Transcription

*Transcipt was generated automatically, its accuracy may vary.

0:12

Welcome to the Feminist Park podcast.

I'm Kwame.

And I'm Leilani, it's great to be kicking off this journey with you all today.

Yeah, we're diving into work that's really closely tied to the vision behind the Feminist Park project, which was founded by Hussain Stuck.

That project's goal is pretty ambitious, isn't it?

0:28

Imagining these truly equitable public spaces, starting with the idea for an intersectional feminist park right here in Berlin.

Exactly.

And this podcast, well, it's kind of an extension of that.

We're going to be digging into the academic research that, you know, supports and informs that kind of vision.

0:46

We'll be taking these dense, sometimes quite academic papers and really pulling out the core and insights.

And looking at them through specific lenses.

Things like environmental justice, intersectionality, anti colonial thought, queer theory.

All the stuff that helps us think critically about space.

1:03

Have you ever paused to truly consider the green spaces in your city?

Not just if they're there, but if they're actually working for you, for your neighbors, for, well, everyone in your community.

It's a really important question.

Yeah, and today we're diving deep into exactly that, exploring the complex, often unseen interplay between the natural world and our bustling urban lives.

1:26

It's definitely a critical inquiry and it's something urban planners, environmental scientists, they're all looking at this very urgently worldwide.

So this deep dive, it's really all about how we identify, you know, map and assess those incredible benefits we get from nature.

Ecosystem services, right?

1:42

Ecosystem services.

Exactly.

And the urban green spaces, the parks, the forest, the riverbanks that provide them, We're looking at it from both sides, what nature supplies.

And what we as people, as society, actually demand or need.

Right.

But, and this is crucial, it's not just about knowing what nature offers and what we need.

2:00

We're digging deeper.

Are those benefits distributed fairly across all our diverse communities?

That's the real kicker.

Exactly.

Our mission today is kind of to cut through that simple idea that green is good, which, OK, it generally is, but we want to get to a far more nuanced understanding of how our urban environments truly function, the hidden dynamics.

2:21

We're drawing insights from two really fascinating academic studies.

First up, a look at these ecosystem service bundles in the vibrant Barcelona metropolitan region.

A great case study.

And then we'll shift to Berlin for a critical look at something called Socio environmental justice in its urban green spaces.

2:39

Our goal here is to give you that shortcut you know, to being truly well informed, packed with maybe some surprising facts, and hopefully enough thought provoking moments to keep you hooked.

Let's unearth some hidden truths.

OK.

So with these foundational concepts sort of in our toolkit, now we're ready to zoom in on our first case study, Barcelona, this vibrant complex tapestry and how its urban landscapes deliver these ecosystem services.

3:04

To really grasp what's happening there, we need to start with that core concept you mentioned ecosystem service or ES bundles.

So what exactly are we talking about when we refer to an ES bundle?

OK, at its heart, an ES bundle is simply a set of associated ecosystem services.

3:20

Those benefits that consistently appear together, you find them popping up together across time or across space.

OK, so like a package deal from nature?

That's a perfect way to think about it.

A carefully curated package deal and this integrated approach, looking at the bundle, it doesn't just give us a clearer picture, it's kind of the secret sauce really to understanding if our natural spaces are working with each other or maybe against each other.

3:46

Revealing synergies and trade-offs, you mean?

Exactly.

Critical synergies where different services positively reinforce each other and those hidden trade-offs we're providing one service might invertibly impact another negatively.

It just allows for a much more holistic, a more effective assessment of how a landscape truly functions.

4:04

That makes perfect sense.

And for our listeners, it's probably vital to clarify some related terms.

They're really foundational here.

When we talk about ES supply, ES demand, ES mismatches and green infrastructure, what precisely do we mean?

Excellent point.

Yeah, let's nail these down.

4:20

South ES supply that refers to the ecosystems inherit capacity, its potential to deliver services.

Imagine like a dense forest's ability to filter vast amounts of air, or a fertile fields potential to grow crops.

It's what the natural system can offer.

4:36

OK, the potential.

Then you have ES demand.

That's the amount of an ecosystem service that's actually required, or maybe just desired by society.

And this isn't just basic survival stuff.

It includes our desire for, say, clean air in a busy city or having accessible green spaces nearby for recreation, for mental well-being.

4:55

So if those two, the supply and the demand aren't quite lining up, that's where we start seeing problems, right?

Precisely.

That's where ES mismatches come in.

They're the differences, whether in quality or quantity, between that supply and demand.

So if a city boasts a huge population with a high demand for, let's say, cool filtered air in summer, but the local ecosystems, the trees and parks have a low capacity to provide it, well, that's a significant mismatch, something planners need to address.

5:21

Got it.

And the last one, green infrastructure.

Right Green infrastructure or GI.

Think of this as a strategically planned network.

It includes natural and semi natural areas, parks, green roofs, wetlands, connected corridors, but it's specifically designed and managed to deliver a wide range of these ecosystem services.

5:41

So it's intentional, not just accidental nature.

Very intentional.

It's about integrating and nurturing nature's contributions right into our urban fabric, our towns and cities, making sure these services are sustained and, crucially, accessible.

5:56

OK, now that we have these foundational concepts really clear, let's zoom in on our first case study, the Barcelona Metropolitan region, the BMR.

What made this area such a compelling, such an informative of testing ground for this kind of research?

Well, the Barcelona metropolitan region, it's nestled there in northeast Spain, and it's just an incredibly rich and complex social ecological system.

6:18

That complexity makes it an ideal laboratory for studying these dynamics.

I mean it stretches over 3000 square kilometers.

That's big.

It is.

And it's home to more than 5 million people spread across nearly 165 interconnected municipalities.

And that includes the incredibly dense urban core of Barcelona city itself, but also lots of adjacent middle sized cities that kind of form this continuous urban tapestry.

6:43

So it's not just one single sprawling city, but a whole network of diverse, interconnected communities, and each one has its own unique relationship with the nature around it.

Exactly what about its physical geography?

What does the landscape itself bring to the table?

6:59

Geographically, it's remarkably diverse.

It really offers a microcosm of different landscapes.

You've got 2 significant mountain ranges, the Catalan Coastal Range and the Catalan Pre Coastal Range, running parallel to the Mediterranean Sea.

These elevated areas, they're largely covered by classic Mediterranean forests, shrub land, grassland, and these are natural powerhouses for providing various ecosystem services.

7:21

The regulating ones like clean air and water.

Yes, precisely, and recreation too.

Then as you move towards the coast and maybe more into the interior, you hit these planes dominated by really intense urban and agricultural land uses.

Think of iconic areas like the Yobregat River delta.

7:39

Heavily urbanized now, but it's still retains pockets of invaluable agricultural land and wetlands or the Pentadase region.

Famous for its wine.

World renowned for its wine growing.

Yeah.

So you have this real mix.

