Distribution of green spaces across socio-economic groups: a study of Bhubaneswar, India


Urban green spaces (UGS) are linked with numerous health benefits. However, recent studies have highlighted an increased level of disparity in their distribution across different socio-economic groups. Adequate number of UGS and their size play an important role to achieve spatial equity. The purpose of this study is to analyze the availability of UGS across all socio-economic groups of Bhubaneswar, Orissa, India. Methods: The socio-economic groups are created by using the ward level socio-economic census data of Bhubaneswar and and PCA method of analysis. The UGS are identified using satellite images if they fulfil the criteria such as: named as a park or garden and has a definitive boundary in the year 2021. A one-way ANOVA is used for the analysis. Result: The study revealed a non-uniform distribution; 27 out of 67 wards do not have any form of parks in their vicinity. From the equity point of view, the UGS distribution is examined for parks and overall UGS. There is no major difference found in terms of availability of parks in different SES statistically. However, park area average is observed to be the higher in middle deprived communities (26738.32 m2/neighborhood) followed by least deprived communities (22386.7378 m2/neighborhood) but the average number of parks seem to be the lowest in the least deprived communities (1 park/neighborhood). The land allocation per capita for overall UGS came to be the highest for the most deprived neighborhoods (0.0146 km2/1000 population). The bigger UGS are in the most deprived wards probably because there is availability of land and low population density.

Keyword : park equity, socio-economic status, principal component analysis, spatial distribution, neighborhoods, Bhubaneswar

How to Cite
Dash, M., & Chakraborty, M. (2023). Distribution of green spaces across socio-economic groups: a study of Bhubaneswar, India. Journal of Architecture and Urbanism, 47(1), 57–67.
Published in Issue
Apr 18, 2023
Abstract Views
PDF Downloads
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


Abercrombie, L. C., Sallis, J. F., Conway, T. L., Frank, L. D., Saelens, B. E., & Chapman, J. E. (2008). Income and racial disparities in access to public parks and private recreation facilities. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 34(1), 9–15.

Adlakha, D., Hipp, J., Sallis, J., & Brownson, R. (2018). Exploring neighborhood environments and active commuting in Chennai, India. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(9), 1840.

Agarwal, M. K., Sehgal, V., & Ogra, A. (2021). A critical review of standards to examine the parameters of Child-Friendly Environment (CFE) in parks and open space of planned neighborhoods: A case of Lucknow City, India. Social Sciences, 10(6), 199.

Anand, G., & Deb, A. (2017). Planning, ‘violations’, and urban inclusion: A study of Bhubaneswar. Indian Institute for Human Settlements.

American Psychological Association. (2018). APA dictionary of psychology.

Bardhan, R., Kurisu, K., & Hanaki, K. (2015). Does compact urban forms relate to good quality of life in high density cities of India? Case of Kolkata. Cities, 48, 55–65.

Berkman, L. F., & Macintyre, S. (1997). The measurement of social class in health studies: Old measures and new formulations. IARC Scientific Publications, (138), 51–64.

Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation. (n.d.).

Boone, C. G., Buckley, G. L., Grove, J. M., & Sister, C. (2009). Parks and people: An environmental justice inquiry in Baltimore, Maryland. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 99(4), 767–787.

Census PCA. (2011). Census of India 2011: Primary census abstract [Data file]. Office of Register General and Census Commissioner of India.

Census HH Amenities. (2011). Census of India 2011: H-series-tables on houses, household amenities and assets [Data file]. Office of Register General and Census Commissioner of India.

Chandrasiri, O., & Arifwidodo, S. (2017). Inequality in active public park: A case study of Benjakitti Park in Bangkok, Thailand. Procedia Engineering, 198, 193–199.

Chimankar, D. A. (2016). Urbanization and condition of urban slums in India. Indonesian Journal of Geography, 48(1), 28–36.

