How Urban Greening Perpetuates Inequality

Having a deep desire to leave a mark on climate education and improve climate advocacy, I decided to research and develop an informational hub filled with educational content about lesser-known climate solutions. To begin this project, I took on the task of researching and summarizing 16 different unique climate solutions. These included a wide variety of solutions that addressed all forms of issues, from land management to renewable energy. 

As I began to write the articles on the project website, I soon realized that portraying these solutions as entirely positive without providing a more comprehensive, nuanced analysis of both the positive and negative effects of the solution was unfair to website viewers. After all, my goal with the website was to create an informational platform about climate solutions, and a well-rounded approach to the writing process was crucial to maintain the integrity of the website.

For some of the solutions I have written about, like geothermal energy or seaweed farming, it was fairly straightforward to glean the potential consequences of implementing them. A wider use of geothermal energy would require heavy upfront costs, and prevalent seaweed farming could harm aquatic biodiversity if not maintained properly. However, with other solutions, such as urban greening, I was quick to assume that they had no possible consequences. 

After all, how could adding greenery to urban areas have any harmful effects? In my research of urban greening, I discovered that more green spaces in cities can improve the morale, mental health, and happiness of city goers. Not only do green cities improve emotional and mental states, they can also have crucial environmental benefits, such as helping regulate local temperatures and creating microenvironments for native plants and animals to return to. Marvelously, urban greening has also shown to directly contribute to reducing crime! 

With urban greening possessing the ability to make people happier, recreate environmental habitats, and create safer cities, I naively assumed that urban green spaces could not instigate any harm. That’s when I stumbled upon a Nature research paper titled: “Green Gentrification in European and North American Cities.” Green gentrification? Prior to reading the article, I was strictly unaware of the intersection between urban greening and housing inequality. But here’s what I learned: Urban environmental literature demonstrates that there are abhorrent gaps between how much access wealthier and poorer communities have to green spaces, and this inequality also plays a major role in racial housing discrimination. 

To understand why urban greening can perpetuate or worsen racial and socioeconomic inequalities, we have to first understand the concept of the green gentrification hypothesis. This postulation, supported by surmounting evidence, states that as neighborhoods gain more trees, green spaces, and parks, the property values of those locations simultaneously increase. Because of the property value growth, poorer families or individuals often can no longer afford to live in these areas. The phenomenon of low-income communities having to leave behind their homes as they become more beautiful and expensive is known as gentrification. 

This unfortunate reality means that by and large, wealthier communities have more access to green urban spaces. Therefore, they are also more likely to reap the mental, emotional, and environmental benefits of these green spaces. What’s more, growing research demonstrates that racial minorities make up a significant percentage of lower income communities, which means that urban greening detriments both racial and socioeconomic minority groups. 

As urban spaces and neighborhoods become greener, those spaces are more beautiful and therefore more profitable. Since lower income communities, which often encompass racial minorities, often cannot afford these high property value costs, green gentrification sends the message that the vast benefits of green spaces are reserved only for the white and wealthy. This painfully regressive phenomenon not only harms minority groups, but directly contradicts the goals of cities to improve equitable access to climate health. If a city claims that all people deserve to live in eco-friendly areas with ample green space, yet it perpetuates green gentrification, that is startlingly hypocritical. Furthermore, it demonstrates the unfortunate truth that cities prioritize gaining wealth from property taxes over creating equitable green space access. 

The environmental benefits of urban green spaces, more than their beauty and aesthetic value, are crucial for the well-being of vulnerable and minority communities. Environmental injustice demonstrates that in the United States, communities of color and Indigenous people are far more vulnerable to climate-change related extreme weather events such as floods or storms than other groups. Startling empirical evidence demonstrates that Black people are 75% more likely to live near oil and gas refineries, forcing them to face the direct health consequences of toxic air pollution, which include cancer. 

What’s more, because these racial minorities are disproportionately likely to be included in low socioeconomic groups, their communities frequently lack the necessary infrastructure and resources to protect themselves from climate change related weather events or air pollution. The lack of urban greening in racial and socioeconomic minority neighborhoods, therefore, exacerbates existing climate change health consequences for these communities. Now more than ever, equitable access to green spaces is crucial for vulnerable communities to gain the much-needed environmental and health benefits. 

The real problem with urban greening, therefore, lies in who has access to it and how. Furthermore, not only are the effects of green gentrification and unequal green space access observed in Europe and North America, but they are also noticed in discrepancies between the Global South, which includes the nations that are less economically developed, and the Global North, which includes nations that are more economically developed. Cities in the Global South only enjoy one third of the green area exposure of cities in the Global North. 

