Suchergebnisse

It is through urban biodiversity that the majority of humans experience nature on a daily basis. As cities expand globally, it is increasingly important to understand how biodiversity is shaped by human decisions, institutions, and environments. In some cities, research has documented convergence between high socioeconomic status (SES) and high species diversity. Yet, other studies show that residents with low SES live amid high biodiversity or that SES and biodiversity appear unrelated. This study examines the conditions linked to varying types of relationships between SES and biodiversity. We identified and coded 84 case studies from 34 cities in which researchers assessed SES-biodiversity relationships. We used fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) to evaluate combinations of study design and city-level conditions that explain why SES-biodiversity relationships vary city to city and between plants and animals. While the majority of cases demonstrated increased biodiversity in higher SES neighborhoods, we identified circumstances in which inequality in biodiversity distribution was ameliorated or negated by disturbance, urban form, social policy, or collective human preference. Overall, our meta-analysis highlights the contributions of residential and municipal decisions in differentially promoting biodiversity along socioeconomic lines, situated within each city's environmental and political context. Through identifying conditions under which access to biodiversity is more or less unequal, we call attention to outstanding research questions and raise prospects for better promoting equitable access to biodiversity

It is through urban biodiversity that the majority of humans experience nature on a daily basis. As cities expand globally, it is increasingly important to understand how biodiversity is shaped by human decisions, institutions, and environments. In some cities, research has documented convergence between high socioeconomic status (SES) and high species diversity. Yet, other studies show that residents with low SES live amid high biodiversity or that SES and biodiversity appear unrelated. This study examines the conditions linked to varying types of relationships between SES and biodiversity. We identified and coded 84 case studies from 34 cities in which researchers assessed SES-biodiversity relationships. We used fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) to evaluate combinations of study design and city-level conditions that explain why SES-biodiversity relationships vary city to city and between plants and animals. While the majority of cases demonstrated increased biodiversity in higher SES neighborhoods, we identified circumstances in which inequality in biodiversity distribution was ameliorated or negated by disturbance, urban form, social policy, or collective human preference. Overall, our meta-analysis highlights the contributions of residential and municipal decisions in differentially promoting biodiversity along socioeconomic lines, situated within each city's environmental and political context. Through identifying conditions under which access to biodiversity is more or less unequal, we call attention to outstanding research questions and raise prospects for better promoting equitable access to biodiversity.