Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Geography
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apgeog

Reduction of disparities in access to green spaces: Their geographic

insertion and recreational functions matter
Roland Ngom a, *, Pierre Gosselin a, b, c, d, Claudia Blais b, c
a
Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique, 490, rue de la Couronne, Qu
ebec, Qu

ebec, G1K 9A9, Canada
b
Institut National de la Sant

e Publique du Qu
ebec, Universit

e 945, Avenue Wolfe, QC, G1V 5B3, Canada
c
Universit
e Laval, 2325 Rue de l'Universit

e, Qu
ebec, QC, G1V 0A6, Canada
d
Ouranos consortium sur la climatologie r
egionale et l'adaptation aux changements climatiques, 550 Sherbrooke Ouest, Tour Ouest, 19e

etage, Montr

eal,
Qu
ebec, H3A 1B9, Canada

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Green spaces (GS) have many functions that can moderate the climate change impact and help prevent
Received 16 January 2015 disease and thus alleviate public health expenses in a context of aging societies. However, several so-
Received in revised form cioeconomic, demographic and geographic processes may render the access to GS challenging. Moreover,
2 November 2015
it is often critical to know what type of GS service to develop at a specific place. Also, measurements
Accepted 10 November 2015
Available online xxx
accuracy issues could be critical for planning and decision making. As an example of what could happen
in many other cities of different sizes, we modeled and compared the access to GS, including several of
their specific functions, in the Census Metropolitan Areas (CMA) of Montreal and Quebec City in Canada.
Keywords:
Green space
We used the Quebec Integrated Chronic Disease Surveillance System (QICDSS) (average of 3 million
Function people per year over 1996e2011) to measure over time, the proximity of each individual to the closest GS
Attractiveness boundary using travel costs and spatial interaction models. ANOVA models and their corresponding base
Inequality regressions were used to evaluate the statistical significance of the relationship of GS distances and
Accessibility surface to density, deprivation, gender and age, including interaction terms. The spatial clustering of the
reduction of distances to GS was evaluated on a chronological basis. Unlike the larger CMA of Montreal,
Que
bec City CMA showed greater equity in access to GS, largely due to the specific geographic insertion
of linear GS. The CMA of Montreal showed an improvement in the access to GS which benefits the
wealthy in the densest areas on the island of Montreal. Everything happens as if a green gentrification
process affects the access to GS in Montreal. Our results suggest that for the promotion of GS as an
important element of primary prevention in public health, both the quality or functions of GS and the
geographic determinants of their access are of higher importance than a simple consideration of total GS
surface per capita as often used by decision makers or public health promoters. They also underline the
limits of standard measurements of attraction and accessibility and the complexity for large cities to
promote environmental justice, given the complexity of their socio-demographic processes.
© 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Background GS. Moreover, they underline the multiple functions that can be
attributed to GS.
What is a green space (GS)? Is it an open area with or without Within a context of climate change and evolving orientations in
vegetation? And what type of vegetation is considered green: lawn terms of development and urbanization policies, GS are gaining a
or ligneous or both? Should a GS be tailored for recreation? Or as a growing interest for their role as a central element for sustainable
natural space? A protected area? What minimal surface does a GS societies in an urban context. Many recognize that the size, quality
must have? Those questions illustrate how difficult it is to define a and vegetation type and proportion of GS help urban areas to adapt
to the impact of climate change (Gill, Handley, Ennos, & Pauleit,
2007; Luber & McGeehin, 2008; Oliveiral, Andrade, Vaz, 2011;
* Corresponding author.
Van den Berg, Maas, Verheij, & Groenewegenb, 2010). Reduction
E-mail addresses: Roland_Pierre.Ngom@inrs.ca, roland.ngom@yahoo.ca
(R. Ngom), pierre.gosselin@inspq.qc.ca (P. Gosselin), claudia.blais@inspq.qc.ca of urban heat, pollution, erosion, improvement of water quality and
(C. Blais). biodiversity are all direct positive roles attributed to GS (Gill et al.,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.11.008
0143-6228/© 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
36 R. Ngom et al. / Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51
2007; Luber & McGeehin, 2008; Oliveiral et al., 2011). The positive
role of GS can also be appreciated through the complex interaction
between the environment and human population with conse-
quences on their well-being and mental health (Thompson et al.,
2012), while the impacts on mortality and physical health appear
mixed, sensitive to age and gender, and variable in space (Lee &
Maheswaran, 2010; Richardson et al., 2012). These services pro-
vided by GS fall under the concept of ecological services provided
for free by nature, as long as humans maintain enough of it to
accomplish those regulation, provision of amenities and cleaning
functions, not to mention greenhouse gas mitigation and provision
of shade and cool for urban populations. Such services can be
quantified and a dollar value can even be assigned to them, as done
