Barriers Affecting Women’s Access to Urban Green Spaces during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. The COVID Pandemic and UGS
1.2. Barriers Affecting Women’s Access to UGS
1.2.1. Distance and Size of UGS
1.2.2. UGS Quality and Safety
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Phase 1: Quantitative Analysis
2.2. Phases 2 and 3: Qualitative Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Characteristics of Survey Respondents and UGS Use (Access) during the Pandemic
3.2. Association between UGS Use (Access) and Perceived Quality of UGS in the Neighborhood
3.3. Features Associated with UGS Quality
3.4. Qualitative Analysis Results
“I often used the parks nearby, especially to walk with my dog and clear my head for a while. The parks near our building did not close. Sometimes, police officers make sure that there are not too many people and that those who come to the park wear face masks.”(Participant 10, age 33)
“In my neighborhood, their [UGS] use is not allowed at the moment.”(Participant 1, age 20)
“From September [2020] onwards, I started going for a walk because I was desperate to avoid being at home all day, but not to the park because it is closed. I usually just walk around the block.”(Participant 4, age 27)
“I live with someone who is at higher risk of serious complications if they get sick with COVID-19, and I don’t want to expose them.”(Participant 6, age 23)
“I still don’t go out much. I go out much more than a few months ago, but I am still not entirely comfortable since some people don’t wear masks.… The park in front [of the house] is sometimes crowded, and there are new variants.”(Participant 2, age 57)
“I cannot say that a place is of good quality if it is not safe. What is more, I am not particularly eager to go if I consider it unsafe.”(Participant 3, age 45)
“The road leading to the park is ugly; I do not feel safe walking there.”(Participant 6, age 23)
“The neighborhood park is not ugly, it’s okay, but I hardly use it because I only have time in the mornings, and the street is very dark at that time.”(Participant 7, age 28)
“I feel that if the place looks neglected, half abandoned, it is a dangerous area where there may be gangs or drugs are sold since no one is going to monitor or clean the place.”(Participant 12, age 59)
“In the greenway across the street, they put exercise machines, and I use them with my sister and nephews from time to time; they keep us active. It looks nice because they are well cared for and functional.”(Participant 5, age 25)
“I like that I can see my boys play … even if they run, they are in a closed space where they will not be able to run into the street.”(Participant 9, age 35)
“In these months, there have been more assaults. Nothing has happened to me yet, but I watch the news, and the situation looks bad.”(Participant 11, age 33)
“I do not go out to walk my dog at night unless my boyfriend is home, and we go together. It is a deal we have, and that way, I feel calmer and enjoy the walk.”(Participant 8, age 38)
“On the block, there are two policemen who make the rounds on their bicycles and also look after people in the park nearby. We know them well; I greet them whenever I am outside watering my plants.”(Participant 10, age 33)
“It makes me uncomfortable to encounter cops anywhere. A patrol began to guard our neighborhood after COVID-19 to check that everything was fine. It makes me very nervous that cops are around here, especially because sometimes they go into the buildings to use the bathrooms, and I fear they might steal something.”(Participant 9, age 35)
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Vidal, D.G.; Teixeira, C.P.; Dias, R.C.; Fernandes, C.O.; Filho, W.L.; Barros, N.; Maia, R.L. Stay close to urban green spaces: Current evidence on cultural ecosystem services provision. Eur. J. Public Health 2021, 31 (Suppl. S3), 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pouso, S.; Borja, A.; Fleming, L.E.; Gomez-Baggethun, E.; White, M.P.; Uyarra, M.C. Contact with blue-green spaces during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown beneficial for mental health. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 756, 143984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wang, R.; Feng, Z.; Pearce, J.; Liu, Y.; Dong, G. Are greenspace quantity and quality associated with mental health through different mechanisms in Guangzhou, China: A comparison study using street view data. