1. Environmental Justice of Open Space Amenities in Baltimore, Maryland Christopher Boone School of Human Evolution and Social Change Global Institute of Sustainability Arizona State University J. Morgan Grove USDA Forest Service Northeastern Research Station (Vermont)

2. Environmental “Goods” EJ focus on disamenities Environmental amenities and human well- being

3. Research Question Who has access to parks and open space in Baltimore, and who uses them? http://www.audubonmddc.org/patterson_park_programs.htm

4. Who? Groups Neighborhoods Census Tracts Neighborhood Statistical Areas (Baltimore Neighborhood Indicators Alliance)

6. Access Different standards and measures – Straight distance (1/4 - 1/2 mile) – Walkable blocks – Distance-cost functions (network analysis)

7. Equity Access plus area Acres per person – Contained by neighborhood – Accessible by neighborhood

11. Who has access? Neighborhoods are treated as homogenous in extent Dasymetric mapping to improve resolution

16. Populations and Access to Parks Within ¼ mile of park Beyond ¼ mile of park Blacks/African Am. 332,43084,982 Whites135,73668,245 Families in Poverty 22,3015,530 Total pop487,631159,764

17. Access:no access Blacks/African Americans3.91 Whites1.99 Families in Poverty4.03 Total Population3.05

18. Demographics and Park Area Acres/1000 pop within ¼ mile of neighborhoods – Predominantly black neighborhoods: 13.01 – Predominantly white neighborhoods: 24.72

20. Who uses the parks? City (Parks & Rec) has not collected usage statistics BES telephone survey: – 1,508 households in Baltimore Metro Area – 383 households in Baltimore City

21. Survey says…. 37% of all activities occurred in parks or recreation areas

22. Lifestyle and Recreation Little difference in recreation patterns between three major PRIZM clusters: Urban Uptowns, Urban Midscale, Urban Cores General demographics of PRIZM clusters

23. Hidden slide

24. Lifestyle and Park Use Parks or recreation areas were used for 1/3 rd of the top recreation activities (walking; cycling/outdoor sports; picnic/bbq/camping; driving) “Urban cores” more likely to use parks for recreation than urban uptowns

25. Lifestyle and Park Use “Urban Cores” who are predominantly black, lower income, and with less educational attainment more likely to use parks for recreational activities

26. Does access to parks make a difference in use? 287 respondents live within ¼ mile 96 respondents live beyond ¼ mile

27. Proximity makes some difference Ratio of yes to no for major recreation activities Ratio of park to elsewhere; where people recreate

28. Proximity does not make a difference to perception of availability and quality Respondents asked about the availability and quality of parks and open space (no problem, somewhat of a problem, major problem) in their neighborhood Little difference between those that lived within ¼ mile and those that live beyond ¼ mile of parks

29. Lifestyle cluster makes a difference to perceptions of park availability and quality

30. Lifestyle cluster makes a difference to perceptions of park quality Not a problem Somewhat Major

31. Conclusions 1. Baltimore is mid-range in park acreage per thousand population 2. ¼ mile buffer covers 61% of area and 75% of population 3. Access ratio for blacks higher than for whites 4. Parks used mainly for biking 5. Little difference in recreation patterns between major PRIZM groups 6. Perception of availability and quality differs by PRIZM group, not by proximity to parks

32. Limitations “Global” patterns All parks are equal Responses vs. actual use