Chuang, W.-C., Boone, C. G., Locke, D. H., Grove, J. M., Whitmer, A., Buckley, G., & Zhang, S. (2017). Tree canopy change and neighborhood stability: A comparative analysis of Washington, DC and Baltimore, MD. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 27, 363–372.

Comber, A., Brunsdon, C., & Green, E. (2008). Using a GIS-based network analysis to determine urban greenspace accessibility for different ethnic and religious groups. Landscape and Urban Planning, 86(1), 103–114.

Cortinovis, C., Zulian, G., & Geneletti, D. (2018). Assessing nature-based recreation to support urban green infrastructure planning in Trento (Italy). Land, 7(4), 112.

Crawford, D., Timperio, A., Giles-Corti, B., Ball, K., Hume, C., Roberts, R., Andrianopoulos, N., & Salmon, J. (2008). Do features of public open spaces vary according to neighbourhood socio-economic status? Health & Place, 14(4), 889–893.

Estabrooks, P. A., Lee, R. E., & Gyurcsik, N. C. (2003). Resources for physical activity participation: Does availability and accessibility differ by neighborhood socioeconomic status? Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 25(2), 100–104.

Fasihi, H., & Parizadi, T. (2020). Analysis of spatial equity and access to urban parks in Ilam, Iran. Journal of Environmental Management, 260, 110122.

Filmer, D., & Pritchett, L. H. (2001). Estimating wealth effects without expenditure data–or tears: an application to educational enrollments in states of India. Demography, 38(1), 115–132.

Giles-Corti, B., Broomhall, M. H., Knuiman, M., Collins, C., Douglas, K., Ng, K., Lange, A., & Donovan, R. J. (2005). Increasing walking: How important is distance to, attractiveness, and size of public open space? American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28(2), 169–176.

Gilliland, J., Holmes, M., Irwin, J. D., & Tucker, P. (2006). Environmental equity is child’s play: Mapping public provision of recreation opportunities in urban neighbourhoods. Vulnerable Children and Youth Studies, 1(3), 256–268.

Gurtoo, A., & Williams, C. C. (2009). Entrepreneurship and the informal sector: some lessons from India. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 10(1), 55–62.

Ibes, D. C. (2015). A multi-dimensional classification and equity analysis of an urban park system: A novel methodology and case study application. Landscape and Urban Planning, 137, 122–137.

Islam, J., Ali, Md. J., & Mithun, S. (2022). Slums in India: Making sense of place in urban planning. GeoJournal, 87, 1913–1928.

Kalia, R. (1997). Bhubaneswar: Contrasting visions in traditional Indian and modern European Architecture. Journal of Urban History, 23(2), 164–191.

Krishnan, V. (2010). Constructing an area-based socioeconomic index: A principal components analysis approach [Early Child Development Mapping Project]. Edmonton, Alberta.

Lee, R. E., Cubbin, C., & Winkleby, M. (2007). Contribution of neighbourhood socioeconomic status and physical activity resources to physical activity among women. Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, 61(10), 882–890.

Liberatos, P., Link, B. G., & Kelsey, J. L. (1988). The measurement of social class in epidemiology. Epidemiologic Reviews, 10(1), 87–121.

McKenzie, D. J. (2005). Measuring inequality with asset indicators. Journal of Population Economics, 18(2), 229–260.

Mishra, S. V. (2018). Urban deprivation in a global south city-a neighborhood scale study of Kolkata, India. Habitat International, 80, 1–10.

Moore, L. V., Diez Roux, A. V., Evenson, K. R., McGinn, A. P., & Brines, S. J. (2008). Availability of recreational resources in minority and low socioeconomic status areas. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 34(1), 16–22.

Nicholls, S. (2001). Measuring the accessibility and equity of public parks: A case study using GIS. Managing Leisure, 6(4), 201–219.

Nissanke, M., & Thorbecke, E. (2010). Comparative analysis of the globalization-poverty nexus in Asia, Latin America, and Africa. World Development, 38(6), 797–802.

Oh, K., & Jeong, S. (2007). Assessing the spatial distribution of urban parks using GIS. Landscape and Urban Planning, 82(1–2), 25–32.

