Landscape and Urban Planning 241 (2024) 104926

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Landscape and Urban Planning

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/landurbplan

Inclusive green environment for all? An investigation of spatial access

equity of urban green space and associated socioeconomic drivers in China
Yutian LU a, Running CHEN b, Bin CHEN c, Jiayu WU d, *
a
College of Computer Science and Technology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, PR China
b
College of Agriculture and Biotechnology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, Zhejiang Province, PR China
c
Division of Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
d
Institute of Landscape Architecture, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, Zhejiang Province, PR China

H I G H L I G H T S G R A P H I C A L A B S T R A C T

• Big geospatial data was used to portray

three types of green spaces in China:
community green spaces, street green­
ery, and public parks.
• The spatial equity level of community
green spaces, street greenery, and public
parks is comprehensively assessed for
263 cities in China.
• Discrepancies in the spatial equity of
UGS across the country are found.
• GDP and the population growth rate
increase the spatial equity level of
community street green space and street
greenery, while economic development
and increased in-migration can worsen
the spatial equity level of public green
space.

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The inequitable distribution of urban green spaces (UGS) has attracted increasing attention given the important
Urban Green Space (UGS) role of green environments for sustainable development. However, many recent studies have yielded different
Green justice results between cities in different geographic regions and development stages and even within the same city.
Spatial heterogeneity
Hence, this study addresses two research gaps in the green justice literature: (1) What are the spatial equity levels of
China
Urban greening policy
different types of UGS, and what are their differences as well as spatial distribution characteristics? (2) What
Green exposure differences exist in the spatial equity levels of UGS in cities at various socioeconomic stages? On the basis of these
gaps, we explain why contradictory findings have been found in the existing literature. This study focuses on three
types of UGS in China, namely, community green spaces, street greenery, and public parks, and explores the driving
effects of socioeconomic factors on the spatial equity of UGS in 263 Chinese cities. The results show that GDP and
the population growth rate increase the spatial equity of community green spaces and street greenery. By contrast,
economic development and increased in-migration can worsen the equity level of public green space accessibility.
Our study provides evidence and insights for Chinese central and local governments to implement highly effective
and sustainable greening programs to promote inclusive urban greening in Chinese cities.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: wujiayula@gmail.com (J. WU).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2023.104926
Received 10 June 2023; Received in revised form 7 October 2023; Accepted 12 October 2023
Available online 15 October 2023
0169-2046/© 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Y. LU et al.
1. Introduction
In 2021, more than 56 % of the global population lived in urban
areas (UN-Habitat, 2022). With rapid urbanization, cities worldwide are
increasingly becoming crowded and polluted (Blanco et al., 2009).
Urban green spaces (UGS), as a vital component of the urban landscape,
provide various social and ecological benefits. Mounting evidence in­
dicates that UGS, as essential places for entertainment, exercise, and
social activities in cities, can promote physical activities among resi­
dents, reduce the risk of chronic diseases such as obesity (Rundle et al.,
2013), and reduce stress levels and mental health problems (Wood et al.,
2017). Bauwelinck et al. (2021) observed that individuals residing in
regions with elevated levels of green vegetation exhibited improved
stress-coping abilities and a notably decreased mortality rate.
As one of the most critical public infrastructures, equitably distrib­
uted UGS promote sustainable urban development and mitigate health
inequality, which is a crucial component of environmental justice
(Sugiyama et al., 2016; Yang et al., 2022). However, numerous studies
indicate that spatial accessibility of UGS is not equitable. The accessi­
bility of UGS frequently varies depending on a range of demographic
factors (including income, age, race, education level, and social status),
as highlighted by several studies in the related literature (Byrne et al.,
2009; Lineberry, 1977; Xiao et al., 2017). UGS are often concentrated
around neighborhoods characterized by high socioeconomic status
(SES) due to local financial biases and the effects of gentrification (Chen
et al., 2021; Wolch et al., 2014). Despite implementing targeted in­
terventions, such as creating green areas near low-SES communities,
disadvantaged populations still need to relocate to regions with fewer
green spaces because of escalating land costs (Kim et al., 2022). These
viewpoints have been extensively debated and globally substantiated
throughout the preceding decades (Boone et al., 2009; Kaczynski et al.,
2009). Consequently, investigating the unequal distribution of UGS
availability among specific social groups has emerged as an acknowl­
edged environmental justice subject for scholars and governmental
bodies.
While many cities may have experienced some degree of spatial
inequity of urban green space accessibility, recent studies on it have
found varying results between cities in different geographical areas and
development stages and even within the same city (Lafary et al., 2008;
Nesbitt et al., 2019). These studies (Wang et al., 2022; Wu et al., 2022;
Zhang et al., 2020) have argued that the issue of spatial equity may have
been overemphasized (However, we must emphasize that access is a
multifaceted concept that encompasses physical and non-physical as­
pects. This research focuses solely on the physical dimension of access.
Non-physical dimensions, such as cultural access, fall beyond the scope
of this study. We will adopt the term “spatial equity” throughout the
remainder of this paper to represent our focus more concisely on the
spatial equity of UGS accessibility.). For instance, a survey of the spatial
inequality of UGS in Seattle contradicted earlier assertions of substantial
disparities in accessibility within the city. Additionally, the provision of
green spaces does not discriminate against people on the basis of their
SES or at least does not favor those with advantaged SES (Williams et al.,
2020). The conflicting research findings can likely be attributed to two
main reasons.
1.1. Reasons for the contradictory results of the studies on UGS spatial
equity
1.1.1. Studies on different types of green spaces
Despite the growing understanding of spatial equity of UGS, most
researchers still evaluate it on the basis of a single indicator. To elucidate
this point, we consider the case of Shanghai, a notable metropolis. Wu
and Kim (2021b) utilized vegetation area coverage. Meanwhile, Chen
et al. (2020) considered the walking time to the nearest public green
space. In addition, Xiao et al. (2017) employed the green space rate of
communities. These indicators were used to measure the level of spatial
2
Landscape and Urban Planning 241 (2024) 104926
equity for UGS. Remarkably diverse outcomes emerged from these
studies, thus indicating very inequitable, partially inequitable, or very
equitable conditions. Similar phenomena have been observed in other
countries. For instance, Barbosa et al. (2007) found that public parks
provided excellent services for socially disadvantaged groups and senior
citizens in Sheffield, UK. However, the vegetation cover within resi­
dential yards was less available in more SES-advantaged communities.
In Montreal, Canada, a distinct pattern emerged: inequity in vegetation
cover was more pronounced in public green spaces, whereas it was more
balanced in private green spaces (Pham et al., 2012).
The establishment and maintenance of different types of UGS vary
significantly, thus potentially influencing their spatial distribution (Li
et al., 2016). For instance, street greenery and urban parks are funded
and managed publicly, thereby benefiting the broader public. In
contrast, the vegetation within communities primarily serves home­
owners, with maintenance responsibilities falling on them and their
property management entities. The different distribution of various
types of UGS can yield disparate spatial equity results in studies focused
on the same city. Therefore, research that is solely concentrated on a
single UGS type may lead to an incomplete or biased evaluation of
spatial equity. Consequently, accounting for multiple UGS types in
investigating spatial equity becomes imperative. In this study, we clas­
sify UGS within the built-up areas of Chinese cities into three categories:
community green space, street greenery, and public park green space
(PGS).
Community green space pertains to the green space within a resi­
dential community. China’s economic transformation over the past
century has accelerated social segregation, the commodification of
housing, and wealth disparities, thus resulting in residential segregation.
Gated communities have become the prevailing residential model in
China (Wu et al., 2019). Homeowners and contracted property man­
agement firms collectively manage these enclosed residential areas. This
unique arrangement enhances property security and deters crime
(LaCour-Little, 2001). Hence, affluent homeowners fully enjoy the
privileged green spaces (Fleischer, 2007). However, the insularity and
physical barriers that are inherent to gated communities often curtail
social interaction among neighbors and hinder external access to and
enjoyment of the privileged green amenities. This circumstance exac­
erbates spatial inequity related to UGS (Huang & Jiang, 2009). Taxes (e.
g., property and real estate taxes) are employed in many Western nations
to mitigate such inequity (Lucy, 1981). However, in China, comparable
tax mechanisms are not yet fully implemented (Xiao et al., 2017). The
extent of spatial equity concerning community green spaces in Chinese
cities remains uncertain, thereby necessitating further investigation.
Consequently, our study gauges community green spaces by calculating
the proportion of privileged green spaces within a community, which is
denoted as the “green space rate.”.
Street greenery, which encompasses elements such as street trees,
shrubs, lawns, and other verdant features, plays a vital role in enhancing
the visual appeal and pedestrian friendliness of urban streets, thus
constituting a fundamental aspect of urban green spaces (Schroeder &
Cannon, 1983). Current research underscores the tendency for in­
dividuals with lower incomes to reside in locales characterized by
limited street greenery, while those with higher SES more frequently
inhabit areas graced with abundant street greenery . This pattern often
emerges due to individuals with greater SES relocating to suburban re­
gions where street greenery is more abundant (Koprowska et al., 2020).
Furthermore, the financial contributions of lower-SES communities
often fall short of what is necessary to maintain or enhance greenery in
proximity to their residences. Despite these disparities, recent studies
suggest a degree of equitable access to street greenery (Chen et al., 2021;
Wang et al., 2022). To assess the spatial equity of street greenery, we
utilized open-source street view images to quantify the Green View
Index (GVI), a metric that gauges the extent of street greenery.
Disparities in the accessibility of public parks have been extensively
documented (Rigolon, 2016). Given that PGS is considered a vital public
Y. LU et al.
good, private entities typically lack the motivation and capability to
provide them without government or planning authority intervention
(Choumert & Salanié, 2008). Local governing bodies entirely regulate
the placement and dimensions of PGS (Buzbee, 2000; Choumert, 2010).