That sounds like a perfect blend.

Really.

Varied land uses, different ecological zones, bustling cityscapes, productive farm lands, wild mountains.

7:59

How does the existing planning context influence this complex system?

Well, the BMR's development isn't haphazard.

It's thoughtfully guided by some pretty sophisticated strategic planning instruments.

Key among these are the General Territorial Plan of Catalonia and the Territorial Metropolitan Plan of Barcelona.

8:15

These plans carefully delineate open areas, which make up about 74% of the BMI.

The majority, then.

The vast majority, yeah, and urban land, which accounts for the remaining 26%.

And these open areas are often highly protected, either for their ecological value or their agricultural importance.

8:33

It reflects A conscious, sustained effort over time to manage land use for multiple benefits.

So Spanish complexity.

Exactly this blend of dense urbanization, rich agricultural lands, and protected natural areas all stretched along a really pronounced urban rural gradient.

8:50

It just makes Barcelona a uniquely valuable place to examine how ecosystem services are spatially distributed and the myriad demands placed upon them by such a large, diverse population.

It really is a living laboratory of human nature interaction.

OK.

So with such a diverse landscape and millions of people, the study obviously couldn't analyze every single ecosystem service out there.

9:10

Which 5 did they focus on for the Barcelona study?

And why were these particular services so relevant to that region?

Right, they had to be strategic.

They selected five key ecosystem services that were particularly relevant to the BMR's unique context.

First, food provision.

9:27

Pretty fundamental, of course, crucial for sustaining a large and growing population.

They measure this using crop and livestock production data.

Makes sense?

What else?

Second, global climate regulation, really vital for addressing the city's carbon footprint and contributing to broader climate goals.

Third, air purification, a service in exceptionally high demand in dense urban areas where pollution is often a major concern.

9:50

Definitely feel that one in cities. 4th, erosion control.

This is especially relevant given Barcelona's mountainous and hilly in a terrain where soil stability is a constant consideration.

And finally #5 outdoor recreation.

Fundamentally important for promoting healthy urban lifestyles, offering essential opportunities for physical activity, mental restoration, social interaction, all that good stuff.

10:12

Got it.

Food, climate, air, erosion, recreation.

A solid mix.

But how did the researchers actually manage to quantify something as complex as, say, air purification supply or outdoor recreation demand across such a large and varied region?

10:30

That sounds tricky.

It is tricky.

They employed a really meticulous data-driven approach.

They selected and quantified indicators for both supply and demand across all 164 municipalities.

The indicators were chosen based on a few criteria, Their scientific relevance to the BMR.

10:46

Their alignment with CICS.

That's the common international classification of ecosystem services.

Exactly.

It provides a kind of universal language for categorizing nature's benefits.

And crucially, they had to have available reliable data.

They used a combination of direct measurements where possible, but also some clever proxy data.

11:02

Proxy data like stand insurance.

Kind of.

For instance, population density served as a practical proxy for food demand.

Makes sense.

More people, more food needed or for air purification demand.

They looked at concentrations of pollutants like No2 in the air.

Higher pollution indicates higher demand for clean air.

11:18

Yeah, this systematic approach allowed them to construct a remarkably detailed spatial map showing where these services are generated, the supply, and where they are most critically needed, the demand.

OK, let's unpack those spatial patterns then.

What did the mapping reveal about where these services are supplied?

11:37

What the land itself actually offers in Barcelona.

The findings were very clear.

All the ES supply indicators were significantly clustered.

They weren't just randomly scattered across the landscape.

Definitely not.

When we looked at the regulating services, climate regulation, air purification, erosion control and also outdoor recreation, the highest supply was consistently found in those mountainous forested areas.

11:59

With the ranges you mentioned.

Exactly.

Think of the Mancini massive or the Culcerola massive right near the city.

These natural powerhouses are really doing the heavy lifting on those fronts.

They act as vital green lungs and recreational hubs for the whole region.

And what about food, the region's contribution to feeding its population?

12:17

Well, crop production, as you'd probably expect, was highest in the flat, fertile agricultural areas.

Places like the Panetti's wine making region and the Dobregat River delta really stood out.

Livestock production interestingly showed a distinct clustering and lower density more rural hinterland plains further out.

12:35

So a separation of functions almost.

To some extent, yes.

And when you consider the overall picture, the municipalities that provided a high diversity and quantity of ecosystem services with the study called multifunctional municipalities.

They were concentrated in the north and northeast of the BMR.

12:52

Conversely, the highly urbanized areas and those predominantly dedicated to intensive agriculture show the lowest aggregated ES supply it.

Paints A vivid picture the Wilder, more natural areas primarily provide.

While the urbanized zones primarily consume as a recurring theme.

13:09

OK, so that's the supply side, what nature is offering.

Now for the other half of the equation.

What did the study find about the spatial patterns of demand?

What society actually needs and desires?

Again, all the ES demand indicators were also especially clustered.

No surprises there.

13:25

Perhaps the highest demand for food, climate regulation, air purification, outdoor recreation was overwhelmingly concentrated right in the urban core.

Barcelona city proper and its immediate neighbors.

Exactly.

Barcelona itself and its adjacent densely populated municipalities.

13:42

This demand then consistently decreased as you moved further outwards from the city center.

A very clear gradient.

That makes intuitive sense.

More people packed together, more demand for life sustaining services and things that improve quality of life.

But you mentioned erosion control was an exception earlier.

13:58

It is indeed an interesting outlier.

Demand for erosion control was highest in those naturally hilly and mountainous areas, so it isn't necessarily tied directly to population density in the same way, but rather to the topographical vulnerability of the landscape itself.

Where the slopes are steep, the demand for control is high, regardless of how many people live right there.

14:17

Right.

The risk is inherent to the place.

Precisely.

Overall, though, the urban core consistently showed the highest aggregated ES demand, the sheer volume of need, and also the highest diversity of demands.

These areas typically required a simultaneous provision of four or five different ecosystem services.

14:33

Just intense pressure.

Whereas the less populated north and West.

With their high supply naturally exhibited, the lowest aggregated demand really creates this fascinating tension and almost inverse relationship between supply and demand as you move across that urban rural gradient.

And this is where the real complexity emerges, isn't it?

14:52

The researchers took all this intricate supply and demand data and performed a cluster analysis.

They grouped the nearly 165 municipalities into 5 distinct ES supply demand bundle types.

This is essentially carving up the BMR into areas with similar natural offerings and human needs.

15:08

Can you walk us through these five distinct types?

Absolutely.

This cluster analysis is really pivotal for understanding the nuanced interactions across the entire region.

It helps make sense of that complexity.

The first bundle, they aptly named it Urbancore.

It comprised just 7 municipalities, including Barcelona City itself.

15:27

These areas are defined by dense urbanization, exceptionally high population densities.

