Finding the “Heart” in the Green: Conducting a Bibliometric Analysis to Emphasize the Need for Connecting Emotions with Biophilic Urban Planning

Abstract

Although there is a robust body of literature exploring the relationship between biophilic urban planning (BUP) and public health and well-being, there is a dearth of scholarship on the emotional components of BUP. It is crucial to understand these sentiment-related elements, so planners can assign “human value” to green spaces as a strategy for emphasizing the need to thoughtfully implement and properly maintain them in urban environments. Furthermore, humans’ emotional experiences with green spaces may also reveal hidden or unexpected functions of those spaces. To confirm this lack of emphasis on emotions in BUP, we used Scopus to conduct a bibliometric analysis on relevant literature published within the last twenty years (2001–2021), ultimately collecting 589 relevant peer-reviewed articles. We then utilized VOSviewer (Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University, The Netherlands) to visualize our results and identify thematic, geographic, authorship/co-authorship, publication, and temporal trends. “Green space” appeared as our most frequently occurring keyword and scholars affiliated with institutions located within the United States, the United Kingdom and China were the top producers of relevant results. Our authorship analysis resulted in 67 different clusters and three major but isolated networks. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening was the most prevalent source of publication and 2019–2021 was the most prolific period of activity to date. While the goal of our review is to underscore the dearth of controlled, interdisciplinary research on the emotional components of BUP, we also uncovered additional key gaps in scholarship that could promote future avenues of inquiry. First, by focusing on the emotional value of green spaces, practitioners can ascribe them an intangible “human value” that could, in turn, generate more community-focused designs that provide access across socioeconomic, racial and age brackets. Second, an increase in scholarly representation from developing countries could help address the “human value” of green spaces not simply as a “first-world” phenomenon. Finally, a global focus on the emotional, human connections to green spaces may help scholars and practitioners alike mitigate the growing trend of green gentrification.

A systematic review of urban green space research over the last 30 years: A bibliometric analysis

“…Shao et al [ 50 ] used CiteSpace to analyze 5420 papers indexed in Web of Science to understand the development of green infrastructure research. By reviewing 589 articles from Scopus, Tirri et al [ 51 ] investigated the emotional components of biophilic urban planning. For the visualization of the results and the identification of thematic, geographic, authorship/co-authorship, publication, and temporal trends, they used VOSviewer.…”

“The Urban Poor and Vulnerable Are Hit Hardest by the Heat”: A Heat Equity Lens to Understand Community Perceptions of Climate Change, Urban Heat Islands, and Green Infrastructure

“…In contrast, some communities where GI has become a focus in the urban landscape have faced green gentrification-another aspect of GI equity [13,23,24]. Researchers have argued for a "just green enough" approach to achieve equitable greening and limit environmental gentrification [24,51,52]. Although Camden's GI planning strategies address issues related to UHI mitigation, stormwater management, park access, and other environmental concerns typically associated with EJ communities [53], it remains unclear what measures the city intends to implement to prevent green gentrification.…”

“Green Enough Ain’t Good Enough:” Public Perceptions and Emotions Related to Green Infrastructure in Environmental Justice Communities

“…Another line of research underscores how the biophilic planning process has failed to account for long-term, unintended consequences of community greening in many places, especially disadvantaged and EJ communities, in the form of green gentrification [17][18][19][20][21]. While studies have shown that community greening efforts in lower income and minority neighborhoods do not automatically promote health equity [18], they are nonetheless connected to other social factors such as community revitalization, affordable housing, neighborhood walkability, food security, job creation, and youth engagement [22].…”