Social inequality deeply affects people’s perception of ecosystem services and disservices provided by street trees

Nuria Pistón, Dario S.E. Silva Filho and André T.C. Dias

Ecosystem Services, 2022, vol. 58, issue C

Abstract: To ensure that changes in the landscape do not reinforce existing inequalities or create new ones, it is vital to continuously monitor the urban landscape. This is especially important in situations of poverty and economic and environmental inequality. However, little is known about the influence of socioeconomic factors on peoples’ perception of Ecosystem Services (ES) in Latin American cities, where a weak environmental governance, deep social inequality and high biodiversity and degree of endemism will differently determine the supply and demand of ESs. In this study, we investigated the social perception of a range of ESs and Ecosystem Disservices (i.e., negative impacts of ecosystems on people; ED) delivered by the street trees of Rio de Janeiro (Brazil), a city marked by a strong socioeconomic inequality. For this, we used a questionnaire investigating how the perceptions about the provision of ESs and EDs by street trees is modulated by sociodemographic (e.g., age and gender), urban (e.g., population density), socioeconomic (e.g., Social Development Index; SDI) and ecological factors (e.g., street trees density). For that, we used bi- and multi-variate analysis, including principal component analysis. We found that in neighborhoods with lower SDI, lower population density, lower species richness and higher arboreal deficit, respondents identified more ESs related to food provision, air quality, noise, and flood regulation while in neighborhoods with opposite characteristics, residents tend to affirm the esthetic identity of their neighborhoods, which are usually better maintained in terms of both green and grey infrastructures. Female respondents identified more safety EDs regarding negative aspects of street trees (e.g., risk of crime). Also, younger respondents identified for more regulatingservices (e.g., climate regulation and habitat support). We demonstrate that local assessment of ESs and EDs is necessary to adequately instruct suitable strategies for increase people's engagement, identify potential conflicts, as well as planning, designing, and managing the green infrastructures.

Keywords: Cultural services; Equity; Green infrastructure; Provisioning services; Regulating services; Tropics; Urban ecology (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041622000766
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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:eee:ecoser:v:58:y:2022:i:c:s2212041622000766

DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2022.101480

Access Statistics for this article

Ecosystem Services is currently edited by Leon C Braat

More articles in Ecosystem Services from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().