In light of considerable fiscal limitations, local governments have a clear
motive to subject PGS location decisions to capital accumulation and
speculative market activities (Chen & Hu, 2015), particularly in devel­
oping countries such as China. China’s unique urbanization model,
which is rooted in land financing, involves local governments
commercializing and capitalizing on urban land by transferring land-use
rights to private entities for residential or commercial development
(Ding et al., 2014; Lan, 2021; Lin & Yi, 2011). Although the capital
accumulation from land development empowers local governments to
uphold green infrastructure (Lichtenberg & Ding, 2009; Yew, 2012),
market forces and the pursuit of short-term gains often compel Chinese
cities to repurpose green spaces for other land uses (Wu & Kim, 2021b).
Consequently, local authorities often establish PGS on cost-effective
peripheral lands, thus allowing capital to exert substantial influence
over the green space planning process and exacerbating the limited
access to PGS for low-SES communities. To gauge accessibility to PGS,
we employed big geospatial data, real-time navigation technology, and a
two-step floating catchment area method.
1.1.2. Studies on cities at varying socioeconomic stages
Contrasting results regarding the spatial equity of UGS can also be
attributed to variations in the study periods and the socioeconomic
development stages of the examined cities. Cross-city studies have
underscored that spatial equity levels can be highly influenced by an
interrelated mix of socioeconomic and environmental factors (Chen and
Wang, 2013b). Socioeconomic indicators, which are represented by
GDP, sway the government’s allocation of land and financial resources
for UGS, thereby affecting their spatial arrangement (Zhu & Zhang,
2008) and subsequently influencing UGS’s spatial patterns (Nesbitt
et al., 2019). Cities at varying socioeconomic stages exhibit diverse
population sizes and industrial structures; factors can also compete or
cooperate with UGS, thus shaping urban landscapes (Li, Ma, et al., 2021;
Wang & Yuan, 2017). Notably, economically advanced cities, such as
Beijing and Shanghai, boast enhanced financial capacities and larger
populations, which allow them to provide a greater extent of UGS.
However, these densely populated and industrialized metropolises must
grapple with intricate UGS planning and management by addressing
various challenges, such as air quality and residents’ recreational de­
mands. Furthermore, cities at distinct socioeconomic stages are char­
acterized by differing levels of governance ability (Marino et al., 2016).
Specifically, economically prosperous cities tend to wield more robust
financial capabilities and greater governance efficiency. Hence, they are
able to facilitate superior UGS planning and management. Conversely,
financially disadvantaged cities may encounter substantial hurdles in
this aspect (Rigolon et al., 2018), thus profoundly influencing UGS’s
spatial equity level (Wu & Kim, 2021b).
The socioeconomic stage of a city affects the accessibility to different
types of green spaces in distinct manners (Bolitzer & Netusil, 2000;
Panduro & Veie, 2013). The three UGS types correspond to three distinct
types of goods: community green spaces as private goods, peri-residen­
tial street greenery as quasi-public goods, and PGS as public goods.
Variations in the spatial equity of these UGS types are expected to be
affected by the city’s socioeconomic stage for several reasons.
Cities at a more advanced socioeconomic stage typically manifest
large market-driven economies (Afonso & Furceri, 2010; Ding et al.,
2014), thus leading to a broad array of goods available in the market and
reduced governmental control over the provisioning of private goods.
Hence, more economically developed cities likely offer a broader range
of residential communities with varying degrees of green spaces, thus
potentially intensifying social inequity. However, our perspective is
rooted in the idea that housing, as a highly interchangeable private
commodity (Chen et al., 2017), may cater to diverse needs, such as
3
Landscape and Urban Planning 241 (2024) 104926
access to green spaces or proximity to transportation hubs, even within
properties of the same price range. Moreover, a market-oriented econ­
omy suggests that local businesses would strive to offer superior-quality
products in a competitive market (Greer & Doellgast, 2017). A diverse
and high-quality goods supply enhances the prospects for individuals
with lower SES to inhabit communities with a high green space rate.
Consequently, cities at higher socioeconomic stages may exhibit more
favorable levels of spatial equity in community green spaces.
Economic progress brings the potential for increased funding allo­
cated to establish and maintain green infrastructure (Chen & Wang,
2013a; Zhu & Zhang, 2008), thereby suggesting an overall improvement
in the quality of street greenery (Chen & Hu, 2015; Fuller & Gaston,
2009). However, this assertion does not universally hold true, as evi­
denced by a study conducted in the United States, which found that
urban street greenery coverage initially declined alongside economic
development (Zhu & Zhang, 2006). Nonetheless, the rationale guiding
urban development and green infrastructure in Chinese cities signifi­
cantly diverges from that of Western cities (Zhao et al., 2013). In addi­
tion, a yardstick competition exists among Chinese cities (Caldeira,
2012; Yu et al., 2016). If a city is awarded the honor of National Forest
City, National Garden City, or National Eco-City, the principal officers of
that city will obtain better political prospects (Chen et al., 2017).
Consequently, officials may find themselves increasingly motivated to
enhance street greenery while concurrently pursuing economic growth.
This drive to meet the criteria for National Garden City, even to a
minimal extent, could inadvertently contribute to an elevation in the
spatial equity level of street greenery.
Existing literature suggests that while economic development has the
potential to fund urban greening efforts, it may also have adverse effects
on equitable access to PGS (Song et al., 2021; Wu & Kim, 2021b). Chi­
nese cities at the advanced socioeconomic stage often rely heavily on
land finance and are eager to extract revenue from land (Lin & Yi, 2011;
Xu et al., 2009). However, this reliance carries inherent risks and re­
wards. On the one hand, this off-budget revenue is anticipated to un­
derwrite urban infrastructure development, stimulate labor and
material markets, and foster local economic expansion (Chen & Hu,
2015). On the other hand, sustainability within the framework of land
finance hinges upon the prosperity of the city’s economy. In instances of
declining economic growth rates, the repayment of substantial debts
arising from infrastructure projects becomes a formidable challenge
(Lan, 2021). Consequently, local authorities are inclined to prioritize
robust economic growth over urban planning. This focus often alters the
previously uniform green space distribution patterns. The new aim is to
create an urban layout that better promotes economic growth and at­
tracts increased investment (Wu & Kim, 2021b). It can generate unde­
sirable ramifications, such as spatial dislocation and gentrification (Wu
& Kim, 2021a), thereby diminishing the spatial equity level of PGS.
Over the last few decades, China has directed substantial efforts to­
ward urban greening as a means to mitigate the negative impacts of
urbanization, particularly addressing the issue of inequitable access to
UGS (Zhao et al., 2013). However, Chinese urban managers have pre­
dominantly employed quantity-based metrics, such as park count and
green space area per capita, which fall short of capturing the prevailing
UGS access disparities across the country (Li et al., 2018; Wang, 2009;
Wu & Kim, 2021a). Moreover, Chinese cities’ diverse socioeconomic
stages and natural settings further complicate the situation. The asso­
ciation of these factors with the spatial equity level of UGS remains
inadequately investigated. Detailed analysis is required to evaluate the
spatial equity level of UGS accessibility in Chinese cities thoroughly
using appropriate indicators, thus strengthening the theoretical foun­
dation for future research. Furthermore, its relationship with urban so­
cioeconomic stages should be studied to evaluate greening practices in
China and develop appropriate policies.
Y. LU et al.
2. Research questions and value
This study, which concentrates on China, aims to tackle two key
research questions: (1) What are the spatial equity levels of different
types of UGS, and what are their differences as well as spatial distribu­
tion characteristics? (2) What differences exist in the spatial equity
levels of UGS spatial access in cities at various socioeconomic stages?
The importance of this study lies in addressing the theoretical
quandary stemming from conflicting findings in the current literature
regarding the spatial equity of various UGS types while simultaneously
offering empirical insights for practical urban planning. Theoretically,
this research introduces a novel perspective to reconcile the scholarly
discord surrounding the spatial equity of UGS. By comprehensively
evaluating the spatial equity of diverse UGS types within cities repre­
senting different socioeconomic stages, we strive to expound upon the
contradictory conclusions found in the existing literature. This
comprehensive analysis will enrich the comprehension of environmental
justice and the impact of socioeconomic factors on spatial equity,
especially within developing countries. Practically, the outcomes of this
study hold dual significance. First, they provide empirical guidance to
urban planners, which can aid them in devising highly effective UGS
planning strategies. Through an extensive investigation encompassing
three distinct types of UGS across 263 Chinese cities, our objective is to
present real-world case studies and recommendations for policymakers.
These recommendations, which are grounded in empirical evidence, are
poised to facilitate the judicious allocation and provisioning of specific
green space types, thus fostering equitable distribution. Second, we
recognize that the approach to equity varies among cities at different
socioeconomic stages. While less developed cities prioritize funda­
mental infrastructure development, their more developed counterparts
Fig. 1. Study area.
4
Landscape and Urban Planning 241 (2024) 104926
must focus on ensuring an even distribution of existing resources among
all citizens. Hence, acknowledging the divergent equity requirements of
cities at varying socioeconomic stages, our study also aims to offer
tailored green space planning recommendations that cater to their
unique environmental and social needs. The potential implications of
this research are substantial. They encompass the promotion of sus­
tainable urban development, enhancement of public health, and alle­
viation of social inequalities. The upcoming section will detail the
methodologies employed, followed by Section 3, which will unveil the
findings. Then, Section 4 will delve into an extensive discussion of the
results.
3. Data and methods
3.1. Study area
To enhance the evaluation’s reliability and ensure result compara­
bility, the urban built environment of Chinese cities was specifically
selected as the study area. The boundary of the urban built environment
in 2020 was extracted from the National Land-Use/Cover Database for
China (NLUD-C), a dataset created by the Chinese Academy of Sciences
that features a spatial resolution of 30 m. Derived from Landsat TM
images and China-Brazil Earth Resources Satellite images, the NLUD-C
encapsulates land use coverage information dating back to 1990
(https://www.resdc.cn). Rigorous sampling procedures have validated
the NLUD-C’s classification accuracy, which exceeded 90 % (Lai et al.,
2016). Subsequently, we selected 263 cities boasting sufficiently
comprehensive data for our study, encompassing 4 municipalities, 14
sub-provincial cities, 16 provincial capitals, and 229 prefecture-level
cities (Fig. 1). To account for the potential of accessing green spaces
Y. LU et al. Landscape and Urban Planning 241 (2024) 104926

