Environmental inequities in terms of different types of urban greenery in Hartford, Connecticut

Urban Forestry and Urban Greening

Volumn 18, Issue , 2016, Pages 163-172

  Li, Xiaojiang ^a   Zhang, Chuanrong ^a   Li, Weidong ^a   Kuzovkina, Yulia A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

Author keywords

Environmental inequity; Private yard vegetation; Street greenery; Urban parks

Indexed keywords

AFRICAN AMERICAN; CENSUS; GREENSPACE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INCOME; PARK DESIGN; PRIVATE LAND; SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION; URBAN ECOSYSTEM; URBAN PLANNING;

CONNECTICUT; HARTFORD; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84975758705     PISSN: 16188667     EISSN: 16108167     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ufug.2016.06.002     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Akbari H., Pomerantz M., Taha H. Cool surfaces and shade trees to reduce energy use and improve air quality in urban areas. Sol. Energy 2001, 70:295-310.
2. Anselin L. Exploring Spatial Data with GeoDaTM: A Workbook 2005, 244. Spatial Analysis Laboratory Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics. University of Illinois.
3. Bain L., Gray B., Rodgers D. Living Streets: Strategies for Crafting Public Space 2012, John Wiley & Sons.
4. Boone C.G., Buckley G.L., Grove J.M., Sister C. Parks and people: an environmental justice inquiry in Baltimore, Maryland. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 2009, 99(4):767-787.
5. Chen X.L., Zhao H.M., Li P.X., Yin Z.Y. Remote sensing image-based analysis of the relationship between urban heat island and land use/cover changes. Remote Sens. Environ. 2006, 104:133-146.
6. Dai D. Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in urban green space accessibility: where to intervene?. Landscape Urban Plann. 2011, 102(4):234-244.
7. Dwivedi P., Rathore C.S., Dubey Y. Ecological benefits of urban forestry: the case of kerwa forest area (KFA), Bhopal, India. Appl. Geogr. 2009, 29:194-200.
8. Ellaway A., Macintyre S., Bonnefoy X. Graffiti, greenery: and obesity in adults: secondary analysis of European cross sectional survey. Br. Med. J. 2005, 331:611-612.
9. Gidlow C.J., Ellis N.J., Bostock S. Development of the Neighbourhood Green Space Tool (NGST). Landscape Urban Plann. 2012, 106:347-358.
10. Google Google Street View Image API 2014, (accessed October 2014). https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/streetview/.
11. Google Google Maps API 2015, (accessed 2015). https://developers.google.com/maps/.
12. Grove J.M., Troy A.R., O'Neil-Dunne J.P.M., Burch W.R., Cadenasso M.L., Pickett S.T.A. Characterization of households and its implications for the vegetation of urban ecosystems. Ecosystems 2006, 9(4):578-597.
13. Heynen N., Perkins H.A., Roy P. The political ecology of uneven urban green space the impact of political economy on race and ethnicity in producing environmental inequality in Milwaukee. Urban Affairs Rev. 2006, 42(1):3-25.
14. Huang G., Zhou W., Cadenasso M.L. Is everyone hot in the city? Spatial pattern of land surface temperatures, land cover and neighborhood socioeconomic characteristics in Baltimore, MD. J. Environ. Manage. 2011, 92(7):1753-1759.
15. Jim C.Y., Chen W. Assessing the ecosystem service of air pollutant removal by urban trees in Guangzhou (China). J. Environ. Manage. 2008, 88:665-676.
16. Kaplan R. The nature of the view from home: psychological benefits. Environ. Behav. 2001, 33:507-542.
17. Kardan O., Gozdyra P., Misic B., Moola F., Palmer L.J., Paus T., Berman M.G. Neighborhood greenspace and health in a large urban center. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5.
18. Kessel A., Green J., Pinder R., Wilkinson P., Grundy C., Lachowycz K. Multidisciplinary research in public health: a case study of research on access to green space. Public Health 2009, 123:32-38.
19. Konijnendijk C.C., Ricard R.M., Kenney A., Randrup T.B. Defining urban forestry-a comparative perspective of North America and Europe. Urban For. Urban Greening 2006, 4(3):93-103.
20. Lachowycz K., Jones A. Towards a better understanding of the relationship between greenspace and health: development of a theoretical framework. Landscape Urban Plann. 2012, 118:62-69.
21. Landry S.M., Chakraborty J. Street trees and equity: evaluating the spatial distribution of an urban amenity. Environ. Plann. A 2009, 41(11):2651.
