitchell & Lowell W. Busenitz & Barbara Bird & Connie Marie Gaglio & Jeffery S. McMullen & Eric A. Morse & J. Brock Smith, 2007. "The Central Question in Entrepreneurial Cognition Research 2007," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 31(1), pages 1-27, January.
    3. Miltiadis D. Lytras & Anna Visvizi, 2018. "Who Uses Smart City Services and What to Make of It: Toward Interdisciplinary Smart Cities Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-16, June.
    4. Shanahan, D.F. & Lin, B.B. & Bush, R. & Gaston, K.J. & Dean, J.H. & Barber, E. & Fuller, R.A., 2015. "Toward improved public health outcomes from urban nature," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 105(3), pages 470-477.
    5. Yuemei Zhu & Junxiang Ding & Qing Zhu & Yang Cheng & Qiuchen Ma & Xuze Ji, 2017. "The Impact of Green Open Space on Community Attachment—A Case Study of Three Communities in Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-14, April.
    6. Yanhua Yuan & Jiangang Xu & Zhenbo Wang, 2017. "Spatial Equity Measure on Urban Ecological Space Layout Based on Accessibility of Socially Vulnerable Groups—A Case Study of Changting, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-20, August.
    7. Narasimha D. Rao & Jihoon Min, 2018. "Decent Living Standards: Material Prerequisites for Human Wellbeing," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 138(1), pages 225-244, July.
    8. Christien Klaufus & Paul Van Lindert & Femke Van Noorloos & Griet Steel, 2017. "All-Inclusiveness versus Exclusion: Urban Project Development in Latin America and Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-15, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Jun Yang & Andong Guo & Xueming Li & Tai Huang, 2018. "Study of the Impact of a High-Speed Railway Opening on China’s Accessibility Pattern and Spatial Equality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-13, August.
    2. Elsa A. Pérez-Paredes & Aleksandra Krstikj, 2020. "Spatial Equity in Urban Public Space (UPS) Based on Analysis of Municipal Public Policy Omissions: A Case Study of Atizapán de Zaragoza, State of México," Societies, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, January.
    3. Houde, Maxime & Apparicio, Philippe & Séguin, Anne-Marie, 2018. "A ride for whom: Has cycling network expansion reduced inequities in accessibility in Montreal, Canada?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 9-21.
    4. Maw–Der Foo & Marilyn A. Uy & Charles Murnieks, 2015. "Beyond Affective Valence: Untangling Valence and Activation Influences on Opportunity Identification," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 39(2), pages 407-431, March.
    5. Christopher M. Bacon & Gregory A. Baker, 2017. "The rise of food banks and the challenge of matching food assistance with potential need: towards a spatially specific, rapid assessment approach," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(4), pages 899-919, December.
    6. Charlie M. Shackleton & Patrick T. Hurley & Annika C. Dahlberg & Marla R. Emery & Harini Nagendra, 2017. "Urban Foraging: A Ubiquitous Human Practice Overlooked by Urban Planners, Policy, and Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-18, October.
    7. Rakhman, Fuad & Wijayana, Singgih, 2024. "Human development and the quality of financial reporting among the local governments in Indonesia," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    8. Annelies (E.B.) Zoomers, 2018. "Development at the Crossroads of Capital Flows and Migration: Leaving No One Behind?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-10, December.
    9. zu Ermgassen, Sophus & Drewniok, Michal & Bull, Joseph & Walker, Christine Corlet & Mancini, Mattia & Ryan-Collins, Josh & Serrenho, André Cabrera, 2022. "A home for all within planetary boundaries: pathways for meeting England’s housing needs without transgressing national climate and biodiversity goals," OSF Preprints 5kxce, Center for Open Science.
    10. Steve Harris & Jan Weinzettel & Gregor Levin, 2020. "Implications of Low Carbon City Sustainability Strategies for 2050," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-23, July.
    11. Yanfang Zhang & Mushang Lee, 2019. "A Hybrid Model for Addressing the Relationship between Financial Performance and Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-15, May.
    12. Benoît Desmarchelier & Faridah Djellal & Faïz Gallouj, 2018. "Public Service Innovation Networks (PSINs): Collaborating for Innovation and Value Creation," Working Papers halshs-01934275, HAL.
    13. Felipe Vásquez & Gibran Vita & Daniel B. Müller, 2018. "Food Security for an Aging and Heavier Population," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-19, October.
    14. María Eugenia López-Pérez & María Eugenia Reyes-García & María Eugenia López-Sanz, 2023. "Smart Mobility and Smart Climate: An Illustrative Case in Seville, Spain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-11, January.
    15. Bryan T. Stinchfield & Reed E. Nelson & Matthew S. Wood, 2013. "Learning from Levi–Strauss’ Legacy: Art, Craft, Engineering, Bricolage, and Brokerage in Entrepreneurship," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 37(4), pages 889-921, July.
    16. Yan Xu & Weixuan Song & Chunhui Liu, 2018. "Social-Spatial Accessibility to Urban Educational Resources under the School District System: A Case Study of Public Primary Schools in Nanjing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, July.
    17. Lanivich, Stephen E. & Smith, Adam & Levasseur, Ludvig & Pidduck, Robert J. & Busenitz, Lowell & Tang, Jintong, 2022. "Advancing entrepreneurial alertness: Review, synthesis, and future research directions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 1165-1176.
    18. David R. Marshall & Robert Gigliotti, 2020. "Bound for entrepreneurship? A career-theoretical perspective on entrepreneurial intentions," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 287-303, March.
    19. Olaf Tietje, 2025. "Self‐Organised Practices of Social Participation; or How Individualisation is Collectively Contested in the Raval," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 13.
    20. Mauri Laukkanen, 2023. "Understanding the contents and development of nascent entrepreneurs’ belief systems," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 1289-1312, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:11:p:3917-:d:178798. 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.