beyond the delineated boundaries, an extension of the study area for
each city was established, which encompassed a buffer zone extending 5
km beyond the urban built environment.
3.2. Measurements of urban green space
This section offers a detailed exposition of the measurement meth­
odologies applied to three types of UGS in China (Table 1).
3.2.1. Measurement of community green space
Community green space is quantified by the green space rate within a
community, which is defined as the ratio of the sum of all types of green
spaces within the community area to the total community area. The
green ratio typically remains unchanged post-community construction
(Gu et al., 2021). Regulatory guidelines stipulate a minimum green
space rate for each city. A higher green space rate and a lower building
area correspond to heightened resident comfort (Zhang et al., 2017).
The data on residential communities were derived from Soufang (https
://www.sofang.com) in 2018, encompassing information on 301,243
residential communities nationwide, including details such as location,
average price, green space rate, and household count. However, some
communities exhibited incomplete data on green space rate and
household numbers. To complete this information, we employed web
crawling technology via Loupan (https://www.loupan.com). The Min­
istry of Housing and Construction closely scrutinizes these datasets due
to their impact on residential project valuations, urban planning, and
greening policies. To validate the reliability of this data, we cross-
referenced the data with satellite imagery, which revealed an approxi­
mately 10 % variance between the current green space rate and officially
provided values (Appendix A).
3.2.2. Measurement of street greenery
To evaluate street greenery, we utilized the Green View Index (GVI),
a metric that quantifies the proportion of green pixels in street view
images. Since 2007, street view images captured by vehicle-mounted
provider. At each sampling point, we captured four images spaced at 90-
degree intervals to cover a complete 360◦ street view. Then, these in­
dividual images were merged to create a comprehensive panoramic
image.
This study conducted batch computations on processed street view
images leveraging machine-learning techniques. We opted for the
Cityscapes dataset for initial training in machine-to-image recognition
(https://www.Cityscapes-dataset.com/datasetoverview/). This dataset
encompasses a wide array of street view images from 50 different cities,
spanning various seasons and weather conditions. The dataset is avail­
able in two versions: fine and coarse. The finely labeled dataset consists
of 5,000 finely labeled images, while the coarsely labeled dataset con­
sists of 5,000 finely labeled images and 20,000 coarsely labeled images.
For our research, we utilized the finely labeled dataset for training,
specifically employing 2,975 images for training, 500 for validation, and
the remaining 1,525 for testing. We employed the TensorFlow and
DeepLabV3 models for training, optimizing, and fine-tuning the model
using techniques such as dilated convolution and ASPP to improve the
serial neural network architecture. These techniques enhanced model
precision and expedited its operational speed. During the training phase,
parameters were set as follows: the batch size was 4, the initial learning
rate was 0.001, and the neural network training crop size was adjusted
to match the original size of the Cityscapes images. The remaining pa­
rameters followed the default settings of the DeepLabV3 model. For
validation, a subset of 75 finely labeled Cityscapes images was used, thus
yielding a mean intersection over a union (mIOU) of 79.6 %. Subse­
quently, we used the trained model to perform batch computations on
the collected street view images. The pixel proportion of vegetation
areas within the images was calculated, which obtained the GVI at each
sampling point (Fig. 2).
For community i, we computed the average GVI of the roads within
the 500 m buffer zone of community i using the road length as the
weight with the following formula:
∑
∑
GVI imn
n Lin
m

GVI i = ∑ m ,
cameras have been widely accessible on map provider platforms, thus n Lin
forming the foundational data for GVI computation. The evolution of
GVI measurement techniques, which has progressed from manual Pho­ where GVIi represents the green view value of community i. GVIimn
toshop approaches (Yang et al., 2009) to spectral analysis (Li et al., represents the green view value of the m-th street view on the n-th road
2016) and deep learning (Wang et al., 2021), has facilitated large-scale within the catchment around community i. Lin is the length of the n-th
and cost-effective GVI assessments. The street greenery assessment in­ road.
volves two core steps: street view data collection and GVI computation.
The process of collecting street view data is as follows. We initially 3.2.3. Extraction and accessibility measurement of PGS
generated sampling points at intervals of 100 m, leveraging road We identified and consolidated the presence of PGS within urban
network data sourced from OpenStreetMap. Subsequently, we dis­ built-up areas using POIs and AOIs from three reputable sources. POIs
patched sampling requests for street view images to the Baidu Maps are specific location references, which are often represented as co­
open API, which serves as China’s principal map and street view image ordinates. Meanwhile, AOIs denote defined geographical areas that are
usually encompassed by polygonal boundaries that consist of a sequence
of coordinates. The collection of POIs transpired in August 2022, which
Table 1
Definitions and assessment methods for urban green space.
was sourced from categories encompassing tourist attractions and nat­
ural features on Baidu Maps, as well as the scenic attractions category on
UGS type Definition Assessment Method
Amap. AOIs were extracted from boundary data pertaining to green
Community Refers to green space within Assess by calculating the ratio spaces from OpenStreetMap, Baidu Maps, and Amap, all dated August
green space residential areas, including of community green space area 2022. By cross-referencing and validating these datasets against each
various types of land occupied to total area to obtain the
by green vegetation, such as community green space rate.
other, we ensured the integration of comprehensive and accurate green
lawns, gardens, etc. space boundary data (further insights provided in Appendix B). For the
Street greenery Refers to greenery on both Use open-source street view delimitation of community boundaries, we applied the same approach
sides of streets, such as trees, data to calculate the Green by combining AOIs sourced from Baidu Maps and Amaps. To refine the
lawns, etc. View Index (GVI) to assess the
assessment of PGS accessibility, we extended the conventional two-step
level of street greenery.
Public parks Refers to green spaces in urban Use the two-step floating floating catchment area method. Our innovation involved the creation
built-up areas that are open to catchment area method to of a real-time measurement technique for navigation routes utilizing the
the public, including parks, calculate the accessibility of Amap API. This technique facilitated the calculation of routes and travel
greenways, pocket parks, etc. each community to public times from communities to nearby PGS, thereby assessing the accessi­
green spaces as an assessment
indicator.
bility of each community to PGS (see Appendix C for details).

