Prioritizing the provision of urban ecosystem services in deprived areas, a question of environmental justice

Abstract

The distribution of urban ecosystem services (UES) is often uneven across socioeconomic groups, leading to environmental justice issues. Understanding the distribution of UES across a landscape can help managers ensure an equitable distribution of services. While many past studies have focused on the distribution of green spaces in relation to socioeconomic variables, this research analyzes the distribution of UES provided by these green spaces. This research quantified air pollution removal, atmospheric carbon reduction, and surface runoff mitigation provided by urban trees in Strasbourg city (France). The provision of these three UES was studied at the census block scale by creating an index of UES delivery, which was contrasted with a constructed social deprivation index. Our results show that there is no significant association between the delivery of UES and social deprivation. Some deprived populations benefit from high UES delivery. Results also suggest that mapping associations between UES delivery and social deprivation should be integrated with future development plans to enhance the equitable distribution of UES. This study provides insights into the French context where studies about the distribution of UES at a small-area level remain lacking.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. ADEUS. 2018. Plan Climat Air Energie territorial de l’Eurométropole de Strasbourg. Strasbourg: Diagnostic et evolution de la situation Climat Air Energie.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Agyeman, J., R.D. Bullard, and B. Evans. 2002. Exploring the Nexus: Bringing together sustainability, environmental justice and equity. Space and Polity 6: 77–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562570220137907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Amini Parsa, V., E. Salehi, A.R. Yavari, and P.M. van Bodegom. 2019. An improved method for assessing mismatches between supply and demand in urban regulating ecosystem services: A case study in Tabriz, Iran. Edited by Ali Kharrazi. PLoS ONE 14: e0220750. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220750.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Andersson, E., J. Langemeyer, S. Borgström, T. McPhearson, D. Haase, J. Kronenberg, D.N. Barton, M. Davis, et al. 2019. Enabling green and blue infrastructure to improve contributions to human well-being and equity in urban systems. BioScience 69: 566–574. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biz058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Anguelovski, I., J.J.T. Connolly, L. Masip, and H. Pearsall. 2018. Assessing green gentrification in historically disenfranchised neighborhoods: A longitudinal and spatial analysis of Barcelona. Urban Geography 39: 458–491. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2017.1349987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Anguelovski, I., and J. Martínez Alier. 2014. The ‘Environmentalism of the Poor’ revisited: Territory and place in disconnected glocal struggles. Ecological Economics 102: 167–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.04.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Atmo GRAND-EST, 2018. Bilan de la qualité de l’air. 2018. Retrieved 10 March, 2020, from http://www.atmo-grandest.eu/sites/prod/files/2019-12/BQA2018_indice2.pdf.

  8. Baró, F., D. Haase, E. Gómez-Baggethun, and N. Frantzeskaki. 2015. Mismatches between ecosystem services supply and demand in urban areas: A quantitative assessment in five European cities. Ecological Indicators 55: 146–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.03.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Baró, F., I. Palomo, G. Zulian, P. Vizcaino, D. Haase, and E. Gómez-Baggethun. 2016. Mapping ecosystem service capacity, flow and demand for landscape and urban planning: A case study in the Barcelona metropolitan region. Land Use Policy 57: 405–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.06.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Baró, F., A. Calderón-Argelich, J. Langemeyer, and J.J.T. Connolly. 2019. Under one canopy? Assessing the distributional environmental justice implications of street tree benefits in Barcelona. Environmental Science & Policy 102: 54–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.08.016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Blanchard, N. 2019. Etude du phénomène dʼembourgeoisement à lʼœuvre dans un quartier en mutation à Strasbourg.

