**Social Science, Equal Justice and Public Health Policy: Translating Research into Action Through the Urban Greening Movement**

Robert García and Seth Strongin *The City Project USA* 

#### **1. Introduction**

154 Social Sciences and Cultural Studies – Issues of Language, Public Opinion, Education and Welfare

Schmitter, P. (2000). *How to Democratize the European Union … and Why Bother?*, Lanham

In Los Angeles, California, United States of America, where one lives, the color of one's skin, and how much money one has impacts one's health and quality of life. One reason for this is that people of color and low-income people disproportionately lack access to safe places and programs for physical activity, including parks, school fields and green streets. People who lack access are deprived of the benefits of green space, including improved physical and mental health, the full development of the child including improved academic performance, positive alternatives to gangs, crime drugs and violence, social cohesion, economic vitality including green local jobs, and other values (García and Strongin, 2011).

Over the past ten years, attorneys, advocates and activists in what has become known as the urban greening movement have worked to alleviate inequities in access to green space including parks, schools and pools, translating social science research, policy and law into systemic social change.

In southern California, Los Angeles State Historic Park, Río de Los Angeles State Park, and Baldwin Hills Park are three best practice examples where community driven organizing and legal campaigns have helped create and maintain parks in neighborhoods that are disproportionately of color and low-income and lack opportunities for physical activity. These community victories for greening, democracy and equal justice took place over the span of a decade in three neighborhoods in Los Angeles, California. Each case study demonstrates how research including public health, demographic, geographic, and economic analyses, geographic information systems (GIS) mapping and demographic analyses, social science, and history were employed to present quantitative and qualitative evidence that supported the use of civil rights and environmental laws to influence the investment of public resources to create and maintain great urban parks. Section 2-5 of this chapter present the evidence. Section 6 presents the legal analyses. Section 7 illustrates the application of the law to the evidence in the context of those parks. Section 8 presents lessons learned in translating research into action. These case studies present replicable models for other cities and regions.

Social Science, Equal Justice and Public

**2.2 The geography of Los Angeles** 

**3. Park access in Los Angeles** 

socioeconomic status impact these disparities, as well.

equity and hold public officials accountable.

pocket park and one wants to play soccer.

**3.2 Measuring park access** 

color.

**3.1 Park poor, Income poor and communities of color** 

Health Policy: Translating Research into Action Through the Urban Greening Movement 157

Los Angeles is located in southern California, in the southwestern United States. Los Angeles County is spread out over more than 4,000 square miles. The region includes 70 miles of coastline along the Pacific Ocean and mountains reaching elevations of over 10,000 feet (County of Los Angeles, 2011). Los Angeles contains rugged forests, rivers, deep valleys, and desolate deserts, as well as numerous urban parks. The region's many different geographical features provide a variety of recreational opportunities. In fact, it is possible to go alpine skiing and surf in the Pacific Ocean in the same day without leaving the county.

Despite an overall wealth of parks and recreational opportunities, not all residents share equal access to the region's green space. Where one lives within Los Angeles factors into how much park access one has, and a closer analysis demonstrates that race, ethnicity, and

California state law defines "park poor" and "income poor" communities in order to prioritize investment of park bond funds in underserved communities. "Park poor" is defined as three acres or less of parks per thousand residents. "Income poor" is a median household income of \$47,331 or less (García and Strongin, 2011). Though these criteria apply to the investment of park funds under a specific statewide ballot measure (Proposition 84), these criteria are a best practice example to establish standards to measure progress and

The City Project has used GIS and demographic tools to map the entire state of California at the census tract level to illustrate park poor, income poor communities that are disproportionately populated by people of color. The City Project advocates that park

There are numerous ways to measure park access aside from acres of parks per thousand residents. The ultimate question is whether the parks meet the needs of the community as defined by the community. There is no single rule of thumb that works. A more useful method is a combination of measures, such as park poor, income poor, communities of

The National Recreation and Parks Association (U.S.), for example, at one time recommended ten acres of park space per thousand residents, but more recently supports a more flexible approach (Wolch et al., 2001). Most urban areas in California fall short of ten acres of parks per thousand residents. The total amount of park space within a certain area is important, but this does not take into account who can reach the parks. Another method is distance to the park, measured in miles or "walking distance." This does not address whether nearby parks meet the needs of the community -- for example, if a nearby park is a

funding be prioritized in these combined "hot spots" (García and Strongin, 2011).
