ABSTRACT
Green infrastructure (GI) refers to trees, rain gardens, rain barrels, and other features that address stormwater management, climate change and other challenges facing many cities. GI is often not equitably distributed across urban landscapes, making its benefits unevenly experienced. Cities have multiple initiatives focused on different types of GI in residential areas, including underserved neighborhoods, although there is potential for GI programs to serve more privileged neighborhoods. The goal of this study was to examine GI program participants and non-participants to better understand who participates in different types of residential GI programs and why. We surveyed residents who had previously participated in Philadelphia’s GI programs as well as those who had not, comparing socio-demographics, knowledge-levels, environmental concerns, outdoor space preferences, motivations and barriers. We found that the GI program participants are on average younger, wealthier, more highly educated, and more likely to be White than our sample of residents who have not participated. Participants in tree programs have different socio-demographics and motivations as compared to those who installed green stormwater infrastructure. Future research should examine strategies to reach neighborhoods with different socioeconomic conditions and built environment characteristics, such as offering features appropriate for small properties with limited plantable space.
Acknowledgements
The Pennsylvania Horticulture Society (PHS) provided administrative support for the survey of non-participants, while both PHS and Philadelphia Parks & Recreation (PPR) shared the contact information needed for the participants survey. Thank you to Glen Abrams, Tim Ifill, Mindy Maslin, and Zach Popkin (PHS) and Erica Smith Fichman, Jack Braunstein and Marisa Wilson (PPR) for providing feedback on the survey instrument and/or earlier versions of this manuscript. We also thank the residents who took the time to complete our survey. The findings and conclusions in this publication are those of the authors and should not be construed to represent any official USDA or US Government determination or policy.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 Small metal planters (approximate footprint of 0.75 sq. m) designed to filter and absorb stormwater flowing from a roof downspout. For more information: https://www.pwdraincheck.org/en/stormwater-tools/metal-downspout-planters.
2 Three renters received GI from more than one program.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Tenley M. Conway
Tenley M. Conway is a Professor in the Department of Geography, Geomatics and Environment at the University of Toronto-Mississauga.
Annie Yachen Yuan
Annie Yachen Yuan completed her Masters degree in the Department of Geography, Geomatics and Environment at the University of Toronto-Mississauga. She is currently a Landowner Outreach Program Assistant at Credit Valley Conservation.
Lara A. Roman
Lara A. Roman is a Research Ecologists with the Philadelphia Field Station of the USDA Forest Service.
Megan Heckert
Megan Heckert is an Associate Professor in the Department of Geography and Planning at West Chester University.
Hamil Pearsall
Hamil Pearsall is an Associate Professor in the Department of Geography and Urban Studies at Temple University.
Stephen T. Dickinson
Stephen T. Dickinson completed his PhD in the Department of Geography and Urban Studies at Temple University. He is currently a Project Manager working on the MESA Neighborhoods Project at Drexel University.
Christina D. Rosan
Christina D. Rosan is an Associate Professor in the Department of Geography and Urban Studies at Temple University.
Camilo Ordóñez
Camilo Ordóñez is a Post-Doctoral Fellow in the Department of Geography, Geomatics and Environment at the University of Toronto-Mississauga.