Urban Green Space Distribution Related to Land Values in Fast-Growing Megacities, Mumbai and Jakarta–Unexploited Opportunities to Increase Access to Greenery for the Poor

Yun Hye Hwang, Ivan Kurniawan Nasution, Deepika Amonkar and Amy Hahs
Additional contact information
Yun Hye Hwang: Department of Architecture, School of Design and Environment, National University of Singapore, Singapore 119077, Singapore
Ivan Kurniawan Nasution: Department of Architecture, School of Design and Environment, National University of Singapore, Singapore 119077, Singapore
Deepika Amonkar: Department of Architecture, School of Design and Environment, National University of Singapore, Singapore 119077, Singapore
Amy Hahs: School of Biosciences, Faculty of Science, University of Melbourne, Melbourne 3010, Australia

Sustainability, 2020, vol. 12, issue 12, 1-17

Abstract: Many studies on disparities in the distribution of urban green space (UGS) focus on the quantity and accessibility of designated open spaces. However, when all types of UGS, including unmanaged green areas, are accounted for, claims of green space distributive injustice become more complicated. We conducted a preliminary investigation questioning the common Global North assumption that the poor have less access to the benefits of green space, using the cities of Mumbai and Jakarta as case studies as, in their respective countries, wealth inequality has grown at a higher rate than in other Asian countries. We employed four sets of geospatial data to analyze green space distribution patterns and probe the relationship with UGS inequity in different land value districts. We found that the lower land value districts had more vegetation coverage with a higher vegetation density, mainly due to a large quantity of unmanaged greenery. The relationship between the status of urban development and the land values in a district is not necessarily reflective of the UGS distribution once unmanaged vegetation is considered. We conclude by discussing ways to optimize the use of unmanaged UGS as a socioecological asset for poorer districts, and we point to the practical consequences of incorporating the study’s findings into policy and planning towards the creation of ecologically inclusive cities.

Keywords: green space distribution; UGS inequity; unmanaged greenery; fast-growing megacities; environmental equity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/12/4982/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/12/4982/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:12:p:4982-:d:373213

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().