IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i5p948-d1131334.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spatial Optimization of Park Green Spaces by an Improved Two-Step Optimization Model from the Perspective of Maximizing Accessibility Equity

Author

Listed:
  • Lei Mu

    (Faculty of Resources and Environmental Science, Hubei University, 368 Youyi Road, Wuhan 430062, China)

  • Lijun Xing

    (Faculty of Resources and Environmental Science, Hubei University, 368 Youyi Road, Wuhan 430062, China
    Key Laboratory of Regional Development and Environmental Response, Hubei University, 368 Youyi Road, Wuhan 430062, China)

  • Ying Jing

    (Business School, NingboTech University, Qianhunan Road 1, Ningbo 315100, China)

  • Qinjiang Hu

    (Faculty of Resources and Environmental Science, Hubei University, 368 Youyi Road, Wuhan 430062, China)

Abstract

As a type of public land, park green spaces (PGSs) carry the daily recreation and social communication of urban residents, and the inequity of their space accessibility has been widely confirmed. However, the optimized suggestions based on evaluations of accessibility and equity in previous studies cannot guide actual planning effectively because the reasonable locations and scales of construction of PGSs were difficult to accurately identify. This study first constructed two equity objective functions: the minimum standard deviation (SD) and the minimum Gini coefficient (GC) in accessibility; then an improved two-step optimization method considering location-allocation was adopted to maximal accessibility equity (MAE) for optimizing the spatial layout of PGSs and doing comparisons of these two objectives for further analysis. The results showed that the improved method based on covering the accessibility blind area and preserving the existing PGSs could optimize the location selection and rationally determine the area. The two objective functions were both effective for optimization, but the GC minimization is more advantageous than the SD for achieving the MAE. The accessibility value increased significantly in a higher proportion of regions, and the overall accessibility median increased by 0.0445. It is worth mentioning that the MAE optimization would lead to a new imbalance between supply and demand in some regions. This indicated that the strictly restricted area standard may lead to the oversupply of PGSs in some areas, while the improvement of equity might not mean the improvement of accessibility. The proposed optimization framework could achieve the optimal layout of PGSs on the goal of MAE. Our findings also could provide inspiration for the equity allocation of other types of public facility lands and support decision-making for government departments regarding management and planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Lei Mu & Lijun Xing & Ying Jing & Qinjiang Hu, 2023. "Spatial Optimization of Park Green Spaces by an Improved Two-Step Optimization Model from the Perspective of Maximizing Accessibility Equity," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-20, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:5:p:948-:d:1131334
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/5/948/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/5/948/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gugulica, Madalina & Burghardt, Dirk, 2023. "Mapping indicators of cultural ecosystem services use in urban green spaces based on text classification of geosocial media data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    2. El Murr, Karl & Boisjoly, Genevieve & Waygood, E.O.D., 2023. "Measuring accessibility to parks: Analyzing the relationship between self-reported and calculated measures," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    3. Khan, Abdullah A., 1992. "An integrated approach to measuring potential spatial access to health care services," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 275-287, October.
    4. Kremer, Peleg & Hamstead, Zoé A. & McPhearson, Timon, 2016. "The value of urban ecosystem services in New York City: A spatially explicit multicriteria analysis of landscape scale valuation scenarios," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 57-68.
    5. Li, Xin & Ma, Xiaodong & Hu, Zongnan & Li, Siyuan, 2021. "Investigation of urban green space equity at the city level and relevant strategies for improving the provisioning in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    6. Páez, Antonio & Scott, Darren M. & Morency, Catherine, 2012. "Measuring accessibility: positive and normative implementations of various accessibility indicators," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 141-153.
    7. Gu, Zongni & Luo, Xiaolong & Tang, Mi & Liu, Xiaoman, 2023. "Does the edge effect impact the healthcare equity? An examination of the equity in hospitals accessibility in the edge city in multi-scale," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    8. Yang Yang & Ruizhen He & Guohang Tian & Zhen Shi & Xinyu Wang & Albert Fekete, 2022. "Equity Study on Urban Park Accessibility Based on Improved 2SFCA Method in Zhengzhou, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, November.
