Examining privilege and power in US urban parks and open space during the double crises of antiblack racism and COVID-19

Abstract

In this perspective, we argue that creating the positive outcomes socio-ecological researchers and practitioners seek for urban areas requires acknowledging and addressing the interactions of race and systemic racism in parks, open and green spaces. Racial experiences are inseparable from physical landscapes and the processes of designing, managing, or studying them. From COVID-19 to the Black Lives Matter movement and protests, the events of 2020 in the United States underscore how considerations of social justice must extend beyond the conventional distributional focus of environmental justice. It must incorporate an understanding of how the built environment is racialized spatially, but not always readily quantified through the proximity-based measurements frequently used in research and practice. The perspective is organized in three main parts. The first part presents a series of vignettes to frame the ways cities and individuals participate, respond, and interact under COVID-19 with racial segregation as the backdrop. The second part suggests a stepwise approach to building an understanding of racial inequities in socio-ecological systems (SES) research and practice including four entry points: (1) racialized spatial distribution of hazards and amenities, (2) racialized qualities of space, (3) racialized people in space, and (4) racialized creation of space. Finally, the third part proposes actions the SES community can take to enhance our commitment to community recovery, improvement, and thrivability. This perspective cautions practitioners and researchers against opportunistic or quick-fix solutions, and instead challenges our colleagues to be inclusive of disenfranchised voices in shaping socio-ecological goals, now more than ever. The goal of this perspective is to spark engagement with power and privilege in parks and open space using the example of COVID-19 and race in the US.

Urban Park Use During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Are Socially Vulnerable Communities Disproportionately Impacted?

“…Although we controlled for differences across urban areas, we did not directly explore how different public health regulations in the wake of COVID-19 might have influenced park use (Geng et al, 2021). And we did not account for other concurrent events, such as the social justice movement in the US, that might have impacted the way different populations-especially BIPOC communities-utilize public spaces (Hoover and Lim, 2021). Future research could explore all of these relationships.…”

The affective benefits of nature exposure

“…It also includes factors affecting nature experiences among marginalized populations due to exclusionary histories and practices in these spaces (Finney, 2014). It is critical to document and address the racism, discrimination, and lack of safety that individuals experience within urban greenspace and natural areas (Byrne, 2012; Hoover & Lim, 2020; Roberts, 2021), and the negative associations with these spaces that exist for some Black Americans due to collective memories of traumatic events and acts of violence against past generations that have occurred in similar environments (Johnson & Bowker, 2004; Johnson et al., 1997). Also crucially important for this field will be an integration of the deep understandings that come from the interactions and relationships of Indigenous peoples with nature (Díaz et al., 2015; Hatala et al., 2019; Hill et al., 2020).…”

An ecosystem service perspective on urban nature, physical activity, and health

“…Controlling gentrification requires carefully executed social and economic policies, such as community land trusts, rent control, and ample housing construction ( 31 , 32 ). Similarly, physical violence or perceived threat of violence (e.g., driven by prejudice and discrimination from fellow humans) in urban nature can make people feel or be unsafe or unwelcome, and therefore eclipse other potential benefits of time in nature ( 33 , 34 ). As with green gentrification, these harms come not from nature contact itself, but from personal factors (e.g., gender, age, or past experiences) and the interaction of societal dynamics and hierarchies, low-occupancy, and other factors.…”