IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i4p1115-d140130.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Contrary to Common Observations in the West, Urban Park Access Is Only Weakly Related to Neighborhood Socioeconomic Conditions in Beijing, China

Author

Listed:
  • Xingyue Tu

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology (ESPRE), Center for Human-Environment System Sustainability (CHESS), Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    School of Natural Resources, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Ganlin Huang

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology (ESPRE), Center for Human-Environment System Sustainability (CHESS), Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    School of Natural Resources, Faculty of Geographical Science, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China)

  • Jianguo Wu

    (State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology (ESPRE), Center for Human-Environment System Sustainability (CHESS), Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
    School of Life Sciences and School of Sustainability, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287, USA)

Abstract

Parks provide critical ecosystem services to urban residents. Park access critically determines how parks are used by residents. Many existing studies, which mostly have been conducted in developed countries, reported that park access disproportionately benefits the socioeconomically advantaged groups. To test if this observation also holds true in developing countries, we examined the park access and its relationship with socioeconomic conditions in Beijing, China. We used a buffering method and a road network-based analysis to calculate the park access of 130 neighborhoods, and applied the Pearson correlation to examine how neighborhood park access is related to socioeconomic conditions. Our results showed that (1) the park access decreased from 76% in the downtown areas to 24% in the suburbs; (2) the correlation coefficients (r) between socioeconomic conditions and park access were all smaller than 0.3 ( p < 0.05)—that is, explaining less than 8% of the variability. Our study indicated that neighborhood socioeconomic conditions were only weakly associated with park access in Beijing and did not support the common phenomenon in western countries. Such a contradiction might be explained by the fact that park planning in Beijing is funded and administered by the city government and influenced by the central government’s policy, whereas in most developed countries market sectors play a critical role in park planning. Our research suggested that urban planning funded by governments, when aimed at improving the wellbeing of all urban residents, may effectively reduce potential environmental inequalities.

Suggested Citation

  • Xingyue Tu & Ganlin Huang & Jianguo Wu, 2018. "Contrary to Common Observations in the West, Urban Park Access Is Only Weakly Related to Neighborhood Socioeconomic Conditions in Beijing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-12, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:4:p:1115-:d:140130
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/4/1115/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/4/1115/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shinya Yasumoto & Andrew Jones & Chihiro Shimizu, 2014. "Longitudinal Trends in Equity of Park Accessibility in Yokohama, Japan: An Investigation into the Role of Causal Mechanisms," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(3), pages 682-699, March.
    2. Macintyre, Sally & Macdonald, Laura & Ellaway, Anne, 2008. "Do poorer people have poorer access to local resources and facilities? The distribution of local resources by area deprivation in Glasgow, Scotland," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(6), pages 900-914, September.
    3. Pascale Joassart-Marcelli, 2010. "Leveling the Playing Field? Urban Disparities in Funding for Local Parks and Recreation in the Los Angeles Region," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 42(5), pages 1174-1192, May.
    4. Lincoln R Larson & Viniece Jennings & Scott A Cloutier, 2016. "Public Parks and Wellbeing in Urban Areas of the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, April.
    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. Wen Wu & Kewei Ding, 2022. "Optimization Strategy for Parks and Green Spaces in Shenyang City: Improving the Supply Quality and Accessibility," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-13, April.
    2. Wenbin Luo & Mingming Su, 2018. "A Spatial-Temporal Analysis of Urban Parkland Expansion in China and Practical Implications to Enhance Urban Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Min Liu & Xiaoma Li & Ding Song & Hui Zhai, 2021. "Evaluation and Monitoring of Urban Public Greenspace Planning Using Landscape Metrics in Kunming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-20, March.
    4. Weichang Kong & Dorina Pojani & Neil Sipe & Dominic Stead, 2021. "Transport Poverty in Chinese Cities: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-24, April.