    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. Chen, Wendong & Cheng, Long & Chen, Xuewu & Chen, Jingxu & Cao, Mengqiu, 2021. "Measuring accessibility to health care services for older bus passengers: A finer spatial resolution," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    2. Xu, Wangtu (Ato) & Li, Yongling & Wang, Hui, 2016. "Transit accessibility for commuters considering the demand elasticities of distance and transfer," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 138-156.
    3. Chih-Hao Wang & Na Chen, 2021. "A multi-objective optimization approach to balancing economic efficiency and equity in accessibility to multi-use paths," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1967-1986, August.
    4. Antonio Abatemarco & Massimo Aria & Sergio Beraldo & Michela Collaro, 2023. "Measuring Access and Inequality of Access to Health Care: a Policy-Oriented Decomposition," CSEF Working Papers 666, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    5. Mengying Cui & David Levinson, 2018. "Accessibility analysis of risk severity," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 1029-1050, July.
    6. Daniel Oviedo & Lynn Scholl & Marco Innao & Lauramaria Pedraza, 2019. "Do Bus Rapid Transit Systems Improve Accessibility to Job Opportunities for the Poor? The Case of Lima, Peru," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-24, May.
    7. Rui Xiao & Guofeng Wang & Meng Wang, 2018. "Transportation Disadvantage and Neighborhood Sociodemographics: A Composite Indicator Approach to Examining Social Inequalities," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 29-43, May.
    8. Higgins, Christopher D. & Páez, Antonio & Kim, Gyoorie & Wang, Jue, 2021. "Changes in accessibility to emergency and community food services during COVID-19 and implications for low income populations in Hamilton, Ontario," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 291(C).
    9. Piotr Rosik & Julia Wójcik, 2022. "Transport Infrastructure and Regional Development: A Survey of Literature on Wider Economic and Spatial Impacts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-19, December.
    10. Hone-Jay Chu & Bo-Cheng Lin & Ming-Run Yu & Ta-Chien Chan, 2016. "Minimizing Spatial Variability of Healthcare Spatial Accessibility—The Case of a Dengue Fever Outbreak," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-11, December.
    11. Lin, Jen-Jia & Cheng, Yu-Chun, 2016. "Access to jobs and apartment rents," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 121-128.
    12. Helai Huang & Jialing Wu & Fang Liu & Yiwei Wang, 2020. "Measuring Accessibility Based on Improved Impedance and Attractive Functions Using Taxi Trajectory Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-23, December.
    13. Zhen Yang & Weijun Gao, 2022. "Evaluating the Coordinated Development between Urban Greening and Economic Growth in Chinese Cities during 2005 to 2019," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-25, August.
    14. Karner, Alex & Niemeier, Deb, 2013. "Civil rights guidance and equity analysis methods for regional transportation plans: a critical review of literature and practice," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 126-134.
    15. Francisco Núñez & Elías Albornoz & Mariella Gutiérrez & Antonio Zumelzu, 2022. "Socially Sustainable Accessibility to Goods and Services in the Metropolitan Area of Concepción, Chile, Post-COVID-19," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-22, October.
    16. Brain, Isabel & Prieto, Joaquin, 2021. "Understanding changes in the geography of opportunity over time: the case of Santiago, Chile," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 109915, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Tao, Zhuolin & Cheng, Yang & Du, Shishuai & Feng, Ling & Wang, Shaoshuai, 2020. "Accessibility to delivery care in Hubei Province, China," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    18. Rezaei, Nazanin & Todd-Blick, Annika & Fujita, K. Sydny & Popovich, Natalie & Needell, Zachary & Poliziani, Cristian & Caicedo, Juan David & Guirado, Carlos & Spurlock, C. Anna, 2024. "At the nexus of equity and transportation modeling: Assessing accessibility through the Individual Experienced Utility-Based Synthesis (INEXUS) metric," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    19. Moyano, Amparo & Martínez, Héctor S. & Coronado, José M., 2018. "From network to services: A comparative accessibility analysis of the Spanish high-speed rail system," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 51-60.
    20. Mengying Cui & David Levinson, 2020. "Primal and Dual Access," Working Papers 2022-01, University of Minnesota: Nexus Research Group.

    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:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:5:p:948-:d:1131334. 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.