IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i15p9611-d880353.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Green Exposure Levels in Communities of Different Economic Levels at Different Completion Periods: Through the Lens of Social Equity

Author

Listed:
  • Qinyu Cui

    (School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, China)

  • Yiting Huang

    (School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, China)

  • Guang Yang

    (Urban Planning, Shenzhen New Land Tool Planning & Architectural Design Co., Shenzhen 518172, China)

  • Yu Chen

    (School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen 518060, China)

Abstract

Exposure to green spaces contributes to residents’ physical and mental health and well-being. The equitable allocation of green space has also become an increasingly important issue for society and the government. This study takes 3281 communities in Shenzhen as the analysis units. Using web crawlers, semantic segmentation based on deep learning, web map path planning and entropy weighting methods, four types of residents’ daily green exposure indicators are calculated, including community green space ratio, green view index (GVI), park accessibility, and the weighted composite green exposure index. The results reveal inequalities in the level of green exposure in Shenzhen’s communities across economic classes, mainly in GVI and comprehensive green exposure. We also found that the level of composite green exposure is relatively stable; however, green space ratio attainment levels for newer communities are increasing and GVI and park accessibility attainment levels are decreasing. Finally, among the newly built communities: compared to the low-income level communities, the high-income level communities have a significant advantage in green space, but the mid-income level communities do not have such an advantage. The main findings of this study can provide policy implications for urban green space planning, including the need to prioritize the addition of public green space near older communities with poor levels of green exposure, the addition of street greenery near communities with poor levels of composite green exposure, and ensuring that parks have entrances in all four directions as far as possible.

Suggested Citation

  • Qinyu Cui & Yiting Huang & Guang Yang & Yu Chen, 2022. "Measuring Green Exposure Levels in Communities of Different Economic Levels at Different Completion Periods: Through the Lens of Social Equity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-26, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:15:p:9611-:d:880353
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/15/9611/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/15/9611/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Victoria Houlden & Scott Weich & João Porto de Albuquerque & Stephen Jarvis & Karen Rees, 2018. "The relationship between greenspace and the mental wellbeing of adults: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-35, September.
    2. Siqi Yu & Xigang Zhu & Qian He, 2020. "An Assessment of Urban Park Access Using House-Level Data in Urban China: Through the Lens of Social Equity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-19, March.
    3. Chunhui Liu & Weixuan Song, 2019. "Perspectives of Socio-Spatial Differentiation from Soaring Housing Prices: A Case Study in Nanjing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-16, May.
    4. Yuyang Zhang & Qilin Wu & Lei Wu & Yan Li, 2021. "Measuring Community Green Inequity: A Fine-Scale Assessment of Beijing Urban Area," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-16, November.
    5. Sheng Li & Yi Jiang & Shuisong Ke & Ke Nie & Chao Wu, 2021. "Understanding the Effects of Influential Factors on Housing Prices by Combining Extreme Gradient Boosting and a Hedonic Price Model (XGBoost-HPM)," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-15, May.
    6. Yu Ye & Hanting Xie & Jia Fang & Hetao Jiang & De Wang, 2019. "Daily Accessed Street Greenery and Housing Price: Measuring Economic Performance of Human-Scale Streetscapes via New Urban Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-21, March.
    7. Yonglin Zhang & Xiao Fu & Chencan Lv & Shanlin Li, 2021. "The Premium of Public Perceived Greenery: A Framework Using Multiscale GWR and Deep Learning," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(13), pages 1-16, June.
    8. Chengdong Yi & Youqin Huang, 2014. "Housing Consumption and Housing Inequality in Chinese Cities During the First Decade of the Twenty-First Century," Housing Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(2), pages 291-311, March.
    9. Bolund, Per & Hunhammar, Sven, 1999. "Ecosystem services in urban areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 293-301, May.
    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. Lihui Gao & Zhen Xu & Ziqi Shang & Mingyu Li & Jianhui Wang, 2024. "Assessing Urban Park Accessibility and Equity Using Open-Source Data in Jiujiang, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-20, December.
    2. Yonggeng Xiong & Min Xu & Yan Zhao, 2024. "Resident Preferences for Urban Green Spaces in Response to Pandemic Public Health Emergency: A Case Study of Shanghai," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-25, April.
    3. Zihe Wang & Gege Yan & Siyuan Wang, 2022. "Fairness Evaluation of Landscape Justice in Urban Park Green Space: A Case Study of the Daxing Part of Yizhuang New Town, Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, December.
    4. Xin Li & Xiangrong Wang & Jingyi Han & Danzi Wu & Qing Lin & Jiayi Zhou & Shujie Zhao, 2022. "Effects of River Scale on the Aesthetic Quality of Urban On-Water Sightseeing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-16, October.