    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. Zhen Li & Wanmin Zhao & Miaoyao Nie, 2021. "Scale Characteristics and Optimization of Park Green Space in Megacities Based on the Fractal Measurement Model: A Case Study of Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-18, July.
    2. Olsen, Jonathan R. & Thornton, Lukar & Tregonning, Grant & Mitchell, Richard, 2022. "Nationwide equity assessment of the 20-min neighbourhood in the scottish context: A socio-spatial proximity analysis of residential locations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 315(C).
    3. 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.
    4. Huiying Ng, 2020. "Recognising the edible urban commons: Cultivating latent capacities for transformative governance in Singapore," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(7), pages 1417-1433, May.
    5. 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.
    6. SHIMIZU, Chihiro & 清水, 千弘 & NAKAGAWA, Masayuki & 中川, 雅之, 2018. "Aging and House Prices: The Impact of Aging Housing Stock to Housing Market in the Tokyo Metropolitan Area," Discussion Papers 2018-01, Graduate School of Economics, Hitotsubashi University.
    7. Evan Elderbrock & Chris Enright & Kathryn A. Lynch & Alexandra R. Rempel, 2020. "A Guide to Public Green Space Planning for Urban Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-23, October.
    8. Robert F. Baldwin & Nakisha T. Fouch, 2018. "Understanding the Biodiversity Contributions of Small Protected Areas Presents Many Challenges," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-12, October.
    9. Siqi Lai & Brian Deal, 2022. "Parks, Green Space, and Happiness: A Spatially Specific Sentiment Analysis Using Microblogs in Shanghai, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, December.
    10. König, Christian & Salomo, Katja & Helbig, Marcel, 2024. "Understanding Variation in Neighbourhood Environmental Inequalities: The Influence of Residential Segregation, Gentrification, and other City-Level Factors," SocArXiv j4tf2, Center for Open Science.
    11. Shixian Luo & Jing Xie & Katsunori Furuya, 2021. "“We Need such a Space”: Residents’ Motives for Visiting Urban Green Spaces during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-18, June.
    12. Lin Lin & Xueming (Jimmy) Chen & Anne Vernez Moudon, 2021. "Measuring the Urban Forms of Shanghai’s City Center and Its New Districts: A Neighborhood-Level Comparative Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-18, July.
    13. Vanessa G. Macintyre & Sarah Cotterill & Jamie Anderson & Chris Phillipson & Jack S. Benton & David P. French, 2019. "“I Would Never Come Here Because I’ve Got My Own Garden”: Older Adults’ Perceptions of Small Urban Green Spaces," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-18, June.
    14. Argyro Anna Kanelli & Panayiotis G. Dimitrakopoulos & Nikolaos M. Fyllas & George P. Chrousos & Olga-Ioanna Kalantzi, 2021. "Engaging the Senses: The Association of Urban Green Space with General Health and Well-Being in Urban Residents," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-15, June.
    15. Piotr Wójcik & Krystian Andruszek, 2022. "Predicting intra‐urban well‐being from space with nonlinear machine learning," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(4), pages 891-913, August.
    16. Brenda B. Lin & Susan Thompson & Richard Mitchell & Thomas Astell-Burt & Evelyne De Leeuw & Bin Jalaludin & Xiaoqi Feng, 2023. "Policymaker and Practitioner Perceptions of Parks for Health and Wellbeing: Scoping a Holistic Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-16, March.
    17. Ying Xu & David Matarrita-Cascante & Jae Ho Lee & A.E. Luloff, 2019. "Incorporating Physical Environment-Related Factors in an Assessment of Community Attachment: Understanding Urban Park Contributions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-19, October.
    18. Alessandro Rigolon & Matthew H. E. M. Browning & Olivia McAnirlin & Hyunseo (Violet) Yoon, 2021. "Green Space and Health Equity: A Systematic Review on the Potential of Green Space to Reduce Health Disparities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-27, March.
    19. Kubiszewski, Ida & Jarvis, Diane & Zakariyya, Nabeeh, 2019. "Spatial variations in contributors to life satisfaction: An Australian case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    20. Arnab Bhattacharjee & Taps Maiti & Dennis Petrie, 2014. "Spatial structures of health outcomes and health behaviours in Scotland: Evidence from the Scottish Health Survey," SEEC Discussion Papers 1401, Spatial Economics and Econometrics Centre, Heriot Watt University.

    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:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:4:p:1115-:d:140130. 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.