Equality in access to urban green spaces: A case study in Hannover, Germany, with a focus on the elderly population

Urban Forestry and Urban Greening

Volumn 55, Issue , 2020, Pages

  Wen, Chen ^a,b   Albert, Christian ^b,c   Von Haaren, Christina ^b  

^a HUAZHONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (China)

^b LEIBNIZ UNIVERSITY HANNOVER   (Germany)

^c RUHR UNIVERSITY BOCHUM   (Germany)

Author keywords

Access; Equity; Inequality; Landscape design; Population aging; Provision; Urban green and blue infrastructure

Indexed keywords

ELDERLY POPULATION; GREENSPACE; RESIDENTIAL LOCATION; URBAN AREA; VEGETATION TYPE;

GERMANY; HANNOVER; LOWER SAXONY;

EID: 85090349989     PISSN: 16188667     EISSN: 16108167     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126820     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Alves, S., Aspinall, P.A., Ward Thompson, C., Sugiyama, T., Brice, R., Vickers, A., Preferences of older people for environmental attributes of local parks: the use of choice-based conjoint analysis. Facilities 26 (2008), 433–453, 10.1108/02632770810895705.
2. Artmann, M., Chen, X., Iojă, C., Hof, A., Onose, D., Poniży, L., Lamovšek, A.Z., Breuste, J., The role of urban green spaces in care facilities for elderly people across European cities. Urban For. Urban Green. 27 (2017), 203–213, 10.1016/j.ufug.2017.08.007.
3. Aspinall, P.A., Thompson, C.W., Alves, S., Sugiyama, T., Brice, R., Vickers, A., Preference and relative importance for environmental attributes of neighbourhood open space in older people. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 37 (2010), 1022–1039, 10.1068/b36024.
4. Boeing, G., OSMnx: new methods for acquiring, constructing, analyzing, and visualizing complex street networks. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 65 (2017), 126–139, 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2017.05.004.
5. Boll, T., Kempa, D., Von Haaren, C., Weller, M., Naturschutzfachliche Bewertung von Kurzumtriebsplantagen in der betrieblichen Mangementsoftware MANUELA. Gerold, D., Schneider, M., (eds.) Erfahrungsberichte Zur Vernetzung von Erzeugern Und Verwertern von Dendromasse Für Die Energetische Verwertung, 2014, 108–115.
6. Boll, T., Von Haaren, C., Von Ruschkowski, E., The preference and actual use of different types of rural recreation areas by urban dwellers - the Hamburg case study. PLoS One 9 (2014), 1–11, 10.1371/journal.pone.0108638.
7. Braquinho, C., Cvejić, R., Eler, K., Gonzales, P., Haase, D., Hansen, R., Kabisch, N., Lorance Rall, E., Niemela, J., Pauleit, S., Pintar, M., Lafortezza, R., Santos, A., Strohbach, M., Vierikko, K., Železnikar, Š., A Typology of Urban Green Spaces, Ecosystem Services Provisioning Services and Demand. [WWW Document]. URL http://greensurge.eu/working-packages/wp3/files/D3.1_Typology_of_urban_green_spaces_1_.pdf (Accessed 2.22.17), 2015.
8. Bryant, J., Delamater, P.L., Examination of spatial accessibility at micro- and macro-levels using the enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) method. Ann. GIS 25 (2019), 219–229, 10.1080/19475683.2019.1641553.
9. Cortinovis, C., Zulian, G., Geneletti, D., Assessing nature-based recreation to support urban green infrastructure planning in Trento (Italy). Land, 7, 2018, 112, 10.3390/land7040112.
10. Dai, D., Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in urban green space accessibility: where to intervene?. Landsc. Urban Plan. 102 (2011), 234–244, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.05.002.
11. Drachenfels von, O., Kartierschlüssel für Biotoptypen in Niedersachsen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der gesetzlich geschützten Biotope sowie der Lebensraumtypen von Anhang I der FFH-Richtlinie (Stand März 2011). Naturschutz und Landschaftspfl. Niedersachsen, 2011 doi:0933-1247.
12. Fan, P., Xu, L., Yue, W., Chen, J., Accessibility of public urban green space in an urban periphery: the case of Shanghai. Landsc. Urban Plan. 165 (2017), 177–192, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.11.007.
