Green justice or just green? Provision of urban green spaces in Berlin, Germany

Landscape and Urban Planning

Volumn 122, Issue , 2014, Pages 129-139

  Kabisch, Nadja ^a,b   Haase, Dagmar ^a,b  

^a HUMBOLDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH UFZ   (Germany)

Author keywords

Berlin; Socio environmental justice; Urban green space provisioning; User preferences

Indexed keywords

CLUSTER ANALYSIS; DIGITAL STORAGE; LAND USE; POPULATION STATISTICS; SURVEYS;

BERLIN; DISSIMILARITY INDEX; ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE; GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE; QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEYS; SOCIODEMOGRAPHIC DATA; URBAN GREEN SPACES; USER PREFERENCES;

URBAN GROWTH;

DEMOGRAPHIC METHOD; ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; GREENSPACE; INFRASTRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT; QUALITY OF LIFE; RESIDENTIAL LOCATION; URBAN DEVELOPMENT; URBAN PLANNING;

BERLIN; GERMANY;

EID: 84892172054     PISSN: 01692046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.11.016     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Amt für Statistik, Berlin-Brandenburg Statistik Berlin-Brandenburg 2013, Retrieved from: http://www.statistik-berlin-brandenburg.de/home.asp.
2. Argus GmbH Wettbewerb Parklandschaft Tempelhof Ergebnisse der Besuchermonitoring 2009 - Bürgerbeteiligung zum Wettbewerbsverfahren 2009 2009.
3. Bixler R., Floyd M. Nature is scaring, disgusting, and uncomfortable. Environment and Behavior 1997, 28(4):443-467.
4. Bolund P., Hunhammar S. Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecological Economics 1999, 29:293-301.
5. Bowler D.E., Buyung-Ali L., Knight T.M., Pullin A.S. Urban greening to cool towns and cities: A systematic review of the empirical evidence. Landscape and Urban Planning 2010, 97(3):147-155. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.05.006.
6. Breuste J., Haase D., Elmqvist T. Urban landscapes and ecosystem services. Ecosystem services in agricultural and urban landscapes 2013, 83-104. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ. S. Wratten, H. Sandhu, R. Cullen, R. Costanza (Eds.).
7. Byrne J., Wolch J. Nature, race, and parks: Past research and future directions for geographic research. Progress in Human Geography 2009, 33(6):743-765. 10.1177/0309132509103156.
8. Chiesura A. The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landscape and urban Planning 2004, 68:129-138.
9. City of Leipzig Umweltqualitätsziele und - standards für die Stadt Leipzig 2003.
10. Comber A., Brunsdon C., Green E. Using a GIS-based network analysis to determine urban greenspace accessibility for different ethnic and religious groups. Landscape and Urban Planning 2008, 86(1):1-18.
11. Dai D. Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in urban green space accessibility: Where to intervene?. Landscape and Urban Planning 2011, 102(4):234-244. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.05.002.
12. Davis A.Y., Belaire J.A., Farfan M.A., Milz D., Sweeney E.R., Loss S.R., et al. Green infrastructure and bird diversity across an urban socioeconomic gradient. Ecosphere 2012, 3(November):1-18.
13. Downey L., Hawkins B. NIH Public Access 2009, 51(4):759-781. 10.1525/sop.2008.51.4.759.RACE.
14. Ernstson H. The social production of ecosystem services: A framework for studying environmental justice and ecological complexity in urbanized landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 2013, 109(1):7-17. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.10.005.
15. Flasbarth J. Preface. Special Issue II Environmental Justice 2011, 7-8. UMID: Environment and Human Health - Information Service (Ed.).
16. Gentin S. Outdoor recreation and ethnicity in Europe - A review. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 2011, 10(3):153-161. 10.1016/j.ufug.2011.05.002.
17. Germann-Chiari C., Seeland K. Are urban green spaces optimally distributed to act as places for social integration?. Results of a Geographical Information System (GIS) Approach for Urban Forestry Research 2004, 6:3-13.