recently for several cities worldwide. It is even becoming more
important to do it since these services are globally decreasing at
alarming rates (Costanza et al., 2014).
In societies where the combination of multiple chronic diseases
and aging of the population are continuously draining significant
public health resources, it thus appears important to seriously
consider the contribution of primary prevention methods, including
solutions such as an equitable access to GS. Despite the generally
recognized positive roles of GS on population health at both domestic
and global levels (Coutts, Horner, & Chapin, 2010; Villeneuve et al.,
2012), implementing recommendable urban planning policies is
challenging and seen by some as environmental justice problems
(Dahmann, Wolch, Joassart-Marcelli, Reynolds, & Jerrett, 2010; Jen-
nings, Johnson-Gaither, & Gragg, 2012; Krueger & Gibbs, 2007; Wolch,
Byrne, & Newell, 2014). Methods for measuring population access to
GS may vary (Omer, 2006; Stahle, 2010; Zhang, Lu, & Holt, 2011). The
various functions of GS and their underlying multiple benefits
constitute an additional challenge for planners. The barriers to more
environmental justice appear to be difficult to overcome mostly for
larger cities, due to their much more complex and dynamic urban
processes which impact on the existing sociotopes (Stahle, 2010).
As an illustration of the differences on how socioeconomic and
demographic processes and their resulting geographies impact on the
access to the services offered by GS, we considered the second largest
Census Metropolitan Areas (CMA) in Canada, namely Montreal, and
the medium-sized Quebec City CMA, separated by a mere 250 km and
subject to the same provincial laws and regulations governing their
jurisdictions (Fig. 1). The choice of the two most important urban areas
of the province was linked to the funding coming from a provincial
program aimed at Quebec-related studies. The choice of Montreal and
Quebec City, while imposed, presents many interesting features, as
those cities are quite representative of other North American cities of
the same size, especially for Montreal, while Quebec City maintained a
much better overall employment rate but lower foreign immigration
rates compared to Montreal. They have experienced the same eco-
nomic pressures during the period under study. During the period of
interest, both regions experienced major increases in urban sprawl
while historic urban centers remained more or less stable. In the first
half of the period, the population increases were lower, but gained
speed around 2005, almost doubling their rate. For the Quebec City
region (2006e2012), this meant population increases around 8.5% for
the center, while some suburbs increased even more (10e31%). In the
Montreal area for the same period, the picture was similar, with the
center at about 9% while most suburbs increased by 15%. Immigration
from rural regions and from foreign countries contributed to the in-
creases (ISQ, 2010, 2013).
On a chronological basis, we investigated how access to GS has
varied over 15 years (1996e2011), taking into account socioeconomic
deprivation, age and gender. We also integrated variations in popu-
lation density as a factor that well reflects, not only the environmental
dynamics in terms of levels of access to GS, but also in terms of social
responses to the ongoing transformations. Our approach thus
integrates the population distance to GS as a function of access, but
also the type and quality of GS. The richness of this approach is sup-
plemented by a more accurate and realistic GIS-based method for the
measurement of distance to GS, a method that considers boundaries
of GS rather than their geometric center as commonly measured.
The aim of the study is to test the hypothesis that disparities in
access to GS vary according to important sociodemographic factors
such as age, gender, socioeconomic status and population densities,
and also that this variation may be emphasized by the geographic
insertion of GS through their location, shape, and specific functions,
which brings out an important concern on how access to GS is
measured.
2. Data and methods
2.1. Study sites and period of interest
A CMA1 is formed according to specific rules of municipality size
and commuting flows (Statistics Canada 2014a, b). The CMA of
Montreal is the main urban catchment area in the province of
Quebec and its most important economic center. According to the
latest available data estimates from the Statistical Institute of
Quebec (ISQ) of December 2010 for our period of interest
(1996e2011), the Montreal's CMA with 3,824,221 people repre-
sented 49% of the population of the province and 11% of the Ca-
nadian population (Institut de la Statistique du Que
bec, 2013). Its
population density is about 898 inhabitants per km2. The popula-
tion of the Quebec City's CMA was estimated at 765,706 people
with 228 inhabitants per km2. Those sites draw an interesting
contrast in terms of distribution of the population densities which
potentially impact on the access to GS (Fig. 1). As explained above,
the period of interest was restricted to 1996e2011.
2.2. Age and gender from a health surveillance database
We used a sample of data from the Quebec Integrated Chronic
Disease Surveillance System (QICDSS) of the Institut national de sant
e
publique du Qu
ebec, the linkage of five health administrative data to
define selected social variables of individuals aged 20 years and over
meeting at least one case definition for cardiovascular disease (coro-