5
Y. LU et al. Landscape and Urban Planning 241 (2024) 104926

Fig. 2. The technical process of GVI calculation from street view images.

3.3. Statistical methods Yuan, 2017). As a supplement, electricity consumption indirectly offers
insights into urban residents’ economic status and quality of life (Chen
3.3.1. Methods for measuring the UGS spatial equity level and its spatial et al., 2022). The housing price, which acts as a gauge of economic
distribution characteristics development in Chinese cities (Wang et al., 2011), encapsulates multi­
The assessment of spatial equity to UGS among different residential farious economic aspects, such as supply–demand dynamics, investment
communities within a city utilizes the generalized Gini index (Biró & behaviors, and residents’ purchasing power (Li & Fan, 2020). Elevated
Néda, 2020; O’Donnell, O’Neill, Van Ourti, & Walsh, 2016), which housing prices typically signify a heightened cost of living, robust eco­
provides a refined algorithm tailored to this study’s distinctive aspects. nomic capabilities, ample employment prospects, and an abundance of
Unlike the original algorithm, the horizontal axis is now defined by the public resources (Yip & Chen, 2021). Notably, pronounced economic
average housing price within each residential community. Sorting disparities emerge across cities at distinct administrative levels (Yu &
communities from lowest to highest prices, the vertical axis illustrates
the cumulative green access levels across these communities. This
alteration accounts for SES and green space access better because it Table 2
Explanation of analysis variables and descriptive statistics.
explicitly depicts the impact of socioeconomic factors on access. The
Gini index ranges from 0 to 1, and a lower Gini index means people in Variable Definition Mean S.D. Min. Max.
different SES can assess a more even amount of green space. Dependent variables
Subsequently, variance computation and the k-means clustering al­ GINI1 Gini of green space rate 0.2488 0.056 0.1 0.418
gorithm are employed to delve deeply into China’s spatial distribution (equity of community
greenspace accessibility)
characteristics and patterns of spatial equity of UGS. The consistency of
GINI2 Gini of GVI (equity of street 0.23 0.052 0.097 0.379
spatial equity levels across the three green space types is determined by greenery accessibility)
calculating the Gini index variance for each type within each city. GINI3 Gini of accessibility (equity of 0.2988 0.071 0.089 0.453
Smaller variance values signify more consistent spatial equity perfor­ park space accessibility)
Independent variables
mance across the three green space types, whereas larger variance
POP Population (1 million) 4.9324 3.903 0.112 32.05
values denote greater variations. The k-means clustering algorithm, a POP_G Population growth rate (from 1.0545 0.214 0.309 2.25
classical unsupervised technique, effectively groups datasets on the basis 2010 to 2020)
of feature similarities. By employing this algorithm to identify urban GDP Gross domestic product per 0.6511 0.321 0.174 1.659
clusters with analogous performance and subsequently analyzing their capita (10,000 CNY/person)
IND2 The proportion of secondary 0.388 0.102 0.058 0.651
characteristics and patterns, we can further investigate potential ratio­
industry in total GDP
nales behind the observed phenomena and provide tailored recom­ (fraction)
mendations to enhance UGS spatial equity. Moreover, determining the IND3 The proportion of tertiary 0.4924 0.082 0.274 0.835
optimal number of clusters for the k-means algorithm holds significance. industry in total GDP
Here, the elbow method is employed to achieve this objective (Soto & (fraction)
POW Power consumption (1trillion 0.0179 0.032 0.006 0.529
Pintó, 2010). Wh/km2)
PR_A Average value of house price 0.6894 0.583 0.292 5.228
3.3.2. Methods for finding the driving factors of the UGS spatial equity level (10,000 CNY/m2)
The equitable distribution of UGS correlates with socioeconomic and ADM China’s administrative grade
(Dummy)
environmental factors. To dissect this relationship, we employed the
ECZ China’s economic zoning
Gini index as the dependent variable and amassed an array of inde­ (Dummy)
pendent variables. After correlation analysis, we selected socioeconomic Control variables
variables that were significantly correlated with the Gini index as in­ TEM Average temperature in 2020 0.6109 0.087 0.394 0.778
dependent variables, including total population, population growth (100 ◦ F)
GR_A Average value of greening rate 0.3534 0.036 0.259 0.498
rate, GDP per capita, the proportion of secondary industry in GDP, the ND_A Average value of NDVI 1.0792 0.184 0.228 1.706
proportion of tertiary industry in GDP, electricity consumption, and AC_A Average accessibility of public 1.5756 0.955 0.05 6.874
average housing price (Table 2). The proportion of secondary or tertiary green space
industry within the overall GDP delineates a city’s economic structure, NGC National Garden City title
(Dummy)
thus potentially shaping green space demand and patterns (Wang &

6
Y. LU et al.
Padua, 2007), thus rendering the administrative level a pivotal inde­
pendent variable. Moreover, the geographical location of Chinese cities
profoundly influences their economic trajectories. The eastern region,
buoyed by its proximity to the sea and efficient transportation, has
magnetized substantial investments, thus fueling rapid economic prog­
ress. Conversely, geographical constraints have tempered the economic
advancement of the central and western regions. Despite once serving as
China’s industrial bastion, the northeastern region’s economic growth
has waned in recent years. Acknowledging these economic imbalances
steered by geographical attributes (Bai et al., 2012; Chen et al., 2016),
cities were categorized into eastern, central, western, and northeastern
zones, which are aligned with the economic subdivisions announced by
the National Bureau of Statistics of China. As such, dummy variables
were instantiated as independent variables.
Eco-geographic city factors, including temperature, average green
space rate, average NDVI, and average PGS accessibility, were included
as control variables. Precipitation and humidity were disregarded and
omitted from the analysis because of their non-correlation with the
dependent variable. Furthermore, a dummy variable was integrated:
National Garden City. This descriptor is conferred upon cities aligning
with national greening and municipal construction standards, thus
signifying superior greening infrastructure. Illustrations of greenspace-
related factors and average housing prices across cities are presented
(Figure 3).
Before constructing the multivariate linear model for further verifi­
cation, we tested the spatial autocorrelation of variables. We checked
the model for residual independence, normality in distribution, and the
collinearity of the residuals. The results show that the three dependent
variables show no multicollinearity between the variables (VIF < 5). The
residual distribution of the model is also normal and does not correlate
with the residual generation sequence of another observation value. A
multiple linear regression model is used to identify the relationship
between the spatial equity of urban green exposure and urban economic
and environmental indicators. The equation of the multiple linear
regression model is as follows:
∑K
GINI i = β0 + β XiK + εi
1 K
where GINIi is the Gini index of city i, β0 is the intercept, βK is the slope of
variable K, XiK is the value of variable k, and εi is the residual term.
4. Results
4.1. Spatial equity of UGS and its spatial distribution
Evident disparities among cities are discernible in the Gini index
Fig. 3. (a) Contribution of green space rate, GVI, and PGS accessibility to 263 Chinese cities. The closer the color of the city is to green (blue, red), the higher the
average green ratio (GVI, PGS accessibility) of the city. (b) Comparison of housing prices in different provinces
7
Landscape and Urban Planning 241 (2024) 104926
(Fig. 4). Across the green space rate, the Gini index spanned from 0.09 in
Shanghai to 0.34 in Yangjiang, Guangdong Province. Concerning the
GVI, the range spanned from 0.07 in Beijing to 0.39 in Jiangmen,
Guangdong Province. As for accessibility, the range spanned from 0.08
in Wuzhong, Ningxia Province to 0.44 in Zhangjiajie, Hunan Province.
Notable disparities in the spatial equity of UGS are evident among
cities categorized by different regions and administrative levels, thus
illustrating a marked spatial heterogeneity (Fig. 4). The average values
among cities across distinct economic subdivisions show that the Gini
index is higher in eastern cities across all three UGS types. The issue of
inequitable UGS access is particularly pronounced in eastern cities.
Regarding administrative levels, eastern cities with elevated adminis­
trative statuses generally exhibit lower Gini indices. Comparatively,
provincial capital and prefecture-level cities in the western region
display nearly identical spatial equity levels. In the northeast,
prefecture-level cities show superior spatial equity levels compared with
provincial capital cities. Appendix D provides a detailed outcome of the
local spatial autocorrelation analysis.
To delve deeply into the exploration of regional disparities in the
spatial equity of the three UGS types and their geographic heterogeneity,
we conducted variance calculations.
The findings reveal significant disparities in the spatial equity levels
of the three types of green spaces within certain developed coastal
metropolitan regions, such as the Yangtze River Delta and the Pearl
River Delta (Fig. 5). Conversely, in more established metropolitan re­
gions, such as the Shandong Peninsula and Jilin, the spatial equity levels
of the three types of green spaces tend to be more uniform. This
discrepancy can be attributed to factors such as the city’s historical
context. Specifically, the more established urban clusters exhibit more
balanced urban planning owing to their lengthy development history
and relatively stable economic structure. Thus, spatial equity is more
consistent across all types of UGS. Conversely, emerging coastal
metropolitan regions undergoing rapid economic growth and urbani­
zation may have encountered imbalances in their urban planning efforts,
thus leading to disparities. To delve further into the analysis, we utilized
the K-means clustering method to classify the study areas, which could
yield more nuanced results. Employing the elbow method, we deter­
mined that the optimal number of clusters was six.
Based on the outcomes of the clustering analysis (Fig. 6), a significant
portion of cities within the Yangtze River Delta, a prominent metro­
politan region in China, are categorized within the first cluster. This
cluster reveals distinct inequity in the access to all three types of urban
green spaces, with particular emphasis on PGS. This pattern could be
linked to the rapid shifts in land use occurring within the Yangtze River
Delta. Within this context, certain areas may experience encroachments
upon PGS or uneven distribution of such spaces. In the case of the Pearl
Y. LU et al. Landscape and Urban Planning 241 (2024) 104926

