Urban planners are increasingly promoting green infrastructure projects for their health and climate benefits. However, research from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign warns that without considering historical development and existing power structures, these projects may worsen social and racial inequalities instead of helping all residents equally.

“For the environmental and ecological questions, we have a pretty good handle on what we need to do. The questions that are the hardest and the most important for people to tackle are how to work well with communities, particularly marginalized communities,” the researchers explain.

Unequal distribution

Green infrastructure can benefit the ecosystem in many ways, including reducing floods and heat, storing carbon, and providing recreation and health benefits, said the researchers. But urban landscapes do not distribute environmental benefits and harms equally.

For example, in St. Louis, Missouri, water quality standards for rivers reflect the city’s racial divisions. Waterways in white neighborhoods have historically been managed for recreation, while those in Black neighborhoods have been managed for industrial uses. Today, water quality standards in white neighborhoods remain higher than those in Black neighborhoods, according to the paper.

“Plans must contend with the histories of discriminatory policies and practices that produced underlying inequalities, and be attentive to the ways that contemporary efforts might reproduce or undermine the structures driving inequities in urban greenspace. This is true for new greenspace developments, as well as changes to existing urban nature,” the researchers explain.

Multi-disciplinary approach

Various disciplines need to contribute to urban green infrastructure, including those that explore the social implications of ecological and economic projects, the researchers say.

Planners should consider factors like the scale of a project and its impact on specific communities. For example, a wetlands mitigation program in Mississippi allowed developers to fill in wetlands in one area while buying wetland mitigation credits elsewhere. Residents of Turkey Creek, a small Black community in Mississippi, argued that this practice harmed their neighborhood by removing wetlands that could absorb stormwater, exacerbating the damage from Hurricane Katrina.

“This suggests that … attempting to address large-scale issues (such as global climate change) cannot be done equitably without careful attention to local-scale issues (such as neighborhood flooding),” the paper explains.

Their research highlights the importance of building relationships with communities and embracing uncertainty about project outcomes. While working with a community on water quality and flooding issues, community members repeatedly voiced concerns about gentrification related to green infrastructure solutions.

In response, the researchers shifted their focus and developed an anti-gentrification toolkit, providing strategies to invest in urban greening without displacing residents. Being open to ambiguity in defining problems led to new opportunities for justice-oriented policies.

The researchers advocate for an approach that favors modest projects addressing community needs and priorities, allowing residents to shape the projects, over large, developer-driven infrastructure investments.

“While the uptake of urban green infrastructure represents a promising development in urban sustainability and development practices, it cannot be assumed that these projects will benefit all residents or promote urban equity. Indeed, the history of urban development and infrastructure projects shows that there is a tendency for such projects to consolidate benefits for powerful groups, often at the expense of the vulnerable or marginalized,” the authors conclude.