18. Gill S.E., Handley J.F., Ennos A.R., Pauleit S. Adapting cities for climate change: The role of the green infrastructure. Built Environment 2007, 33:115-133.
19. Gobster P.H. Urban parks as green walls or green magnets? Interracial relations in neighborhood boundary parks. Landscape and Urban Planning 1998, 41(1):43-55. 10.1016/S0169-2046(98)00045-0.
20. Gobster P.H. Managing urban parks for a racially and ethnically diverse clientele. Leisure Sciences 2002, 24:143-159.
21. Grün Berlin GmbH Besucherbefragung Berlin Tempelhof 2011 2012, 20. Retrieved from: http://www.gruen-berlin.de/fileadmin/used_files/Infomaterial/Tempelhof/Besuchermonitoring_2011_Zusammenfassung.pdf?PHPSESSID=0f16fe32c2a621f16cb3818d199f88a5.
22. Haase D., Kabisch N., Haase A. Endless urban growth? On the mismatch of population, household and urban land area growth and its effects on the urban debate. PloS One 2013, 8(6):e66531. 10.1371/journal.pone.0066531.
23. Handley J., Pauleit S., Slinn P., Barber A., Baker M., Jones C., et al. Accessible natural green space standards in towns and cities: A review and toolkit for their implementation. English Nature Research Reports 2003, Report Nr. 526.
24. Van Herzele A., Wiedemann T. A monitoring tool for the provision of accessible and attractive urban green spaces. Landscape and Urban Planning 2003, 63:109-126.
25. Jay M., Schraml U. Understanding the role of urban forests for migrants - Uses, perception and integrative potential. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 2009, 8(4):283-294. 10.1016/j.ufug.2009.07.003.
26. Jim C.Y., Chen W.Y. Assessing the ecosystem service of air pollutant removal by urban trees in Guangzhou (China). Journal of Environmental Management 2008, 88(4):665-676.
27. Kabisch N., Haase D., Haase A. Evolving reurbanisation? Spatiotemporal dynamics as exemplified by the East German City of Leipzig. Urban Studies 2010, 47(5):967-990.
28. Konijnendijk C.C., Annerstedt M., Nielsen A.B., Maruthaveeran S. Benefits of urban parks: A systematic review 2013, Copenhagen.
29. Kuo F.E., Bacaicoa M., Sullivan W.C. Transforming inner-city landscapes: Trees, sense of safety, and preference. Environment and Behavior 1998, 30(1):28-59. 10.1177/0013916598301002.
30. Lafortezza R., Carrus G., Sanesi G., Davies C. Benefits and well-being perceived by people visiting green spaces in periods of heat stress. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 2009, 8(2):97-108. 10.1016/j.ufug.2009.02.003.
31. Larondelle N., Haase D. Urban ecosystem services assessment along a rural-urban gradient: A cross-analysis of European cities. Ecological Indicators 2013, 29:179-190.
32. Li F., Liu X., Hu D., Wang R., Yang W., Li D., et al. Measurement indicators and an evaluation approach for assessing urban sustainable development: A case study for China's Jining City. Landscape and Urban Planning 2009, 90(3-4):134-142. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.10.022.
33. Loukaitou-Sideris A. Urban form and social context: Cultural differentiation in the uses of urban parks. Journal of Planning Education and Research 1995, 14(2):89-102. 10.1177/0739456X9501400202.
34. Low S. Theorizing the city: The new urban anthropology reader 1999, 448. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, N.J. S. Low (Ed.).
35. Low S. Public space and diversity: Distributive, procedural and interactional justice for parks. The Ashgate research companion to planning and culture 2013, 295-310. Ashgate Publishing, Surrey. G. Young, D. Stevenson (Eds.).
36. Maas J., Spreeuwenberg P., Van Winsum-Westra M., Verheij R.a, de Vries S., Groenewegen P.P. Is green space in the living environment associated with people's feelings of social safety?. Environment and Planning A 2009, 41(7):1763-1777. 10.1068/a4196.
37. Maas J., Verheij R.A., Groenewegen P.P., de Vries S., Spreeuwenberg P. Green space, urbanity, and health: How strong is the relation?. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 2006, 60(7):587-592. 10.1136/jech.2005.043125.
