TY - JOUR
T1 - Urban socioeconomic inequality and biodiversity often converge, but not always
T2 - A global meta-analysis
AU - Kuras, Evan R.
AU - Warren, Paige S.
AU - Zinda, John Aloysius
AU - Aronson, Myla F.J.
AU - Cilliers, Sarel
AU - Goddard, Mark A.
AU - Nilon, Charles H.
AU - Winkler, Richelle
N1 - Funding Information:
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation DEB#1354676/1355151 and a Graduate Research Fellowship under award #1451512 . Any opinion, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. The analytical approach emerged from a workshop held in January 2016 in Pilanesberg, South Africa with participation from the co-authors as well as Pippin Anderson, Jeremiah Asaka, George Middendorf, Dain Palmer, Colin Polsky, Stefan Siebert, Marie du Toit, Kumelachew Yeshitela. In addition, Colin Polsky gave valuable early guidance on the analyses. The following undergraduate students assisted with researching the cities in the cases: Morgan Gray, Lohitha Madhireddy, Jasmine Pierre, and Rahael Rawson. Max Piana assisted with the literature searches, and Alexander Bryan aided in collecting climate data. We thank Charlie Schweik, Jennifer Randall, and two anonymous reviewers for their comments on previous versions of the manuscript.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 The Authors
PY - 2020/6
Y1 - 2020/6
N2 - It is through urban biodiversity that the majority of humans experience nature on a daily basis. As cities expand globally, it is increasingly important to understand how biodiversity is shaped by human decisions, institutions, and environments. In some cities, research has documented convergence between high socioeconomic status (SES) and high species diversity. Yet, other studies show that residents with low SES live amid high biodiversity or that SES and biodiversity appear unrelated. This study examines the conditions linked to varying types of relationships between SES and biodiversity. We identified and coded 84 case studies from 34 cities in which researchers assessed SES-biodiversity relationships. We used fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) to evaluate combinations of study design and city-level conditions that explain why SES-biodiversity relationships vary city to city and between plants and animals. While the majority of cases demonstrated increased biodiversity in higher SES neighborhoods, we identified circumstances in which inequality in biodiversity distribution was ameliorated or negated by disturbance, urban form, social policy, or collective human preference. Overall, our meta-analysis highlights the contributions of residential and municipal decisions in differentially promoting biodiversity along socioeconomic lines, situated within each city's environmental and political context. Through identifying conditions under which access to biodiversity is more or less unequal, we call attention to outstanding research questions and raise prospects for better promoting equitable access to biodiversity.
AB - It is through urban biodiversity that the majority of humans experience nature on a daily basis. As cities expand globally, it is increasingly important to understand how biodiversity is shaped by human decisions, institutions, and environments. In some cities, research has documented convergence between high socioeconomic status (SES) and high species diversity. Yet, other studies show that residents with low SES live amid high biodiversity or that SES and biodiversity appear unrelated. This study examines the conditions linked to varying types of relationships between SES and biodiversity. We identified and coded 84 case studies from 34 cities in which researchers assessed SES-biodiversity relationships. We used fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) to evaluate combinations of study design and city-level conditions that explain why SES-biodiversity relationships vary city to city and between plants and animals. While the majority of cases demonstrated increased biodiversity in higher SES neighborhoods, we identified circumstances in which inequality in biodiversity distribution was ameliorated or negated by disturbance, urban form, social policy, or collective human preference. Overall, our meta-analysis highlights the contributions of residential and municipal decisions in differentially promoting biodiversity along socioeconomic lines, situated within each city's environmental and political context. Through identifying conditions under which access to biodiversity is more or less unequal, we call attention to outstanding research questions and raise prospects for better promoting equitable access to biodiversity.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85082023678&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85082023678&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103799
DO - 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103799
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85082023678
SN - 0169-2046
VL - 198
JO - Landscape and Urban Planning
JF - Landscape and Urban Planning
M1 - 103799
ER -