Socio-Ecological Impacts of the Investment of Urban Nature in Heat Mitigation for Two Megacities

IF 7.3 1区 地球科学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Earths Future Pub Date : 2025-06-03 DOI:10.1029/2025EF005976
Jing Wang, Weiqi Zhou, Timon McPhearson, Elizabeth M. Cook, Pablo Herreros-Cantis, Jing Liu
{"title":"Socio-Ecological Impacts of the Investment of Urban Nature in Heat Mitigation for Two Megacities","authors":"Jing Wang,&nbsp;Weiqi Zhou,&nbsp;Timon McPhearson,&nbsp;Elizabeth M. Cook,&nbsp;Pablo Herreros-Cantis,&nbsp;Jing Liu","doi":"10.1029/2025EF005976","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Cities are increasingly adapting green interventions meant to enhance climate resilience, given their capacity to provide numerous ecosystem services (ES). Yet, little is known about ecological and social impacts of such interventions in the context of socio-ecological framework and environmental justice. Here, we used a quantitative and spatial analytical approach to assess the changes of urban greenspace (UG) and examine the equity of changes in ES supply and demand across demographic and socioeconomic groups in Beijing and NYC between 2010 and 2017. Results showed that previously existing green space and its expansion were unevenly distributed across districts. High-income districts in NYC had high green cover and experienced the highest increase of UG, in contrast to high green cover in areas with low population density and the greatest increase of UG in high-income areas for Beijing, respectively. The inequitable distribution of UG resulted in a high level of mismatch in supply demand of ES, revealing a pattern of distributional ecological injustice within city. We also found more ecological supply was provided in the areas having less vulnerability, indicating that social vulnerability remained in a lower greenspace exposure after greening implementation in both cities. Our study contributes to a better understanding on how the dynamics of urban greenspace impact urban climate injustices, and provides new insights for critical urban adaptation interventions or practice on shaping ecological injustice.</p>","PeriodicalId":48748,"journal":{"name":"Earths Future","volume":"13 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2025EF005976","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Earths Future","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2025EF005976","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cities are increasingly adapting green interventions meant to enhance climate resilience, given their capacity to provide numerous ecosystem services (ES). Yet, little is known about ecological and social impacts of such interventions in the context of socio-ecological framework and environmental justice. Here, we used a quantitative and spatial analytical approach to assess the changes of urban greenspace (UG) and examine the equity of changes in ES supply and demand across demographic and socioeconomic groups in Beijing and NYC between 2010 and 2017. Results showed that previously existing green space and its expansion were unevenly distributed across districts. High-income districts in NYC had high green cover and experienced the highest increase of UG, in contrast to high green cover in areas with low population density and the greatest increase of UG in high-income areas for Beijing, respectively. The inequitable distribution of UG resulted in a high level of mismatch in supply demand of ES, revealing a pattern of distributional ecological injustice within city. We also found more ecological supply was provided in the areas having less vulnerability, indicating that social vulnerability remained in a lower greenspace exposure after greening implementation in both cities. Our study contributes to a better understanding on how the dynamics of urban greenspace impact urban climate injustices, and provides new insights for critical urban adaptation interventions or practice on shaping ecological injustice.

城市自然投资对两个特大城市减热的社会生态影响
鉴于城市提供多种生态系统服务(ES)的能力,它们正越来越多地采用旨在增强气候适应能力的绿色干预措施。然而,在社会生态框架和环境正义的背景下,对这些干预措施的生态和社会影响知之甚少。本文采用定量和空间分析方法评估了2010年至2017年间北京和纽约城市绿地(UG)的变化,并考察了不同人口和社会经济群体对绿地供需变化的公平性。结果表明:城市原有绿地及其扩展在区域间分布不均匀;纽约市高收入地区的绿化覆盖率高,UG增幅最大,而北京的低人口密度地区的绿化覆盖率高,高收入地区的UG增幅最大。城市生态资源的不公平分配导致城市生态资源的高度不匹配,揭示了城市生态资源分配不公平的格局。我们还发现,在脆弱性较小的地区提供了更多的生态供给,这表明两个城市实施绿化后,社会脆弱性仍然处于较低的绿地暴露水平。我们的研究有助于更好地理解城市绿地动态如何影响城市气候不公正,并为关键的城市适应干预措施或形成生态不公正的实践提供新的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Earths Future
Earths Future ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCESGEOSCIENCES, MULTIDI-GEOSCIENCES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
7.30%
发文量
260
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Earth’s Future: A transdisciplinary open access journal, Earth’s Future focuses on the state of the Earth and the prediction of the planet’s future. By publishing peer-reviewed articles as well as editorials, essays, reviews, and commentaries, this journal will be the preeminent scholarly resource on the Anthropocene. It will also help assess the risks and opportunities associated with environmental changes and challenges.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信