13. Gong, Y., Gallacher, J., Palmer, S., Fone, D., Neighbourhood green space, physical function and participation in physical activities among elderly men: the Caerphilly Prospective study. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act., 11, 2014, 40, 10.1186/1479-5868-11-40.
14. Gong, F., Zheng, Z.-C., Ng, E., Modeling elderly accessibility to urban green space in high density cities: a case study of Hong Kong. Procedia Environ. Sci. 36 (2016), 90–97, 10.1016/j.proenv.2016.09.018.
15. Gong, P., Liu, H., Zhang, M., Li, C., Wang, J., Huang, H., Clinton, N., Ji, L., Li, Wenyu, Bai, Y., Chen, B., Xu, B., Zhu, Z., Yuan, C., Ping Suen, H., Guo, J., Xu, N., Li, Weijia, Zhao, Y., Yang, J., Yu, C., Wang, X., Fu, H., Yu, L., Dronova, I., Hui, F., Cheng, X., Shi, X., Xiao, F., Liu, Q., Song, L., Stable classification with limited sample: transferring a 30-m resolution sample set collected in 2015 to mapping 10-m resolution global land cover in 2017. Sci. Bull. 64 (2019), 370–373, 10.1016/j.scib.2019.03.002.
16. Grunewald, K., Richter, B., Meinel, G., Herold, H., Syrbe, R.U., Proposal of indicators regarding the provision and accessibility of green spaces for assessing the ecosystem service “recreation in the city” in Germany. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manag. 13 (2017), 26–39, 10.1080/21513732.2017.1283361.
17. Haaren von, C., Hülsbergen, K.J., Naturschutz im landwirtschaftlichen Betriebsmanagement: EDV-Systeme zur Erfassung und Bewertung von Naturschutzleistungen landwirtschaftlicher Betriebe. Ibidem. 2008.
18. Harrison, C., Burgess, J., Millward, A., Dawe, G., Accessible natural greenspace in towns and cities. A review of appropriate size and distance criteria. English Nature Peterborough., 1995.
19. Heckert, M., Access and equity in greenspace provision: a comparison of methods to assess the impacts of greening vacant land. Trans. GIS 17 (2013), 808–827, 10.1111/tgis.12000.
20. Hermes, J., Albert, C., von Haaren, C., Assessing the aesthetic quality of landscapes in Germany. Ecosyst. Serv. 31 (2018), 296–307, 10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.02.015.
21. Hoffimann, E., Barros, H., Ribeiro, A.I., Socioeconomic inequalities in green space quality and accessibility—evidence from a Southern European city. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 14, 2017, 10.3390/ijerph14080916.
22. Jorgensen, A., Anthopoulou, A., Enjoyment and fear in urban woodlands - does age make a difference?. Urban For. Urban Green. 6 (2007), 267–278, 10.1016/j.ufug.2007.05.004.
23. Kabisch, N., Haase, D., Green justice or just green? Provision of urban green spaces in Berlin, Germany. Landsc. Urban Plan. 122 (2014), 129–139, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.11.016.
24. Kabisch, N., Strohbach, M., Haase, D., Kronenberg, J., Urban green space availability in European cities. Ecol. Indic. 70 (2016), 586–596, 10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.02.029.
25. Kaczynski, A.T., Potwarka, L.R., Saelens, B.E., Association of park size, distance, and features with physical activity in neighborhood parks. Am. J. Public Health 98 (2008), 1451–1456, 10.2105/AJPH.2007.129064.
26. Kaczynski, A.T., Johnson, A.J., Saelens, B.E., Neighborhood land use diversity and physical activity in adjacent parks. Heal. Place 16 (2010), 413–415, 10.1016/j.healthplace.2009.11.004.
27. Kamphuis, C.B.M., van Lenthe, F.J., Giskes, K., Huisman, M., Brug, J., Mackenbach, J.P., Socioeconomic differences in lack of recreational walking among older adults: the role of neighbourhood and individual factors. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act., 6, 2009, 1, 10.1186/1479-5868-6-1.
28. Kemperman, A., Timmermans, H., Green spaces in the direct living environment and social contacts of the aging population. Landsc. Urban Plan. 129 (2014), 44–54, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.05.003.
29. Kwan, M.-P., The Uncertain geographic context problem. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 102 (2012), 958–968, 10.1080/00045608.2012.687349.
30. La Rosa, D., Takatori, C., Shimizu, H., Privitera, R., A planning framework to evaluate demands and preferences by different social groups for accessibility to urban greenspaces. Sustain. Cities Soc. 36 (2018), 346–362, 10.1016/j.scs.2017.10.026.