Fig. 4. Spatial equity level of Chinese cities and its spatial heterogeneity.

River Delta, another renowned metropolitan area, most of its cities fall
into the second cluster. This cluster exhibits comparatively lower spatial
equity levels across all three types of green spaces. However, PGS shows
relatively better spatial equity than the first cluster. This distinction may
be attributed to the fact that the Pearl River Delta has been at the
forefront of China’s economic exchanges since the initiation of the
reform and opening-up policy. Its urban planning and development have
assimilated external experiences and concepts, recognizing the impor­
tance of equitable distribution of green spaces in cities from an early
stage. Cities positioned in the fifth cluster are predominantly located in
the western region. Within this cluster, all three types of UGS demon­
strate high levels of spatial equity. This pattern may be associated with

8
Y. LU et al.
Fig. 5. (a) 3D visualization of the Gini index ranking in the three dimensions (b) Spatial visualization of variance of Gini index. The closer the color is to blue
indicates that this city shows similar spatial equity levels of three types of UGS, and the closer it is to red indicates that this city has significant differences in spatial
equity levels of three types of UGS.
Fig. 6. Result of clustering.
the relatively lower degree of urbanization in the western region and its
distinct land use strategies.
4.2. Impact of the socioeconomic stage on spatial equity of UGS
The multiple linear regression analysis outcomes revealed that so­
cioeconomic factors’ influence on the spatial equity of community green
space and street greenery is relatively similar (Table 3). Population size
demonstrates a negative correlation with the Gini index, thus suggesting
that larger metropolitan areas tend to exhibit a more balanced distri­
bution of these two types of green spaces. In contrast, the regression
results pertaining to PGS accessibility indicate positive correlations with
GDP per capita, population, and the Gini index. This outcome implies
that cities at a higher socioeconomic stage tend to experience less equity
regarding PGS accessibility. Moreover, an increased proportion of sec­
ondary and tertiary industries is associated with decreased spatial equity
for all three types of UGS.
The inequity arising from variations in economic subdivisions and
city levels is evident in the results. Municipalities display the smallest
coefficient, while provincial cities show the largest coefficient, thus
indicating that higher city levels lead to lower levels of spatial equity for
all three UGS types. From the perspective of economic subdivisions, all
three models consistently show that the coefficient is smallest for cities
9
Landscape and Urban Planning 241 (2024) 104926
in the western region and highest for those in the eastern region. This
outcome implies that the lowest level of spatial equity for the three types
of UGS is observed in eastern cities, while the highest spatial equity level
is found in cities within the western region.
5. Discussion
5.1. Difference between the spatial equity of three types of UGS
In our analysis of the geographic distribution of spatial equity, we
uncovered some intriguing patterns. First, we observed that community
green spaces exhibit notable spatial equity in western cities, which is
contrary to our expectations given that previous research highlighted
high levels of access inequity regarding UGS in these areas (Song et al.,
2021). The challenging climate in western China, which is unfavorable
for vegetation and maintenance, often results in uneven urban vegeta­
tion distribution and relatively low per capita urban green space
coverage (Wen et al., 2019). Consequently, green space provision is
often concentrated within residential communities to meet policy re­
quirements, thus leading to better spatial equity for community green
spaces.
Second, our findings revealed that street greenery displays enhanced
spatial equity in northeastern cities. This phenomenon may be
Y. LU et al. Landscape and Urban Planning 241 (2024) 104926

Table 3
OLS regression results on spatial equity level of three types of green space.
Model1 (GINI1) Model2 (GINI2) Model3 (GINI3)
coef p-value coef p-value coef p-value

Independent variables
POP − 0.002 0.093* − 0.002 0.044** 0.004 0.034**
POP_G 0.026 0.057* 0.003 0.893 − 0.028 0.181
GDP − 0.007 0.096* − 0.019 0.319 0.035 0.090*
IND2 0.1 0.007*** 0.079 0.171 0.117 0.040**
IND3 0.081 0.108 0.066 0.09* 0.286 0.000***
POW 0.05 0.482 0.124 0.261 0.233 0.032**
PR_A − 0.008 0.247 − 0.02 0.046** − 0.019 0.066*
Municipality − 0.08 0.009*** − 0.096 0.037*** − 0.101 0.033**
Sub-provincial city − 0.039 0.016** − 0.034 0.0143 − 0.038 0.125
Provincial capital city − 0.006 0.644 − 0.009 0.613 − 0.008 0.7
Eastern city − 0.003 0.778 0.042 0.02** − 0.002 0.915
Central city − 0.028 0.012** 0.028 0.093* − 0.003 0.86
Western city − 0.02 0.050* 0.002 0.921 − 0.005 0.729
Control variables
TEM 0.102 0.003*** 0.007 0.897 − 0.012 0.818
GR_A 0.027 0.695 − 0.022 0.837 − 0.246 0.019**
ND_A − 0.005 0.683 0.014 0.49 0.015 0.445
AC_A 0.001 0.868 0.01 0.058* − 0.003 0.63
NGC 0.013 0.025** − 0.001 0.984 0.02 0.020**
Others
_cons 0.059 0.236 0.119 0.121 0.164 0.031**
R-squared 0.55 0.496 0.441
*** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.1.

