Racial Disparities in Access to Public Green Spaces: Using Geographic Information Systems to Identify Underserved Populations in a Small American City

Introduction

Interest in environmental justice stems from an understanding that environmental burdens often disproportionately affect racial minority and low-income populations. ^{1 , 2} Wealthier populations often gain from social privileges in the form of better access to environmental amenities and their associated benefits. ³ Of particular interest are the benefits associated with green spaces, which have demonstrated important psychological, economic, social, and cultural benefits. ⁴ Due to the many benefits provided by green spaces to human populations, researchers have become increasingly concerned with the social implications of inequitable access to these areas.

Urban green spaces provide valuable ecosystem services for people living in cities. Studies have shown that these areas can facilitate physical activity, provide clean air, and help increase cooling, among other benefits. ^{5 , 6} Urban parks specifically have demonstrated a moderate-to-high air filtration capacity ⁷ and have been shown to mitigate the negative effects associated with the urban heat island effect by providing shade and surface cooling. ⁸ Access to quality green space also contributes to better physical and mental health outcomes. For example, regular interactions with green space can reduce depression, anxiety, obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular-related illness. ⁹ Green spaces have also been shown to encourage nearby residents to be more physically active, resulting in improved mental and cardiovascular health. ¹⁰ The presence of green spaces in urban environments has also been shown to encourage positive social interactions that can improve interpersonal dynamics and connectiveness among people. ¹¹ Given the importance of green spaces for human health, urban planners and government officials should work to ensure all residents have equal access to these areas.

Inequitable access to green space has long been considered an environmental justice issue in the United States. For example, racist redlining policies of the 1930s and 1940s in the United States have resulted in less green space access in more than 100 studied urban metropolitan areas today. ¹² However, the nature of the relationship between socioeconomic status and access to green space has been shown to vary depending on context (e.g., geographical region, type and quality of green space considered). ¹³ Several studies that have examined green space distribution in cities have found that minorities, citizens of lower socioeconomic levels, and less educated populations have limited access to green space (both in terms of quantity and quality) and their associated benefits. ^{14 , 15 , 16 , 17} Given that these social groups often suffer from higher rates of health issues, ¹⁸ these communities stand to benefit the most from access to these resources. ⁹ For example, McEachan et al. ¹⁹ found that higher residential greenness was associated with a reduced likelihood of depressive symptoms, with larger effects on disadvantaged groups—such as minority populations and individuals with less education. Additionally, Maas et al. ²⁰ demonstrated that the percentage of green space in people's living environment has a significant relation to perceived general health of residents, with a stronger association for lower socioeconomic groups. However, two recent reviews highlight the complexity of the issue: while low-income and racial–ethnic minority people experience inequities in urban green space quantity and quality (e.g., number of amenities, maintenance, youth programs, safety levels), there are often no clear differences for urban green space proximity (distance to the closest park) based on income or race–ethnicity. ^{21 , 22} Furthermore, although a majority of studies demonstrate an inequity, some studies report that minorities and low-income populations actually have greater access to green space in urban environments. ^{23 , 24} Equity considerations are also complexified by the modifying effect that gentrification might have on the relationship between green space and health, ²⁵ as green gentrification is known to undermine access by contributing to physical and sociocultural displacement. ^{26 , 27}

Research in race-related environmental justice aims to explain differences in the lived experiences of dominant (White) and marginalized (non-White) groups. To develop a complete understanding of these differences, it is necessary for researchers to accurately define populations, avoiding broadly lumping people of color into “minority” categories. Correctly categorizing populations can make it possible to understand the ways in which being a non-White person impacts an individual's behavior and attitudes toward utilizing natural areas. ²⁸ Often, studies that aim to identify environmental injustices surrounding green space access sort populations into either “white,” “minority,” or “black and minority” groups. ^{29 , 30 , 31} This can produce incorrect assumptions, generalizing across populations that are not similar other than in their lack of being White and failing to recognize the complexities of living as a minority in the United States. For example, several studies that assess access to green space by specific minority group have found that not all minority groups have similar access to green spaces in urban areas. ^{32 , 33 , 34} Different ethnic groups may face varying degrees of discrimination and violence in green space and nature, which also undermines the relationship that some minorities have with their neighborhood environment, and with parks in particular. ³⁵ Therefore, it is imperative that current and future studies avoid broad characterizations and assess patterns for specific racial groups, which may differ in their proximity to green space based either on income level^14,15,16,17 or cultural preference. ³⁶

