IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jgeogr/v2y2022i3p25-418d858094.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Toward Sustainable Urban Drainage Planning? Geospatial Assessment of Urban Vegetation Density under Socioeconomic Factors for Quito, Ecuador

Author

Listed:
  • René Ulloa-Espíndola

    (Investigación, Desarrollo e Innovación, Empresa Pública Metropolitana de Agua Potable y Saneamiento de Quito, EPMAPS Agua de Quito, Quito 170519, Ecuador
    ETSI Agronómica, Alimentaria y de Biosistemas, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Ciudad Universitaria sn, 28040 Madrid, Spain
    Departament de Geografia, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, 43480 Tarragona, Spain)

  • Elisa Lalama-Noboa

    (WorldGeo, Estudios Geoespaciales, Quito 170501, Ecuador)

  • Jenny Cuyo-Cuyo

    (Investigación, Desarrollo e Innovación, Empresa Pública Metropolitana de Agua Potable y Saneamiento de Quito, EPMAPS Agua de Quito, Quito 170519, Ecuador
    WorldGeo, Estudios Geoespaciales, Quito 170501, Ecuador)

Abstract

Natural or anthropogenic urban vegetation is an important resource for urban planning, risk assessment, and sustainable development of a city. Quito is a megadiverse city due to its location and topography, but the socioeconomic diversity generates more contrasting conditions of certain behaviors and habits related to urban infrastructure. The contrasts of vegetation and green spaces in the different sectors of Quito also reflect the diversity of the city. This study examines the effects of socioeconomic conditions on the loss or increase of urban vegetation. The exploratory regression method (spatial) and logit model (non-spatial) were used to explain the socioeconomic effects on urban vegetation density at the level of urban parishes. On the one hand, the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) was calculated as the dependent variable based on the 2021 sentinel images. On the other hand, the independent variables were structured based on the socioeconomic level, the land valuation areas of Quito (AIVAS), and the quality of life index. This article contributes to establishing baseline information that helps structure the conditions, strategies, and investments to design and implement plans and programs for urban drainage, ecosystem benefits, and sustainable development in the city of Quito.

