Greening and Just Cities: Elements for Fostering a South–North Dialogue Based on a Systematic Literature Review
Open accessAbstract
The design and deployment of green amenities is a way to tackle cities' socio-environmental problems in the quest for urban sustainability. In this study, we undertake a systematic review of research published in international peer-reviewed journals that analyzes environmental justice issues within the context of the deployment of urban green amenities. Since most studies focus on the Global North, where this scholarship first emerged, our goal is to link the literature focused on the North and the South. This study aims to outline similarities and differences regarding the nexus of justice and the greening of cities in both contexts as well as to identify knowledge gaps in this scholarship in the Global South. “Green infrastructure” and “nature-based solutions,” as the leading concepts for cities' greening agendas, are used as descriptors in combination with “justice” and/or “green gentrification” in searches undertaken of two bibliographic databases. Our results show there is a need to better delineate a research agenda that addresses such issues in a heterogeneous Global South context while gaining insights from advances made by research on the Global North.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The most prominent societal challenge facing NbS is how to center justice and make inclusive planning for NbS a standard practice given limited participatory urban planning and governance.
“The most prominent societal challenge facing NbS is how to center justice and make inclusive planning for NbS a standard practice given limited participatory urban planning and governance (23, 24, 26, 32, 44–53).”
From Global synthesis and regional insights for mainstreaming urban nature-based solutions (2025) · cites this paper as [46]
The Discussion (page unavailable) links justice in NbS projects to meaningful participation and says top-down projects can exclude disadvantaged communities. The Conclusions (page unavailable) call for participatory processes from a project's conception. The paper does not establish this as the most prominent societal challenge or say that inclusive planning should become standard practice. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredCurrently, NbS tend to be conceptualized in the Global North and replicated in the Global South, which ignores disparities in ecological and socioeconomic contexts.
“Currently, NbS tend to be conceptualized in the Global North and replicated in the Global South, which ignores disparities in ecological and socioeconomic contexts (34, 46).”
From Global synthesis and regional insights for mainstreaming urban nature-based solutions (2025) · cites this paper as [46]
The Introduction says NbS research is more advanced and primarily focused on the Global North, while the Discussion stresses that Global North and South contexts differ and that local analysis is needed (page numbers unavailable). The paper does not establish that NbS are currently replicated from North to South or that such replication ignores ecological and socioeconomic disparities. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThere is wide agreement over the need for more research on justice aspects and processes of NbS, notably on local community participation to address potential trade-offs for marginalized and disadvantaged groups.
“Generally, there is wide agreement over the need for more research on justice aspects and processes of NbS, notably on local community participation to address potential trade-offs for marginalized and disadvantaged groups (46).”
From Global synthesis and regional insights for mainstreaming urban nature-based solutions (2025) · cites this paper as [46]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 35 · Cited by 37
- Authors
- de Souza, D. T., & Torres, P. H. C.
- Affiliations
- Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (BR)
- Venue
- Frontiers in Sustainable Cities
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media SA
- Published
- 2021-05-24
- Volume
- 3
- ISSN
- 2624-9634 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3165010887
- Cited by
- 37
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 2
- FWCI
- 1.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Frontiers in Sustainable Cities (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (2018/06685-9, 2015/, 15/03804-9)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Environmental Justice and Health Disparities
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Urban Green Space and Health
- Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Urban Planning and Governance
- Keywords
- urban greening, environmental justice, green infrastructure, nature-based solutions, green gentrification, Global South, Global North, urban sustainability
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
