Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Neighborhood Parks and Recreationists’ Exposure to Ozone: A Comparison of Disadvantaged and Affluent Communities in Los Angeles, California

  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 22 April 2019

This article has been updated

Abstract

Urban parks are valued for their benefits to ecological and human systems, likely to increase in importance as climate change effects continue to unfold. However, the ability of parks to provide those myriad benefits hinges on equitable provision of and access to green spaces and their environmental quality. A social–ecological approach was adopted in a study of urban park use by recreationists in the City of Los Angeles, contrasting two affluent and two disadvantaged communities situated in coastal and inland zones. Twenty-four days of observations distributed across morning and afternoon time blocks were gathered, with observations in each day drawn from a pair of affluent and disadvantaged community parks. Observers noted location, gender, age, ethnicity/race, and level of physical activity of each visitor encountered during four scheduled observation sweeps on each day of field work. In addition, ozone dose exposure was measured through passive monitoring. Ozone dose exposure was calculated using average hourly ozone in ppb multiplied by METS (metabolic expenditures). Dose exposure was significantly higher in the disadvantaged community parks (with majority Latino use). Findings suggest that additional monitoring in disadvantaged communities, especially inland, may be prudent to facilitate community-based information as well as to assess the degree of potential impact over time. Additionally, mitigative strategies placed in urban parks, such as increased tree canopy may help to reduce the degree of risk and improve community resilience. Future research examining the positive outcomes from physically active use of urban parks may benefit from adopting a nuanced approach in light of the present findings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 22 April 2019

    The original version of the article contained an error in the Exposure to Ozone section, paragraph 4, the 1st sentence, reporting the finding that male recreationists experienced higher ozone dose exposure than female recreationists, the number should be males M = 77.08.

Notes

  1. For an extensive review of benefits of urban parks, see Konijnendijk et al. (2013).

  2. Insertion of product names is for reporting purposes only and is not intended to indicate preference for a particular brand or company.

  3. If asked, observers were instructed to offer basic information about their employing agency and to explain they were studying recreation use in the parks. Because recreationists could not be individually identified when recorded, and they were in an openly public setting, concerns regarding the observations were minimal.

  4. Additional ozone study was conducted through installation of temporary monitors, left in each of the neighborhood parks for 30 consecutive days during the period of study. We also downloaded ozone data for the days, locations, and proximate regional air quality monitoring stations (https://www.arb.ca.gov/qaweb/sitelist_create.php). These data and the resulting analyses are reported in a separate publication, obtained by contacting the corresponding author.

  5. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences.

  6. This is a conservative approach in that some physical activities are assigned higher METS values than these generalized assignments. For a list of values and equivalents see Ainsworth et al. (2000). A more activity-specific calculation would be possible had we elected to record the full range of actions that are listed in the compendium of activities.

  7. It should be noted that on one occasion, the field team encountered a large gathering for a festival at the assigned park. On that day, the team completed observation forms based on supply of materials and their ability to move through and track the individuals they encountered. We expect that the actual number of visitors was considerably higher than what was recorded; however, we are unable to estimate the proportion of visitors who were unobserved.

  8. This was a surprise to us as we had elected to add the indoor spaces after preliminary visits to the parks revealed high levels of indoor participation in planned events, such as Zumba classes, basketball games, and indoor activities for seniors.

  9. Alternative assessments of ozone readings taken from the parks and case study areas can be obtained by contacting the corresponding author.

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was conducted jointly by the Pacific Southwest Research Station, US Forest Service, and California State Polytechnic University, Pomona (PSWRS RJVA 13-JV-11272131-051). Both agencies provided in kind support, with the Forest Service providing funding to the university through the Joint Venture Agreement. David Olson, Pacific Southwest Research Station, US Forest Service (PSWRS) assisted with technical support aspects of this study through all phases. David Jones (PSWRS) assisted by preparing the Ogawa samplers for field deployment and analyzing the field samples in the chemistry lab. Field data were gathered by graduate and upper-division students from the California State Polytechnic University, Pomona (Cal Poly Pomona), including Ernesto Altamarino, Jason Bingham, Paulo Castaneda, Adam Kehoss, Flor Mota, Jeremy Munns, Jeff Palmer, and Kristen Misa Sullivan. Field team coordination and housing of field materials was provided by Kristopher Penrose, also of Cal Poly Pomona. Natasha Nava-Gutierrez and Sandra Jimenez, contractors with the US Forest Service aided data entry and verification. Kevin Rincon (PSWRS) and Neil Rhodes (volunteer) assisted with moving materials and data between the Cal Poly offices and the US Forest Service lab. The City of Los Angeles granted access to seven of our eight park locations, herein recognized for their valuable assistance with special thanks to Louis Loomis. Tree People granted field team access to their park (Coldwater Canyon).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patricia L. Winter.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Institutional Review Board and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Institutional Review Board approval was granted through California State Polytechnic University, Pomona File Review # 14-0111.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Winter, P.L., Padgett, P.E., Milburn, LA.S. et al. Neighborhood Parks and Recreationists’ Exposure to Ozone: A Comparison of Disadvantaged and Affluent Communities in Los Angeles, California. Environmental Management 63, 379–395 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-019-01140-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-019-01140-3

Keywords

Navigation