nary heart disease, stroke, heart failure) or its risk factors (hypertension
and diabetes). This choice of database was motivated by our intention
to examine the relationship between GS and cardiovascular disease for
primary prevention purposes. For those data, the total period from
1996 to 2011 was considered and divided into the corresponding three
reference periods P12, P23 and P3.4 For P1 there were a total of
3,100,000 individuals in the QICDSS, 3,420,000 for P2 and 3,920,000
for P3. Age and gender were obtained from this database. Population
ages were stratified into two groups: the first one was composed of
active population having between 20 and 64 years, and the second
group was composed of retired population having 65 years or more.
A social and material deprivation index, calculated at the
smallest most complete census division level DA5 (Statistics Canada
2014a, b), was tagged to individuals using spatial extraction queries
under ArcGIS of ESRI.6 This index was developed at the Institut
national de sant
e publique du Qu
ebec (Pampalon, Hamel, &
Raymond, 2004; Pampalon & Raymond, 2000). Only the material
1
Census Metropolitan Areas.
2
Period 1(1996e2000).
3
Period 2(2001e2005).
4
Period 3(2006e2011).
5
Dissemination Area.
6
Environmental System Research Institute.
 R. Ngom et al. / Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51
Fig. 1. Location of the study site and description of its population density.
deprivation component of this index was integrated in our analyses.
Total population at the DA level were obtained from Statistics
Canada and population densities calculated. Values of population
densities were also allocated to individuals through spatial extrac-
tion queries using ArcGIS (ESRI). Population densities for each period
were segmented into four quartiles, reflecting variations into the
level of urbanity. The fourth quartile was not only representing the
highest population density, but supposedly higher presence of urban
services, and hypothetically more complex processes in terms of
population socioeconomic profiles and values of goods and services.
The first quartile was more representative of the less urbanized
environment with a supposedly higher physical proximity of GS.
2.3. Dealing with green spaces multiple functions
Good quality data on the evolution of GS and their functions is
often difficult to find. In our case, the availability of such data was
restricted to the periods under study (1996e2011) for the type of
analyses we had planned (Appendix C, Figs. C.1eC.3). This recent
period was also interesting as it coincided with major efforts by
both urban areas to develop their GS and a strong economic growth
that spurred apartment and home building on a large scale.
Given the multiple types of GS, we designed a conceptual model
based on the potential attractiveness of their intrinsic functions
(Fig. 2). These include natural functions as represented by regional/
national parks and wooded lands; hedonic functions identified
through parks with sports facilities and those dedicated to fairs and
other fun activities. Safety of GS is also an important attractive factor;
however we could not obtain reliable data to integrate this factor into
the final analysis. Other factors directly related to the physical access
to GS were walking and cycling tracks and all types of roads, defined
by a binary variable describing if they crossed or not a GS. A Euclidian
distance calculation method was used for the calculation of the
nearest distance (maximum of 200 m) from GS to public
37
transportation stations (Bus and/or subway, called Metro). There is
actually no subway in Quebec City, and the biggest GS in Montreal are
connected to the Metro network. Were definitively considered as a
“green space”, all open areas containing vegetation in addition of the
functions previously described. The presence of vegetation within
open areas was monitored using spatial queries under ArcGIS of ESRI.
Data from the DMTI7 (see Appendix B for a detailed description) were
used as source to build all the GS variables for three reference pe-
riods: 2000 for the first period (P1), 2005 for the second period (P2),
and 2011 for the third and last period (P3). Thus the minimal surface
of GS was predefined by the DMTI database. Depending on the
availability and quality of data, some of the types of GS were only
defined for P3. The DMTI database was also the source used for the
definition of transportation networks (all types of roads) for the three
periods. For P3 only, we added the data on public transport from
RTC8, STM9 and TCJC10 to the DMTI base to obtain the geographic
position of public transportation stations. We used municipal maps
to define the geographic networks of cycling and walking tracks.
However, the complete historic set of data on public transportation
stations and cycling/walking tracks were not reliable for P1 and P2.
2.4. Dealing with distance accuracy for the measurement of green
space proximity
Distance calculation of individuals to GS were not based on the
container approach (centroids of polygons representing the geo-
metric definition of GS as destination points) as it is often done,
because we estimated that this calculation method is biased (Omer,
2006) and can misrepresent actual access to GS. We found it more
7
Desktop Managing technologies Inc.
8
seau de Transport de la Capitale, Quebec City.
Re
9
te
Socie
de transport de Montre
al.
10
Transport Collectif de La Jacques-Cartier, near Quebec City.
38 R. Ngom et al. / Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51

