Upload
stewart-malone
View
218
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Environmental Justice of Open
Space Amenities in Baltimore, Maryland
Christopher BooneSchool of Human Evolution and Social ChangeGlobal Institute of SustainabilityArizona State UniversityJ. Morgan GroveUSDA Forest ServiceNortheastern Research Station (Vermont)
Research Question
Who has access to parks and open space in Baltimore, and who uses them?
http://www.audubonmddc.org/patterson_park_programs.htm
Who?
Groups Neighborhoods Census Tracts Neighborhood Statistical Areas (Baltimore
Neighborhood Indicators Alliance)
Equity
Access plus area Acres per person
– Contained by neighborhood– Accessible by neighborhood
Who has access?
Neighborhoods are treated as homogenous in extent
Dasymetric mapping to improve resolution
Populations and Access to Parks
Within ¼ mile of park
Beyond ¼ mile of park
Blacks/African Am.
332,430 84,982
Whites 135,736 68,245
Families in Poverty
22,301 5,530
Total pop 487,631 159,764
Access:no access
Blacks/African Americans 3.91
Whites 1.99
Families in Poverty 4.03
Total Population 3.05
Demographics and Park Area
Acres/1000 pop within ¼ mile of neighborhoods– Predominantly black neighborhoods: 13.01– Predominantly white neighborhoods: 24.72
Who uses the parks?
City (Parks & Rec) has not collected usage statistics
BES telephone survey:– 1,508 households in Baltimore Metro
Area– 383 households in Baltimore City
Survey says….
Activity Yes No Park ElsewhereTake a walk or exercise 81.72 18.28 35.02 64.98Biking or outdoor sports 53.26 46.74 66.88 33.13Picnic/bbq/camping 72.32 27.68 29.78 70.22Drive for pleasure 65.27 34.46 10.64 89.36Swimming 54.31 45.69 5.81 94.19Canoe/kayaking/sailing 16.45 83.55 9.80 90.20Motor boat/fishing 24.28 75.72 10.39 89.61
37%37% of all activities occurred in parks or recreation areas
Lifestyle and Recreation
Little difference in recreation patterns between three major PRIZM clusters: Urban Uptowns, Urban Midscale, Urban Cores
Blacks Whites Less than HS HS Grad College Grad <$50KUrban Uptowns 25 64 3 16 32 32Urban Midscale 48 43 13 24 16 41Urban Cores 68 26 21 32 20 68
General demographics of PRIZM clusters
Lifestyle and Park Use
Parks or recreation areas were used for 1/3rd of the top recreation activities (walking; cycling/outdoor sports; picnic/bbq/camping; driving)
“Urban cores” more likely to use parks for recreation than urban uptowns
ALL ACTIVITIESn % n % n % n %
Park 74 28.35 81 32.79 116 46.03 317 32.88Elsewhere 187 71.65 166 67.21 136 53.97 647 67.12
Urban Uptowns Urban Midscale Urban Cores All Groups
Lifestyle and Park Use
“Urban Cores” who are predominantly black, lower income, and with less educational attainment more likely to use parks for
recreational activities
Does access to parks make a difference in use?
287 respondents live within ¼ mile 96 respondents live beyond ¼ mile
Proximity makes some difference
Within 1/4 mile of park Beyond 1/4 mile of parkTalk a walk or exercise 3.17 5.11Biking or outdoor sports 1.09 1.16Picnic/bbq/camping 3.17 2.46Drive for pleasure 1.50 2.05
Walk where 0.68 0.50Bike/outdoor sports where 1.64 2.15Picnic/bbq/camping where 0.33 0.46Pleasure drive where 0.20 0.10
Ratio of yes to no for major recreation activities
Ratio of park to elsewhere; where people recreate
Proximity does not make a difference to perception of availability and quality
Respondents asked about the availability and quality of parks and open space (no problem, somewhat of a problem, major problem) in their neighborhood
Little difference between those that lived within ¼ mile and those that live beyond ¼ mile of parks
Lifestyle cluster makes a difference to perceptions of park availability and quality
Availability of Parks and Open Spaces
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
Urban Uptowns Urban Midscale Urban Cores
Not a problem
Somewhat of a problem
Major problem
Lifestyle cluster makes a difference to perceptions of park quality
Quality of parks and open spaces
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
Urban Uptowns Urban Midscale Urban Cores
Per
cen
t
Not
a p
robl
em
Som
ewha
t
Maj
or
Conclusions
1. Baltimore is mid-range in park acreage per thousand population
2. ¼ mile buffer covers 61% of area and 75% of population
3. Access ratio for blacks higher than for whites4. Parks used mainly for biking5. Little difference in recreation patterns between
major PRIZM groups6. Perception of availability and quality differs by
PRIZM group, not by proximity to parks
Limitations
“Global” patterns All parks are equal Responses vs. actual use