Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 53Urban Green Space and HealthEnvironmental Justice and Health DisparitiesUrban Arborization and Environmental Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Exploring Relationships between Socioeconomic Background and Urban Greenery in Portland, OR

Open access

Abstract

Do urban residents experience societal benefits derived from urban forests equitably? We conducted a broad-scale spatial analysis of the relationship between urban greenery and socioeconomic factors in the Portland metropolitan area. The Normalized Difference Vegetation Index was derived from National Agriculture Imagery Program images to map urban vegetation cover, and Outdoor Recreation and Conservation Area data were used to identify green spaces. These measures of urban greenery were correlated with census data to identify socioeconomic factors associated with high levels of green inequity. Population density, house age, income, and race were strongly correlated with vegetation cover. However, the distribution of green spaces showed a much weaker relationship with socioeconomic factors. These results highlight the importance of different measures of access to urban greenery and suggest potential solutions to the problem of urban green inequity. Cities can use our methods to conduct targeted urban forest management to maximize urban forest benefits received by residents.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/f7080162

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 48

  1. Aspinall, 2011, Natural environments and their impact on activity, health, and quality of life, Appl. Psychol. Health Well Being, 3, 230, 10.1111/j.1758-0854.2011.01053.x · DOI
  2. Kuchelmeister, 2000, Trees for the urban millennium: Urban forestry update, Unasylva, 51, 49
  3. Thompson, 2002, Urban open space in the 21st century, Landsc. Urban Plan., 60, 59, 10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00059-2 · DOI
  4. Kenney, 2011, Criteria and indicators for strategic urban forest planning and management, Arboric. Urban For., 37, 108, 10.48044/jauf.2011.015 · DOI
  5. Carreiro, M., Song, Y., and Wu, J. (2008). Ecology, Planning, and Management of Urban Forests, Springer. · DOI
  6. Poudyal, 2009, A hedonic analysis of the demand for and benefits of urban recreation parks, Land Use Policy, 26, 975, 10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.11.008 · DOI
  7. Ulrich, 1991, Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments, J. Environ. Psychol., 11, 201, 10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80184-7 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Konijnendijk, C.C., Nilsson, K., Randrup, T.B., and Schipperijn, J. (2005). Urban Forests and Trees, Springer-Verlag. · DOI
  9. Gatrell, 2002, Growth through greening: Developing and assessing alternative economic development programmes, Appl. Geogr., 22, 331, 10.1016/S0143-6228(02)00049-8 · DOI
  10. McPherson, 1999, Benefit-cost analysis of Modesto’s municipal urban forest, J. Arboric., 25, 235
  11. Maas, 2006, Green space, urbanity, and health: How strong is the relation?, J. Epidemiol. Community Health, 60, 587, 10.1136/jech.2005.043125 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Mitchell, 2008, Effect of exposure to natural environment on health inequalities: An observational population study, Lancet, 372, 1655, 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61689-X · DOI · Paper page
  13. Kweon, 1998, Green common spaces and the social integration of inner-city older adults, Environ. Behav., 30, 832, 10.1177/001391659803000605 · DOI
  14. Sullivan, 2004, The Fruit of Urban Nature: Vital Neighborhood Spaces, Environ. Behav., 36, 678, 10.1177/0193841X04264945 · DOI
  15. Kuo, 2001, Environment and crime in the inner city: Does vegetation reduce crime?, Environ. Behav., 33, 343
  16. Goddard, 2009, Scaling up from gardens: Biodiversity conservation in urban environments, Trends Ecol. Evol., 25, 90, 10.1016/j.tree.2009.07.016 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Rudd, 2002, Importance of backyard habitat in a comprehensive biodiversity conservation strategy: A connectivity analysis of urban green spaces, Restor. Ecol., 10, 368, 10.1046/j.1526-100X.2002.02041.x · DOI
  18. Heynen, 2003, Correlates of urban forest canopy cover: Implications for local public works, Public Works Manag. Policy, 8, 33, 10.1177/1087724X03008001004 · DOI
  19. Landry, 2009, Street trees and equity: Evaluating the spatial distribution of an urban amenity, Environ. Plan. A, 41, 2651, 10.1068/a41236 · DOI
  20. McConnachie, 2010, Public green space inequality in small towns in South Africa, Habitat Int., 34, 244, 10.1016/j.habitatint.2009.09.009 · DOI
  21. Pearsall, 2009, Concrete evidence & geographically weighted regression: A regional analysis of wealth and the land cover in Massachusetts, Appl. Geogr., 29, 478, 10.1016/j.apgeog.2009.03.001 · DOI
  22. Talarchek, 1990, The urban forests of New Orleans: An exploratory analysis of relationships, Urban Geogr., 11, 65, 10.2747/0272-3638.11.1.65 · DOI
  23. Kirkpatrick, 2011, Temporal and spatial variation in garden and street trees in six eastern Australian cities, Landsc. Urban Plan., 101, 244, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.02.029 · DOI