Research regarding green space tends to focus on metropolises or is concerned with differences in access along a rural–urban gradient. When considering differences in green space access along this gradient, small cities are often overlooked. A recent study demonstrated what one would expect regarding green space access along an urban–rural gradient: poverty levels are positively associated with distances to parks and recreation areas in urban/suburban neighborhoods. ³⁷ Interestingly though, the study found that the opposite is true in rural areas, with poverty levels negatively associated with distance to green space. ³⁷ However, with rising societal inequities in the United States, it is important to investigate green space access within a context that considers cultural differences between large and small cities—not just between urban and rural populations. Small cities are known to operate differently than larger ones in terms of policy and political motivation, land management, and constituent opinion/voice. ³⁸ The limited research on green space access that considers city size comes mostly from outside the United States, ³⁹ whereas some characterize certain small American cities as “left behind” or even “forgotten”. ⁴⁰ Indeed, a recent analysis of access to green space focused only on the 500 most populated cities in the United States, cities with an average population size of ∼200,000. ⁴¹ The current literature on the effects of natural areas on human health is severely biased toward large cities; despite nearly half of the global human population living in small cities (defined as <300,000 people ⁴² ), only 3% of small cities have been studied, compared with 85% of large cities worldwide. ⁴³ Working-class and minority residents of small cities may face additional hurdles to overcome in accessing green space, such as inadequate access to public transportation. ⁴⁴ Furthermore, globalization has resulted in the formation of “global cities,” which serve as economic and manufacturing centers and draw in people from surrounding areas. This has resulted in the shrinkage of populations and a resulting demise of entrepreneurship, innovation, and intellectual engagement in many small American cities. ⁴⁵ To be able to generalize trends in green space access based on socioeconomic status of an urban population, research in small American cities requires further investigation.

With the inconsistencies from previous studies regarding the relationship between socioeconomic status and green space access, more case studies are needed. Binghamton, located in Broome County, New York, is a city of around 45,000 inhabitants, has nearly a third of its population living below the poverty line, and residents experience relatively high rates of asthma morbidity and cardiovascular disease-related deaths in addition to higher overall rates of premature death relative to the rest of New York State (146.9 compared with 99.1 per 100,000 people). ^{46 , 47} In this study, we utilized Geographic Information Systems (GIS) tools to analyze the distribution of green spaces in Binghamton, New York, in relation to the socioeconomic standing of its residents. Information from this study will be critical for advising future initiatives that address disparities in quality green space access in cities with high levels of poverty and public health concerns.

Methods

Statistical analysis

To understand how racial background influences access to green space, we first determined patterns of representation in Binghamton by calculating the total percentage of individuals identifying as Asian, Black, or Hispanic reported in the previous census. As previously stated, in Binghamton, 4.1%, 10.4%, and 6.4% of the population identify as Asian, Black, or Hispanic, respectively (Fig. 1). ⁴⁶ Next, we identified and grouped neighborhood blocks into two categories: (1) Blocks where Asians, Blacks, and Hispanics are underrepre- sented relative to the percent representation in Binghamton and (2) Blocks where Asians, Blacks, and Hispanics are overrepresented relative to the percent representation in Binghamton (Fig. 2). We then compared the average (A) distance to closest green space and (B) distance to closest large green space (i.e., >5000 m ² ) for blocks where Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, or Minorities (non-white) were overrepresented versus blocks where they were underrepresented using separate analyses of variance (ANOVA). We chose to run separate analyses for each group because the different racial categories were differentially represented in Binghamton leading to different standards for under- versus overrepresentation (Table 1). We tested all assumptions of ANOVA. To support the ANOVA, we also conducted correlation analyses to test the hypothesis that neighborhood blocks with higher percentages of White members of the community would be negatively associated with (A) distance to closest green space and (B) distance to closest large green space. Finally, we employed multiple regression analysis to control for potential mediating relationships of other important independent variables. Specifically, we used multiple regression analysis to determine whether racial composition (percent Asian, Black, Hispanic, and White) or overall percent Minority predicted a census block's (A) distance to closest green space and (B) distance to closest large green space (i.e., >5000 m ² ), while also controlling for the percentage of homeowners in each census block. We used home ownership status in our multiple regression as a proxy for income, as income data are not readily available at the block level through the census data; renting is generally associated with lower incomes in the United States ^{48 , 49}

OPEN IN VIEWER

FIG. 1.

Distribution of different racial groups in relation to large public green spaces in Binghamton, New York.