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 290, 117976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Burnett, H.; Olsen, J.R.; Nicholls, N.; Mitchell, R. Change in time spent visiting and experiences of green space following restrictions on movement during the COVID-19 pandemic: A nationally representative cross-sectional study of UK adults. BMJ Open 2021, 11, e044067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lopez, B.; Kennedy, C.; McPhearson, T. Parks are Critical Urban Infrastructure: Perception and Use of Urban Green Spaces in NYC during COVID-19. Preprints 2020, 2029918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grima, N.; Corcoran, W.; Hill-James, C.; Langton, B.; Sommer, H.; Fisher, B. The importance of urban natural areas and urban ecosystem services during the COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0243344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Borkenhagen, D.; Grant, E.; Mazumder, R.; Negami, H.R.; Srikantharajah, J.; Ellard, C. The effect of COVID-19 on parks and greenspace use during the first three months of the pandemic—A survey study. Cities Health 2021, 10, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, C.; Li, C.; Wang, M.; Yang, S.; Wang, L. Environmental justice and park accessibility in urban China: Evidence from Shanghai. Asia Pac. Viewp. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yessoufou, K.; Sithole, M.; Elansary, H.O. Effects of urban green spaces on human perceived health improvements: Provision of green spaces is not enough but how people use them matters. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0239314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wright Wendel, H.E.; Zarger, R.K.; Mihelcic, J.R. Accessibility and usability: Green space preferences, perceptions, and barriers in a rapidly urbanizing city in Latin America. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2012, 107, 272–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rigolon, A.; Browning, M.; Lee, K.; Shin, S. Access to Urban Green Space in Cities of the Global South: A Systematic Literature Review. Urban Sci. 2018, 2, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mazumder, R. Experiential equity: An environmental neuroscientific lens for disparities in urban stress. In Global Reflections on COVID-19 and Urban Inequalities; Bristol University Press: Bristol, UK, 2021; Volume 1, pp. 187–194. [Google Scholar]
- Van Herzele, A.; Wiedemann, T. A monitoring tool for the provision of accessible and attractive urban green spaces. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2003, 63, 109–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pipitone, J.M.; Jović, S. Urban green equity and COVID-19: Effects on park use and sense of belonging in New York City. Urban For. Urban Green. 2021, 65, 127338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bolte, G.; Nanninga, S.; Dandolo, L. Sex/Gender Differences in the Association between Residential Green Space and Self-Rated Health-A Sex/Gender-Focused Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 4818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Curtis, D.S.; Rigolon, A.; Schmalz, D.L.; Brown, B.B. Policy and Environmental Predictors of Park Visits During the First Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Getting out While Staying in. Environ. Behav. 2021, 54, 487–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ode Sang, Å.; Knez, I.; Gunnarsson, B.; Hedblom, M. The effects of naturalness, gender, and age on how urban green space is perceived and used. Urban For. Urban Green. 2016, 18, 268–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manyani, A.; Shackleton, C.M.; Cocks, M.L. Attitudes and preferences towards elements of formal and informal public green spaces in two South African towns. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2021, 214, 104147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sreetheran, M.; van den Bosch, C.C.K. A socio-ecological exploration of fear of crime in urban green spaces—A systematic review. Urban For. Urban Green. 2014, 13, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mayen Huerta, C.; Cafagna, G. Snapshot of the Use of Urban Green Spaces in Mexico City during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 4304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carli, L.L. Women, Gender equality and COVID-19. Gend. Manag. Int. J. 2020, 35, 647–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venter, Z.S.; Barton, D.N.; Gundersen, V.; Figari, H.; Nowell, M. Urban nature in a time of crisis: Recreational use of green space increases during the COVID-19 outbreak in Oslo, Norway. Environ. Res. Lett. 2020, 15, 104075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- da Schio, N.; Phillips, A.; Fransen, K.; Wolff, M.; Haase, D.; Ostoić, S.K.; Živojinović, I.; Vuletić, D.; Derks, J.; Davies, C.; et al. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the use of and attitudes towards urban forests and green spaces: Exploring the instigators of change in Belgium. Urban For. Urban Green. 2021, 65, 127305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Google. Google COVID-19 Community Mobility Reports. 2020. Available online: https://www.google.com/covid19/mobility/ (accessed on 6 April 2022).