Unsurprisingly, they consistently show the lowest ES supply across almost all indicators.

Just not much nature left to provide.

But the highest demand?

Exactly simultaneously exhibiting the highest ES demand for nearly every service except erosion control.

15:46

As we noted, this bundle starkly reveals that overall ecosystem service mismatch extremely high demand coupled with critically low local supply.

So the central hub is undeniably a net consumer.

It's relying heavily on the offerings, the services coming from other areas.

16:01

What's the next bundle as we move outwards?

OK, moving out from that dense core, we encounter suburban nodes.

This is a group of 23 municipalities.

These areas feature relevant populations, significant urbanized land, but maybe not quite as intense as the core.

16:18

They're typically situated in close proximity to the urban core.

They exhibited slightly higher ES supply than the pure urban core, which makes sense, but more green space mixed in and moderate overall ES demand.

However, a key finding here was a substantially higher demand specifically for air purification.

16:37

Interesting.

Why might that be?

It could indicate particular environmental pressures in these transitional zones, maybe heavy commuter traffic corridors, industrial pockets, or just residents being more aware or sensitive to air quality issues right on the edge of the main city.

OK.

And what about the largest group?

16:52

You said there was one that covered most municipalities.

That would be the Perry Urban Green Bundle.

This was the largest group, encompassing 69 municipalities, some quite dominant.

Geographically, this is a truly mixed landscape.

It's characterized by a significant share of urban land.

17:07

People live there, but crucially, also substantial forests, shrub land and agricultural areas mixed in a real mosaic.

Some more balanced.

In terms of land cover, yes.

In terms of services, they showed low supply of food provision and global climate regulation.

Maybe not enough large scale agriculture or forests, but moderate to high supply of air purification, erosion control and outdoor recreation, likely from those mixed green patches.

17:33

Demands in these areas were quite varied, too low for some services but moderate for air purification and erosion control.

It reflects their heterogeneous character.

They're both residential areas and working landscapes.

And then we get to the more specialized, less densely populated areas, I imagine further out.

17:49

Exactly.

The 4th type is Croplin.

This comprised 29 municipalities, primarily agricultural areas, epitomized by that Panetti's winemaking region we talked about.

As you anticipate, these areas had low to moderate values for all the ES indicators except one crop production, which was exceptionally high.

18:07

That's their main job functionally.

And demand.

Low to moderate ES demand, it fits their less populated agrarian nature focused primarily on agricultural output rather than dense human settlement.

OK.

And finally, the most natural dominated areas, the true Wilder spaces.

18:23

That's the forest land bundle.

This consisted of 36 inland municipalities predominantly covered by woodland with only small scattered within.

This group showcased by far the highest supply for regulating services, climate, air erosion and also for outdoor recreation.

18:38

Just huge capacity there.

But low demand locally.

Lowest, yes.

Demand for most indicators, Yes, with a notable exception, again, of erosion control, where demand was highest because of those steep forested slopes needing stabilization.

What's truly fascinating here, though, is that this forest land bundle strikingly mirrors the urban core bundle, but in reverse.

19:00

How so?

High supply where demand is often low for most services apart from food.

It just underscores that geographical separation between where the natural bounty is generated and where the bulk of human need resides.

So these distinct urban rural types lead to an interesting interpretation.

19:16

The study mentions the land sharing versus land sparing models.

This isn't just academic jargon, is it?

It sounds like a fundamental fork in the road for urban planners.

Are we concentrating human impact to spare nature elsewhere, or are we trying to blend the two?

It's absolutely a fundamental choice, or maybe a spectrum of choices in strategic land use planning.

19:36

Think of it this way, the land sparing model is like putting all your eggs in one basket, but making that basket really good.

And it's one specific job, so you have an intensively farmed area dedicated almost purely to food production, or a dedicated, highly protected forest primarily for conservation and regulating services.

19:56

Specialization.

Right.

The urban core, the cropland bundle and the forest land bundle largely follow this model.

They were dominated by 1 predominant land cover and function, optimizing for specific benefits.

The urban core is optimized for people, cropland for food, forest land for those natural regulating and recreational services.

20:14

OK, I see.

And land sharing offers a different strategy then.

Yes, it's not quite the opposite, but it's a complementary approach.

Land sharing advocates for integrating human activities and conservation across the same landscape.

It seeks multi functionality within a given area.

Our suburban nodes and especially the peri urban green areas align more with this land sharing approach.

20:35

They consists of a mix of land covers, a patchwork of Urban Development, agriculture, natural patches, parks.

They provide a wider range of services, albeit often at a lower intensity per unit of land compared to those highly specialized spared areas.

So understanding which model A bundle aligns with helps planners think about the most appropriate strategies for each area moving beyond A1 size fits all plan.

20:57

Precisely, it allows for much more tailored and potentially effective interventions acknowledging the inherent character of different parts of the region.

This research also dug into the relationships between these ecosystem services, revealing both beneficial synergies, where they help each other, and challenging trade-offs where they conflict.

21:15

What did the correlations in the data and that powerful statistical technique, principal component analysis, tell us about how these services interact across the Barcelona landscape?

Yeah.

The data revealed some very clear and important patterns, some expected, some maybe less.

So we observed strong positive correlations among the supply of regulating ecosystem services.

21:36

So climate regulation, air purification, erosion control, they tended to go hand in hand.

Where you found a high supply of 1, you generally found a high supply of the others.

And recreation too.

And outdoor recreation supply was also positively correlated with those.

That's a beautiful synergy, really.

21:53

It highlights the inherent interconnectedness of healthy, functioning natural systems.

They often provide multiple benefits simultaneously.

But it wasn't all synergy, was it?

You mentioned trade-offs.

No, definitely not.

On the flip side, there was a moderate negative correlation between crop production supply and the supply of those regulating services and outdoor recreation.

22:13

So more farmland often means less forest or natural area.

Essentially yes, that's a clear trade off.

Land use for intensive farming, well obviously vital for food, often provides fewer of those other natural benefits like air filtration, carbon storage, or extensive recreational opportunities within the same parcel of land.

22:32

So you can't always have maximum everything in one place.

What about on the demand side?

Do human needs also show these kinds of correlations?

Yes, absolutely.

On the demand side, most ES demand indicators were also strongly positively correlated.

If there's high demand for food in an area indicating high population density, there's usually concurrently high demand for climate regulation, cooling, etcetera, and air purification in that same area.

22:56

The urban pressure hooker effect again.

Exactly.

It points to the intense environmental pressures of urban centers, where many demands converge in the same place.

The notable exception again was erosion control demand.

It showed a moderate negative correlation with other ES demands.

23:13

Because it's tied to the landscape, not just the people.

Primarily, yes.

As we discussed, its demand is driven more by specific topography and geological vulnerability than by sheer population density alone.

The principal component analysis, the PCA, must have really brought those underlying patterns and trade-offs into sharper focus for our listeners.

