The Effects of Historical Housing Policies on Resident Exposure to Intra-Urban Heat: A Study of 108 US Urban Areas

Abstract

The increasing intensity, duration, and frequency of heat waves due to human-caused climate change puts historically underserved populations in a heightened state of precarity, as studies observe that vulnerable communities—especially those within urban areas in the United States—are disproportionately exposed to extreme heat. Lacking, however, are insights into fundamental questions about the role of historical housing policies in cauterizing current exposure to climate inequities like intra-urban heat. Here, we explore the relationship between “redlining”, or the historical practice of refusing home loans or insurance to whole neighborhoods based on a racially motivated perception of safety for investment, with present-day summertime intra-urban land surface temperature anomalies. Through a spatial analysis of 108 urban areas in the United States, we ask two questions: (1) how do historically redlined neighborhoods relate to current patterns of intra-urban heat? and (2) do these patterns vary by US Census Bureau region? Our results reveal that 94% of studied areas display consistent city-scale patterns of elevated land surface temperatures in formerly redlined areas relative to their non-redlined neighbors by as much as 7 °C. Regionally, Southeast and Western cities display the greatest differences while Midwest cities display the least. Nationally, land surface temperatures in redlined areas are approximately 2.6 °C warmer than in non-redlined areas. While these trends are partly attributable to the relative preponderance of impervious land cover to tree canopy in these areas, which we also examine, other factors may also be driving these differences. This study reveals that historical housing policies may, in fact, be directly responsible for disproportionate exposure to current heat events.

Assessing equality in neighbourhood availability of quality greenspace in Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom

“…Following Slater's (2013) critique of 'neighbourhood effects' research, it is also imperative that one does not read results such as ours as suggesting that the health, wellbeing and indeed resilience outcomes of deprived neighbourhoods can be enhanced simply by 'improving' the quality of greenspaces or the surrounding built environment. Rather, following exemplary recent work such as Hoffman et al (2020) on redlining practices in the USA and Venter et al (2020) on how Apartheid legacies continued to affect greenspace distribution in South African cities, quantitative and spatial assessments of greenspace inequality ought to be considered a starting point for stimulating discussion on why such disparities occur, and what broader actions in areas such as social policy and urban planning may need to be taken to redress underpinning inequalities. Possible strategies in this regard may explicitly including environmental and climate justice into deprivation indices (Kazmierczak et al 2015;Fairburn, Maier, and Braubach 2016); or applying equity lenses to urban and greenspace planning (Horst, Mcclintock, and Hoey 2017;Cave et al 2020) as a way of understanding how interventions may affect people differently according to demographic or socio-economic characteristics.…”

“…Whilst it has long been recognised that greenspace can offer significant health benefits to urban dwellers (Pearce et al 2016); there is a burgeoning body of evidence to suggest that abundant, good-quality and accessible greenspace may disproportionately accrue to more affluent neighbourhoods (e.g. Hoffman, Shandas, & Pendleton, 2020;Nyelele & Kroll, 2020;Shokry, Connolly, & Anguelovski, 2020;Venter, Shackleton, Van Staden, Selomane, & Masterson, 2020). At the same time, a parallel body of recent research also indicates that greenspace not only supports positive health outcomes, but can facilitate social interaction and build a sense of community (Mears et al 2019;Tidball and Krasny 2011); support environmental learning (Bendt, Barthel, and Colding 2013); and maintain pride, identity and social memory (Barthel et al 2014).…”

“…The COVID-19 pandemic has triggered further scholarly debate on the importance ofyet disparity inaccess to good quality greenspace to support resilience and wellbeing in cities (Honey-Rosés et al 2020). Such research is needed only to identify priority areas where urban greening expansion or improvement may provide the most benefit (Byrne et al 2016), but also to illuminate historical and structural processes which have led to greening and investment accruing to wealthier and more empowered neighbourhoods (Hoffman, Shandas, and Pendleton 2020;Venter et al 2020). Indeed, popular media coverage of the effects of 'redlining'a historical practice in the USA informing the provision of financial and other services to neighbourhoods, closely associated with racial discrimination on greenspace distribution shows how assessing the spatial links between greenspace and deprivation can provide a powerful account of the physical effects of planning and policy decisions (Plumer and Popovic 2020).…”

Environmental justice in urban greening for subtropical Asian cities: the view from Taipei

“…This work has addressed issues such as ‘green gentrification’ forcing poorer residents out of areas where greening interventions are made or leading to urban greening accumulating in more affluent areas (Curran & Hamilton, 2012; Gould & Lewis, 2016); and the potential for ecosystem disservices from urban greening such as pollens and allergens, air pollution trapping and fear of crime to more negatively affect the poor (Escobedo et al ., 2011; Schwarz et al ., 2015). More recently, this literature has turned its attention to the justice implications of greening in the context of planning cities resilient to urban climate change, looking at how existing greenspace distribution may lead to disproportionate climate vulnerability (Byrne et al ., 2016; Hoffman et al ., 2020) and how new green interventions in the name of climate resilience may accrue towards wealthier areas (Shokry et al ., 2020). Yet despite this interest, fewer studies have considered the environmental justice implications of urban greening in Asian city contexts.…”

Effects of trees, gardens, and nature trails on heat index and child health: Design and methods of the Green Schoolyards Project

“…Methodology for Climate and Health SolutionsWe provided baseline ndings from the Green Schoolyards Project as evidence for the utility of the methods in understanding how green features can moderate place-based climate change and health inequities affecting children. Public health researchers and practitioners can use these methods as a model for exploring how joint-use parks with green features can serve as climate and health solutions for divested communities, in the wake of current climate change and health inequities impacting cities(7). Understanding how green features in school parks impact heat index and child health is essential due to projected increases in a) urban temperatures from population-driven development; b) global temperatures from greenhouse gas emissions; and c) the intensity, frequency, and duration of extreme heat events from climate change(57).…”