- Mayen Huerta, C.; Utomo, A. Evaluating the association between urban green spaces and subjective well-being in Mexico city during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health Place 2021, 70, 102606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Marconi, P.L.; Perelman, P.E.; Salgado, V.G. Green in times of COVID-19: Urban green space relevance during the COVID-19 pandemic in Buenos Aires City. Urban Ecosyst. 2022, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Viezzer, J.; Biondi, D. The influence of urban, socio-economic, and eco-environmental aspects on COVID-19 cases, deaths and mortality: A multi-city case in the Atlantic Forest, Brazil. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 69, 102859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Roe, J.J.; Thompson, C.W.; Aspinall, P.A.; Brewer, M.J.; Duff, E.I.; Miller, D.; Mitchell, R.; Clow, A. Green space and stress: Evidence from cortisol measures in deprived urban communities. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2013, 10, 4086–4103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pereira, R.H.M.; Schwanen, T.; Banister, D. Distributive justice and equity in transportation. Transp. Rev. 2016, 37, 170–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lennon, M. Green space and the compact city: Planning issues for a ‘new normal’. Cities Health 2020, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bell, S.; Montarzino, A.; Travlou, P. Mapping research priorities for green and public urban space in the UK. Urban For. Urban Green. 2007, 6, 103–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richardson, E.A.; Mitchell, R. Gender differences in relationships between urban green space and health in the United Kingdom. Soc. Sci. Med. 2010, 71, 568–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Creswell, J.W.; Fetters, M.D.; Ivankova, N.V. Designing A Mixed Methods Study in Primary Care. Ann. Fam. Med. 2004, 2, 7–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Ivankova, N.V. Implementing Quality Criteria in Designing and Conducting a Sequential QUAN → QUAL Mixed Methods Study of Student Engagement With Learning Applied Research Methods Online. J. Mix. Methods Res. 2013, 8, 25–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Cathain, A.; Murphy, E.; Nicholl, J. Three techniques for integrating data in mixed methods studies. BMJ 2010, 341, c4587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Creswell, J.W.; Tashakkori, A. Developing publishable mixed methods manuscripts. J. Mix. Methods Res. 2007, 1, 107–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ugolini, F.; Massetti, L.; Calaza-Martinez, P.; Carinanos, P.; Dobbs, C.; Ostoic, S.K.; Marin, A.M.; Pearlmutter, D.; Saaroni, H.; Sauliene, I.; et al. Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the use and perceptions of urban green space: An international exploratory study. Urban For. Urban Green. 2020, 56, 126888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ettman, C.K.; Abdalla, S.M.; Cohen, G.H.; Sampson, L.; Vivier, P.M.; Galea, S. Prevalence of Depression Symptoms in US Adults Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic. JAMA Netw. Open 2020, 3, e2019686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dozois, D.J.A. Anxiety and depression in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic: A national survey. Can. Psychol. Psychol. Can. 2021, 62, 136–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heo, S.; Desai, M.U.; Lowe, S.R.; Bell, M.L. Impact of Changed Use of Greenspace during COVID-19 Pandemic on Depression and Anxiety. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 5842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cindrich, S.L.; Lansing, J.E.; Brower, C.S.; McDowell, C.P.; Herring, M.P.; Meyer, J.D. Associations Between Change in Outside Time Pre- and Post-COVID-19 Public Health Restrictions and Mental Health: Brief Research Report. Front. Public Health 2021, 9, 619129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burki, T. The indirect impact of COVID-19 on women. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2020, 20, 904–905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Triguero-Mas, M.; Anguelovski, I.; Cole, H.V.S. Healthy cities after COVID-19 pandemic: The just ecofeminist healthy cities approach. J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2021, 76, 354–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Giordani, R.C.F.; Zanoni da Silva, M.; Muhl, C.; Giolo, S.R. Fear of COVID-19 scale: Assessing fear of the coronavirus pandemic in Brazil. J. Health Psychol. 