IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirb/v47y2020i4p626-644.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dismantling the fence for social justice? Evidence based on the inequity of urban green space accessibility in the central urban area of Beijing

Author

Listed:
  • Jiayu Wu

    (Zhejiang University, PR China)

  • Qingsong He

    (Huazhong University of Science & Technology, PR China)

  • Yunwen Chen

    (Zhejiang University, PR China)

  • Jian Lin

    (Peking University, PR China)

  • Shantong Wang

Abstract

Gated communities have become a common feature in recent decades and have been shown to lead to social inequality to the detriment of the poorest social classes. Because access to urban green space is crucial for both physical health and spiritual pleasure, it is often regarded as an indicator of social justice; however, there are many references to the current inequity in urban green space accessibility. Our study aimed first to measure the potential spatial accessibility of green space in the central urban area of Beijing; then to evaluate the socio-economic disparities in green space accessibility; and finally, to assess the effect of the policy of “opening up gated residential communities†on urban green space accessibility. We adopt the Gaussian-based two-step floating catchment to assess the spatial accessibility of green spaces in each residential zone in the central area of Beijing, and the ordinary least squares model was used to evaluate the inequity in accessibility caused by socio-economic disparities. The results reveal that lower income residential zones have remarkably lower access to green spaces. Next, by comparing the differences in accessibility equity between two comparable scenarios in which all communities have dismantled their fences, we unexpectedly find that the inequity of access to urban green space does not improve but becomes more pronounced. We attribute this result to socio-spatial polarization. Our findings can be used by urban planners to target current urban planning system reform and by policymakers to focus closely on the gradual spatial polarization between the rich and the poor.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiayu Wu & Qingsong He & Yunwen Chen & Jian Lin & Shantong Wang, 2020. "Dismantling the fence for social justice? Evidence based on the inequity of urban green space accessibility in the central urban area of Beijing," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(4), pages 626-644, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirb:v:47:y:2020:i:4:p:626-644
    DOI: 10.1177/2399808318793139
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2399808318793139
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2399808318793139?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Katherine Kenyon Henderson & Yan Song, 2008. "Can nearby open spaces substitute for the size of a property owner's private yard?," International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 1(2), pages 147-165, June.
    2. Siqi Zheng & Matthew E. Kahn, 2013. "Does Government Investment in Local Public Goods Spur Gentrification? Evidence from Beijing," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 41(1), pages 1-28, March.
    3. Michael LaCour-Little & Stephen Malpezzi, 2001. "Gated Communities and Property Values," Wisconsin-Madison CULER working papers 01-12, University of Wisconsin Center for Urban Land Economic Research.
    4. Ta, Na & Zhao, Ying & Chai, Yanwei, 2016. "Built environment, peak hours and route choice efficiency: An investigation of commuting efficiency using GPS data," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 161-170.
    5. Lin Li & Lei Yang & Haihong Zhu & Rongrong Dai, 2015. "Explorative Analysis of Wuhan Intra-Urban Human Mobility Using Social Media Check-In Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-19, August.
    6. Fred E. Foldvary, 1994. "Public Goods And Private Communities," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 167.
    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. Yi-Ya Hsu & Scott Hawken & Samad Sepasgozar & Zih-Hong Lin, 2022. "Beyond the Backyard: GIS Analysis of Public Green Space Accessibility in Australian Metropolitan Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-25, April.
    2. Wu, Chao & Du, Yihao & Li, Sheng & Liu, Pengyu & Ye, Xinyue, 2022. "Does visual contact with green space impact housing pricesʔ An integrated approach of machine learning and hedonic modeling based on the perception of green space," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    3. Zelin Zhang & Xiaomin Tang & Yun Wang, 2023. "Evaluation of the Intergenerational Equity of Public Open Space in Old Communities: A Case Study of Caoyang New Village in Shanghai," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-26, July.
    4. Wang, Ruoyu & Cao, Mengqiu & Yao, Yao & Wu, Wenjie, 2022. "The inequalities of different dimensions of visible street urban green space provision: A machine learning approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    5. Chang Wang & Siyuan Wang & Yilun Cao & Haojun Yan & Yunyuan Li, 2023. "The Social Equity of Urban Parks in High-Density Urban Areas: A Case Study in the Core Area of Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-21, September.
    6. Juliana Melo & Ana Isabel Ribeiro & Susana Aznar & Andreia Pizarro & Maria Paula Santos, 2021. "Urban Green Spaces, Greenness Exposure and Species Richness in Residential Environments and Relations with Physical Activity and BMI in Portuguese Adolescents," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-14, June.
    7. Xin Xu & Jing Hu & Li Lv & Jiaojiao Yin & Xiaobo Tian, 2022. "Research on the Matching Relationship between the Supply of Urban Ecological Recreational Space and the Demand of Residents—A Case Study of an Urban Development Area in Wuhan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(2), pages 1-19, January.
    8. Liqin Zhang & Huhua Cao & Ruibo Han, 2021. "Residents’ Preferences and Perceptions toward Green Open Spaces in an Urban Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-23, February.
    9. Xiaoling Li & Chunliang Xiu & Ye Wei & Hong S. He, 2020. "Evaluating Methodology for the Service Extent of Refugee Parks in Changchun, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-16, July.
    10. Yi-Ya Hsu & Zih-Hong Lin & Chong-En Li, 2023. "Realising the Sustainable Development Goal 11.7 in the post-pandemic era – A case study of Taiwan," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 50(1), pages 162-181, January.
    11. Benjamin Guinaudeau & Mark Brink & Beat Schäffer & Martin A. Schlaepfer, 2023. "A Methodology for Quantifying the Spatial Distribution and Social Equity of Urban Green and Blue Spaces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-20, December.