23:33

Maybe think of PCA as like a sophisticated filter.

It finds the main underlying dimensions, the biggest sources of variation in a complex data set.

It reveals connections and conflicts that might be hidden and just looking at pairwise correlations.

That's a great analogy.

The PCA provided a more holistic, powerful view of these complex interactions.

23:53

It clearly revealed a significant trade off along 1 main axis or dimension.

This axis showed a trade off between the supply of regulating services and outdoor recreation, often concentrated in those large protected natural areas, the forest lands, and their demand, which is overwhelmingly concentrated in the dense urban areas, the urban core.

24:13

The core spatial mismatch visualized.

Starkly highlighted, yes, another key axis revealed a clear trade off between the supply of food services, specifically crop production in the croplands, and nearly all other ES indicators, both supply and demand for other things.

Reinforcing that land sparing idea for agriculture.

24:31

It does reinforces that idea where intensive agriculture often means a reduction in the provision of other natural services within that same land unit.

These dominant patterns really structure the whole system.

And those urban, rural gradients you mentioned earlier, how did they confirm these fundamental patterns across the Barcelona region?

24:48

Did they hold up consistently?

Beautifully, the gradients illustrated these spatial patterns with remarkable consistency across the DMR.

We found that the overall ES supply generally increases as you move further away from the Barcelona city center, with the obvious exception of crop production, which peaks in specific agricultural zones, not necessarily the furthest points.

25:10

And demand.

Conversely, ES demand generally decreases with distance from the urban core.

Again, erosion control was the consistent outlier there.

It's demand following supply trends driven by topography rather than just population centers.

So that inverse relationship holds strong.

25:26

It does.

This consistently observed inverse relationship between supply and demand along the urban rural gradient is one of the most important and frankly maybe slightly disquieting takeaways from the Barcelona study.

It points to a systemic challenge in how our cities develop and interact with their surrounding natural environments.

25:44

OK, given all these intricate findings, the ES bundles, the trade-offs, the synergies, the persistent urban rural gradients, what are the crucial implications for actual urban planning, for designing green infrastructure in places like the Barcelona metropolitan region?

26:01

How can planners use this knowledge to tailor their approach and be truly effective?

The implications are really profound.

They strongly call for a highly differentiated, strategic approach to green infrastructure planning, not a blunt instrument.

Let's take decoupled ecosystem services like food provision.

26:17

The benefits?

The food itself can obviously be transported long distances.

And while the BMR currently imports a significant amount of his food, the study powerfully emphasizes that local farming remains vital not just for basic food security or regional resilience against supply chain shocks.

26:33

But for other reasons too.

Yes, for crucial cultural values, think about the aesthetic appreciation of those agricultural landscapes, the Panetti's vineyards for instance.

The deep sense of place They foster, the invaluable local knowledge embedded in farmers practices and increasingly consumer preferences for fresh, locally sourced produce.

26:50

So protecting farmland is about more than just calories.

Absolutely.

It's about cultural heritage, regional identity and supporting local economies.

That's why planning instruments like the PTMB already wisely protect areas like Pinedas.

OK, so even if the food isn't all consumed locally, preserving those agricultural areas serves multiple, sometimes unseen purposes.

27:12

What about something like climate regulation that feels very global, maybe harder to tackle locally?

It is global.

For global non proximal ES like climate regulation, the benefits are indeed felt globally, not just confined to the place where trees are planted.

For example, urban regions like the BMR are typically not carbon neutral.

27:31

In fact, they are often significant contributors to global greenhouse gas emissions due to energy use transport industry.

So the clear take away here is that local and regional policies are absolutely crucial for carbon reduction and offsetting actions, and these efforts must extend not just within the metropolitan boundaries, but potentially beyond them to supporting carbon sequestration projects elsewhere, for instance.

27:54

So cities have a global responsibility.

A profound responsibility, yes.

To be proactive in contributing to global climate goals, actively seeking to reduce their footprint and enhance carbon sinks wherever possible.

Then there are those services that are very much felt locally almost immediately, like clean air.

28:11

Exactly for local, proximal or omnidirectional ES like air purification, the benefits are primarily realized right there in the immediate providing area or its direct surroundings.

Trees cooling a street filtering pollutants right where people live and breathe.

28:27

This fundamentally means that urban green spaces, parks, street trees, green walls and those nearby peri urban areas are absolutely key.

They act as the lungs of the city in a very real sense.

So green infrastructure planning needs to focus within the city, too.

Definitely it needs to champion a land sharing approach within Urban Development itself.

28:46

That means increasing multifunctionality inside the city, making every available space from rooftops to schoolyards to private courtyards, work harder to provide these local ES.

And concurrently, there's an urgent need to protect those large peri urban green areas like the magnificent Gulsarola massif right next to Barcelona.

29:04

It functions as a vital green lung for the entire urban population, providing clean air and cooling that drifts into the city.

So initiatives like green roofs are part of this.

Perfect examples, the Barcelona Green Infrastructure and Biodiversity Plan 2020, which promotes GI expansion through green roofs, green walls, courtyards.

29:22

That's precisely this land sharing principle being put into powerful action right where demand is highest.

What about a service like erosion control where the benefit is so specific to a particular slope or riverbank?

For in situ or directional ES like erosion control, the benefits like holding soil in place preventing landslides are inherently localized.

29:42

They happen right there.

The study found a beautiful synergistic relationship here.

Actually, areas with high erosion risk like steep slopes often naturally boast robust ecosystems like dense forests, which have a high potential to control that erosion nature providing the solution where the problem exists.

30:01

And planning recognizes this.

Yes, regional planning in the BMR already wisely supports this by forbidding Urban Development on steep slopes, those greater than a 20% gradient.

That's an intelligent, protective measure.

It respects natural processes and protects lives and infrastructure downstream.

30:16

Smart.

And finally, those services that require people to actually go to them, like outdoor recreation.

Accessibility must be the keyword there.

You've absolutely hit on the critical point for in situ or user movement related ES like outdoor recreation, accessibility is paramount.

30:32

Yeah, people have to be able to get there easily.

The research consistently sites studies showing that everyday recreational use of urban green space drops off significantly beyond maybe 304 hundred meters from someone's home.

People just won't walk much further for a quick break.

That's not very far at.

30:48

All it's not This starkly implies a dual need for green spaces.

We need numerous small, accessible pocket parks for immediate everyday use.

Sitting on a bench, walking the dog, kids playing briefly.

But we also need larger areas for more extensive activities like running, cycling, team sports or big family picnics.

31:06

So you need both land sparing and land sharing for recreation.

Exactly.

You need to strategically combine both models.

Protect the large spared parks and natural areas like Culsarola, but also integrate shared green spaces throughout the urban fabric.