2022, 27, 901–912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Broche-Perez, Y.; Fernandez-Fleites, Z.; Jimenez-Puig, E.; Fernandez-Castillo, E.; Rodriguez-Martin, B.C. Gender and Fear of COVID-19 in a Cuban Population Sample. Int. J. Ment. Health Addict. 2020, 20, 83–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Marino, R.; Vargas, E.; Flores, M. Impacts of COVID-19 lockdown restrictions on housing and public space use and adaptation: Urban proximity, public health, and vulnerability in three Latin American cities. Taylor Francis 2021, 22, 363. [Google Scholar]
- Hanzl, M. Urban forms and green infrastructure—The implications for public health during the COVID-19 pandemic. Cities Health 2020, 10, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Noël, C.; Rodriguez-Loureiro, L.; Vanroelen, C.; Gadeyne, S. Perceived Health Impact and Usage of Public Green Spaces in Brussels’ Metropolitan Area During the COVID-19 Epidemic. Front. Sustain. Cities 2021, 3, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Slater, S.J.; Christiana, R.W.; Gustat, J. Recommendations for Keeping Parks and Green Space Accessible for Mental and Physical Health During COVID-19 and Other Pandemics. Prev. Chronic Dis. 2020, 17, E59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Larson, L.R.; Mullenbach, L.E.; Browning, M.; Rigolon, A.; Thomsen, J.; Metcalf, E.C.; Reigner, N.P.; Sharaievska, I.; McAnirlin, O.; D’Antonio, A.; et al. Greenspace and park use associated with less emotional distress among college students in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. Environ. Res. 2022, 204, 112367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Douglas, M.; Katikireddi, S.V.; Taulbut, M.; McKee, M.; McCartney, G. Mitigating the wider health effects of covid-19 pandemic response. BMJ 2020, 369, m1557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chu, D.K.; Akl, E.A.; Duda, S.; Solo, K.; Yaacoub, S.; Schunemann, H.J.; on behalf of the COVID-19 Systematic Urgent Review Group Effort (SURGE) study authors. Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2020, 395, 1973–1987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Freeman, S.; Eykelbosh, A. COVID-19 and outdoor safety: Considerations for use of outdoor recreational spaces. Natl. Collab. Cent. Environ. Health 2020, 829, 1–15. [Google Scholar]
- Reyes-Riveros, R.; Altamirano, A.; De La Barrera, F.; Rozas-Vásquez, D.; Vieli, L.; Meli, P. Linking public urban green spaces and human well-being: A systematic review. Urban For. Urban Green. 2021, 61, 127105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schipperijn, J.; Ekholm, O.; Stigsdotter, U.K.; Toftager, M.; Bentsen, P.; Kamper-Jørgensen, F.; Randrup, T.B. Factors influencing the use of green space: Results from a Danish national representative survey. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2010, 95, 130–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Basu, S.; Nagendra, H. Perceptions of park visitors on access to urban parks and benefits of green spaces. Urban For. Urban Green. 2021, 57, 126959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Derose, K.P.; Han, B.; Williamson, S.; Cohen, D.A.; Corporation, R. Racial-Ethnic Variation in Park Use and Physical Activity in the City of Los Angeles. J. Urban Health 2015, 92, 1011–1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van den Berg, M.; Wendel-Vos, W.; van Poppel, M.; Kemper, H.; van Mechelen, W.; Maas, J. Health benefits of green spaces in the living environment: A systematic review of epidemiological studies. Urban For. Urban Green. 2015, 14, 806–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hunter, R.F.; Christian, H.; Veitch, J.; Astell-Burt, T.; Hipp, J.A.; Schipperijn, J. The impact of interventions to promote physical activity in urban green space: A systematic review and recommendations for future research. Soc. Sci. Med. 2015, 124, 246–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Vos, S.; Bijnens, E.M.; Renaers, E.; Croons, H.; Van Der Stukken, C.; Martens, D.S.; Plusquin, M.; Nawrot, T.S. Residential green space is associated with a buffering effect on stress responses during the COVID-19 pandemic in mothers of young children, a prospective study. Environ. Res 2022, 208, 