article · Cities
The provision and management of urban green infrastructure (UGI) provides multiple benefits to the wellbeing of urban residents. A crucial, yet underexplored benefit, is the role that UGI can play in poverty alleviation. Acknowledging this role raises questions as to how UGI design and management can better provide opportunities for poverty alleviation and how it varies across UGI types and contexts. We consider this, using South Africa as an example, for five dimensions of poverty alleviation, namely (i) contributions to cash or non-cash income; (ii) increased opportunities for skills development and learning; (iii) improved physical and mental health; (iv) lessening of vulnerability and risk, and (v) increased opportunities to participate in decision-making. We do this for six types of UGI (amenity spaces, blue infrastructure, natural/semi-natural lands, urban parks, urban agriculture, and verges). We collectively ranked the current and future potential for poverty alleviation and the extent of change required to achieve the ranked potential for each UGI type. Urban agriculture was scored as having the highest current potential to contribute to poverty alleviation, and verges the least. In contrast, the ranking indicates that adopting pro-poor designs and principles will have the greatest returns per effort in parks and amenity spaces. But the widespread distribution and large extent of verges make them key areas for pro-poor interventions. Overall, we found that greater investment and changes in attitudes of authorities would have the greatest impact in poverty alleviation in all types of UGI, rather than policy and procedures around UGI design and management. We conclude that although the various types of UGI have markedly different potentials to contribute to poverty alleviation, there are some overarching strategies that planners and managers could adopt to promote poverty alleviation through UGI design and management. • Urban green infrastructure (UGI) can help alleviate multidimensional poverty. • We use a scoring approach to assess which types of UGI and which facets of poverty. • We also rate the type and amount of effort needed to achieve poverty alleviation gains. • Urban agriculture ranks highest, but already makes high contributions to poverty alleviation. • Verges have high potential for poverty alleviation but require reconsideration to achieve it.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2024.105442
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.