IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i12p5474-d1678528.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of Spatial Equality and Social Justice of Urban Park Distribution from Park Category Perspective: Evidence from Shanghai, China

Author

Listed:
  • Jieqiong Wang

    (College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
    Eco-SMART Lab Attached to Key Laboratory of Ecology and Energy-Saving Study of Dense Habitat, Tongji University, Ministry of Education, Shanghai 200092, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Huiqing Jiang

    (College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Min Wang

    (College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
    Eco-SMART Lab Attached to Key Laboratory of Ecology and Energy-Saving Study of Dense Habitat, Tongji University, Ministry of Education, Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Yue Xiong

    (Shanghai Key Laboratory of Urban Design and Urban Science, NYU Shanghai, Shanghai 200122, China
    School of Ecological and Environmental Sciences, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China)

  • Anna Zhu

    (Shanghai Urban Planning and Design Research Institute, Shanghai 200040, China)

  • Fangxinyi Wang

    (The Shanghai Planning and Natural Resources Bureau, Shanghai 200003, China)

Abstract

Urban parks deliver vital ecosystem services and enhance residents’ well-being globally, yet equitable access remains challenging in high-density cities. The prevailing planning paradigms predominantly rely on proximity-based metrics, overlooking critical interactions between demographic diversity, differentiated social demands, and park typology distinctions. Moreover, the existing studies frequently examine aggregate green space distributions without categorically analyzing justice implications. This study develops a geospatial–quantitative framework integrating spatial equality and social justice metrics, applied in Xuhui District, Shanghai. Key findings reveal the following: (1) spatial inequality characterized by large parks clustered in low-density peripheries, while high-density central zones lack adequate park coverage; (2) significant social justice deficits for priority groups (elderly, youth, low-income), exacerbated by insufficient consideration of socioeconomic needs; (3) pronounced disparities in justice across park types, with pocket parks exhibiting the most severe inequities. Consequently, we recommend prioritizing the social demand in park allocation and implementing community-centered pocket park development. This study not only diagnoses spatial–environmental injustices in high-density urban cores but also provides a transferable framework for equitable park planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Jieqiong Wang & Huiqing Jiang & Min Wang & Yue Xiong & Anna Zhu & Fangxinyi Wang, 2025. "Assessment of Spatial Equality and Social Justice of Urban Park Distribution from Park Category Perspective: Evidence from Shanghai, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-19, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:12:p:5474-:d:1678528
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/12/5474/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/12/5474/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:17:y:2025:i:12:p:5474-:d:1678528. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.