112603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wood, L.; Hooper, P.; Foster, S.; Bull, F. Public green spaces and positive mental health—Investigating the relationship between access, quantity and types of parks and mental wellbeing. Health Place 2017, 48, 63–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sugiyama, T.; Gunn, L.D.; Christian, H.; Francis, J.; Foster, S.; Hooper, P.; Owen, N.; Giles-Corti, B. Quality of Public Open Spaces and Recreational Walking. Am. J. Public Health 2015, 105, 2490–2495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rojas, C.; Páez, A.; Barbosa, O.; Carrasco, J. Accessibility to urban green spaces in Chilean cities using adaptive thresholds. J. Transp. Geogr. 2016, 57, 227–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jato-Espino, D.; Moscardo, V.; Vallina Rodriguez, A.; Lazaro, E. Spatial statistical analysis of the relationship between self-reported mental health during the COVID-19 lockdown and closeness to green infrastructure. Urban For. Urban Green. 2022, 68, 127457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Adinolfi, C.; Suárez-Cáceres, G.P.; Cariñanos, P. Relation between visitors’ behaviour and characteristics of green spaces in the city of Granada, south-eastern Spain. Urban For. Urban Green. 2014, 13, 534–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bell, S.L.; Phoenix, C.; Lovell, R.; Wheeler, B.W. Green space, health and wellbeing: Making space for individual agency. Health Place 2014, 30, 287–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Lee, A.C.; Jordan, H.C.; Horsley, J. Value of urban green spaces in promoting healthy living and wellbeing: Prospects for planning. Risk Manag. Healthc. Policy 2015, 8, 131–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Williams, T.G.; Logan, T.M.; Zuo, C.T.; Liberman, K.D.; Guikema, S.D. Parks and safety: A comparative study of green space access and inequity in five US cities. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2020, 201, 103841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Talal, M.L.; Santelmann, M.V. Visitor access, use, and desired improvements in urban parks. Urban For. Urban Green. 2021, 63, 127216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Braçe, O.; Garrido-Cumbrera, M.; Correa-Fernández, J. Gender differences in the perceptions of green spaces characteristics. Soc. Sci. Q. 2021, 102, 2640–2648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Knapp, M.; Gustat, J.; Darensbourg, R.; Myers, L.; Johnson, C. The Relationships between Park Quality, Park Usage, and Levels of Physical Activity in Low-Income, African American Neighborhoods. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 16, 85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Valentine, G. The Geography of Women’s Fear. Area 1989, 21, 385–390. [Google Scholar]
- Wesely, J.K.; Gaarder, E. The Gendered “Nature” of the Urban Outdoors. Gend. Soc. 2016, 18, 645–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Navarrete-Hernandez, P.; Vetro, A.; Concha, P. Building safer public spaces: Exploring gender difference in the perception of safety in public space through urban design interventions. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2021, 214, 104180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dunckel Graglia, A. Finding mobility: Women negotiating fear and violence in Mexico City’s public transit system. Gend. Place Cult. 2015, 23, 624–640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, A.; Nayar, K.R. COVID 19 and its mental health consequences. J. Ment. Health 2021, 30, 1–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spotswood, E.N.; Benjamin, M.; Stoneburner, L.; Wheeler, M.M.; Beller, E.E.; Balk, D.; McPhearson, T.; Kuo, M.; McDonald, R.I. Nature inequity and higher COVID-19 case rates in less-green neighbourhoods in the United States. Nat. Sustain. 2021, 4, 1092–1098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Justice, J. The bureaucratic context of international health: A social scientist’s view. Soc. Sci. Med. 1987, 25, 1301–1306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mao, J. Social media for learning: A mixed methods study on high school students’ technology affordances and perspectives. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2014, 33, 213–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burns, A. Mixed Methods. In Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics: A Practical Introduction; Heigham, J., Croker, R.A., Eds.; Palgrave Macmillan UK: London, UK, 2009; pp. 135–161. [Google Scholar]
