Search results

This paper takes a prudent approach to assessing the quality of greenspace in low- and high socio-economic status (SES) settings. Socio-economic data from deprivation indexes were used to systematically define low- and high-SES suburbs. A Geographical Information System (GIS) observation of greenspaces was used to score spaces according to a scoring criterion contingent on six quality facets. Statistics were then synthesised, producing a Cohen effect score highlighting disparities in each criterion between the two SES groups.

As the phenomena of locational prejudice and meritocratic inequality continue to garner global attention, this paper extrapolates this to a world-renown metropolis, Melbourne. This paper endeavours to provide invaluable insights into the environmental injustice paradigm within greenspace and its respective quality.

Conclusive results affirmed a concerning disparity in the quality of greenspace between Melbourne's low- and high-SES settings. Cohen's effect size found that on average, there was a “medium” distinction between the spaces, whilst an individual focus on the quality facets concluded diverse findings.

The core of study adopted a meticulous virtual assessment to critique the quality of selected greenspaces opposed to an in-person-real world assessment which could garner more nuanced findings.

Existing literature on Melbourne has prioritised distribution, proximity and accessibility domains when assessing inequitable greenspace and, consequently, has catalysed a research gap in greenspace quality. This is also one of the first papers to provide insight into the “Plan Melbourne” policy regarding urban regeneration and ameliorating public open spaces.