    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. Yilun Cao & Yuhan Guo & Mingjuan Zhang, 2022. "Research on the Equity of Urban Green Park Space Layout Based on Ga2SFCA Optimization Method—Taking the Core Area of Beijing as an Example," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-20, August.
    2. Siqi Yu & Xigang Zhu & Qian He, 2020. "An Assessment of Urban Park Access Using House-Level Data in Urban China: Through the Lens of Social Equity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-19, March.
    3. Yonglin Zhang & Xiao Fu & Chencan Lv & Shanlin Li, 2021. "The Premium of Public Perceived Greenery: A Framework Using Multiscale GWR and Deep Learning," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(13), pages 1-16, June.
    4. Goran Krsnik & Sonia Reyes-Paecke & Keith M. Reynolds & Jordi Garcia-Gonzalo & José Ramón González Olabarria, 2023. "Assessing Relativeness in the Provision of Urban Ecosystem Services: Better Comparison Methods for Improved Well-Being," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    5. Alexander V. Rusanov, 2019. "Dacha dwellers and gardeners: garden plots and second homes in Europe and Russia," Population and Economics, ARPHA Platform, vol. 3(1), pages 107-124, April.
    6. Hui, Ling Chui & Jim, C.Y., 2022. "Urban-greenery demands are affected by perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices, and socio-demographic and environmental-cultural factors," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    7. Monika Kopecká & Daniel Szatmári & Konštantín Rosina, 2017. "Analysis of Urban Green Spaces Based on Sentinel-2A: Case Studies from Slovakia," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-17, April.
    8. Veerkamp, Clara J. & Schipper, Aafke M. & Hedlund, Katarina & Lazarova, Tanya & Nordin, Amanda & Hanson, Helena I., 2021. "A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    9. Jiang, Wenhao & Stickley, Andrew & Ueda, Michiko, 2021. "Green space and suicide mortality in Japan: An ecological study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    10. Ahmet Tolunay & Çağlar Başsüllü, 2015. "Willingness to Pay for Carbon Sequestration and Co-Benefits of Forests in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, March.
    11. Heiko Rüger & Stefanie Hoherz & Norbert F. Schneider & Herbert Fliege & Maria M. Bellinger & Brenton M. Wiernik, 2023. "The Effects of Urban Living Conditions on Subjective Well-Being: The Case of German Foreign Service Employees," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 18(4), pages 1939-1963, August.
    12. Xiaohuan Xie & Yinrong Li & Ruobing Wang & Zhonghua Gou, 2023. "Park Recreation Intention and Satisfaction of Blue-Collar Workers Based on the ACSI Model: A Case Study of Anning Industrial Park in Yunnan," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-26, March.
    13. Massoni, Emma Soy & Barton, David N. & Rusch, Graciela M. & Gundersen, Vegard, 2018. "Bigger, more diverse and better? Mapping structural diversity and its recreational value in urban green spaces," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 502-516.
    14. Somajita Paul & Harini Nagendra, 2017. "Factors Influencing Perceptions and Use of Urban Nature: Surveys of Park Visitors in Delhi," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-23, April.
    15. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    16. Lishan Xiao & Quanyi Qiu & Lijie Gao, 2016. "Chinese Housing Reform and Social Sustainability: Evidence from Post-Reform Home Ownership," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-14, October.
    17. Aggelos Tsaligopoulos & Stella Kyvelou & Nefta-Eleftheria Votsi & Aimilia Karapostoli & Chris Economou & Yiannis G. Matsinos, 2021. "Revisiting the Concept of Quietness in the Urban Environment—Towards Ecosystems’ Health and Human Well-Being," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-19, March.
    18. Jonas Smit Andersen & Sara Maria Lerer & Antje Backhaus & Marina Bergen Jensen & Hjalte Jomo Danielsen Sørup, 2017. "Characteristic Rain Events: A Methodology for Improving the Amenity Value of Stormwater Control Measures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-18, October.
    19. Jeroen Degerickx & Martin Hermy & Ben Somers, 2020. "Mapping Functional Urban Green Types Using High Resolution Remote Sensing Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-35, March.
    20. Holt, Alison R. & Mears, Meghann & Maltby, Lorraine & Warren, Philip, 2015. "Understanding spatial patterns in the production of multiple urban ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 33-46.

    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:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:15:p:9611-:d:880353. 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.