OPEN IN VIEWER

FIG. 2.

Location of census blocks in relation to large green spaces in Binghamton, New York, for blocks with a lower percentage of Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, or all minorities relative to overall percentage of Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, or all minorities (white) versus blocks with a greater percentage of Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, or minorities relative to overall percentage of Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, or all minorities (black).

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

The Number of Blocks, of 670 Occupied in Binghamton, NY, That Contained Under- Versus Overrepresentation Relative to City Averages of Different Racial Groups

	Asian		Black		Hispanic		Non-white
% Representation	<4.1%	>4.1%	<10.4%	>10.4%	<6.4%	>6.4%	<20.1%	>20.1%
No. of blocks	504	166	446	224	449	221	444	226

NY, New York.

Results

ANOVA results

Asian population

We found a marginally significant effect of representation on distance to closest green space (F₁₆₆₈ = 3.6; p = 0.059; Fig. 3). Neighborhood blocks with higher percentages of Asian residents were significantly further away from green space. Similarly, this pattern was exacerbated when we consider distance to closest large green space (F₁₆₆₈ = 8.2; p = 0.004).

OPEN IN VIEWER

FIG. 3.

Distance to closest large green space for (A) blocks with a lower percentage of Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, or all minorities (“fewer”) relative to overall percentage of Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, or all minorities in Binghamton, New York versus (B) blocks with a greater percentage of Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, or minorities relative to overall percentage of Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, or all minorities in Binghamton, New York. Asterisks indicate significant differences.

Black population

We found no significant effect of representation on distance to closest green space (F₁₆₆₈ = 3.3; p = 0.07; Fig. 3). Similarly, there was no effect of representation when we considered distance to closest large green space (F₁₆₆₈ = 0.7; p = 0.42).

Hispanic population

We found a significant effect of representation on distance to closest green space (F₁₆₆₈ = 4.3; p = 0.04; Fig. 3). Neighborhood blocks with higher percentages of Hispanic residents were significantly closer to green space compared with blocks with lower percentages of Hispanic residents. We found a similar significant effect when we considered distance to closest large green space (F₁₆₆₈ = 4.1; p = 0.04).

Minority (non-white) population

We found no significant effect of representation on distance to closest green space (F₁₆₆₈ = 2.5; p = 0.12; Fig. 3). Similarly, there was no effect of representation when we considered distance to closest large green space (F₁₆₆₈ = 0.2; p = 0.7) (Fig. 2).

Discussion

We found that when minority groups are aggregated, there is no relationship between access to green space and minority composition by blocks in Binghamton, New York. However, when considering the individual minority groups, the pattern is not as clear; blocks with a greater percentage of Asians relative to their overall population in Binghamton live farther from green space than blocks with a below average percentage of Asians. Furthermore, blocks with a greater percentage of Hispanics relative to their overall population in Binghamton actually live closer to green space than blocks with below average percentages of Hispanics. Our study highlights the complexity of equitable access to green space in urban areas by showing variation in green space access across different racial groups.

The patterns we identified in Binghamton reflect similar trends in other studies where Asian populations tend to have less access to green space, whereas Hispanic populations tend to have greater access. For example, studies from Phoenix, Arizona ⁵⁰ ; Atlanta, Georgia ³² ; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania ³³ ; and Leicester, England, ³⁴ all document Asian populations having the lowest public green space access. Despite this trend, it remains unclear exactly why Asian populations in these cities experience less access to green space. One pattern that may explain access disparities in the U.S. cities listed above is the relative size of the population to the other major minority groups (Black and Hispanic). Of these three minority populations in Binghamton, Atlanta, Philadelphia, and Phoenix, the Asian population is the smallest; low population density may simply mean that fewer individuals are likely to be found near areas of green space, particularly in suburbs where green spaces are more common and Whites are relatively more abundant. ⁵¹ Another factor that might contribute to the results is potential cultural differences in whether residents value living near green space. A study in Leicester demonstrated that Asian people avoided using public parks out of fear of racial attack. ³⁶ This certainly explains differences in green space access, but other cultural preferences may require equity to be redefined in the context of green space access. ⁵² Furthermore, and similar to recent studies in several American cities, ³⁷ we found that high-Hispanic blocks had greater access to green space compared with other ethnic groups. However, additional studies are needed to determine whether spatial access equates to “social access,” that is, whether parks are actually utilized by these groups. ⁵³ Understanding public perception of green spaces, for example, are they considered “safe” spaces, by local residents across ethnic groups is critical toward understanding utilization and potential benefits of green space proximity. Qualitative metrics other than size may also be critical factors determining benefits of green space proximity; Moore et al., ⁵⁴ for example, found that while Hispanics lived in closer proximity to green space overall, those green spaces had fewer recreational facilities and thus provided fewer benefits than those green spaces in predominantly White neighborhoods. The use of green space by Hispanic populations may be of critical importance for managing overall public health of a diverse community, as Hispanics are less likely to meet physical activity recommendations than Whites. ^{55 , 56} Finally, in addition to fear, societal rules and social norms can undermine the use of green space for racialized minorities; it cannot be assumed that the creation of green space, unassisted, will create more just cities. Rather, urban planners must better account for the needs, identities, and day-to-day lives of marginalized communities in the process of designing and implementing new green spaces. ²⁷