  12. Boone, C.G., and M. Fragkias (eds.). 2013. Urbanization and sustainability. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5666-3.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. Boyce, J.K., K. Zwickl, and M. Ash. 2016. Measuring environmental inequality. Ecological Economics 124: 114–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.01.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Brown, A., A. Dayal, and C. Rumbaitis Del Rio. 2012. From practice to theory: Emerging lessons from Asia for building urban climate change resilience. Environment and Urbanization 24: 531–556. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956247812456490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Chen, W.Y., and F.Z.Y. Hu. 2015. Producing nature for public: Land-based urbanization and provision of public green spaces in China. Applied Geography 58: 32–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.01.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Cohen, M., R. Baudoin, M. Palibrk, N. Persyn, and C. Rhein. 2012. Urban biodiversity and social inequalities in built-up cities: New evidences, next questions. The example of Paris, France. Landscape and Urban Planning 106: 277–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.03.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Cressie, N.A.C. 1993. Statistics for spatial data. New York: Wiley-Interscience Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  18. de Groot, R.S., R. Alkemade, L. Braat, L. Hein, and L. Willemen. 2010. Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecological Complexity 7: 260–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2009.10.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Dobbs, C., D. Kendal, and C.R. Nitschke. 2014. Multiple ecosystem services and disservices of the urban forest establishing their connections with landscape structure and sociodemographics. Ecological Indicators 43: 44–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.02.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. EFESE. 2018. Les écosystèmes urbains. Retrieved 5 April, 2019, from https://www.ecologie.gouv.fr/levaluation-francaise-des-ecosystemes-et-des-services-ecosystemiques.

  21. Ernstson, H., S. Barthel, E. Andersson, and S.T. Borgström. 2010. Scale-crossing brokers and network governance of urban ecosystem services: The case of stockholm. Ecology and Society. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-03692-150428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Escobedo, F.J., N. Clerici, C.L. Staudhammer, and G.T. Corzo. 2015. Socio-ecological dynamics and inequality in Bogotá, Colombia’s public urban forests and their ecosystem services. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening 14: 1040–1053. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2015.09.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Escobedo, F.J., V. Giannico, C.Y. Jim, G. Sanesi, and R. Lafortezza. 2019. Urban forests, ecosystem services, green infrastructure and nature-based solutions: Nexus or evolving metaphors? Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 37: 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2018.02.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Escobedo, F.J., T. Kroeger, and J.E. Wagner. 2011. Urban forests and pollution mitigation: Analyzing ecosystem services and disservices. Environmental Pollution 159. Selected Papers from the Conference Urban Environmental Pollution: Overcoming Obstacles to Sustainability and Quality of Life (UEP2010), 20–23 June 2010, Boston, USA, 2078–2087 pp. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2011.01.010.

  25. Faburel, G., and S. Gueymard. 2008. Inégalités environnementales en région Île-de-France : le rôle structurant des facteurs négatifs de l’environnement et des choix politiques afférents. Espace Populations Sociétés. Space Populations Societies. https://doi.org/10.4000/eps.2477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Fisher, B., R.K. Turner, and P. Morling. 2009. Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecological Economics 68: 643–653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.09.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gerber, P. 1999. Processus de gentrification et demande sociale citadine. Exemple du centre-ville de Strasbourg. Revue Géographique de l’Est 39.

  28. Graça, M.S., J.F. Gonçalves, P.J.M. Alves, D.J. Nowak, R. Hoehn, A. Ellis, P. Farinha-Marques, and M. Cunha. 2017. Assessing mismatches in ecosystem services proficiency across the urban fabric of Porto (Portugal): The influence of structural and socioeconomic variables. Ecosystem Services 23: 82–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.11.015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Graça, M., P. Alves, J. Gonçalves, D.J. Nowak, R. Hoehn, P. Farinha-Marques, and M. Cunha. 2018. Assessing how green space types affect ecosystem services delivery in Porto, Portugal. Landscape and Urban Planning 170: 195–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.10.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Greenberg, M., and M. Cidon. 1997. Broadening the definition of environmental equity: A framework for states and local governments. Population Research and Policy Review 16: 397–413. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005702430607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Grove, J.M., A.R. Troy, J.P.M. O’Neil-Dunne, W.R. Burch, M.L. Cadenasso, and S.T.A. Pickett. 2006. Characterization of households and its implications for the vegetation of urban ecosystems. Ecosystems 9: 578–597. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-006-0116-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Havard, S., S. Deguen, J. Bodin, K. Louis, O. Laurent, and D. Bard. 2008. A small-area index of socioeconomic deprivation to capture health inequalities in France. Social Science and Medicine 67: 2007–2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.09.031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Heynen, N., H.A. Perkins, and P. Roy. 2006. The political ecology of uneven urban green space: The impact of political economy on race and ethnicity in producing environmental inequality in Milwaukee. Urban Affairs Review 42: 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087406290729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Hoffimann, E., H. Barros, and A. Ribeiro. 2017. Socioeconomic inequalities in green space quality and accessibility—evidence from a Southern European City. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 14: 916. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14080916.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. INSEE. 2016. Recensement de la population. 2013. Retrieved 1 January, 2019, from https://insee.fr/fr/accueil.

