Abstract
This chapter highlights the need to understand more about people’s own lived experience of nature rather than assume Western notions of ‘green is good’ is true in all contexts – in this instance, in the Global South. The authors highlight that ‘good’ is a subjective notion and depends on understandings of ‘green’. Calling on empirical research in Brazil and Nicaragua, the authors discuss how fear as well as attraction can underpin human relationships with nature which are entangled with understandings of climate change and with experience of natural hazards that bring flooding of communities and homes. Nature may also be perceived as a sign of poverty and when unmanaged as ‘dirty’ and dangerous. Biodiversity then may be associated with a sense of threat, leading people to shun particular places and favour others. Making ‘green’ spaces attractive may include concreting them over or painting them bright colours to appeal to potential users. The chapter raises questions around just how accessible and inclusive urban nature is, highlighting how interpretations of ‘nature’ as safe or restorative are fundamentally dependent on human intervention. The chapter explores how users and decision-makers make trade-offs, taming and constructing places to make them safer and more attractive, challenging notions of ‘natural’ and ‘nature’ in urban green spaces.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bebbington A (1999) Capitals and capabilities: a framework for analysing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty. World Dev 27(12):2021–2044
Brand P (2007) Green subjection: the politics of neoliberal urban environmental management. Int J Urban Reg Res 31(3):616–632. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2007.00748.x
Baumann P, Sinha S (2001) Linking development with democratic processes in India: political capital and sustainable livelihoods analysis. Nat Resour Perspect 68:1–4
Bradshaw S, Linneker B, with Nascimento N, Caballero INV, Costa H, Oki Y, Pires RBW, Juntti M, Lundy L, Wade R (2017) Engendering ecosystem services for urban transformation: the role of natural capital in reducing poverty and building resilient urban communities. ESRC-Newton Fund UK Project Report, Middlesex University, Abertay University, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais in Brazil, January 2017, available at https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BzsYq-aDZJuZZlZxZVBKYm1td1U/view
Bradshaw S, Linneker B (2015) The gendered destruction and reconstruction of assets and the transformative potential of ‘disasters. In: Moser C (ed) Gender, asset accumulation and just cities: pathways to transformation? Routledge, Abingdon, pp 164–180
Brand P (2003) La invención de futuros urbanos [the invention of urban futures]. Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Colombia
Costa HSM, Costa GM (2005) Repensando a análise e a praxis urbana: algumas contribuições da teoria do espaço e do pensamento ambiental. In: Diniz CC, Lemos MB (eds) (orgs.) Economia e território. Editora da UFMG, Belo Horizonte, pp 365–382
Dempsey N, Burton M (2012) Defining place-keeping: the long-term management of public spaces. Urban For Urban Gree 11(1):11–20
Dobson J (2018) From contest to context: urban green space and public policy. People Place Policy 12(2):72–83
Fernandes E (2007) Constructing the right to the City in Brazil. Soc Leg Stud 16(2):201–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663907076529
Fischer A, Eastwood A (2016) Coproduction of ecosystem services as human–nature interactions – an analytical framework. Land Use Policy 52:41–50
Harvey D (2014) Seventeen contradictions and the end of capitalism. Profile Books, London
Haines-Young RH, Potschin MP (2010) The links between biodiversity, ecosystem services and human well-being. In: Raffaelli D, Frid C (eds) Ecosystem ecology: a new synthesis, BES Ecological Reviews Series. CUP, Cambridge
Lamarca MG (2011) Right to the City in Brazil. Polis October http://www.thepolisblog.org/2011/10/implementing-right-to-city-in-brazil.html
Lefebvre H (1996) Writings on cities. English edition: (trans: Kofman E, Lebas E). Blackwell, Cambridge, MA
Juntti M, Costa H, Nascimento N (2019) Urban environmental quality and wellbeing in the context of incomplete urbanization in Brazil: integrating directly experienced ecosystem services into planning. Progress in Planning, Published online first, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2019.04.003
Kaplan R, Kaplan S (1989) The experience of nature: a psychological perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Kuo FE, Sullivan WC, Levine Coley R et al (1998) Fertile ground for community: inner-city neighbourhood common spaces. Am J Community Psychol 26(6):823–851
Macnaghten P and Urry J (1998) Contested Natures, Sage, London
Maas J (2006) Green space, urbanity, and health: how strong is the relation? J Epidemiol Community Health 60(7):587–592
Maricato E (1979) A produção capitalista da casa (e da cidade) no Brasil industrial. Editora Alfa-Omega, São Paulo
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystem and human Well-being: a synthesis. Island Press, Washington, DC
Moser CO (2016) Gender, asset accumulation and just cities: pathways to transformation. Routledge, London
Moser CO (2007) Asset accumulation policy and poverty reduction. In: Moser C (ed) Reducing global poverty: the case for asset accumulation. Brookings Press, Washington, DC
Moser CO (1998) The asset vulnerability framework: reassessing urban poverty reduction strategies. World Dev 26(1):1–19
Peterson GD, Harmackova ZV, Meacham M et al (2018) Welcoming different perspectives in IPBES: “nature’s contributions to people” and “ecosystem services”. Ecol Soc 23(1):39. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10134-230139
Sen A (1997) Editorial: human capital and human capability. World Dev 25(12):1959–1961
TEEB (2010) The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: mainstreaming the economics of nature: a synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. http://www.teebweb.org/our- publications/teeb-study-reports/synthesis-report/. Accessed 24 Jun 2019
Wolcha J, Byrne J, Newell JP (2014) Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: the challenge of making cities ‘just green enough’. Landsc Urban Plan 125:–234, 244
WHO (2017) Urban green spaces: a brief for action. WHO Europe, Copenhagen
Acknowledgements
This paper draws on work undertaken as part of a Newton Fund Research Partnership scheme grant (ES/M011631/1 – jointly funded by RCUK and FAPEMG). We would like to acknowledge the work of Nilo Nascimento and Heloisa Costa (Federal University of Minas Gerais), Rebecca Wade (Abertay university) and Meri Juntti (Middlesex University) on this project. We would particularly like to thank Indira Nahomi Viana Caballero, Yumi Oki, and Rogério Brittes W. Pires who undertook the fieldwork in Brazil. In Nicaragua we benefited from HEFCE Overseas Development Assistance funding and we would like to thank Karla Bojorge M. and her team for undertaking the fieldwork there. Our particular thanks goes to all those who agreed to be interviewed in both countries, for sharing their time and thoughts with us.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bradshaw, S., Linneker, B., Lundy, L. (2020). Naturally Feeling Good? Exploring Understandings of ‘Green’ Urban Spaces in the Global South. In: Dempsey, N., Dobson, J. (eds) Naturally Challenged: Contested Perceptions and Practices in Urban Green Spaces. Cities and Nature. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44480-8_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-44480-8_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-44479-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-44480-8
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)