首页> 外文OA文献 >A spatial analytic approach for classifying greenspace and comparing greenspace social equity
【2h】

A spatial analytic approach for classifying greenspace and comparing greenspace social equity

机译:用于对绿地进行分类和比较绿地社会公平性的空间分析方法

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Urban planners frequently adhere to ‘park minimum standards’ to ensure that public health and environmental benefits associated with greenspace are socially equitable. These standards denote the extent and placement of greenspaces, but rarely consider their form and function. Arguably, an inclusive evaluation of greenspace social equity requires the comparison of greenspace types. To address if greenspace types are socially equitable, I develop a novel spatial analytic approach that classifies 4265 greenspaces according to twelve functional, physical characteristics. I then compare the social equity of these greenspace types using multiple operationalizations of social equity (provision, accessibility, and population pressure) throughout 4524 neighborhoods in a capital city in Australia. I find that greenspace social equity varies for each of these types. For example, results reveal that affluent households have an abundance of amenity rich greenspaces and few amenity poor ones. Further, by comparing across multiple social equity operationalizations, I find that affluent households may have a deficit of the amenity poor greenspace type, but live closer to this type. These findings confirm that employing a greenspace typology and multiple social equity operationalizations can deepen our understanding of the association between social equity and greenspace provision. This spatial analytic approach is both adaptable for examining other urban land use types, and portable to other urban contexts, and can aid urban planners, researchers, and policy makers to understand how to improve the social equity of publicly beneficial greenspace types.
机译:城市规划人员经常遵守“公园最低标准”,以确保与绿色空间相关的公共健康和环境利益在社会上是公平的。这些标准表示绿色空间的范围和位置,但很少考虑其形式和功能。可以说,对绿色空间社会公平性进行包容性评估需要对绿色空间类型进行比较。为了解决绿色空间类型在社会上是否公平的问题,我开发了一种新颖的空间分析方法,该方法根据12种功能性,物理特征对4265个绿色空间进行了分类。然后,我使用澳大利亚首都全市4524个社区的社会公平的多种运作方式(供给,可及性和人口压力),比较了这些绿地类型的社会公平。我发现,每种类型的绿地社会公平性都不尽相同。例如,结果表明,富裕家庭拥有丰富的便利性绿化空间,而很少有便利性绿化空间。此外,通过比较多种社会公平运营方式,我发现富裕家庭的便利性差的绿地类型可能有所不足,但生活水平却更高。这些发现证实,采用绿色空间分类法和多种社会公平运营方式可以加深我们对社会公平与绿色空间供给之间联系的理解。这种空间分析方法既适用于检查其他城市土地使用类型,又可移植到其他城市环境中,并且可以帮助城市规划人员,研究人员和政策制定者了解如何提高公益性绿色空间类型的社会公平性。

著录项

  • 作者

    Kimpton, Anthony;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2017
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号