Suggested Citation

  • René Ulloa-Espíndola & Elisa Lalama-Noboa & Jenny Cuyo-Cuyo, 2022. "Toward Sustainable Urban Drainage Planning? Geospatial Assessment of Urban Vegetation Density under Socioeconomic Factors for Quito, Ecuador," Geographies, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-22, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jgeogr:v:2:y:2022:i:3:p:25-418:d:858094
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2673-7086/2/3/25/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2673-7086/2/3/25/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kirsten Schwarz & Michail Fragkias & Christopher G Boone & Weiqi Zhou & Melissa McHale & J Morgan Grove & Jarlath O’Neil-Dunne & Joseph P McFadden & Geoffrey L Buckley & Dan Childers & Laura Ogden & S, 2015. "Trees Grow on Money: Urban Tree Canopy Cover and Environmental Justice," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-17, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Wimmer, Lorenz & Maus, Victor & Luckeneder, Sebastian, 2023. "Investigating social inequality of urban green spacedistribution using Sentinel-2: the case of Vienna," Ecological Economic Papers 46/2023, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    2. Jeremy Mennis & Gerald J. Stahler & Michael J. Mason, 2016. "Risky Substance Use Environments and Addiction: A New Frontier for Environmental Justice Research," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-15, June.
    3. Andrew R. Tilman & Robert G. Haight, 2023. "Public policy for management of forest pests within an ownership mosaic," Papers 2312.05403, arXiv.org.
    4. Yves Schaeffer & Mihaï Tivadar, 2019. "Measuring environmental inequalities: insights from the residential segregation literature [Mesurer les inégalités environnementales: perspectives issues de la littérature sur la ségrégation réside," Post-Print hal-02610105, HAL.
    5. Alexis Martin & Jason Gordon & John Schelhas & Tawana Smith Mattox, 2024. "Perceptions of Tree Risks and Benefits in a Historically African American Neighborhood," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-18, May.
    6. David Martin & Sidney Swearingen, 2019. "Improving Environmental Justice Analysis of Urban Tree Ecosystem Services: A Case Study from Asheville, NC," Working Papers 19-01, Davidson College, Department of Economics.
    7. Viniece Jennings & Lincoln Larson & Jessica Yun, 2016. "Advancing Sustainability through Urban Green Space: Cultural Ecosystem Services, Equity, and Social Determinants of Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-15, February.
    8. Li, Liqing, 2023. "Environmental goods provision and gentrification: Evidence from MillionTreesNYC," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    9. Lorena Alves Carvalho Nascimento & Vivek Shandas, 2021. "Integrating Diverse Perspectives for Managing Neighborhood Trees and Urban Ecosystem Services in Portland, OR (US)," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-22, January.
    10. Dong-ah Choi & Keunhyun Park & Alessandro Rigolon, 2020. "From XS to XL Urban Nature: Examining Access to Different Types of Green Space Using a ‘Just Sustainabilities’ Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-25, August.
    11. Alexandra Gulachenski & Bruno M. Ghersi & Amy E. Lesen & Michael J. Blum, 2016. "Abandonment, Ecological Assembly and Public Health Risks in Counter-Urbanizing Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-26, May.
    12. Christine C. Rega-Brodsky & Charles H. Nilon & Paige S. Warren, 2018. "Balancing Urban Biodiversity Needs and Resident Preferences for Vacant Lot Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-21, May.
    13. Christopher B. Riley & Kayla I. Perry & Kerry Ard & Mary M. Gardiner, 2018. "Asset or Liability? Ecological and Sociological Tradeoffs of Urban Spontaneous Vegetation on Vacant Land in Shrinking Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-19, June.
    14. Isabelle Anguelovski & James J. T. Connolly & Helen Cole & Melissa Garcia-Lamarca & Margarita Triguero-Mas & Francesc Baró & Nicholas Martin & David Conesa & Galia Shokry & Carmen Pérez Pulgar & Lucia, 2022. "Green gentrification in European and North American cities," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-13, December.
    15. Namin, S. & Xu, W. & Zhou, Y. & Beyer, K., 2020. "The legacy of the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation and the political ecology of urban trees and air pollution in the United States," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    16. Youngme Seo, 2020. "Varying Effects of Urban Tree Canopies on Residential Property Values across Neighborhoods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-19, May.
    17. YunJae Ock & Vivek Shandas & Fernanda Ribeiro & Noah Young, 2024. "Drivers of Tree Canopy Loss in a Mid-Sized Growing City: Case Study in Portland, OR (USA)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-20, February.
    18. Yuxiang Li & Jens-Christian Svenning & Weiqi Zhou & Kai Zhu & Jesse F. Abrams & Timothy M. Lenton & William J. Ripple & Zhaowu Yu & Shuqing N. Teng & Robert R. Dunn & Chi Xu, 2024. "Green spaces provide substantial but unequal urban cooling globally," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    19. Locke, Dexter & Hall, Billy & Grove, J Morgan & Pickett, Steward T.A. & Ogden, Laura A. & Aoki, Carissa & Boone, Christopher G. & O’Neil-Dunne, Jarlath PM, 2020. "Residential housing segregation and urban tree canopy in 37 US Cities," SocArXiv 97zcs, Center for Open Science.
    20. Goyette, Jean-Olivier & Mendes, Poliana & Cimon-Morin, Jérôme & Dupras, Jérôme & Pellerin, Stéphanie & Rousseau, Alain N. & Poulin, Monique, 2024. "Using the ecosystem serviceshed concept in conservation planning for more equitable outcomes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).

    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:jgeogr:v:2:y:2022:i:3:p:25-418:d:858094. 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: 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.