- Sargeant, J. Qualitative research part II: Participants, analysis, and quality assurance. J. Grad. Med. Educ. 2012, 4, 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Palinkas, L.A.; Horwitz, S.M.; Green, C.A.; Wisdom, J.P.; Duan, N.; Hoagwood, K. Purposeful Sampling for Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis in Mixed Method Implementation Research. Adm. Policy Ment. Health 2015, 42, 533–544. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- McCormack, G.R.; Petersen, J.; Naish, C.; Ghoneim, D.; Doyle-Baker, P.K. Neighbourhood environment facilitators and barriers to outdoor activity during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada: A qualitative study. Cities Health 2022, 10, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Volenec, Z.M.; Abraham, J.O.; Becker, A.D.; Dobson, A.P. Public parks and the pandemic: How park usage has been affected by COVID-19 policies. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0251799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wilson, T.D. Violence against Women in Latin America. Lat. Am. Perspect. 2013, 41, 3–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salahub, J.E.; Gottsbacher, M.; De Boer, J. Social Theories of Urban Violence in the Global South: Towards safe and Inclusive Cities; Routledge: London, UK, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Sanchez, O.R.; Vale, D.B.; Rodrigues, L.; Surita, F.G. Violence against women during the COVID-19 pandemic: An integrative review. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obs. 2020, 151, 180–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shoari, N.; Ezzati, M.; Baumgartner, J.; Malacarne, D.; Fecht, D. Accessibility and allocation of public parks and gardens in England and Wales: A COVID-19 social distancing perspective. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0241102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hamstead, Z.A.; Fisher, D.; Ilieva, R.T.; Wood, S.A.; McPhearson, T.; Kremer, P. Geolocated social media as a rapid indicator of park visitation and equitable park access. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2018, 72, 38–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Young, A.F.; Russell, A.; Powers, J.R. The sense of belonging to a neighbourhood: Can it be measured and is it related to health and well being in older women? Soc. Sci. Med. 2004, 59, 2627–2637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jennings, V.; Bamkole, O. The Relationship between Social Cohesion and Urban Green Space: An Avenue for Health Promotion. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Han, Z.; Sun, I.Y.; Hu, R. Social trust, neighborhood cohesion, and public trust in the police in China. J. Polic. Int. J. Police Strateg. Manag. 2017, 40, 380–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martínez-Ferrer, B.; Vera, J.A.; Musitu, G.; Montero-Montero, D. Trust in Police and Fear of Crime Among Young People from a Gender Perspective: The Case of Mexico. Violence Gend. 2018, 5, 226–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chakravarty, S.; Fonseca, M.A. The effect of social fragmentation on public good provision: An experimental study. J. Behav. Exp. Econ. 2014, 53, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Beauvais, C.; Jenson, J. Social Cohesion: Updating the State of the Research; CPRN: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 2002; Volume 62. [Google Scholar]
- Viswanath, K.; Mehrotra, S.T. ‘Shall we go out?’ Women’s safety in public spaces in delhi. Econ. Polit. Wkly. 2007, 42, 1542–1548. [Google Scholar]
- Dammert, L. Fear and Crime in Latin America; Routledge: London, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Queirós, A.; Faria, D.; Almeida, F. Strengths and limitations of qualitative and quantitative research methods. Eur. J. Educ. Stud. 2017, 3, 93131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jorgensen, A.; Hitchmough, J.; Calvert, T. Woodland spaces and edges: Their impact on perception of safety and preference. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2002, 60, 135–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Young, I.M. CHAPTER 8. City Life and Difference. In Justice and the Politics of Difference; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2012; pp. 226–256. [Google Scholar]