Fig. 2. Conceptual model of green spaces with their intrinsic functions.

Fig. 3. A calculation of population's distances to green spaces based on green spaces boundaries.

realistic to consider a mix of the travel costs and spatial interaction
models (Zhang et al., 2011). So we characterized access to GS
through the transportation network including all types of roads and
tracks. The definition of access points to GS was primarily corre-
sponding to the intersections between the transportation network
and GS (Fig. 3). For GS that had no intersection with the trans-
portation network, we transformed their polygons into several
points corresponding to their nodes. In the topological language, a
polygon is made of nodes and edges (lines) and nodes are used to
bound edges. This allowed us to obtain x and y coordinates of the
location of points from the borders of GS but also a z-value corre-
sponding to the identifier of each GS. Thus, for most of the GS we
obtained multiple points sharing the same unique identifier and
the same functions in the database. Distance calculations from in-
dividuals homes (six-digit postal codes) to GS represented by
previously calculated points were weighted by the transportation
network and the topography. In doing so, natural restrictions such
as water bodies and artificial restrictions defined by roads di-
rections were considered and a more realistic distance to GS was
obtained. This was done using network analyst of ArcGIS (ESRI).
 R. Ngom et al. / Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51
Fig. 4. Times series of the relative difference of distances to green space.
Weighted distance to the closest GS and surface area of this GS
were stratified by population density, deprivation index, age and
gender. Descriptive statistics were obtained based on that stratifi-
cation. Distance to the closest GS and surface area of this closest GS
were used as dependant variables in factorial ANOVA analysis,
completed by base level regressions models. Those models
included interactions terms between dependent variables. Further
analyses including the specific qualities of GS were developed for
P3 (which was the most complete in terms of availability of data
describing the qualitative functions of GS).
For mapping, the variation of the distance of individuals to the
closest GS for P2 and P3 was considered. We were particularly
interested in areas where the distance to GS was significantly
reduced during these selected periods. The calculation was based
on the difference in distances between the first year and last year
ðdti1  dti0 Þ for each of the selected period. With dti0 being the
distance value of individuals to the nearest GS for the first year of
the selected period (2001 for P2 and 2006 for P3) and dti1 being the
distance value of individuals to the nearest GS for the last year of
the selected period (2005 for P2 and 2011 for P3). As a prerequisite,
we considered a distance of 400 m (about five walking minutes) as
being the minimum value beyond which one could consider that a
significant variation happened. Therefore a reduction in distance to
the closest GS was implying both an absolute value of more than
400 m and a value of dti0 superior to dti1  dti0 :
Distance reduction ¼ fjdti1  dti0 j; with jdti1
 dti0 j > 400 meters and dti0 > dti1 g
A distance of 400 m is an empirical compromise based on
guidelines from various cities concerning the maximum distance to
39
a GS (European Common Indicators 2003; Lancaster, 1987; Stahle,
2010; World Health Organization, 2010). The requirements for a
maximum distance to a GS may vary according to the type of GS.
Natural parks do not necessarily need to have the same maximum
distance as pocket parks for example.
To identify hot spots of areas where the distance to GS were
significantly reduced, we developed Getis-Ord Gi* statistics (and
their 95% confidence interval). The spatial weighting was based on
a K-nearest neighbors algorithm with k ¼ 3 (Getis & Ord, 2010).
Relative differences of distances to the nearest GS were calculated
between extreme categories of densities, deprivation index, age
and gender. ANOVA analyses were performed to test the signifi-
cance of various relationships between individuals and the prox-
imity of GS.
3. Results
3.1. Higher disparities according to the deprivation index and
population densities
The variability (relative difference of the distance) in access to
GS was very important according to densities and deprivation
index. People living in less dense areas had an overall better
access to GS in general (without considering their specific char-
acteristics) (Fig. 4) and socioeconomically deprived individuals
had an overall worse access. We systematically found significant
statistical association between those two variables and the dis-
tance to GS as well as with the surface values of the nearest GS
(Table 1).
Focusing on the stratification of the access to GS by population
densities, relative differences of distance to GS between extreme
quartiles of density were higher for the CMA of Quebec (Fig. 4; see
40 R. Ngom et al. / Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51