22. Leslie E., Sugiyama T., Ierodiaconou D., Kremer P. Perceived and objectively measured greenness of neighbourhoods: are they measuring the same thing?. Landscape Urban Plann. 2010, 95(1):28-33.
23. Li X., Meng Q., Li W., Zhang C., Jancso T., Mavromatis S. An explorative study on the proximity of buildings to green spaces in urban areas using remotely sensed imagery?. Ann. GIS 2014, 20(3):193-203.
24. Li X., Zhang C., Li W., Ricard R., Meng Q., Zhang W. Assessing street-level urban greenery using Google Street View and a modified green view index. Urban For. Urban Greening 2015, 14(3):675-685.
25. Li X., Zhang C., Li W., Kuzovkina Y.A., Weiner D. Who lives in greener neighborhoods? The distribution of street greenery and its association with residents' socioeconomic conditions in Hartford, Connecticut, USA. Urban For. Urban Greening 2015, 14(4):751-759.
26. Li X., Zhang C., Li W. Does the visibility of greenery increase perceived safety in urban areas? Evidence from the place pulse 1.0 dataset. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2015, 4(3):1166-1183.
27. Lindsey G., Maraj M., Kuan S. Access equity, and urban greenways: an exploratory investigation. Prof. Geogr. 2001, 53:332-346.
28. Maas J., Verheij R.A., Groenewegen P.P., de Vries S., Spreeuwenberg P. Green space, urbanity: and health: how strong is the relation. J. Community Health 2006, 60:587-592.
29. Maroko A.R., Maantay J.A., Sohler N.L., Grady K.L., Arno P.S. The complexities of measuring access to parks and physical activity sites in New York City: a quantitative and qualitative approach. Int. J. Health Geogr. 2009, 8(1).
30. Nichol J., Wong M.S. Modeling urban environmental quality in a tropical city. Landscape Urban Plann. 2005, 73:49-58.
31. Onishi A., Cao X., Ito T., Shi F., Imura H. Evaluating the potential for urban heat-island mitigation by greening parking lots. Urban For. Urban Greening 2010, 9:323-332.
32. Pazhouhanfar M., Kamal M. Effect of predictors of visual preference as characteristics of urban natural landscapes in increasing perceived restorative potential. Urban For. Urban Greening 2014, 13(1):145-151.
33. Perkins H.A., Heynen N., Wilson J. Inequitable access to urban reforestation: the impact of urban political economy on housing tenure and urban forests. Cities 2004, 21(4):291-299.
34. 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 Urban Plann. 2012, 107(3):214-224.
35. Schroeder H.W., Cannon W.N. The esthetic contribution of trees to residential streets in Ohio towns. J. Arboric. 1983, 9:237-243.
36. Seymour M., Wolch J., Reynolds K.D., Bradbury H. Resident perceptions of urban alleys and alley greening. Appl. Geogr. 2010, 30(3):380-393.
37. Shanahan D.F., Lin B.B., Gaston K.J., Bush R., Fuller R.A. Socio-economic inequalities in access to nature on public and private lands: a case study from Brisbane, Australia. Landscape Urban Plann. 2014, 130:14-23.
38. Takano T., Nakamura K., Watanabe M. Urban residential environments and senior citizens' longevity in megacity areas: the importance of walkable green spaces. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2002, 56(12):913-918.
39. Troy A.R., Grove J.M., O'Neil-Dunne J.P., Pickett S.T., Cadenasso M.L. Predicting opportunities for greening and patterns of vegetation on private urban lands. Environ. Manage. 2007, 40(3):394-412.
40. Ulrich R. View through a window may influence recovery. Science 1984, 224(4647):224-225.
41. Wendel H.E., Downs J.A., Mihelcic J.R. Assessing equitable access to urban green space: the role of engineered water infrastructure. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45:6728-6734.
42. Wolch J., Wilson J.P., Fehrenbach J. Parks and park funding in Los Angeles: an equity-mapping analysis. Urban Geogr. 2005, 26:4-35.
43. Wolch J., Jerrett M., Reynolds K., McConnell R., Chang R., Dahmann N., Brady K., Gilliland F., Su J.G., Berhane K. Childhood obesity and proximity to urban parks and recreational resources: a longitudinal cohort study. Health Place 2011, 17(1):207-214.
44. Wolf K.L. Business district streetscapes, trees, and consumer response. J. For. 2005, 103(8):396-400.
45. van Dillen S.M., de Vries S., Groenewegen P.P., Spreeuwenberg P. Greenspace in urban neighbourhoods and residents' health: adding quality to quantity. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2012, 66:e8.
46. Zhou X., Kim J. Social disparities in tree canopy and park accessibility: a case study of six cities in Illinois using GIS and remote sensing. Urban For. Urban Greening 2013, 12(1):88-97.