  24. Nilsson, K., Sangster, M., Gallis, C., Hartig, T., de Vries, S., Seeland, K., and Schipperijn, J. (2011). Forests, Trees and Human Health, Springer Netherlands. · DOI
  25. Mitchell, 2007, Greenspace, urbanity and health: Relationships in England, J. Epidemiol. Commun. Health, 61, 681, 10.1136/jech.2006.053553 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Barbosa, 2007, Who benefits from access to green space? A case study from Sheffield, UK, Landsc. Urban Plan., 83, 187, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.04.004 · DOI
  27. Lafary, 2008, People, pixels and weights in Vanderburgh County, Indiana: Toward a new urban geography of human–environment interactions, Geocarto Int., 23, 53, 10.1080/10106040701494575 · DOI
  28. Pearsall, 2012, Tree-lined lanes or vacant lots? Evaluating non-stationarity between urban greenness and socio-economic conditions in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA at multiple scales, Appl. Geogr., 35, 257, 10.1016/j.apgeog.2012.07.006 · DOI
  29. Li, 2007, Measuring the quality of life in city of Indianapolis by integration of remote sensing and census data, Int. J. Remote Sens., 28, 249, 10.1080/01431160600735624 · DOI
  30. Sellers, 1987, Relations between canopy reflectance, photosynthesis and transpiration: Links between optics, biophysics and canopy architecture, Adv. Sp. Res., 7, 27, 10.1016/0273-1177(87)90291-2 · DOI
  31. Tucker, 1979, Red and photographic infrared linear combinations for monitoring vegetation, Remote Sens. Environ., 8, 127, 10.1016/0034-4257(79)90013-0 · DOI
  32. Nowak, 2006, Air pollution removal by urban trees and shrubs in the United States, Urban For. Urban Green., 4, 115, 10.1016/j.ufug.2006.01.007 · DOI
  33. Chiesura, 2004, The role of urban parks for the sustainable city, Landsc. Urban Plan., 68, 129, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2003.08.003 · DOI · Paper page
  34. McBride, J. (2011). LUMA-GIS Thesis, Lund University.
  35. Konijnendijk, C., Nilsson, K., Randrup, T., and Schipperijn, J. (2005). Urban Forests and Trees, Springer-Verlag. · DOI
  36. Jim, 2004, Green-space preservation and allocation for sustainable greening of compact cities, Cities, 21, 311, 10.1016/j.cities.2004.04.004 · DOI
  37. Greene, 2011, Who is likely to plant a tree? The use of public socio-demographic data to characterize client participants in a private urban forestation program, Urban For. Urban Green., 10, 29, 10.1016/j.ufug.2010.11.004 · DOI
  38. Fraser, 2000, Cultural background and landscape history as factors affecting perceptions of the urban forest, J. Arboric., 26, 106
  39. Buijs, 2009, No wilderness for immigrants: Cultural differences in images of nature and landscape preferences, Landsc. Urban Plan., 91, 113, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.12.003 · DOI
  40. Braverman, 2008, Everybody loves trees: Policing American cities through street trees, Duke Environ. Law Policy Forum, 19, 81
  41. Field, C.B., Barros, V.R., Dokken, D.J., Mach, K.J., Mastrandrea, M.D., Bilir, T.E., Chatterjee, M., Ebi, K.L., Estrada, Y.O., and Genova, R.C. (2014). Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press. · DOI
  42. Paavola, 2006, Fair adaptation to climate change, Ecol. Econ., 56, 594, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.03.015 · DOI
  43. Otto-Zimmerman, K. (2011). Resilient Cities: Cities and Adaptation to Climate Change Proceedings of the Global Forum 2010, Springer. · DOI
  44. Fields, 2009, From green dots to greenways: Planning in the age of climate change in post-Katrina New Orleans, J. Urban Des., 14, 325, 10.1080/13574800903056515 · DOI
  45. Tyler, 2012, A framework for urban climate resilience, Clim. Dev., 4, 311, 10.1080/17565529.2012.745389 · DOI
  46. Patterson, 2011, Empty spaces: Neighbourhood change and the greening of Detroit, 1975–2005, Geocarto Int., 26, 417, 10.1080/10106049.2011.585439 · DOI
  47. Gobster, 2004, The human dimensions of urban greenways: Planning for recreation and related experiences, Landsc. Urban Plan., 68, 147, 10.1016/S0169-2046(03)00162-2 · DOI
  48. Zhang, 2014, Species diversity and performance assessment of trees in domestic gardens, Landsc. Urban Plan., 128, 23, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.04.017 · DOI

Cited by

See all 53

Metadata

Authors
Nesbitt, L., & Meitner, M.
Affiliations
University of British Columbia (CA)
Corresponding author
Meitner, Michael
Venue
Forests
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2016-07-29
Volume
7
Issue
8
Pages
162
ISSN
1999-4907 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2484803562
Cited by
53
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
2.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Forests (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • cIRcle (University of British Columbia) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Open Collections
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Urban Green Space and Health
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Environmental Justice and Health Disparities
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Urban Arborization and Environmental Studies
Keywords
urban vegetation, socioeconomic disparities, urban forests, green space accessibility, vegetation cover, urban forest management, population density, income, race, Portland metropolitan region

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.