This requires integrating comprehensive regional planning which protects the big areas, with finely tuned municipal GI plans that ensure local access everywhere, creating a diverse network of accessible green spaces, varying sizes, varying types, fawfully catering to the diverse recreational needs of all residents.

31:39

What's truly fascinating here is how detailed this framework is.

It really allows planners to genuinely tailor their strategies.

Rather than just saying more parks are good, they can ask what kind of park, where and for which services.

It moves towards precision planning for ecosystem services.

Yeah, this deep dive is already challenging some of my own assumptions about how green spaces are valued and managed.

32:01

It makes me wonder if we're truly seeing the full picture of their performance in our own cities.

OK, our journey takes us now from the intricate ecosystem service bundles and planning strategies of Barcelona to a very different but equally crucial perspective in the heart of Germany.

32:18

We're looking at green justice in the city, focusing on Berlin.

Before we dive into Berlin's specifics, let's just set the stage again.

Why are urban green spaces so utterly vital, far beyond simply looking nice?

That's an excellent framing, because their role extends so far beyond mere aesthetics.

32:36

It's truly fundamental to urban well-being.

Urban livability.

I mean, think about it.

Over half the world's population now lives in cities, and urbanization is accelerating rapidly.

This puts urban green spaces under immense pressure if they deliver this remarkable, indispensable array of benefits.

32:51

Environmentally you mean?

Environmentally, they are absolute powerhouses.

They provide local climate stabilization, filtering air, providing vital cooling and shade, significantly reducing those oppressive urban heat island effects that make cities so hot in summer.

They dampen noise pollution, they actively store carbon.

33:09

They help with crucial rainwater infiltration, reducing flood risk, and they even help purify water in some cases.

They're working hard.

So they're not just passive features on the map, they're actively working ecosystems, making our cities more resilient, more livable.

33:24

What about the direct benefits for us, the people who actually call these cities home?

Absolutely.

The social benefits are equally compelling and often deeply personal for residents.

They demonstrably improve mental and physical health, reducing stress, offering crucial opportunities for relaxation and mindfulness, providing spaces for physical activity, whether it's jogging or just a gentle walk.

33:45

They directly alleviate the adverse effects of heat waves, which is increasingly important.

They offer diverse recreational opportunities.

Active and passive both.

Active sports, safe playgrounds for children, areas for dog walking, but also passive activities like simply relaxing on a bench, sunbathing, reading, or enjoying social interaction with friends and neighbors.

34:07

Studies also suggest they can increase the perception of safety within a neighborhood.

And critically, they serve as vital community meeting places, fostering social cohesion, helping people connect.

I can definitely relate to that feeling of relief.

You know, when you find a peaceful green space in the middle of a busy city, It just changes your whole mood.

34:25

But it's also important to acknowledge, I suppose, that it's not always a purely positive story.

There can be potential downsides or challenges too.

Indeed, it's crucial to maintain a balanced and realistic view.

While the benefits are overwhelmingly positive, some studies have noted potential negative effects, which importantly, thoughtful design can usually mitigate.

34:46

For example, sometimes very dense, largely unmanaged, Wilder areas within cities can paradoxically lead to feelings of insecurity or even a fear of crime among some residents, particularly if sight lines are poor or maintenance seems lacking.

Right perception matters.

Perception matters hugely, but these issues are often context dependent, and they're usually addressable through thoughtful urban planning, better lighting, clearer pathways and, importantly, community engagement.

35:12

Which leads us directly into this whole issue of justice.

Yes, this brings us right to the core of the Berlin deep dive, Justice in green.

If urban green spaces are so beneficial, the big problem, as we've hinted, is that they're often not evenly distributed.

They disproportionately benefit certain urban populations over others.

35:30

This is where the concept of socio environmental justice becomes so critical.

Can you define that for us and maybe explain how it's evolved from earlier ideas?

Right.

The core problem is precisely that uneven distribution and the resulting unequal access to benefits.

35:47

Historically, traditional environmental justice movements focus primarily on the health implications for low income communities and minority groups.

These groups were often disproportionately exposed to environmental pollutants, factories, waste sites, highways or unwanted land uses.

36:04

The fight was about ensuring equal access to a clean, healthy environment and equal protection from environmental harm, irrespective of race, income or Class, A hugely important foundation.

But the thinking has expanded beyond just exposure to bads right to include access to goods like parks.

36:20

Exactly.

The framework has significantly expanded over time to encompass much more, including the distribution of environmental amenities.

And this is where, as you said, the conventional wisdom maybe gets turned on its head a bit.

Anthropologist Seth the Low proposed an expanded framework specifically for public spaces like parks, with three crucial dimensions of justice.

36:39

This adds powerful new layers to how we think about fairness and equity in green space.

That's right, Lowe's argumentation pushes us far beyond just asking where the parks are physically located.

Her 3 dimensions are really insightful.

First, distributive justice.

This is about the fair allocation of public spaces and their resources, size, quality, amenities for all social groups.

37:01

Are there enough parks?

Are they large enough?

Are they genuinely accessible to everyone who needs them in a particular neighborhood?

OK.

The fair share aspect. 2nd Procedural justice.

This concerns the fair integration of all affected groups into the planning and decision making processes regarding these spaces.

37:17

Are diverse voices being heard?

Are they actively sought out?

Are they genuinely listened to?

When a new park is designed or an existing one is renovated, do all communities feel they have a real say in what happens?

The fair say aspect.

Precisely.

And 3rd, interactional justice.

37:34

This delves into the quality of interpersonal relations within the place itself.

Do people feel safe, respected, and included when they interact in these spaces?

Can they use the space without experiencing discriminatory behavior or feeling unwelcome?

It's about fostering a sense of belonging and positive social interaction within the park.

37:52

The fair treatment aspect within the space.

Wow, that's a truly powerful and comprehensive expansion of the concept.

Why are these distinctions so incredibly crucial now, perhaps more than ever before in our cities?

Well, these issues have become increasingly critical due to some profound transformations happening in urban societies globally.

38:11

We're witnessing increased immigration, leading to greater cultural and social heterogeneity in populations.

We see persistent, sometimes deepening patterns of localized socioeconomic segregation.

There's ongoing economic restructuring impacting jobs and incomes, and often there's less public money available for maintaining these vital public spaces properly.

38:30

A perfect storm, almost.

In some ways, yes.

In this complex dynamic urban context, understanding justice across all three dimensions, distributive, procedural, interactional, is absolutely essential if we want to achieve truly equitable and effective urban green space provision.

38:47

It's no longer enough to just plant trees, we have to ensure they genuinely benefit everyone fairly and inclusively.

OK, let's turn our attention now to Berlin's green story specifically and how it measures up in terms of citywide urban green space provision.

Berlin is often celebrated, isn't it, as one of Europe's greenest cities.

39:05

I think the figure is nearly a third of its area designated as green space.

That sounds incredibly impressive on paper.

On paper, yes, Berlin's claim to being a green city is indeed strong.