    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. Moroni, Stefano & Antoniucci, Valentina & Bisello, Adriano, 2016. "Energy sprawl, land taking and distributed generation: towards a multi-layered density," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 266-273.
    2. Sara Santos Cruz & Paulo Pinho, 2009. "Closed Condominiums as Urban Fragments of the Contemporary City," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(11), pages 1685-1710, November.
    3. Fred E. Foldvary, 2011. "Contract, Voice and Rent: Voluntary Urban Planning," Chapters, in: David Emanuel Andersson & Åke E. Andersson & Charlotta Mellander (ed.), Handbook of Creative Cities, chapter 25, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Francesco Minora, 2013. "Collective institutions towards habitability: roles, strategies and forms of governance," Euricse Working Papers 1352, Euricse (European Research Institute on Cooperative and Social Enterprises).
    5. Devin Michelle Bunten & Matthew E. Kahn, 2014. "The Impact of Emerging Climate Risks on Urban Real Estate Price Dynamics," NBER Working Papers 20018, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Ben O’Neill, 2011. "The Threat of Virtue: Why Independence and Integrity Threaten the State," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 27(Fall 2011), pages 75-98.
    7. Guerrieri, Veronica & Hartley, Daniel & Hurst, Erik, 2013. "Endogenous gentrification and housing price dynamics," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 45-60.
    8. Peter Boettke & Christopher Coyne & Peter Leeson, 2011. "Quasimarket failure," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 209-224, October.
    9. Peter Gordon & Wendell Cox, 2014. "Modern cities: their role and their private planning roots," Chapters, in: David Emanuel Andersson & Stefano Moroni (ed.), Cities and Private Planning, chapter 8, pages 155-173, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Pramono, Ari & Oppewal, Harmen, 2021. "Where to refuel: Modeling on-the-way choice of convenience outlet," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    11. Levent Taş & Esra Burcu Sağlam, 2020. "New Trends and Socio-Spatial Relations in Gated Communities," Journal of Economy Culture and Society, Istanbul University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 62(0), pages 1-21, December.
    12. Yoonseuk Woo & Chris Webster, 2014. "Co-evolution of gated communities and local public goods," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(12), pages 2539-2554, September.
    13. Ruohan Hu, 2017. "The impact of rail transit on the distribution of new housing projects in Beijing," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(8), pages 1867-1886, June.
    14. Kai Liu & Toshiaki Ichinose, 2017. "Hedonic Price Modeling of New Residential Property Values in Xi’an City, China," International Journal of Social Science Studies, Redfame publishing, vol. 5(9), pages 42-56, September.
    15. Aron Gooblar, 2002. "Outside the Walls: Urban Gated Communities and their Regulation within the British Planning System," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(3), pages 321-334, April.
    16. Alessi Louis De, 1998. "Reflections on Coase, Cost, and Efficiency," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-22, March.
    17. F. Frederic Deng, 2002. "Ground Lease-Based Land Use System versus Common Interest Development," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(2), pages 190-206.
    18. Huiran Han & Kai Yang & Chengfeng Yang & Gang Yang & Lingyi Xu, 2022. "Influence and Mechanism of a Multi-Scale Built Environment on the Leisure Activities of the Elderly: Evidence from Hefei City in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-24, July.
    19. Stefano Moroni, 2014. "Towards a general theory of contractual communities: neither necessarily gated, nor a form of privatization," Chapters, in: David Emanuel Andersson & Stefano Moroni (ed.), Cities and Private Planning, chapter 3, pages 38-65, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Klein, Daniel, 2004. "The People’s Romance: Why People Love Government (as much as they do)," Ratio Working Papers 31, The Ratio Institute, revised 11 May 2005.

    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:sae:envirb:v:47:y:2020:i:4:p:626-644. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.