  36. i-Tree Eco User’s Manual. 2013. Retrieved 23 January, 2013, from https://www.itreetools.org/resources/manuals/EcoManualv5.pdf : http://www.itreetools.org/resources/archives.

  37. Jenerette, G.D., S.L. Harlan, W.L. Stefanov, and C.A. Martin. 2011. Ecosystem services and urban heat riskscape moderation: Water, green spaces, and social inequality in Phoenix, USA. Ecological Applications 21: 2637–2651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Jensen, R., J. Gatrell, J. Boulton, and B. Harper. 2005. Using remote sensing and geographic information systems to study urban quality of life and urban forest amenities. Ecology and Society. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-01201-090505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kremer, P., Z. Hamstead, D. Haase, T. McPhearson, N. Frantzeskaki, E. Andersson, N. Kabisch, N. Larondelle, et al. 2016. Key insights for the future of urban ecosystem services research. Ecology and Society 21.

  40. Kruize, H., P.P.J. Driessen, P. Glasbergen, and K. van Egmond. 2007. Environmental equity and the role of public policy: Experiences in the Rijnmond Region. Environmental Management 40: 578–595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-005-0378-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kuras, E.R., P.S. Warren, J.A. Zinda, M.F.J. Aronson, S. Cilliers, M.A. Goddard, C.H. Nilon, and R. Winkler. 2020. Urban socioeconomic inequality and biodiversity often converge, but not always: A global meta-analysis. Landscape and Urban Planning 198: 103799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103799.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Lakes, T., M. Brückner, and A. Krämer. 2014. Development of an environmental justice index to determine socio-economic disparities of noise pollution and green space in residential areas in {Berlin}. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 57: 538–556. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2012.755461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Landry, S.M., and J. Chakraborty. 2009. Street trees and equity: Evaluating the spatial distribution of an urban amenity. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 41: 2651–2670. https://doi.org/10.1068/a41236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Larondelle, N., and S. Lauf. 2016. Balancing demand and supply of multiple urban ecosystem services on different spatial scales. Ecosystem Services 22: 18–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.09.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Legendre, P., and L. Legendre. 1998. Numerical ecology, vol. 24, 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Lovell, S.T., and J.R. Taylor. 2013. Supplying urban ecosystem services through multifunctional green infrastructure in the United States. Landscape Ecology 28: 1447–1463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-013-9912-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Martinuzzi, S., O.M. Ramos-González, T.A. Muñoz-Erickson, D.H. Locke, A.E. Lugo, and V.C. Radeloff. 2018. Vegetation cover in relation to socioeconomic factors in a tropical city assessed from sub-meter resolution imagery. Ecological Applications 28: 681–693. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.1673.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. McPhearson, T., P. Kremer, and Z.A. Hamstead. 2013. Mapping ecosystem services in New York City: Applying a social–ecological approach in urban vacant land. Ecosystem Services 5: 11–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.06.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Nowak, D.J., D.E. Crane, J.C. Stevens, R.E. Hoehn, J.T. Walton, and J. Bond. 2008. A ground-based method of assessing urban forest structure and ecosystem services. Arboriculture and Urban Forestry 34: 347–358.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Pham, T.-T.-H., P. Apparicio, A.-M. Séguin, S. Landry, and M. Gagnon. 2012. Spatial distribution of vegetation in Montreal: An uneven distribution or environmental inequity? Landscape and Urban Planning 107: 214–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.06.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Pickett, S.T.A., M.L. Cadenasso, J.M. Grove, P.M. Groffman, L.E. Band, C.G. Boone, W.R. Burch, C.S.B. Grimmond, et al. 2008. Beyond urban legends: An emerging framework of urban ecology, as illustrated by the Baltimore Ecosystem Study. BioScience 58: 139–150. https://doi.org/10.1641/B580208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. POS. 1979. rapport de presentation du plan d’occuppation du sol. Strasbourg: Hautepierre-Meinau.