Although consistent with the theme of inequitable distribution of green space, green space access issues for different racial populations often relate to green space quality and perception, rather than proximity. ^{57 , 58 , 59} In Los Angeles, minorities and low-income groups are likely to live near parks with higher potential for congestion, whereas White and affluent groups are likely to live closer to green spaces with lower potential park congestion. ⁵⁸ Similarly, in Philadelphia, Black and Hispanic populations are more likely to live close to a public green space than White populations, but live in proximity to smaller, and subsequently lower quality, green spaces overall. ³³ A study in Bristol, England, found that groups living in deprived areas (lower socioeconomic status) actually lived closer to green spaces than their more affluent counterparts, but reported poorer perceived safety, and less frequent use of those spaces. ⁵⁹ Rigolon ²² determined that most inequality related to green space access exists for parameters of acreage and quality, not general proximity. For example, larger green spaces have been shown to more effectively reduce air temperature in urban environments, ^{60 , 61} providing a more comfortable environment for those with access to them. Access to relatively larger green space is also negatively correlated with feelings of anger, frustration, and aggression. ⁶² Larger (>5000 m ² ) and thus higher quality green spaces are not equitably distributed in Binghamton across different racial groups and present an opportunity for local planners to address social injustice.

While there is often a disparity in the access to green space for lower income and minority groups, the literature demonstrates conflicting reports on overall equitable access to green space. What is unclear about these trends is exactly why differences in overall access to green space exist depending on the city. Some studies have found that level of education and income level have a stronger positive correlation with urban green space access than race, ^{63 , 64} suggesting that differences in city education budgets and wealth distribution contribute to the conflicting results presented in the literature on green space access. Additionally, recent spatial analyses of distributional green equity found that low population density may allow for more equitable distribution of urban vegetation, attributing green space access to the amount of land over which a city's population resides. ⁶⁵ Another possible explanation for differences in access is paradoxical. While the creation of quality green space can make neighborhoods healthier and more attractive, it can also increase housing costs and property values, ultimately gentrifying a neighborhood and pushing out the very people it was meant to benefit. ²¹ Heynen et al. ⁶⁶ showed that lower socioeconomic groups and minorities are often underserved in terms of receiving green space associated benefits as a result of increases in land privatization. However, the so-called “green gentrification” may be less relevant in small versus large cities, as it is generally associated with global flows of investment, resources, and branding. ²⁶ More comprehensive studies are needed that analyze city characteristics that may contribute to inequities in green space use, such as political leadership and economic trends.

Our findings are crucial for broadly evaluating green space access based on demographics. Asians residing in Binghamton do not have equal access to these critical public goods and therefore do not benefit from access to green space to the same extent as other populations in Binghamton. Certain health problems, such as obesity, disproportionately affect lower income and minority groups. ⁶⁷ Considering that green spaces have been shown to alleviate health issues in humans in various ways (e.g., promoting exercise to reduce obesity rates), ⁶⁸ Binghamton's inequitable access to quality green space for its Asian populations represents a significant social justice issue. While it is important to recognize that many determinants of urban health are not remediable by landscape design and green space access, ¹⁴ improvements in this regard should be considered key components to developing a sustainable community for all residents.

Conclusions

Green space is a crucial part of any urban ecosystem because of the many benefits that it provides to the environment and the communities that surround it. Regarding overall green space distribution, Binghamton lacks in opportunities for its Asian population, while providing more access to its Hispanic population relative to other minorities and Whites. Our findings suggest that city planners in Binghamton, as well as in other urban populations, have opportunities and obligations to eliminate social inequities and injustices related to green space access.