31. Landeshauptstadt Hannover, Fachbereich umwelt und stadtgrün. [WWW Document]. URL https://www.hannover.de/Leben-in-der-Region-Hannover/Verwaltungen-Kommunen/Die-Verwaltung-der-Landeshauptstadt-Hannover/Dezernate-und-Fachbereiche-der-LHH/Wirtschafts-und-Umweltdezernat/Fachbereich-Umwelt-und-Stadtgrün (Accessed 11.11.18), 2014.
32. Landeshauptstadt Hannover, Statistische Gliederungen. [WWW Document]. URL https://www.hannover.de/Leben-in-der-Region-Hannover/Verwaltungen-Kommunen/Die-Verwaltung-der-Landeshauptstadt-Hannover/Dezernate-und-Fachbereiche-der-LHH/Baudezernat/Fachbereich-Planen-und-Stadtentwicklung/Geoinformation/Open-GeoData/Themenkarten-und-sta (Accessed 1.22.19), 2016.
33. Landeshauptstadt Hannover, Stadtgrün 2030. [WWW Document]. URL https://www.hannover.de/Leben-in-der-Region-Hannover/Verwaltungen-Kommunen/Die-Verwaltung-der-Landeshauptstadt-Hannover/Dezernate-und-Fachbereiche-der-LHH/Wirtschafts-und-Umweltdezernat/Fachbereich-Umwelt-und-Stadtgrün/Stadtgrün-2030 (Accessed 6.20.18), 2017.
34. Landeshauptstadt Hannover, Statistische Profile der Stadtteile und Stadtbezirke 2017. [WWW Document]. URL https://www.hannover.de/content/download/693008/16689364/file/Statistische+Profile+2017_Gesamt.pdf (Accessed 6.11.18), 2017.
35. Landeshauptstadt Hannover, Bevölkerungsentwicklung und demografischer Wandel. [WWW Document]. URL https://www.hannover.de/Leben-in-der-Region-Hannover/Verwaltungen-Kommunen/Die-Verwaltung-der-Landeshauptstadt-Hannover/Dezernate-und-Fachbereiche-der-LHH/Baudezernat/Fachbereich-Planen-und-Stadtentwicklung/Stadtentwicklung/Bevölkerungsentwicklung-und-dem (Accessed 1.15.19), 2018.
36. Landeshauptstadt Hannover, Hannover – Stadt der Gärten [WWW Document]. URL https://www.hannover.de/Leben-in-der-Region-Hannover/Verwaltungen-Kommunen/Die-Verwaltung-der-Landeshauptstadt-Hannover/Dezernate-und-Fachbereiche-der-LHH/Wirtschafts-und-Umweltdezernat/Fachbereich-Umwelt-und-Stadtgrün/Hannover-–-Stadt-der-Gärten (Accessed 1.7.19), 2018.
37. Leaver, R., Wiseman, T., Garden visiting as a meaningful occupation for people in later life. Br. J. Occup. Ther. 79 (2016), 768–775, 10.1177/0308022616666844.
38. Lee, A.C.K., Maheswaran, R., The health benefits of urban green spaces: a review of the evidence. J. Public Health (Bangkok). 33 (2011), 212–222, 10.1093/pubmed/fdq068.
39. Löfvenhaft, K., Runborg, S., Sjögren-Gulve, P., Biotope patterns and amphibian distribution as assessment tools in urban landscape planning. Landsc. Urban Plan. 68 (2004), 403–427, 10.1016/S0169-2046(03)00154-3.
40. Luo, W., Qi, Y., An enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) method for measuring spatial accessibility to primary care physicians. Heal. Place 15 (2009), 1100–1107, 10.1016/j.healthplace.2009.06.002.
41. Milanović, Z., Pantelić, S., Trajković, N., Sporiš, G., Kostić, R., James, N., Age-related decrease in physical activity and functional fitness among elderly men and women. Clin. Interv. Aging 8 (2013), 549–556, 10.2147/CIA.S44112.
42. Moseley, D., Marzano, M., Chetcuti, J., Watts, K., Green networks for people: application of a functional approach to support the planning and management of greenspace. Landsc. Urban Plan. 116 (2013), 1–12, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.04.004.
43. Niedersächsischer Landesbetrieb für Wasserwirtschaft Küsten und Naturschutz (NLWKN), Biotopkartierung. [WWW Document]. URL https://www.nlwkn.niedersachsen.de/naturschutz/biotopschutz/biotopkartierung/44696.html (Accessed 6.15.18), 2011.
44. Nohl, W., Landschaftsplanung. Ästhetische und reaktive Aspekte. Konzepte, Begründungen und Verfahrensweisen auf der Ebene des Landschaftsplans. Patzer Verlag. 2001.
45. Payne, L.L., Mowen, A.J., Orsega-Smith, E., An examination of park preferences and behaviors among urban residents: the role of residential location, race and age. Leis. Sci. 24 (2002), 181–198, 10.1080/01490400252900149.