Note: Kindly check Appendix Part in folder.

attributed to the trend of reverse urbanization observed in these areas,
characterized by population decline and deindustrialization (Li et al.,
2018). However, thanks to the government-initiated and implemented
“Three North Shelterbelt Program,” northeast China is also where urban
green space has rarely grown during the rapid urbanization in China
since the 21st century (Chen et al., 2017). The reverse urbanization of
the northeast region instead allows the government to undertake higher
quality green space development and redevelop public spaces (e.g.,
planting sidewalks and urban furniture), thus bringing about better
spatial equity of street greenery. This result suggests that we can address
spatial access inequity in specific areas using a management approach of
compact cities and landscape transformation (Li et al., 2021).
Finally, our analysis reveals a concerning trend of poor PGS acces­
sibility in eastern coastal cities despite their elevated administrative
levels and strong economic foundations.This result is potentially due to
the significant loss of green space experienced by nearly all cities in the
Yangtze River Delta region during continued urbanization (Chen et al.,
2017). The unchecked expansion of built-up land has contributed to a
notable decline in the region’s ecological environment. Despite the
policy requirement for equal distribution of PGS, our findings under­
score that PGS accessibility remains unequal. A significant portion of
low-SES groups, particularly those situated on the urban–rural periph­
ery, are unable to meet the authorities’ requirement of being within a
15-minute radius of green space access (Chen et al., 2020). This obser­
vation aligns with the conclusions drawn by Xiao, Wang, et al., (2017).
The inequality stems from a planning approach that prioritizes the equal
distribution of PGS without adequately addressing spatial equity con­
cerns. Addressing this disparity requires a shift toward more equitable
green space planning strategies that consider the specific requirements
of different socioeconomic groups and prioritize their accessibility to
urban green areas.
5.2. Drivers of spatial equity of UGS
In the regression analysis concerning community green space and
street greenery, per capita GDP significantly negatively affects the Gini
index, while the population growth rate has a positive effect. This
outcome implies that economic growth can facilitate the spatial equity
of community green space and street greenery. Additionally, the positive
effect of population out-migration on equity aligns with our initial hy­
pothesis. This result could be attributed to the increased revenue
available to local governments due to GDP growth, thus allowing for a
greater emphasis on achieving equitable green space distribution targets
and allocating financial resources for uniform vegetation coverage (Zhu
& Zhang, 2008). Conversely, economic growth and population in-
migration appear to be linked to poorer spatial equity in PGS accessi­
bility. The overall increase in green space within cities, driven by
increased GDP and population growth, has occurred more in the low-
cost urban periphery land (Wu & Kim, 2021b). These newly built
green spaces are often located near upscale neighborhoods, which will
further attract high SES groups and exacerbate inequity in PGS acces­
sibility (Yasumoto et al., 2014).
The influence of the secondary and tertiary industries on equity
levels across all three types of UGS is notably negative. This correlation
is particularly evident in the case of the secondary sector, and its impact
is associated with changes in urban land use patterns due to industrial
advancement. Over the past few decades, the economic focus of Chinese
cities has been driven by industrialization, with land parcels sold by the
government at lower prices to facilitate rapid industrial transformation
and revenue generation (Lan, 2021). Consequently, green space is pri­
marily relegated to areas unfit for construction, such as water bodies or
sloping terrain (Wang & Chan, 2019). This practice significantly affects
accessibility, as industrial land expansion often encroaches upon natural
green areas, thus leaving minimal impact on the green ratio within
communities.
Distinct variations in the spatial equity of UGS are evident across
cities with varying economic subdivisions and administrative levels. In
contrast to previous studies that omitted the influence of residents’ SES,
our findings highlight that higher administrative levels of cities are
associated with greater equity. Hence, cities at higher administrative
tiers are more attentive to addressing inequalities arising from wealth
disparities. Such local governments emphasize equal green space access
to achieve residents’ well-being, urban sustainability, and local
competitiveness (Li et al., 2021). These priorities are typically pursued
after achieving economic growth objectives, which subsequently attract
essential resources, such as labor, capital, and technology, thus
contributing to the professional advancement of local officials (Chen
et al., 2017).