legend for study years) and remained relatively stable from the
first period (P1) to the third period (P3). Meanwhile in compari-
son, the CMA of Montreal showed an important chronological
increase of the relative difference in access to GS when stratified
by the extreme quartiles of the population density. Actually, for
the CMA of Montreal, the relative difference was almost multi-
plied by two between the first and the latest periods (from 20% to
37%) (Fig. 4).
The CMA of Montreal also distinguished itself by showing a
continuous increase of the relative differences between extreme
categories of deprivation, while this value considerably decreased
for the CMA of Quebec during the study period (Fig. 4). When we
consider the overall distances to GS (both CMAs), the relative dif-
ferences between the two age groups and gender are very low and
even negligible (Fig. 4, Table 1).
As an indicator of the age distribution in the study areas, in-
dividuals aged 45 years and older are predominantly present in the
north eastern outskirts of Quebec CMA (Appendix A. Fig A.1). There
is no major difference in the distribution of the population ac-
cording to the gender (Appendix A. Table A.1). Interactions terms
between density, deprivation and age were always significantly
associated with the distance to and surface of the nearest GS
(Table 1).
In terms of average surface areas of closest GS, a remarkable
change was noticed for the CMA of Montreal for P3, i.e. an in-
crease in the mean area (Fig. 5). It should also be noted that a
change occurred for the age variable in the same P3 period, with
the elderly having access to larger areas compared to the
younger. However, none of the correlation coefficient for age
groups in the base regression models was significant (Table 1).
This overall improvement of mean surfaces at the level of Mon-
treal CMA should not obliterate high disparities related to the
population deprivation.
When considering all GS regardless of their functions, the most
materially deprived people were systematically at greater distances
to GS (Fig. 5). The more affluent had systematically access to larger
GS compared to most deprived (Fig. 5). These trends are validated
by the base regression models (Table 2). Social disparities are more
pronounced in the CMA of Montreal and especially in the more
densely populated areas for all age categories in all periods (Fig. 6

Table 1
Anova Models for age, gender, deprivation index and densities.

Spatial support Dependant variables Distance to nearest green space Surface of the nearest green space

Explanatory variables Mean square Probability > F (ANOVA Mean square Probability > F (ANOVA
(MS) Model)* (MS) Model)*

Overall Density (P1) 3127.91 .000 9025.20 .000

Density (P2) 5826.57 .000 1454.64 .000
Density (P3) 4158.70 .000 1363.08 .000
Gender (P1) 2.157 .08 1.57 .514
Gender (P2) .12 .615 8.17 .044
Gender (P3) .65 .307 1.85 .438
Age (P1) 80.11 .000 29.40 .008
Age (P2) 339.09 .000 19.28 .002
Age (P3) 85.09 .000 79.40 .000
Deprivation index (P1) 1292.08 .000 934.98 .000
Deprivation index (P2) 601.02 .000 3496.66 .000
Deprivation index (P3) 1294.28 .000 2876.15 .000
Density, deprivation index and age (P3) (interaction 8.52 .000 10.07 .000
term)
CMA of Density (P1) 1619.20 .000 5756.15 .000
Montreal Density (P2) 7015.74 .000 566.48 .000
Density (P3) 2334.46 .000 1838.17 .000
Gender (P1) 1.076 .218 2.34 .441
Gender (P2) .07 .676 2.33 .284
Gender (P3) 1.115 .175 .31 .749
Age (P1) 39.95 56.23 2.84 .395
Age (P2) 110.79 .000 39.83 .000
Age (P3) 30.85 .000 37.48 .000
Deprivation index (P1) 601.52 .000 574.97 .000
Deprivation index (P2) 315.36 .000 3511.64 .000
Deprivation index (P3) 1050.59 .000 3223.74 .000
Density, deprivation index and age (P3) (interaction 5.06 .000 17.82 .000
term)
CMA of Quebec Density (P1) 1277.00 .000 2797.37 .000
Density (P2) 1311.75 .000 2911.61 .000
Density (P3) 11.54 .000 419.98 .000
Gender (P1) .16 .381 2.76 .472
Gender (P2) .586 .381 1.466 .364
Gender (P3) .252 .502 7.66 .118
Age (P1) 27.40 .000 145.41 27.13
Age (P2) 41.30 .000 57.95 .000
Age (P3) 21.59 .000 24.96 .004
Deprivation index (P1) 1268.22 .000 721.17 .000
Deprivation index (P2) 410.94 .000 523.82 .000
Deprivation index (P3) 427.79 .000 1073.83 .000
Density, deprivation index and age (P3) (interaction 7.26 .000 17.57 .000
term)

