Assessing Public Open Spaces: A Case of City Nagpur, India

Abstract

Major Indian cities have a lower public open space (POS)-capita ratio and do not meet national and international standards. Moreover, factors such as lack of design guidelines for POSs, limited funding, and lack of public participation have affected these limitedly available POSs and made them ineffective and incapable of meeting the contemporary needs of a diverse range of users. Therefore, it is essential to make them not only inclusive, user-friendly, attractive, and efficient, but also socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable in order to serve the various facilities and services at their optimum level. This study includes the assessment of two POSs to identify strengths and deficiencies that affect their character and use. These POSs are public parks, provide free access to users and are located in the city of Nagpur. For assessment, the study proposed the Public Open Space Index (POSI) that combines five aspects: Individual well-being, Inclusiveness, Engagement, Sustainable spaces, and Management.A mixed methods approach was considered for data collection, including a self-administered questionnaire survey and observations.According to the results, POSs have strengths in that they facilitate social cohesion, engagement, and basic facilities. POSs do not encourage equitable access and sustainable practices, which are considered deficiencies.The study helps planners, designers, and parenting authority to develop initiatives to make these limited POSs inclusive, functional, and sustainable.

Assessing Inequalities in Wellbeing at a Neighbourhood Scale in Low-Middle-Income-Country Secondary Cities and Their Implications for Long-Term Livability

“…Our findings demonstrate that accessible public realm greenspace and neighbourhood greenery can offset some of the negative impacts on wellbeing of urban living even in challenging environments (socio-economic conditions) including informal settlements counteracting some income related health inequalities ( Scopelliti et al, 2016 ). This supports findings on wellbeing impacts for low-income residents from park use in Indian and Colombian cities ( Scopelliti et al, 2016 ; Ahirrao and Khan, 2021 ). When combined with the recognized physical health benefits ( Siqueira Reis et al, 2013 ; Canterbury District Health Board, 2016 ; Adhikari et al, 2019 ), improved neighbourhood economic prosperity ( Ahirrao and Khan, 2021 ) and co-benefits for active travel ( Fluhrer et al, 2021 ) delivering these features more equitably across cities should be a key consideration for planners.…”

“…This supports findings on wellbeing impacts for low-income residents from park use in Indian and Colombian cities ( Scopelliti et al, 2016 ; Ahirrao and Khan, 2021 ). When combined with the recognized physical health benefits ( Siqueira Reis et al, 2013 ; Canterbury District Health Board, 2016 ; Adhikari et al, 2019 ), improved neighbourhood economic prosperity ( Ahirrao and Khan, 2021 ) and co-benefits for active travel ( Fluhrer et al, 2021 ) delivering these features more equitably across cities should be a key consideration for planners.…”

“…This could begin to counteract the emerging crisis in the rise of non-communicable diseases linked to inactivity and stress identified across South Asia ( Adhikari et al, 2019 ). We add support to the social and spatial justice arguments for widening the distribution of urban greening ( Camargo et al, 2017 ; Rigolon et al, 2018 ; Zuniga-Teran and Gerlak, 2019 ; Ahirrao and Khan, 2021 ) by adding in quantitative evidence on the wellbeing and livability benefits such improvements could bring.…”

“…Wellbeing supporting environments that promote mental health allow individuals realize their own abilities, cope with the normal stresses of life, work productively and fruitfully, and contribute to their community ( World Health Organization (WHO), 2014 ). Research is increasingly demonstrating the importance of immersion in nature for health including both mental and spiritual wellbeing and physical health (both from direct opportunities afforded for recreation and socializing ( Bertram and Rehdanz, 2015 ; Ahirrao and Khan, 2021 ) but also urban agriculture). Studies, including some from the Global South, indicate using urban greenspace can reduce residents stress ( Roe et al, 2013 ; Adhikari et al, 2019 ), improving cognitive performance ( Berman et al, 2008 ; Dadvand et al, 2015 ), decreasing depressive symptoms ( Bratman et al, 2015 ) and increasing relaxation ( Neale et al, 2019 ).…”

Table1.DOCX

“…This could begin to counteract the emerging crisis in the rise of noncommunicable diseases linked to inactivity and stress identified across South Asia (Adhikari et al, 2019). We add support to the social and spatial justice arguments for widening the distribution of urban greening (Camargo et al, 2017;Rigolon et al, 2018;Zuniga-Teran and Gerlak, 2019;Ahirrao and Khan, 2021) by adding in quantitative evidence on the wellbeing and livability benefits such improvements could bring.…”