The set of use a benchmark a kind of target of 6 square meters of Ugs per person.

39:21

They also considered accessibility recommendations like having a decent sized green space, maybe 2 hectares within 300 meters from home, similar to standards used in the UK for instance.

And initially when you look citywide, it looks pretty promising.

Most sub districts in Berlin do actually meet that 6 square meter per capita target.

39:37

So on average, it appears to be doing well.

But as we know, averages can be very deceptive.

They can obscure significant disparities.

Is Berlin's greenness truly equally distributed for everyone who lives there?

That's the critical question, and the answer the study found, sadly but perhaps predictably, is no, it's not equally distributed, not at all.

39:58

The outer districts of Berlin, particularly out towards the southeastern borders.

They boast incredibly large urban green spaces, sometimes exceeding 1000 hectares in a single district.

That translates to more than 35 square meters per capita for the residents there.

Huge forests, large Parklands.

40:15

A lot of green per person.

A mass amount.

In stark contrast, inner city districts have much smaller UGS areas, and they often fall below that 6 square meter per capita threshold.

This is especially true in areas where population density soar, exceeding 14,500 inhabitants per square kilometer in some places just packed with people but with very little green space per person.

40:36

So while the city as a whole might be green on average, the actual lived experience of greenness is profoundly uneven depending on where you live.

Profoundly uneven, yes.

Much like we saw in Barcelona's urban rural gradient.

Really.

What did they find about the demographic patterns in Berlin?

Who lives where in relation to these green spaces?

40:54

The demographic patterns tell a very revealing story, and overlaying them onto the green space map is where the justice issues really start to emerge.

Immigrants, people with a migration background, are primarily concentrated in these inner city areas.

They often make up more than 23% of the population in some subdistricts, with a higher prevalence generally observed in the former W Berlin sectors historically.

41:18

So concentrated where the green space is scarcest.

Largely, yes, OK.

Conversely, older individuals, those aged 65 and over, tend to be concentrated in the more peripheral, less dense parts of the city, often closer to those larger green areas, but maybe further from other amenities.

41:34

This spatial sorting, where different demographic groups are concentrated in specific areas with vastly different levels of green provision, immediately raises significant questions about equitable access to the benefits of green space, even before we consider the quality or the type of green space available.

This brings us to revealing inequities, demographics and green space access.

41:55

The study performed another cluster analysis similar to Barcelona's to identify these patterns more formally.

They grouped subdistricts based on their urban green space share, population density, the percentage of immigrants, and the percentage of older individuals.

What did this powerful analysis uncover in Berlin?

42:13

It was incredibly revealing.

It identified 3 significant clusters that highlights some stark differences of cross Berlin subdistricts.

Cluster 1 comprised 28 subdistricts.

These were kind of spread over the whole city.

They were below the city average for UGS amount, population density and immigrant percentage.

42:30

But interestingly, only they are above average for older individuals. 22% of the population was 65 or older.

So mixed areas, moderate green space, but with an older demographic having that moderate access.

OK, a kind of middle ground.

Then there was cluster 2A, much smaller group, only 9 sub districts, mostly concentrated right along the city border, the periphery.

42:50

These areas had a very high UGS share, often over 55% green space.

Coupled with low population density and low immigrant percentages.

These are the truly green outlying areas.

Abundant nature, but fewer people and a less diverse population generally.

43:06

The leafy suburbs, essentially.

You could say that, but here's where the most critical insights emerge.

Cluster 3.

This consisted of 23 inner city sub districts.

This cluster had the highest population density, nearly double the city average, and the lowest UGS provision, accounting for only about 16% of the city's total green space, despite having so many people.

43:26

And the demographics.

Critically, this cluster also showed a significantly high immigrant percentage, over 20% on average, and conversely, the lowest percentage of older individuals, only around 15%.

Wow, that paints a very clear picture of disadvantage.

High density, low green space, high immigrant population.

43:44

A very clear picture, yes.

And to quantify just how uneven this distribution was, the researchers turned to the Gini coefficient, which is a tool often used in economics to measure income inequality.

But here, applied to green space access, it revealed startling, almost shocking disparities for different groups.

44:02

What did it actually show?

It powerfully reinforced those cluster findings, showing significant inequality across the board, but particularly for one group.

The Gini coefficient was highest, indicating the greatest inequality for urban green space access among the immigrant population.

44:19

It registered a striking .84. .84 That's incredibly high, closer to 1 perfect inequality than to 0 perfect equality.

It's exceptionally high, almost shocking really, for access to a public good like green space.

It was lower for all residents combined at .69 and lowest for individuals aged 65 years and over at .65.

44:38

Still unequal for older people, but less so than for immigrants.

Still indicating substantial inequality for everyone compared to a perfectly even distribution.

But the disparity for immigrant communities was markedly more severe.

So what does this all actually mean for the people living in Berlin, particularly those immigrant communities concentrated in the inner city?

44:59

What are the real world implications?

It means that these communities, often living in high density conditions, have disproportionately less access to local green spaces compared to other groups in the city.

And this isn't just an abstract statistical number, it has profound, tangible, real world impacts.

45:17

It directly effects their access to vital local benefits like noise reduction from traffic, like cooler temperatures during increasingly frequent and intense heat waves, like the direct mental and physical health improvements that come from having quality green spaces nearby to walk, relax and play in.

45:33

It's a clear case of distributive injustice, then.

Absolutely a clear case where essential environmental benefits, essential public goods are not being equally shared among all segments of the population.

This brings us to what the study calls the Tempelhof paradox, access versus actual use.

45:49

This is fascinating.

They focused on Berlin Tempelhof, which is this Massey former airport right in the city that was converted into a huge public park.

It's enormous, 300 hectares, comparable in scale, they say, to New York City Central Park.

Roughly, yes.

46:04

Central Park is a bit bigger, maybe 500 ha, but Tempelhof is vast for a European City Park.

And it's located just five kilometers South of the city center in a highly culturally diverse surrounding area.

And it's easily accessible by rapid transit by Ubon and S Bon.

On paper, it seems like it should be a perfect model of accessible green space for everyone, right?

46:23

A real asset for those inner city communities.

It absolutely has that potential on paper, which makes the paradox they found all the more striking.

The potential accessibility just looking geographically is impressive.

They did AGIS buffer analysis, basically drawing digital rings around the park entrances to see how many people lived with an easy walking or cycling distance.

46:43

More than 25,000 inhabitants live within 500 meters right on its doorstep, and over 180,000 people live within a 1500 meter catchment area.

That's about 5% of Berlin's entire population.

Huge potential user base.

And diverse.

Very diverse within that 1500 meter catchment, approximately 12% are older individuals 65 plus, and a significant 27% are immigrants or have a migration background that's well above the city average of around 14.7% of the time.