10
Y. LU et al.
5.3. Limitations
Some limitations of this study should be acknowledged. First, we
used housing prices to reflect the SES of residents without considering
other relevant factors, such as age, income, and gender. Such factors can
be added to capture the variability of SES better in future work (Reyes
et al., 2014). Second, throughout urban renewal processes, alterations to
the green space rate can occur in a limited number of communities.
These modifications may not be immediately captured by data from real
estate websites. Third, while the Gini index reveals injustice in UGS from
a spatial perspective, relying solely on increasing green space supply to
reduce the Gini index is not an excellent solution to inequity access to
UGS. Residents demand green spaces in quantity and quality (Knobel
et al., 2021). The consideration of quality (e.g., vegetation type and
physical characteristics) will make the assessment of green justice more
rational. In some cases, improving spatial access does not result in im­
provements in use patterns for underrepresented communities (Jones
et al., 2009), and other dimensions of access (such as cultural access) are
also very important (O’Brien et al., 2017).
6. Conclusion
Measuring the spatial equity of UGS has been a popular topic in
academia. This study classifies UGS into three types: community green
spaces, street greenery, and public parks, and attempts to investigate the
driving force of socioeconomic stages on the spatial equity level using
the Gini index. Our findings reveal that a larger population and higher
GDP can increase spatial equity levels of community and street greenery.
However, economic development and more in-migration population
lead to lower PGS accessibility equity. The share of secondary and ter­
tiary industries negatively affects the spatial equity of all three green
space types. Cities with varying economic subdivisions and adminis­
trative levels demonstrate varying spatial equity levels.
These findings offer novel insights into resolving the ongoing
scholarly discourse surrounding the spatial equity of urban green spaces.
In practical terms, these results are anticipated to yield tailored and
precise recommendations for green space planning, thus catering to the
distinct needs of cities at varying socioeconomic stages. Addressing this
challenge necessitates a multifaceted approach beyond simply
increasing green space quantity, which requires the establishment of
comprehensive public participation mechanisms. Furthermore, our
research bridges a gap in the current literature on urban nature by
delving into smaller cities and those in developing nations. As inclusive
cities are being developed in regions such as South America and Africa,
our study holds potential to contribute to their urban environmental
planning efforts. Moving forward, we intend to enhance the accuracy of
resident SES assessment by employing data from the China Social Sur­
vey. Additionally, we aim to quantify the quality of green spaces across
multiple dimensions, which can provide a more holistic understanding
of UGS accessibility.
Funding
This work was supported by National Science Foundation of China
(NO. 32271935), the Natural Science Fund of Zhejiang Province
(LY22E080013), Young Elite Scientists Sponsorship Program by CAST
(2021QNRC001).
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
11
Landscape and Urban Planning 241 (2024) 104926
Data availability
The authors do not have permission to share data.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2023.104926.
References
Afonso, A., & Furceri, D. (2010). Government size, composition, volatility and economic
growth. European Journal of Political Economy, 26(4), 517–532. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2010.02.002
Bai, X., Chen, J., & Shi, P. (2012). Landscape Urbanization and Economic Growth in
China: Positive Feedbacks and Sustainability Dilemmas. Environmental Science &
Technology, 46(1), 132–139. https://doi.org/10.1021/es202329f
Barbosa, O., Tratalos, J. A., Armsworth, P. R., Davies, R. G., Fuller, R. A., Johnson, P., &
Gaston, K. J. (2007). Who benefits from access to green space? A case study from
Sheffield. UK. Landscape and Urban Planning, 83(2), 187–195. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.04.004
Bauwelinck, M., Casas, L., Nawrot, T. S., Nemery, B., Trabelsi, S., Thomas, I., …
Vandenheede, H. (2021). Residing in urban areas with higher green space is
associated with lower mortality risk: A census-based cohort study with ten years of
follow-up. Environment International, 148, Article 106365. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.envint.2020.106365
Biró, T. S., & Néda, Z. (2020). Gintropy: Gini Index Based Generalization of Entropy.
Entropy, 22(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/e22080879. Article 8.
Blanco, H., Alberti, M., Forsyth, A., Krizek, K. J., Rodríguez, D. A., Talen, E., & Ellis, C.
(2009). Hot, congested, crowded and diverse: Emerging research agendas in
planning. Progress in Planning, 71(4), 153–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
progress.2009.03.001
Bolitzer, B., & Netusil, N. R. (2000). The impact of open spaces on property values in
Portland, Oregon. Journal of Environmental Management, 59(3), 185–193. https://doi.
org/10.1006/jema.2000.0351
Boone, C. G., Buckley, G. L., Grove, J. M., & Sister, C. (2009). Parks and People: An
Environmental Justice Inquiry in Baltimore, Maryland. Annals of the Association of
American Geographers, 99(4), 767–787. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00045600903102949
Buzbee, W. W. (2000). Sprawl’s Political-Economy and the Case for a Metropolitan Green
Space Initiative. The Urban Lawyer, 32(3), 367–390.
Byrne, J., Wolch, J., & Zhang, J. (2009). Planning for environmental justice in an urban
national park. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 52(3), 365–392.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09640560802703256
Caldeira, E. (2012). Yardstick competition in a federation: Theory and evidence from
China. China Economic Review, 23(4), 878–897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
chieco.2012.04.011
Chen, B., Nie, Z., Chen, Z., & Xu, B. (2017). Quantitative estimation of 21st-century
urban greenspace changes in Chinese populous cities. Science of The Total
Environment, 609, 956–965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.07.238
Chen, J., Gao, M., Cheng, S., Hou, W., Song, M., Liu, X., & Liu, Y. (2022). Global 1 km × 1
km gridded revised real gross domestic product and electricity consumption during
1992–2019 based on calibrated nighttime light data. Scientific Data, 9(1), Article 1.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-022-01322-5.
Chen, W. Y., & Hu, F. Z. Y. (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
Chen, W. Y., Hu, F. Z. Y., Li, X., & Hua, J. (2017). Strategic interaction in municipal
governments’ provision of public green spaces: A dynamic spatial panel data analysis
in transitional China. Cities, 71, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.07.003
Chen, W. Y., & Wang, D. T. (2013a). Economic development and natural amenity: An
econometric analysis of urban green spaces in China. Urban Forestry & Urban
Greening, 12(4), 435–442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2013.08.004
Chen, W. Y., & Wang, D. T. (2013b). Urban forest development in China: Natural
endowment or socioeconomic product? Cities, 35, 62–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
cities.2013.06.011
Chen, Y., Chen, Z., Xu, G., & Tian, Z. (2016). Built-up land efficiency in urban China:
Insights from the General Land Use Plan (2006–2020). Habitat International, 51,
31–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.10.014
Chen, Y., Xu, Z., Byrne, J., Xu, T., Wang, S., & Wu, J. (2021). Can smaller parks limit
green gentrification? Insights from Hangzhou. China. Urban Forestry & Urban
Greening, 59, Article 127009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127009
Chen, Y., Yue, W., & La Rosa, D. (2020). Which communities have better accessibility to
green space? An investigation into environmental inequality using big data.
Landscape and Urban Planning, 204, Article 103919. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
landurbplan.2020.103919
Choumert, J. (2010). An empirical investigation of public choices for green spaces. Land
Use Policy, 27(4), 1123–1131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2010.03.001
Choumert, J., & Salanié, J. (2008). Provision of urban green spaces: Some insights from
economics. Landscape Research, 33(3), 331–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/
01426390802045996
Y. LU et al.
Ding, C., Niu, Y., & Lichtenberg, E. (2014). Spending preferences of local officials with
off-budget land revenues of Chinese cities. China Economic Review, 31, 265–276.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2014.10.001
Fleischer, F. (2007). “To Choose a House Means to Choose a Lifestyle”. The Consumption
of Housing and Class-Structuration in Urban China. City & Society, 19(2), 287–311.
https://doi.org/10.1525/city.2007.19.2.287
Fuller, R. A., & Gaston, K. J. (2009). The scaling of green space coverage in European
cities. Biology Letters, 5(3), 352–355. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2009.0010
Greer, I., & Doellgast, V. (2017). Marketization, inequality, and institutional change:
Toward a new framework for comparative employment relations. Journal of
Industrial Relations, 59(2), 192–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022185616673685
Gu, W., Tang, Z., Chen, Y., & Dai, M. (2021). Research on the Greening Rate and Spatial
Differences of Urban Residential Neighborhoods in Shenzhen. Landscape Architecture
Frontiers, 9(5), 60. https://doi.org/10.15302/J-LAF-0-020006
Huang, Y., & Jiang, L. (2009). Housing Inequality in Transitional Beijing. International
Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 33(4), 936–956. https://doi.org/10.1111/
j.1468-2427.2009.00890.x
Jones, A., Hillsdon, M., & Coombes, E. (2009). Greenspace access, use, and physical
activity: Understanding the effects of area deprivation. Preventive Medicine, 49(6),
500–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.10.012
Kaczynski, A. T., Potwarka, L. R., Smale, B. J. A., & Havitz, M. E. (2009). Association of
Parkland Proximity with Neighborhood and Park-based Physical Activity: Variations
by Gender and Age. Leisure Sciences, 31(2), 174–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/
01490400802686045
Kim, H., Woosnam, K. M., & Kim, H. (2022). Urban gentrification, social vulnerability,
and environmental (in) justice: Perspectives from gentrifying metropolitan cities in
Korea. Cities, 122, Article 103514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103514
Knobel, P., Maneja, R., Bartoll, X., Alonso, L., Bauwelinck, M., Valentin, A., …
Dadvand, P. (2021). Quality of urban green spaces influences residents’ use of these
spaces, physical activity, and overweight/obesity. Environmental Pollution, 271,
Article 116393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.116393
Koprowska, K., Łaszkiewicz, E., & Kronenberg, J. (2020). Is urban sprawl linked to green
space availability? Ecological Indicators, 108, Article 105723. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.105723
LaCour-Little, M. (2001). Gated Communities and Property Values., 36.
Lafary, E. W., Gatrell, J. D., & Jensen, R. R. (2008). People, pixels and weights in
Vanderburgh County, Indiana: Toward a new urban geography of
human–environment interactions. Geocarto International, 23(1), 53–66. https://doi.
org/10.1080/10106040701494575
Lai, L., Huang, X., Yang, H., Chuai, X., Zhang, M., Zhong, T., … Thompson, J. R. (2016).
Carbon emissions from land-use change and management in China between 1990
and 2010. Science Advances, 2(11), e1601063.
Lan, X. (2021). Zhi shen shi nei: Zhongguo zheng fu yu jing ji fa zhan. Shanghai People Press.
Li, C., & Fan, Y. (2020). Housing wealth inequality in urban China: The transition from
welfare allocation to market differentiation. The Journal of Chinese Sociology, 7(1),
16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40711-020-00129-4
Li, F., Wang, X., Liu, H., Li, X., Zhang, X., Sun, Y., & Wang, Y. (2018). Does economic
development improve urban greening? Evidence from 289 cities in China using
spatial regression models. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 190(9), 541.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-018-6871-4
Li, G., Sun, S., & Fang, C. (2018). The varying driving forces of urban expansion in China:
Insights from a spatial-temporal analysis. Landscape and Urban Planning, 174, 63–77.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.03.004
Li, X., Huang, Y., & Ma, X. (2021). Evaluation of the accessible urban public green space
at the community-scale with the consideration of temporal accessibility and quality.
Ecological Indicators, 131, Article 108231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ecolind.2021.108231
Li, X., Ma, X., Hu, Z., & Li, S. (2021). Investigation of urban green space equity at the city
level and relevant strategies for improving the provisioning in China. Land Use
Policy, 101, Article 105144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105144
Li, X., Zhang, C., Li, W., & Kuzovkina, Y. A. (2016). Environmental inequities in terms of
different types of urban greenery in Hartford, Connecticut. Urban Forestry & Urban
Greening, 18, 163–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2016.06.002
Lichtenberg, E., & Ding, C. (2009). Local officials as land developers: Urban spatial
expansion in China. Journal of Urban Economics, 66(1), 57–64. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jue.2009.03.002
Lin, G. C. S., & Yi, F. (2011). Urbanization of Capital or Capitalization on Urban Land?
Land Development and Local Public Finance in Urbanizing China. Urban Geography,
32(1), 50–79. https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.32.1.50
Lineberry, R. L. (1977). Equality and urban policy: The distribution of municipal public
services (Vol. 39). Incorporated: SAGE Publications.
Lucy, W. (1981). Equity and Planning For Local Services. Journal of the American Planning
Association, 47(4), 447–457. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944368108976526
Marino, P. de B. L. P., Soares, R. A., Luca, M. M. M. D., & Vasconcelos, A. C. de. (2016).
Global Governance Indicators: How they relate to the socioeconomic indicators of
the Brics countries. Revista de Administração Pública, 50, 721–744. Doi: 10.1590/
0034-7612144359.
Nesbitt, L., Meitner, M. J., Girling, C., Sheppard, S. R. J., & Lu, Y. (2019). Who has access
to urban vegetation? A spatial analysis of distributional green equity in 10 US cities.
Landscape and Urban Planning, 181, 51–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
landurbplan.2018.08.007
O’Brien, L., De Vreese, R., Kern, M., Sievänen, T., Stojanova, B., & Atmiş, E. (2017).
Cultural ecosystem benefits of urban and peri-urban green infrastructure across
different European countries. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 24, 236–248. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.03.002
12
Landscape and Urban Planning 241 (2024) 104926
O’Donnell, O., O’Neill, S., Van Ourti, T., & Walsh, B. (2016). Conindex: Estimation of
Concentration Indices. The Stata Journal, 16(1), 112–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1536867X1601600112
Panduro, T. E., & Veie, K. L. (2013). Classification and valuation of urban green
spaces—A hedonic house price valuation. Landscape and Urban Planning, 120,
119–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.08.009
Pham, T.-T.-H., Apparicio, P., Séguin, A.-M., Landry, S., & Gagnon, M. (2012). Spatial
distribution of vegetation in Montreal: An uneven distribution or environmental
inequity? Landscape and Urban Planning, 107(3), 214–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.landurbplan.2012.06.002
Reyes, M., Páez, A., & Morency, C. (2014). Walking accessibility to urban parks by
children: A case study of Montreal. Landscape and Urban Planning, 125, 38–47.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.02.002
Rigolon, A. (2016). A complex landscape of inequity in access to urban parks: A literature
review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 153, 160–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
landurbplan.2016.05.017
Rigolon, A., Browning, M., & Jennings, V. (2018). Inequities in the quality of urban park
systems: An environmental justice investigation of cities in the United States.
Landscape and Urban Planning, 178, 156–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
landurbplan.2018.05.026
Rundle, A., Quinn, J., Lovasi, G., Bader, M. D. M., Yousefzadeh, P., Weiss, C., &
Neckerman, K. (2013). Associations between Body Mass Index and Park Proximity,
Size, Cleanliness, and Recreational Facilities. American Journal of Health Promotion,
27(4), 262–269. https://doi.org/10.4278/ajhp.110809-QUAN-304
Schroeder, H. W., & Cannon, W. (1983). The esthetic contribution of trees to residential
streets in Ohio towns. Journal of Arboriculture, 9(9), 237–243.
Song, Y., Chen, B., Ho, H. C., Kwan, M.-P., Liu, D., Wang, F., … Song, Y. (2021).
Observed inequality in urban greenspace exposure in China. Environment
International, 156, Article 106778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2021.106778
Soto, S., & Pintó, J. (2010). Delineation of natural landscape units for Puerto Rico.
Applied Geography, 30(4), 720–730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.01.010
Sugiyama, T., Villanueva, K., Knuiman, M., Francis, J., Foster, S., Wood, L., & Giles-
Corti, B. (2016). Can neighborhood green space mitigate health inequalities? A study
of socio-economic status and mental health. Health & Place, 38, 16–21. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2016.01.002
UN-Habitat. (2022). World Cities Report 2022: Envisaging the Future of Cities seeks. UN-
Habitat. https://unhabitat.org/wcr/.
Wang, A., & Chan, E. (2019). Institutional factors affecting urban green space provision –
from a local government revenue perspective. Journal of Environmental Planning and
Management, 62(13), 2313–2329. https://doi.org/10.1080/
09640568.2018.1541231
Wang, B., He, S., & Ma, W. (2022). Does Park Size Affect Green Gentrification? Insights
from Chongqing, China. Sustainability, 14(16), Article 16. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su14169916.
Wang, B., Xu, T., Gao, H., Ta, N., Chai, Y., & Wu, J. (2021). Can daily mobility alleviate
green inequality from living and working environments? Landscape and Urban
Planning, 214, Article 104179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104179
Wang, R., & Yuan, Q. (2017). Are denser cities greener? Evidence from China,
2000–2010. Natural Resources Forum, 41(3), 179–189. https://doi.org/10.1111/
1477-8947.12131
Wang, S., Yang, Z., & Liu, H. (2011). Impact of urban economic openness on real estate
prices: Evidence from thirty-five cities in China. China Economic Review, 22(1),
42–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2010.08.007
Wang, X.-J. (2009). Analysis of problems in urban green space system planning in China.
Journal of Forestry Research, 20(1), 79–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11676-009-
0014-2
Wen, X., Deng, X., & Zhang, F. (2019). Scale effects of vegetation restoration on soil and
water conservation in a semi-arid region in China: Resources conservation and
sustainable management. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 151, Article 104474.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104474
Williams, T. G., Logan, T. M., Zuo, C. T., Liberman, K. D., & Guikema, S. D. (2020). Parks
and safety: A comparative study of green space access and inequity in five US cities.
Landscape and Urban Planning, 201, Article 103841. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
landurbplan.2020.103841
Wolch, J. R., Byrne, J., & Newell, J. P. (2014). Urban green space, public health, and
environmental justice: The challenge of making cities ‘just green enough’. Landscape
and Urban Planning, 125, 234–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
landurbplan.2014.01.017
Wood, L., Hooper, P., Foster, S., & Bull, F. (2017). Public green spaces and positive
mental health – investigating the relationship between access, quantity and types of
parks and mental wellbeing. Health & Place, 48, 63–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
healthplace.2017.09.002
Wu, J., Feng, Z., Peng, Y., Liu, Q., & He, Q. (2019). Neglected green street landscapes: A
re-evaluation method of green justice. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 41, 344–353.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2019.05.004
Wu, L., & Kim, S. K. (2021a). Does socioeconomic development lead to more equal
distribution of green space? Evidence from Chinese cities. Science of The Total
Environment, 757, Article 143780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.143780
Wu, L., & Kim, S. K. (2021b). Exploring the equality of accessing urban green spaces: A
comparative study of 341 Chinese cities. Ecological Indicators, 121, Article 107080.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.107080
Wu, L., Kim, S. K., & Lin, C. (2022). Socioeconomic groups and their green spaces
availability in urban areas of China: A distributional justice perspective.
Environmental Science & Policy, 131, 26–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
envsci.2022.01.008
Y. LU et al.
Xiao, Y., Lu, Y., Guo, Y., & Yuan, Y. (2017). Estimating the willingness to pay for green
space services in Shanghai: Implications for social equity in urban China. Urban
Forestry & Urban Greening, 26, 95–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.06.007
Xiao, Y., Wang, Z., Li, Z., & Tang, Z. (2017). An assessment of urban park access in
Shanghai – Implications for the social equity in urban China. Landscape and Urban
Planning, 157, 383–393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.08.007
Xu, J., Yeh, A., & Wu, F. (2009). Land Commodification: New Land Development and
Politics in China since the Late 1990s. International Journal of Urban and Regional
Research, 33(4), 890–913. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2009.00892.x
Yang, J., Zhao, L., Mcbride, J., & Gong, P. (2009). Can you see green? Assessing the
visibility of urban forests in cities. Landscape and Urban Planning, 91(2), 97–104.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.12.004
Yang, W., Yang, R., & Zhou, S. (2022). The spatial heterogeneity of urban green space
inequity from a perspective of the vulnerable: A case study of Guangzhou. China.
Cities, 130, Article 103855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103855
Yasumoto, S., Jones, A., & Shimizu, C. (2014). Longitudinal Trends in Equity of Park
Accessibility in Yokohama, Japan: An Investigation into the Role of Causal
Mechanisms. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 46(3), 682–699.
https://doi.org/10.1068/a45683
Yew, C. P. (2012). Pseudo-Urbanization? Competitive government behavior and urban
sprawl in China. Journal of Contemporary China, 21(74), 281–298. https://doi.org/
10.1080/10670564.2012.635931
Yip, N. M., & Chen, J. (2021). The role of housing in China’s social transformation.
Housing Studies, 36(4), 449–454. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2021.1914410
13
Landscape and Urban Planning 241 (2024) 104926
Yu, J., Zhou, L.-A., & Zhu, G. (2016). Strategic interaction in political competition:
Evidence from spatial effects across Chinese cities. Regional Science and Urban
Economics, 57, 23–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2015.12.003
Yu, K., & Padua, M. G. (2007). China’s cosmetic cities: Urban fever and superficiality.
Landscape Research, 32(2), 255–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426390701231820
Zhang, J., Yu, Z., Cheng, Y., Chen, C., Wan, Y., Zhao, B., & Vejre, H. (2020). Evaluating
the disparities in urban green space provision in communities with diverse built
environments: The case of a rapidly urbanizing Chinese city. Building and
Environment, 183, Article 107170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.107170
Zhang, Y., Van den Berg, A. E., Van Dijk, T., & Weitkamp, G. (2017). Quality over
Quantity: Contribution of Urban Green Space to Neighborhood Satisfaction.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(5), Article 5.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14050535.
Zhao, J., Chen, S., Jiang, B., Ren, Y., Wang, H., Vause, J., & Yu, H. (2013). Temporal
trend of green space coverage in China and its relationship with urbanization over
the last two decades. Science of The Total Environment, 442, 455–465. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.10.014
Zhu, P., & Zhang, Y. (2006). Demand for Urban Forests and Economic Welfare: Evidence
from the Southeastern U.S. CitiesJournal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 38(2),
279–285. https://doi.org/10.1017/S107407080002232X
Zhu, P., & Zhang, Y. (2008). Demand for urban forests in United States cities. Landscape
and Urban Planning, 84(3), 293–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
landurbplan.2007.09.005