57
© The Author(s) 2020
D. Geneletti et al., Planning for Ecosystem Services in Cities, SpringerBriefs
in Environmental Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20024-4_6
Chapter 6
Towards Equity in the Distribution
of Ecosystem Services in Cities
6.1 Introduction
A major challenge for cities worldwide is achieving an equitable distribution of
urban services (UN-Habitat 2016). Among the latter, urban ecosystem services (ES)
are increasingly acknowledged for their role in contributing to health and wellbeing,
hence promoted as a valid nature-based solution to many urban challenges (European
Commission 2015). Yet, urban ecosystems, such as parks, trees, gardens, greenways, are heterogeneously distributed over space, and so are the ES they provide,
which may cause inequality in the distribution of benefits to citizens (Ernstson
2013). Through urban planning, local administrations can manage the distribution
of urban ecosystems and their services in a city, determining the number, location,
and type of beneficiaries they reach (Kremer et al. 2013). However, this requires
moving beyond general urban quality standards, such as per capita green space targets (Badiu et al. 2016; Kabisch et al. 2016), which do not capture details about the
actual distribution of benefits across different areas and population groups
(Larondelle and Haase 2013; Cortinovis et al. 2018).
McDermott and colleagues identified three dimensions of equity in relation to
the local provision of ES, namely distributional equity, procedural equity, and contextual equity (McDermott et al. 2013). Distributional equity considers the allocation of benefits and costs associated to ES provision among stakeholders. Procedural
equity looks at the level of participation and representation in decision-making processes that affect the provision of ES and related benefits. Contextual equity refers
to the conditions that determine people’s capability to participate to decisionmaking processes, as well as to access ES benefits, including physical, socioeconomic, and institutional barriers.
The vast literature on ES mapping is well equipped to assess distributional equity,
possibly accounting for relevant contextual factors. A number of methods in the
biophysical, socio-cultural, and economic domains exist to understand how supply
© The Author(s) 2020
D. Geneletti et al., Planning for Ecosystem Services in Cities, SpringerBriefs
in Environmental Science, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20024-4_6
Chapter 6
Towards Equity in the Distribution
of Ecosystem Services in Cities
6.1 Introduction
A major challenge for cities worldwide is achieving an equitable distribution of
urban services (UN-Habitat 2016). Among the latter, urban ecosystem services (ES)
are increasingly acknowledged for their role in contributing to health and wellbeing,
hence promoted as a valid nature-based solution to many urban challenges (European
Commission 2015). Yet, urban ecosystems, such as parks, trees, gardens, greenways, are heterogeneously distributed over space, and so are the ES they provide,
which may cause inequality in the distribution of benefits to citizens (Ernstson
2013). Through urban planning, local administrations can manage the distribution
of urban ecosystems and their services in a city, determining the number, location,
and type of beneficiaries they reach (Kremer et al. 2013). However, this requires
moving beyond general urban quality standards, such as per capita green space targets (Badiu et al. 2016; Kabisch et al. 2016), which do not capture details about the
actual distribution of benefits across different areas and population groups
(Larondelle and Haase 2013; Cortinovis et al. 2018).
McDermott and colleagues identified three dimensions of equity in relation to
the local provision of ES, namely distributional equity, procedural equity, and contextual equity (McDermott et al. 2013). Distributional equity considers the allocation of benefits and costs associated to ES provision among stakeholders. Procedural
equity looks at the level of participation and representation in decision-making processes that affect the provision of ES and related benefits. Contextual equity refers
to the conditions that determine people’s capability to participate to decisionmaking processes, as well as to access ES benefits, including physical, socioeconomic, and institutional barriers.
The vast literature on ES mapping is well equipped to assess distributional equity,
possibly accounting for relevant contextual factors. A number of methods in the
biophysical, socio-cultural, and economic domains exist to understand how supply