47:12

The major immigrant groups in this specific surrounding area include Turkish, Arab, former youth, Slavian and Polish communities, among others.

So, purely geographically, Tempelhof appears ideally positioned to serve a truly diverse population that, according to the earlier findings, might be lacking green space elsewhere.

47:27

Exactly.

It looks like a solution, and this is where the real twist comes, when we look not just at potential access, but at the actual use data.

A visitor survey conducted in 2011 tells a starkly different story.

It reveals A profound paradox, a real disconnect.

The survey found that only 9% of the surveyed visitors were immigrants. 9% despite making up 27% of the people living right nearby.

47:50

Exactly.

A huge disparity.

Similarly, only 6% of visitors were aged 65 or over, even though nearly 12%, you know 11.7% of that age group live within the same catchment area.

The park was predominantly frequented by Germans, with a mean visitor age of around 41.5 years.

48:08

So it highlights a clear underuse by both immigrant and older populations living right next door.

There's a significant mismatch between who could easily use the park and who actually.

Does a major mismatch?

The critical question then becomes why?

If physical access, proximity and sheer size aren't enough to guarantee equitable use, what else is at play here?

48:27

What's stopping people?

That's such a crucial question.

If simply having a massive, easily reachable green space isn't enough, then what factors are truly driving use or non use?

This leads us directly to more than just green understanding user preferences.

48:42

The study didn't just look at who wasn't coming, it tried to understand what people actually wanted from their parks.

What did they find people generally desired?

Well, a postal survey conducted earlier in 2009 focusing on residents living near Tempelhof revealed some pretty fundamental preferences that most people would probably agree on.

49:00

People desired large trees primarily for shade, ample benches for rest and socializing, smaller, perhaps more enclosed or defined areas for various recreational activities, not just vast open space, and critically clean and well maintained sanitary facilities, toilets, basic comforts.

49:17

OK, makes sense.

But did these preferences differ between groups?

And it sounds like we can't assume a universal Park experience or set of desires.

Precisely when they broke down these preferences by demographics, the picture became far more nuanced, far more complex.

Different groups value different things more highly.

49:35

Native German families, for instance, tended to prioritize open grassy areas specifically for sunbathing and informal play.

They also value dedicated playgrounds for children and specific sports sites for active recreation.

OK.

Active uses open space.

In stark contrast, older individuals and immigrant families showed a strong, often overriding preference for things like designated barbic areas and communal communication zone suitable for picnicking and larger social gatherings.

50:04

Specifically, Turkish and Arab immigrant visitors were observed or reported often engaging in more passive recreational activities, things like group gatherings with extended family and friends, sharing food, relaxing together, and actively seeking out shaded spots for respite from the sun.

That points to really quite different culturally influenced ways of using and valuing public green space.

50:24

Deeply different.

It speaks powerfully to cultural differences and how these spaces are perceived, valued, and ultimately utilized.

It's not just about being in nature, but how one wants to be in nature and with whom.

This sounds like a critical design challenge for Tempelhof itself.

50:40

Then how did the parks actual design this huge open former airfield align or maybe more likely misalign with these incredibly diverse user preferences?

This is precisely where the paradox crystallizes into a profound design mismatch Tempelhof.

50:56

With its immense public green spaces, it's vast open lawns and runways, it's optimally designed for active sport activities.

Cycling, running, skating, kite flying.

Exactly.

Things that need huge unobstructed areas.

However, it significantly lacks sufficient infrastructure for many of the passive activities preferred by other groups.

51:14

There's limited seating overall, not nearly enough shaded areas provided by trees or built structures, very few semi secured more intimate spaces that would be conducive to quiet relaxation or larger social gatherings.

And the barbic areas, The barbic areas that do exist were described as small, often without any seating nearby, and crucially, lacking trees for shade, which is really important, especially during Berlin's warm, sunny summer months if you want to spend several hours there.

51:42

That's a really significant oversight, isn't it?

Particularly for the immigrant and older populations who clearly expressed preferences for exactly those features, shade, seating, places to gather socially, it really makes you stop and think about that vast open space and wonder who is it truly serving best?

52:00

Who feels most comfortable there?

Exactly.

The take away here is profound and a truly maybe unexpected disquieting insight for planners.

A parks design, even if it's physically accessible, even if it's quantitatively large, can inadvertently create socio environmental injustice if it doesn't adequately meet the culturally framed needs and expectations of its diverse potential user groups.

52:21

So physical access is just the first step.

It's necessary, but absolutely not sufficient.

Functional access, Culturally relevant access.

Truly inclusive access.

There's another thing entirely.

This is a powerful lesson in designing for genuine urban equity, not just nominal green provision.

52:40

This has been an incredibly insightful deep dive really.

We've gone from the ecosystem service bundles and the sophisticated planning strategies in Barcelona to these really critical green justice challenges and user preference paradoxes in Berlin.

Now let's try and connect the dots, pull out some common threads and broader insights for all of us listening.

52:58

First, that urban rural gradient we saw in both places.

Is this a universal pattern we as informed citizens should maybe recognize or look for in our own communities?

It absolutely appears to be a widespread, if not universal, pattern in how cities develop relative to their surrounding landscapes.

53:16

Both studies powerfully demonstrate its enduring presence.

And Barcelona remember, we saw that clear gradient supply of most ecosystem services generally increasing with distance from the urban core, while demand decreased except for erosion control.

Similarly, in Berlin, the inner city area's high population density, significant immigrant populations consistently had less urban green space per person, while the peripheral areas with lower densities boasted considerably more.

53:44

It's strongly suggests a common fundamental challenge for urban planning worldwide.

Urban expansion and densification often create these areas of intense human demand right where the local ecosystem service supply is lowest, and conversely, areas of high natural supply often exist where human demand is relatively low or the population less diverse.

54:04

This inherent geographical mismatch seems like a consistent, systemic thing we need to grapple with, definitely.

So it's not just a European phenomenon.

This is likely something city planners and indeed all of us need to contend with globally.

And the Berlin study, particularly the Tempelhof paradox, really highlighted something crucial that goes far beyond just measuring square meters of green space or distance to a park gate.

54:25

It's about the importance of quality qualitative needs.

Indeed, perhaps the most critical and frankly maybe the most disquieting insight from Berlin is this quantity alone is a deception, Or at least it can be deeply misleading if that's all we look at.

The study provides such a powerful illustration that simply meeting a quantitative threshold like that six square meters of UGS per person, or providing vast physical access as in Tempelhoff's huge open space, is simply not enough.

54:56

Not enough to ensure equity, not enough to ensure satisfaction or well-being for all.

So vast green spaces or meeting basic targets might mean very little.

They might mean very little if the design, the amenities, the feel of the place fails to genuinely connect with the diverse cultural and generational needs of the community it's supposed to serve.

55:13

We need to dig much deeper.

