Excluded communities and greenspace

Jane Findlay

LI president Jane Findlay reflects on some of the key issues that emerged from the CPD Day “Bringing nature into the City – place and health in the time of COVID-19”.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted what an important role green public space, and nature, play in all our lives. Before the lockdown, many saw these spaces as a luxury, as something nice to have but not essential, perhaps even a frivolous expense.

The public and politicians now more than ever realise how important these places are for health, nature and wellbeing. And whilst we might enjoy our parks, plazas and tranquil gardens, we must understand that many still do not have easy access to these vital amenities.

At this point in the current coronavirus crisis, it is apparent that many city dwellers became prisoners in their own homes, with no access to views of any green space and nature, emphasising the paucity of parks and green open spaces in many of our towns and cities. However, in places where there are great parks, residents have taken advantage of the spring and summer weather, though sometimes causing social distancing issues and antisocial behaviour. Is this also exacerbated by the low density of green space? These are the questions and issues we will have to address in the months and years to come.

Whilst the spotlight is shining on the importance of green space for people, nature and climate, it is important to recognise that some communities feel, and are, excluded from parks, green open spaces, and countryside. The issue of excluded communities was a major area of discussion during the recent Landscape Institute CPD day: Bringing Nature into the City – place and health in the time of COVID-19. People experience parks differently according to who they are – their social, cultural and economic background, and whether these spaces feel welcoming and relaxing or threatening and even hostile. Who benefits from our parks and green open spaces and also from any investments that are being made now or in the future? What became evident in the debate that followed was that the full range of experience needs to be considered if all green space users are to be comfortable and feel that a particular space or place belongs to them.

The aesthetics of place need to break free from historic preconceptions that assume universal principles and homogeneous societies. The way in which race and space manifests itself in the built environment has to be understood through the subtle, sensual and inconspicuous experiences of black and minority ethnic people in all their diversity, as well as their reading of public and green spaces, travel and safety and work and leisure.

– Karin Woodley, when she was Chief Executive of Stephen Lawrence Charitable Trust for the publication by the Design Council (CABE) ‘Inclusion by Design’ 2008

We are at a pivotal point; this could be the renaissance of urban parks. There is an increasing call from landscape and parks professionals advocating public spending to improve access to green spaces, and this is supported by many national organisations like the CPRE and the National Trust. Research recently commissioned by the National Trust(1) makes a powerful economic case to this government for significant investment across the UK in greening the country’s most left behind and greyest urban communities. The green infrastructure investment could bring £200 billion in physical health benefits by preventing disease, and create mental wellbeing benefits by improving the quality of peoples’ lives. But in the clamour for new and improved green space, it is important that we shape our parks, green open spaces and public realm so that we don’t discriminate by design. We must learn and do so much more to involve local communities when designing to deliver equal access and inclusion.

References

1. Levelling Up and Building Back Better Through Urban Green Infrastructure: An Investment Options Appraisal – Vivid Economics and Barton Willmore, June 2020