CMA ¼ Census Metropolitan Area.

P1 ¼ Period 1 (1996e2000); P2 ¼ Period 2 (2001e2005); P3 ¼ Period 3 (2006e2011).
*P values rounded to 3 decimals.
 R. Ngom et al. / Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51 41

Fig. 5. Distribution of mean distances and mean areas of the nearest green space.

and Table 2). These areas correspond to the first densest urban
cores. In the Montreal CMA, these areas mostly correspond to the
Island of Montreal.
The Getis-Ord Gi * map shows that the distance reduction to GS
was actually mostly done on the island of Montreal during the last
period. A hot spot is however present in the first urban core of
Quebec City. Everything happens as if the positive changes observed
at P3 are mostly for the benefit of the urban cores compared to
changes observed between the first and second period (Fig. 7).
The largest relative difference of access (63%) between
extreme categories of deprivation was characterized by GS served
by walking/cycling tracks. People belonging to the lowest socio-
economic category were significantly more distant to this type of
GS in the Montreal CMA (coefficient ¼ .90, p < .001) (Fig. 8 A1
42 R. Ngom et al. / Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51
Table 2
Values of ANOVA models for deprivation index for the third period (2006e2011).
Study site Independent variables
Overall Deprivation index (P3)
Category 1 (base)
Category 2 (intermediate deprivation category)
Category 3 (most deprived)
CMA of Montreal Deprivation index (P3)
Category 1 (base)
Category 2 (intermediate deprivation category)
Category 3 (most deprived)
CMA of Quebec Deprivation index (P3)
Category 1 (base)
Category 2 (intermediate deprivation category)
Category 3 (most deprived)
CMA ¼ Census Metropolitan Area.
P1 ¼ Period 1 (1996e2000).
*P values rounded to 3 decimals.
and A2), while in the Que
bec CMA, this difference was not sig-
nificant. The most deprived people of age 20 to 64 living in the
less dense areas of Montreal's CMA were also the most distant to
GS served by walking/cycling tracks (mean distance of 2210 m).
In contrast, the most distant to such types of GS in the CMA of
Quebec were the most deprived living in the densest areas (mean
distance of 950 m only).
Only GS that feature sport activities were clearly more accessible
to people living in extremely dense areas (coefficient ¼ .77;
p < .001 for the CMA of Montreal and coefficient ¼ .93 and
p < .001 for the CMA of Quebec) (Fig. 8 B1 and B2). Inequalities of
access to GS having sport facilities were significantly correlated to
the deprivation index. Poorer groups were statistically significantly
more distant than the less deprived in the CMA of Montreal
(coefficient ¼ .47; p < .001). The differences, however, were more
pronounced in less dense areas of the CMA of Montreal (Fig. 8 B1
and B2). For the age group 20e64 years, a mean distance of 980 and
2000 m respectively for the least deprived and most deprived
people was calculated. Similar values where obtained for the age
category of 65 years and over, (930 and 1750 m, respectively). In the
densest areas of the CMA of Montreal, these values hovered around
400 m only for all age groups.
The sole type of GS which was more accessible to the most
disadvantaged is that with fairs and other fun functions in P3. The
relationship between the distance to such types of GS and depri-
vation categories was only significant for the CMA of Quebec, with
the most deprived showing a higher access (coefficient ¼ .51;
P ¼ .020). This type of GS was absent in extremely dense areas
(Fig. 9 C1 and C2). The statistical relationship between categories of
densities and distance to those types of GS was not significant.
For the other functions of GS (proximity to roads, natural
functions, proximity of bus or metro stations), the density variable
was the only statistically significant, notably for the GS proximity to
roads in Montreal CMA and proximity of bus stations to GS in
Quebec CMA (see Appendix).
4. Discussion
4.1. The impact of gentrification
Like most big cities, Montreal is faced with complex challenges
related to the development of its urban space, involving multiple
constraints to urban growth, emerging challenges in terms of sus-
tainable development, including environmental considerations,
Distance to the nearest Surface of the nearest
green space* green space*