The discriminatory nature of where and how urban greening spreads exposes corruption and worsens inequality. With Reduced Inequalities and Sustainable Cities and Communities respectively being the 10th and 11th Sustainable Development Goals, equitable access to green spaces pertinently needs to be addressed. 

To truly solve the issue of unequal access to urban greening and green spaces, it is crucial to advocate for legislation that can preserve more natural land. For example, the PUBLIC Lands Act proposes to preserve one million acres of natural land and 500 miles of rivers in the state of California. When natural resources are treasured and preserved, the likelihood of communities of all races and socioeconomic backgrounds having access to green spaces increases, which is crucial to address the issue of environmental injustice. 

While legislation such as the PUBLIC Lands Act can be necessary in the pursuit of equitable urban greening, it is equally important to listen to the opinions and lived stories of communities that have minimal access to green spaces. For example, the 11th Street Bridge Park project aimed to create more natural areas along the Anacostia River. However, the residents of the area expressed trepidation with the project, fearing that it will lead to green gentrification. 

Recognizing the issues raised by the local residents, the non-profit organization and the District government, who oversaw the project, worked with the residents to set up land trusts, protect affordable housing, and invest in local businesses. Ultimately, the project not only improved green space access, but also prevented green gentrification from occurring, allowing the minority communities that resided in the area to access and enjoy the bridge’s green space. 

Fostering community involvement and discussion when implementing green space and urban greening projects is arduous, and not always the easiest path to take. The community may be initially untrusting or unwilling to participate with the project managers due to previous bad experiences or fear of gentrification. Furthermore, community involvement may require more funds and time delegated to adequately engage the community. 

But despite the setbacks of this solution to unequal green space access, community involvement is a pivotal step in growing trust, respect, and increasing equity. Oftentimes, the right thing to do is not the easiest, but it must be done regardless. Recognizing that some communities experience the worst of gentrification and climate change is only the first step–actionable efforts such as community involvement must also be taken to ensure that real, tangible impact is made in improving equity. 

All communities and people, regardless of socioeconomic status or race, deserve good health and access to green space, because of its numerous benefits. Taking a closer look at the often neglected consequences of urban greening served as a pivotal step in my journey as an advocate for environmental justice. 

By understanding the benefits and consequences of urban greening, I also recognized the importance of intersectionality. Intersectionality means that every social issue is interconnected, and minorities often experience the worst of a cumulation of social injustices. A deeper understanding and on urban greening only grew my respect and strengthened my belief in advocating for justice for minority groups, and taught me more about the privileges I experience that many do not have access to. 

I can walk 15 minutes to a nearby park and enjoy all of the mental, physical, and emotional benefits of being surrounded by tall trees, green grass, smiling families, and adorable dogs. Everyone else deserves that luxury as well. That’s why equity is of the utmost importance when it comes to understanding climate solutions like urban greening. 

Citations 

https://www.globalgoals.org/goals/

Adisa-Farrar, Teju. "How 600 Years of Environmental Violence Is Still Harming Black Communities." EarthJustice, 2 Feb. 2023, earthjustice.org/article/overlooked-connections-between-black-injustice-and-environmentalism. 

Anguelovski, Isabelle, et al. “Green Gentrification in European and North American Cities." Nature, 2 Jul. 2022, www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-31572-1#citeas. 

Berberian, Alique G., et al. "Racial Disparities in Climate Change-Related Health Effects in the United States." National Library of Medicine, 28 May 2022, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9363288/#:~:text=Racially%20and%20socioeconomically%20marginalized%20communities,change%20%5B2%2C%203%5D.

Carter, Kimberly M. "Growing Equity in City Green Space." Eos, 21 May 2021, eos.org/features/growing-equity-in-city-green-space. 

Chen, Bin, et al. "Contrasting Inequality in Human Exposure to Greenspace between Cities of Global North and Global South." Nature, 8 Aug. 2022, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-32258-4.  

Lavelle, Marianne, and Phil McKenna. "‘This Is an Emergency’: 1 Million African Americans Live Near Oil, Gas Facilities." Inside Climate News, 7 Nov. 2017, insideclimatenews.org/news/14112017/african-americans-exposed-oil-gas-wells-refineries-health-risks-naacp-study/. 

Solis, Hilda L. "One Answer to the Lack of Equitable Access to Park Space across California." CalMatters, 18 Aug. 2022, https://calmatters.org/commentary/2020/08/one-answer-to-the-lack-of-equitable-access-to-park-space-across-california/.