38. Martin C., Warren a.P.S., Kinzig A.P. Neighborhood socioeconomic status is a useful predictor of perennial landscape vegetation in residential neighborhoods and embedded small parks of Phoenix, AZ. Landscape and Urban Planning 2004, 69(4):355-368. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2003.10.034.
39. Mitchell R., Popham F. Effect of exposure to natural environment on health inequalities: An observational population study. Lancet 2008, 372:1655-1660.
40. Peters K., Elands B., Buijs A. Social interactions in urban parks: Stimulating social cohesion?. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 2010, 9(2):93-100. 10.1016/j.ufug.2009.11.003.
41. Pham T.-T.-H., Apparicio P., Séguin A.-M., Landry S., Gagnon M. Spatial distribution of vegetation in Montreal: An uneven distribution or environmental inequity?. Landscape and Urban Planning 2012, 107(3):214-224. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.06.002.
42. Ravenscroft N., Markwell S. Ethnicity and the integration and exclusion of young people through urban park and recreation provision. Managing Leisure 2000, 5(3):135-150.
43. de Roo M. The green city guidelines 2011, Zwaan Printmedia, Wormerveer.
44. Schroeder H.W., Anderson L.M. Perception of personal safety in urban recreation sites. Journal of Leisure Research 1983, 16(2):178-194.
45. Schwarte C., Adebowale M. Environmental justice and race equality in the European Union, London 2007, 38.
46. Schwarz N. Urban form revisited - Selecting indicators for characterising European cities. Landscape and Urban Planning 2010, 96(1):29-47. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.01.007.
47. Seeland K., Dübendorfer S., Hansmann R. Making friends in Zurich's urban forests and parks: The role of public green space for social inclusion of youths from different cultures. Forest Policy and Economics 2009, 11(1):10-17. 10.1016/j.forpol.2008.07.005.
48. Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung Berlin Bundesweite Internetbefragung zur Messung der Bürgerzufriedenheit mit den kommunalen Grünflächen 2004 - Berliner Ergebnisse 2004, 103.
49. Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung und Umwelt Bevölkerungsprognose für Berlin und Bezirke 2011-2030 2012, Berlin.
50. Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung und Umwelt Umweltatlas 2012, Retrieved from: http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/umweltatlas/d605_01.htm.
51. Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung und Umwelt Erreichbarkeit von öffentlichen und wohnungsnahen Grünflächen 2013, Retrieved from: http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/umweltatlas/eda605_01.htm.
52. Senatsverwaltung für Stadtentwicklung und Umwelt Urbane Grünflächen 2013, Retrieved from: http://www.stadtentwicklung.berlin.de/umwelt/stadtgruen/gruenanlagen/index.shtml.
53. Seto K.C., Fragkias M., Güneralp B., Reilly M.K. A meta-analysis of global urban land expansion. PLoS One 2011, 6(8):1-9. 10.1371/Citation.
54. Simpson J.R. Improved estimates of tree-shade effects on residential energy use. Energy 2002, 34.
55. Strohbach M.W., Haase D. Above-ground carbon storage by urban trees in Leipzig, Germany: Analysis of patterns in a European city. Landscape and Urban Planning 2012, 104(1):95-104. 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.10.001.
56. Tsai Y.-H. Quantifying urban form: Compactness versus "sprawl". Urban Studies 2005, 42(1):141-161. 10.1080/0042098042000309748.
57. UMID: Environment and Human Health - Information Special Issue II on Environmental Justice 2011, 131.
58. United Nations World Urbanization Prospects, the 2011 Revision 2012, World Urbanization Prospects, Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
59. Vries S.de, Verheij R.A., Groenewegen P.P., Spreeuwenberg P. Natural environments - Healthy environments? An exploratory analysis of the relationship between greenspace and health. Environment and Planning A 2003, 35(10):1717-1731.
60. Walker G., Mitchell G., Fairburn J., Smith G. Environmental quality and social deprivation 2003, Environment Agency.
61. World Health Organization. (2007). Global age-friendly cities: A guide. Geneva.