Age Group | n | % |
---|---|---|
18–24 | 412 | 33.1% |
25–29 | 154 | 12.4% |
30–34 | 109 | 8.8% |
35–39 | 88 | 7.1% |
40–44 | 84 | 6.7% |
45–49 | 76 | 6.1% |
50–54 | 94 | 7.6% |
55–59 | 86 | 6.9% |
60–64 | 77 | 6.2% |
65+ | 63 | 5.1% |
# of other people living in the house | ||
Living alone | 44 | 3.5% |
Living with 1 person | 242 | 19.4% |
Living with 2 people | 268 | 21.5% |
Living with 3 people | 297 | 23.9% |
Living with 4 people | 180 | 14.5% |
Living with 5 or more | 214 | 17.2% |
Socio-economic status | ||
Low-income | 507 | 40.7% |
Middle-income | 284 | 22.8% |
High-income | 442 | 35.5% |
Education | ||
High school or less | 201 | 16.1% |
Technical degree | 128 | 10.3% |
Undergraduate | 615 | 49.4% |
Graduate school | 298 | 23.9% |
M1 | M2 | M3 | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
OR | p | 95% CI | OR | p | 95% CI | OR | p | 95% CI | ||||
Quality of UGS in the neighborhood | ||||||||||||
Not good | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||
Good | 1.62 | 0.00 | *** | (1.30–2.04) | 1.59 | 0.00 | *** | (1.26–2.00) | 1.44 | 0.00 | *** | (1.13–1.83) |
Age group | ||||||||||||
18–24 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||
25–34 | 0.97 | 0.87 | (0.70–1.34) | 1.00 | 1.00 | (0.72–1.39) | ||||||
35–44 | 1.31 | 0.16 | (0.90–1.93) | 1.30 | 0.19 | (0.88–1.91) | ||||||
45–54 | 1.23 | 0.30 | (0.84–1.80) | 1.24 | 0.28 | (0.84–1.83) | ||||||
55–64 | 1.12 | 0.59 | (0.75–1.66) | 1.07 | 0.75 | (0.71–1.60) | ||||||
65+ | 0.86 | 0.61 | (0.49–1.53) | 0.78 | 0.40 | (0.43–1.40) | ||||||
Living arrangement | ||||||||||||
Living alone | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||
Living with 1 person | 1.45 | 0.27 | (0.75–2.82) | 1.51 | 0.23 | (0.77–2.95) | ||||||
Living with more than 1 person | 2.04 | 0.03 | ** | (1.08–3.86) | 2.05 | 0.03 | ** | (1.08–3.89) | ||||
Income group | ||||||||||||
Low-income | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||
Middle-income | 0.70 | 0.02 | ** | (0.52–0.96) | 0.67 | 0.01 | *** | (0.49–0.91) | ||||
High-income | 0.66 | 0.01 | *** | (0.49–0.88) | 0.61 | 0.00 | *** | (0.45–0.82) | ||||
Quiet neighborhood | ||||||||||||
No | 1 | |||||||||||
Yes | 1.42 | 0.04 | ** | (1.03–2.16) | ||||||||
Enough UGS in the neighborhood | ||||||||||||
Strongly disagree | 1 | |||||||||||
Disagree | 1.20 | 0.25 | (0.88–1.65) | |||||||||
Neither agree nor disagree | 1.22 | 0.24 | (0.87–1.72) | |||||||||
Agree | 1.48 | 0.06 | * | (0.99–2.21) | ||||||||
Strongly agree | 1.61 | 0.03 | ** | (1.04–2.49) |
Predictors | OR | p | 95% CI | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Clean and well-maintained | |||||
No | 1 | ||||
Yes | 3.79409 | 0.000 | *** | 2.032134 | 7.083748 |
Good lighting | |||||
No | 1 | ||||
Yes | 4.386839 | 0.000 | *** | 2.672711 | 7.200311 |
Presence of walls | |||||
No | 1 | ||||
Yes | 2.85302 | 0.000 | *** | 2.137672 | 3.80775 |
Low noise | |||||
No | 1 | ||||
Yes | 1.316099 | 0.225 | 0.844746 | 2.050459 | |
Presence of markets | |||||
No | 1 | ||||
Yes | 0.74423 | 0.106 | 0.520042 | 1.065064 | |
Toilets | |||||
No | 1 | ||||
Yes | 1.225118 | 0.173 | 0.91493 | 1.64047 | |
Size (ample) | |||||
No | 1 | ||||
Yes | 1.264952 | 0.269 | 0.833822 | 1.919001 | |
Presence of events | |||||
No | 1 | ||||
Yes | 0.989428 | 0.948 | 0.716886 | 1.365583 | |
Presence of police | |||||
No | 1 | ||||
Yes | 0.86368 | 0.310 | 0.65088 | 1.146053 | |
Playgrounds or sports facilities | |||||
No | 1 | ||||
Yes | 5.078593 | 0.000 | *** | 3.824721 | 6.743527 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Mayen Huerta, C.; Utomo, A. Barriers Affecting Women’s Access to Urban Green Spaces during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Land 2022, 11, 560. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11040560
Mayen Huerta C, Utomo A. Barriers Affecting Women’s Access to Urban Green Spaces during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Land. 2022; 11(4):560. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11040560
Chicago/Turabian StyleMayen Huerta, Carolina, and Ariane Utomo. 2022. "Barriers Affecting Women’s Access to Urban Green Spaces during the COVID-19 Pandemic" Land 11, no. 4: 560. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11040560
APA StyleMayen Huerta, C., & Utomo, A. (2022). Barriers Affecting Women’s Access to Urban Green Spaces during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Land, 11(4), 560. https://doi.org/10.3390/land11040560