Ronghua Xu , Perrine Hamel , Aikeen Youu Ming Lim , Tingting He
{"title":"Assessing equity in heat mitigation ecosystem services of urban green space in Singapore","authors":"Ronghua Xu , Perrine Hamel , Aikeen Youu Ming Lim , Tingting He","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2025.101727","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Urban green space provides ecosystem services such as heat mitigation, which are associated with improved resident health and welfare. While estimating the disparity in ecosystem services is essential to improve equity, little guidance is available as to which indices and indicators should be used. Here, we assess the distributional equity in heat mitigation benefits as measured by two indicators – land surface temperature reduction and wet-bulb temperature reduction – in the city-state of Singapore, and compare three inequality indices: Gini coefficient (GC), Atkinson index (AI), and Theil entropy index (TE). We include scenarios with and without migrant construction workers to test the changes in inequality indices when considering marginalized groups, and explore the influence of income subgroups and other socio-demographic factors. Results suggest that heat mitigation ecosystem services are inequitably distributed in Singapore, as shown by all inequality indices, except AI applied to wet-bulb temperature. Compared to GC, the increase in AI and TE clearly reflects the exacerbation of inequity under scenario with migrant construction workers. Lower-income subgroups typically contribute more to heat mitigation inequity than wealthier communities. The decomposability of AI and TE provided policy-relevant insights; AI helped evaluating inequity differences between heat indicators, while TE proved better at detecting inequity changes across scenarios. We discuss the strengths and limitations of each index, paving the way for improved guidance on analytical approaches to assessing environmental equity.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":"73 ","pages":"Article 101727"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecosystem Services","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041625000312","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Urban green space provides ecosystem services such as heat mitigation, which are associated with improved resident health and welfare. While estimating the disparity in ecosystem services is essential to improve equity, little guidance is available as to which indices and indicators should be used. Here, we assess the distributional equity in heat mitigation benefits as measured by two indicators – land surface temperature reduction and wet-bulb temperature reduction – in the city-state of Singapore, and compare three inequality indices: Gini coefficient (GC), Atkinson index (AI), and Theil entropy index (TE). We include scenarios with and without migrant construction workers to test the changes in inequality indices when considering marginalized groups, and explore the influence of income subgroups and other socio-demographic factors. Results suggest that heat mitigation ecosystem services are inequitably distributed in Singapore, as shown by all inequality indices, except AI applied to wet-bulb temperature. Compared to GC, the increase in AI and TE clearly reflects the exacerbation of inequity under scenario with migrant construction workers. Lower-income subgroups typically contribute more to heat mitigation inequity than wealthier communities. The decomposability of AI and TE provided policy-relevant insights; AI helped evaluating inequity differences between heat indicators, while TE proved better at detecting inequity changes across scenarios. We discuss the strengths and limitations of each index, paving the way for improved guidance on analytical approaches to assessing environmental equity.
期刊介绍:
Ecosystem Services is an international, interdisciplinary journal that is associated with the Ecosystem Services Partnership (ESP). The journal is dedicated to exploring the science, policy, and practice related to ecosystem services, which are the various ways in which ecosystems contribute to human well-being, both directly and indirectly.
Ecosystem Services contributes to the broader goal of ensuring that the benefits of ecosystems are recognized, valued, and sustainably managed for the well-being of current and future generations. The journal serves as a platform for scholars, practitioners, policymakers, and other stakeholders to share their findings and insights, fostering collaboration and innovation in the field of ecosystem services.