46. Pleson, E., Nieuwendyk, L.M., Lee, K.K., Chaddah, A., Nykiforuk, C.I.J., Schopflocher, D., Understanding older adults’ usage of community green spaces in Taipei, Taiwan. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 11 (2014), 1444–1464, 10.3390/ijerph110201444.
47. Radke, J., Mu, L., Spatial decompositions, modeling and mapping service regions to predict access to social programs. Ann. GIS 6 (2000), 105–112, 10.1080/10824000009480538.
48. Rigolon, A., A complex landscape of inequity in access to urban parks: a literature review. Landsc. Urban Plan., 2016, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.05.017.
49. Rigolon, A., Parks and young people: an environmental justice study of park proximity, acreage, and quality in Denver. Colorado. Landsc. Urban Plan. 165 (2017), 73–83, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.05.007.
50. Rigolon, A., Browning, M., Lee, K., Shin, S., Access to urban green space in cities of the global south: a systematic literature review. Urban Sci., 2, 2018, 67, 10.3390/urbansci2030067.
51. Stessens, P., Khan, A.Z., Huysmans, M., Canters, F., Analysing urban green space accessibility and quality: a GIS-based model as spatial decision support for urban ecosystem services in Brussels. Ecosyst. Serv. 28 (2017), 328–340, 10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.10.016.
52. Sugiyama, T., Ward Thompson, C., Associations between characteristics of neighbourhood open space and older people's walking. Urban For. Urban Green. 7 (2008), 41–51, 10.1016/j.ufug.2007.12.002.
53. Talen, E., Neighborhoods as service providers: a methodology for evaluating pedestrian access. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 30 (2003), 181–200, 10.1068/b12977.
54. Tetley, J., Mountain, G., Activity and culture—the contribution to health and well-being in later life: a needs analysis. Int. J. Disabil. Hum. Dev. 5 (2006), 45–52, 10.1515/IJDHD.2006.5.1.45.
55. Wang, L., Wen, C., The relationship between the neighborhood built environment and active transportation among adults: a systematic literature review. Urban Sci., 1, 2017, 29, 10.3390/urbansci1030029.
56. Ward Thompson, C., Aspinall, P.A., Natural environments and their impact on activity, health, and quality of life. Appl. Psychol. Heal. Well-Being 3 (2011), 230–260, 10.1111/j.1758-0854.2011.01053.x.
57. Wei, F., Greener urbanization? Changing accessibility to parks in China. Landsc. Urban Plan. 157 (2017), 542–552, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.09.004.
58. Wen, C., Albert, C., Von Haaren, C., The elderly in green spaces: exploring requirements and preferences concerning nature-based recreation. Sustain. Cities Soc. 38 (2018), 582–593, 10.1016/j.scs.2018.01.023.
59. Wolch, J.R., Byrne, J., Newell, J.P., Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: the challenge of making cities “just green enough.”. Landsc. Urban Plan. 125 (2014), 234–244, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.01.017.
60. World Health Organization, Proposed Working Definition of an Older Person in Africa for the MDS Project [WWW Document]. 2002, World Heal. Organ., 10.13140/2.1.5188.9286.
61. Wu, H., Liu, L., Yu, Y., Peng, Z., Evaluation and planning of urban green space distribution based on mobile phone data and two-step floating catchment area method. Sustainability, 10, 2018, 214, 10.3390/su10010214.
62. Wüstemann, H., Kalisch, D., Kolbe, J., Access to urban green space and environmental inequalities in Germany. Landsc. Urban Plan. 164 (2017), 124–131, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.04.002.
63. Xiao, Y., Wang, Z., Li, Z., Tang, Z., An assessment of urban park access in Shanghai – implications for the social equity in urban China. Landsc. Urban Plan. 157 (2017), 383–393, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.08.007.
64. Xu, M., Xin, J., Su, S., Weng, M., Cai, Z., Social inequalities of park accessibility in Shenzhen, China: the role of park quality, transport modes, and hierarchical socioeconomic characteristics. J. Transp. Geogr. 62 (2017), 38–50, 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2017.05.010.
65. 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 Green. 12 (2013), 88–97, 10.1016/j.ufug.2012.11.004.