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Raddatz, L., and J. Mennis. 2013. Environmental Justice in Hamburg, Germany. The Professional Geographer 65: 495–511. https://doi.org/10.1080/00330124.2012.700500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Rangel, T.F.L.V.B., J.A.F. Diniz-Filho, and L.M. Bini. 2006. Towards an integrated computational tool for spatial analysis in macroecology and biogeography. Global Ecology and Biogeography 15: 321–327. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1466-822X.2006.00237.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Richardson, E., J. Pearce, R. Mitchell, P. Day, and S. Kingham. 2010. The association between green space and cause-specific mortality in urban New Zealand: An ecological analysis of green space utility. BMC Public Health 10: 240. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-10-240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Riley, C.B., and M.M. Gardiner. 2020. Examining the distributional equity of urban tree canopy cover and ecosystem services across United States cities. PLoS ONE 15: e0228499. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228499.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Schüle, S.A., L.K. Hilz, S. Dreger, and G. Bolte. 2019. Social inequalities in environmental resources of green and blue spaces: A review of evidence in the WHO European Region. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16071216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Selmi, W., C. Weber, E. Rivière, N. Blond, L. Mehdi, and D. Nowak. 2016. Air pollution removal by trees in public green spaces in Strasbourg city, France. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2016.04.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Sievers-Glotzbach, S. 2013. Ecosystem services and distributive justice: Considering access rights to ecosystem services in theories of distributive justice. Ethics, Policy & Environment 16: 162–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/21550085.2013.801203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Srang-iam, W. 2011. Planting trees for sustainability? A climate justice perspective on green agriculture in Thailand.

  61. Tratalos, J., R.A. Fuller, P.H. Warren, R.G. Davies, and K.J. Gaston. 2007. Urban form, biodiversity potential and ecosystem services. Landscape and Urban Planning 83: 308–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.05.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Vyas, S., and L. Kumaranayake. 2006. Constructing socio-economic status indices: How to use principal components analysis. Health Policy and Planning 21: 459–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Wilkerson, M.L., M.G.E. Mitchell, D. Shanahan, K.A. Wilson, C.D. Ives, C.E. Lovelock, and J.R. Rhodes. 2018. The role of socio-economic factors in planning and managing urban ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services 31: 102–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Yang, J., Y. Guan, J. Xia, C. Jin, and X. Li. 2018. Spatiotemporal variation characteristics of green space ecosystem service value at urban fringes: A case study on Ganjingzi District in Dalian, China. Science of the Total Environment 639: 1453–1461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.05.253.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Zhao, C., and H.A. Sander. 2015. Quantifying and mapping the supply of and demand for carbon storage and sequestration service from urban trees. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0136392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by “Institution de la Recherche et de l’Enseignement Supérieur Agricoles (IRESA-Tunisia), ‘Zone Ate-lier Environnementale Strasbourg’ (ZAEU) and “Eurométropole de Strasbourg” (EMS).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wissal Selmi.

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

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Selmi, W., Selmi, S., Teller, J. et al. Prioritizing the provision of urban ecosystem services in deprived areas, a question of environmental justice. Ambio 50, 1035–1046 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-020-01438-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Deprivation
  • Environmental justice
  • Urban ecosystem services
  • Urban trees