Pawasarat, J., & Stetzer, F. (1998). Removing transportation barriers to employment: Assessing driver’s license and vehicle ownership patterns of low- Income populations.

Pieters, J. (2010). Growth and inequality in India: Analysis of an extended social accounting matrix. World Development, 38(3), 270–281.

Powell, L. M., Slater, S., Chaloupka, F. J., & Harper, D. (2006). Availability of physical activity–related facilities and neighborhood demographic and socioeconomic characteristics: A national study. American Journal of Public Health, 96(9), 1676–1680.

Rigolon, A. (2016). A complex landscape of inequity in access to urban parks: A literature review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 153, 160–169.

Sathyakumar, V., Ramsankaran, R., & Bardhan, R. (2019). Linking remotely sensed Urban Green Space (UGS) distribution patterns and Socio-Economic Status (SES) - A multi-scale probabilistic analysis based in Mumbai, India. GIScience & Remote Sensing, 56(5), 645–669.

Sewell, W. H., & Shah, V. P. (1967). Socioeconomic status, intelligence, and the attainment of higher education. Sociology of Education, 40(1), 1–23.

Shen, Q. (2001). A spatial analysis of job openings and access in a US metropolitan area. Journal of the American Planning Association, 67(1), 53–68.

Sister, C., Wolch, J., & Wilson, J. (2010). Got green? Addressing environmental justice in park provision. GeoJournal, 75(3), 229–248.

Stoll, M. A. (2005). Job sprawl and the spatial mismatch between blacks and jobs. The Brookings Institution.

Stromberg, P. M., Öhrner, E., Brockwell, E., & Liu, Z. (2021). Valuing urban green amenities with an inequality lens. Ecological Economics, 186, 107067.

Tan, P. Y., & Samsudin, R. (2017). Effects of spatial scale on assessment of spatial equity of urban park provision. Landscape and Urban Planning, 158, 139–154.

Taubenböck, H., & Kraff, N. J. (2014). The physical face of slums: A structural comparison of slums in Mumbai, India, based on remotely sensed data. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 29(1), 15–38.

Tu, X., Huang, G., & Wu, J. (2018). Contrary to common observations in the west, urban park access is only weakly related to neighborhood socioeconomic conditions in Beijing, China. Sustainability, 10(4), 1115.

Vaughan, K. B., Kaczynski, A. T., Wilhelm Stanis, S. A., Besenyi, G. M., Bergstrom, R., & Heinrich, K. M. (2013). Exploring the distribution of park availability, features, and quality across Kansas City, Missouri by income and race/ethnicity: An environmental justice investigation. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 45(S1), 28–38.

Veal, A. (2013). Open space planning standards in Australia: In search of origins. Australian Planner, 50(3), 224–232.

Vyas, S., & Kumaranayake, L. (2006). Constructing socio-economic status indices: How to use principal components analysis. Health Policy and Planning, 21(6), 459–468.

Wang, D., Brown, G., & Liu, Y. (2015). The physical and non-physical factors that influence perceived access to urban parks. Landscape and Urban Planning, 133, 53–66.

Weber, M. (1946). Class, status, party. In H. H. Girth, & C. W. Mills (Eds.), From Max Weber: Essays in sociology (pp. 180–195). Oxford University.

Wolch, J., Wilson, J. P., & Fehrenbach, J. (2005). Parks and park funding in Los Angeles: An equity-mapping analysis. Urban Geography, 26(1), 4–35.

Xiao, Y., Wang, Z., Li, Z., & Tang, Z. (2017). An assessment of urban park access in Shanghai – Implications for the social equity in urban China. Landscape and Urban Planning, 157, 383–393.

Zhang, R., Zhang, C. Q., Cheng, W., Lai, P. C., & Schüz, B. (2021). The neighborhood socioeconomic inequalities in urban parks in a High-density City: An environmental justice perspective. Landscape and Urban Planning, 211, 104099.