systems installations? Given the benefits, perhaps even the necessity, of having
nearby nature experiences in everyday life, perhaps sacred spaces could be conceptualized and planned as another resource system across a city to intentionally activate
local communities to create places that reflect their particular cultural interests and
identity (Wolf and Brinkley 2016).
Environmental equity and justice are other opportunities in planning and promoting the sacred city. The secondary outputs of manufacturing, resource extraction
industries, waste recovery, and congested transportation systems can be materials
and substances that are toxic and put human health at risk. Environmental policies
and regulations are crafted to limit such substances and its consequences in communities, but problems remain. In many cities, there has been concern about the
inequitable distribution of toxins, unsafe water, and other environmental risks in
underserved or minority neighborhoods. Such concerns also extend to megacities in
developing nations and is compounded by conditions, where installation of basic
infrastructure has not kept pace with population growth and increased urbanization.
Of equal interest in research on social–ecological systems is the degree to which
all residents of communities and cities have access to trees, parks, and gardens.
Using big data, such as satellite imagery, citywide parks, and tree canopy distribution analyses, often reveal inequities in location of and access to natural amenities
(Wolch et al. 2014). More, and higher quality, parks, trees, and open spaces are often
found in more affluent neighborhoods. Local governments are responding to the
distribution disparities and crafting equity policies that guide its sustainability
initiatives. An important challenge in the sacred city is the equitable removal or
mitigation of environmental risk for all areas of a city and all residents. Equally
important is the opportunity for sacred place making, where people can be secure
and safe enough to interact, engage in stewardship, and find the spaces that support
mindful and meaningful encounters with nature.
Megacities all around the world have made rapid (and astounding) progress in
their integration of sustainability design and green infrastructure into historic,
sanitary development standards. Can the innovators who are driving these changes
imbed a sense of civic sacred within urban landscapes? The combination of
evidence-based benefits, observations of social processes, and attention to urban
livability and quality of life highly recommend that the sacred, expressed as informal, intimate, meaningful nature, should be a part of every urban resident’s
daily life.
Acknowledgments Support was provided by the USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest
Research Station and the Nature Sacred Project of the TKF Foundation. Thanks to Elizabeth
Housley of Our Future Environment for contribution of ideas and resources about sacred cities.
8 From Sanitary to Sustainable to Sacred: Metro Nature Experiences and. . .
155
nearby nature experiences in everyday life, perhaps sacred spaces could be conceptualized and planned as another resource system across a city to intentionally activate
local communities to create places that reflect their particular cultural interests and
identity (Wolf and Brinkley 2016).
Environmental equity and justice are other opportunities in planning and promoting the sacred city. The secondary outputs of manufacturing, resource extraction
industries, waste recovery, and congested transportation systems can be materials
and substances that are toxic and put human health at risk. Environmental policies
and regulations are crafted to limit such substances and its consequences in communities, but problems remain. In many cities, there has been concern about the
inequitable distribution of toxins, unsafe water, and other environmental risks in
underserved or minority neighborhoods. Such concerns also extend to megacities in
developing nations and is compounded by conditions, where installation of basic
infrastructure has not kept pace with population growth and increased urbanization.
Of equal interest in research on social–ecological systems is the degree to which
all residents of communities and cities have access to trees, parks, and gardens.
Using big data, such as satellite imagery, citywide parks, and tree canopy distribution analyses, often reveal inequities in location of and access to natural amenities
(Wolch et al. 2014). More, and higher quality, parks, trees, and open spaces are often
found in more affluent neighborhoods. Local governments are responding to the
distribution disparities and crafting equity policies that guide its sustainability
initiatives. An important challenge in the sacred city is the equitable removal or
mitigation of environmental risk for all areas of a city and all residents. Equally
important is the opportunity for sacred place making, where people can be secure
and safe enough to interact, engage in stewardship, and find the spaces that support
mindful and meaningful encounters with nature.
Megacities all around the world have made rapid (and astounding) progress in
their integration of sustainability design and green infrastructure into historic,
sanitary development standards. Can the innovators who are driving these changes
imbed a sense of civic sacred within urban landscapes? The combination of
evidence-based benefits, observations of social processes, and attention to urban
livability and quality of life highly recommend that the sacred, expressed as informal, intimate, meaningful nature, should be a part of every urban resident’s
daily life.
Acknowledgments Support was provided by the USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest
Research Station and the Nature Sacred Project of the TKF Foundation. Thanks to Elizabeth
Housley of Our Future Environment for contribution of ideas and resources about sacred cities.
8 From Sanitary to Sustainable to Sacred: Metro Nature Experiences and. . .
155