We need to understand who the potential users are, what their cultural backgrounds and practices are, how they genuinely prefer to use these green spaces, and what specific amenities they need to feel welcomed, safe, comfortable and truly able to benefit from these vital public resources.

55:29

This raises such an important and provocative question for practice, doesn't it?

How do we as planners, designers, community members move from simply providing green spaces the quantity to achieving true green justice, the quality and equity by meticulously matching the quality, the design, the function of parks to the diverse needs of a multicultural, multigenerational urban population, It really forces us to adopt A genuinely human centered approach to nature in the city.

55:59

Precisely.

It fundamentally shifts the focus from purely ecological provision or just hitting targets to a much more holistic socioecological integration.

Both studies really, in their own distinct ways, point to the urgent need for a balanced, inclusive and highly adaptable approach in landscape planning, one that carefully acknowledges both the natural capacity of ecosystems and the incredibly diverse, culturally inflected needs of human populations.

56:23

It's about bringing those two sides together effectively.

Which brings us nicely to our final big insight, Designing for all A all for multifunctionality and inclusion.

What does this balanced, forward thinking approach look like in practice?

What concrete lessons can we draw from both Barcelona and Berlin for creating better, fairer green spaces?

56:43

OK, so from Barcelona, the powerful recommendation is really to combine those land sharing strategies with land sparing, not seeing them as opposites but complementary tools.

This means actively increasing multifunctionality in the urban and agricultural areas, essentially making these human dominated landscapes work harder ecologically.

57:00

This could involve stricter green infrastructure requirements in Urban Development plants demanding more green roofs, permeable surfaces, St. trees.

It could mean actively fostering cultural ecosystem services in agricultural areas like penny days, recognizing using their value beyond just food production, tourism, heritage, biodiversity corridors.

57:19

And concurrently, we absolutely must assure the robust conservation of those large multifunctional peri urban natural areas like Gulcerola.

These spared areas are vital for fulfilling many ES demands of the urban population, but they're often acutely vulnerable to relentless urbanization pressures.

57:37

So protect the big ones and green the city itself.

A dual strategy?

And what specifically can Berlin teach us about moving towards true green justice aligning with Cephalo's framework?

Distributive, procedural, interactional justice.

Berlin's experience, especially the Tempelhof case, offers invaluable concrete recommendations across all three dimensions.

57:57

For distributive justice, it means offering genuinely diverse spaces within parks, not just one type of landscape.

More shaded areas, amle and accessible seating, clearly designated barbic or picnic zones, alongside areas for active sports.

It's about providing a variety of amenities to cater to a variety of uses and cultural preferences, rather than implicitly or explicitly prioritizing a single dominant type of recreation.

58:21

So not just more green, but deliberately different kinds of green spaces and amenities that meet diverse needs.

And what about getting everyone genuinely involved in shaping these spaces?

That's where procedural justice comes in.

It's absolutely crucial to integrate all residents into planning and design processes, not just relying on the usual suspects who turn up to public meetings.

58:41

This means using more inclusive methods, holding focus groups conducted in different languages, maybe in trusted community centers, actively engaging community leaders from diverse groups, robustly supporting long term community initiatives like community gardens or park stewardship groups.

58:57

These approaches empower diverse communities with a genuine voice, ensuring their needs, desires, and concerns are heard and hopefully integrated right from the outset, not as an afterthought.

Giving people real ownership and finally, fostering positive, respectful interactions within these shared public spaces.

59:13

How do we encourage that?

For interactional justice, thoughtful design can play a big role, minimizing potential conflicts and allowing for free and safe interaction among all user groups, even acknowledging that different groups might have contradictory requirements.

59:28

Sometimes this could mean clearly designating certain spaces for specific activities.

A quiet zone here, a sports zone there, a dog park over there, a barbic area clearly marked.

This can enhance everyone's sense of safety, comfort and belonging, reducing friction.

And lastly, related to this, age friendly design is paramount, especially with increasingly aging populations in many cities.

59:49

What does that involve specifically?

It includes providing those basic but essential amenities, clean, accessible restrooms, sufficient and easily reachable seating, especially near entrances and along pathways, clear signage, perhaps dedicated communication zones or quieter areas, ensuring a clean, safe and well maintained environment.

1:00:10

Overall.

These are not luxuries.

They're fundamental necessities for older individuals, and indeed many others with mobility issues to fully utilize and truly enjoy public green spaces.

It's about ensuring these spaces are genuinely designed for all ages and abilities.

This has been a truly enlightening deep dive.

1:00:27

Really fascinating stuff today.

We've gone on quite a journey haven't we?

From the intricate ecosystem service bundles and planning strategies of Barcelona.

All the way to the critical green justice challenges and user preference paradoxes of Berlin.

Yeah.

And I think we've learned that truly effective, truly equitable urban planning needs to go far beyond simply providing a certain amount of green space.

1:00:48

It requires a deep, empathetic understanding of supply, of demand, and crucially, of the incredibly diverse, culturally influenced ways people actually interact with, value and need these vital natural areas in our cities.

Indeed, it's really out recognizing that our urban ecosystems are these complex, dynamic systems of natural provision and human need, and that the ultimate aspirational goal should be to ensure that everyone, truly everyone, regardless of their background, their age, their income, or where they happen to live in the city, can genuinely access, enjoy and benefit from nature's essential services.

1:01:21

So a final thought for you, our listeners, as you look around your own community, maybe on your walk home today, consider are your local green spaces truly serving everyone?

Or are there maybe hidden mismatches, unseen barriers, potential injustices that we as informed citizens should be more aware of and perhaps advocate for changing?

1:01:40

What changes, big or small, would make your local green space A truly just green space for all the people who live near it?

Thank you for joining us on The Deep Dive.

We hope this exploration empowers you to see the unseen ecosystems and social dynamics in your world with new, more discerning eyes.

1:01:55

This knowledge is a tool really, a tool for seeing your city differently and potentially for helping to change it.

It's been a really insightful deep dive.

I think this document provides such a vital framework, especially for projects like the Feminist Park Project that are trying to build something fundamentally different.

1:02:12

It shows just how interlinked urban design and social justice are.

It really does, but it also shows the scale of the challenge right?

It requires sustained effort, real commitment and a genuine willingness to shift power dynamics in how cities get made and managed.

Definitely.

1:02:28

It makes you think about how we ensure those voices, the ones that have been excluded, are actually heard and centered.

There's another quote from Sarah Ahmed in the Handbook that feels relevant here.

Go on, she says.

If you have to shout to be heard, you are heard as shouting.

1:02:46

That's powerful.

It makes you ponder, doesn't it?

How can the design of public space itself work differently?

How can it amplify the voices of those who've been historically silenced, ensuring their needs are met without them having to shout just to be noticed?

How can design itself listen?

1:03:01

That's a really provocative thought to end on.

A lot to think about.

Indeed, thanks for joining us for this deep dive.