Coef. P>t Coef. P>t
.14 .000 .34 .000
.14 .000 .64 .000
.02 .000 .32 .000
.18 .000 .82 .000
.05 .000 .41 .000
.04 .005 .23 .000
pressures of civil society and tax payers. Those constraints may be
contradictory. The results of the present paper show a significant
improvement of the access to GS over time, in line with recent ef-
forts and policies (Plan me
tropolitain d'ame
nagement et de
de
veloppement, 2014). However, this policy effort appears to be
insufficient in view of the variability of access between different
social groups. These relate to all age groups and are more alarming
in the densest areas of the island of Montreal. Everything happens
as if we are witnessing a process of gentrification (Glass, 1964) with
a significant impact on access to GS. Gentrification benefits de-
velopers and can benefit cities' coffers, as higher property values
lead to more property tax revenue.
The example of Montreal underlines the additional role of GS
quality and social functions in the social stratification of their
access. This particularly applies to GS that demands higher in-
vestments in sports equipment and, more generally, in those that
are beneficial to health trough physical activities. Several studies
found that people living in densely populated areas have a better
health, because those areas offer more opportunities for physical
activity, including walking (Aytur, Rodriguez, Evenson, &
Catellier, 2008; Boarnet, Greenwald, & McMillan, 2008;
Gordon-Larsen, Nelson, Page, & Popkin, 2006; Kirk, Penney, &
McHugh, 2010; Leal & Chaix, 2011; Pont, Ziviani, Wadley, Ben-
nett, & Abbott, 2009). The green gentrification process appears to
be one of the biggest barriers to more environmental justice
(Dahmann et al., 2010; Jennings et al., 2012; Krueger & Gibbs,
2007; Wolch et al., 2014).
4.2. Green space geography, geometry and functions matter
Lessons learned from the example of Montreal and Quebec City
CMAs, suggest the need to consider several key factors when
looking for solutions to a more equitable access to GS. One can
argue that given the moderate size of Quebec City, the level of social
disparities is lower than in larger cities. However, it is also true that
the distribution of GS is less centralized than in Montreal where big
parks such as the Mount Royal and the Angrignon are of crucial
importance, given their size, the spatial configuration of the island
and the poor access to the St. Lawrence River due to industrial and
port activities. In the Que
bec CMA, specific GS features such as the
linear park of the St. Charles River with a 32 km walking/cycling
track across town and a 50 km one along the St. Lawrence River
have been developed and they allow a more equitable access to GS
than in the Montreal CMA.
 R. Ngom et al. / Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51 43

Fig. 6. ANOVA models of distances to green space.

The history of this linear park is a testimony of the importance of
the implication of the community in the protection and conserva-
tion of their natural environment. In the 1990s non-governmental
organizations in Quebec City successfully fought for the ecological
revitalization of the St. Charles River, particularly for its most ur-
banized section (Riviere vivante 2009; Ville de Quebec 2014). One
should note that this linear park is characterized by the presence of
various features which render it more attractive. In this particular
example, various functions are singularized to attract various
communities. Specifically, an important role is played by the blue
space (the river), which suggests that blue and green spaces func-
tions can be efficiently used to attract various types of users. The
key role of walking/biking tracks should also be mentioned. The
important role of GS, geography, geometry and specific functions
suggest that the standard measurements of GS access, as estab-
lished by the World Health Organization and many cities, should be
reviewed to incorporate measures of equitable access and features
favorable to physical exercise.
We may need to make a distinction between the accessibility to
GS trough the metro and the one through the bus, since metro
could be of a higher efficiency given its high frequency. The fact that
the less dense population has a better access to GS trough the
public transportation and roads (see Appendix C, Fig. C.4) may
actually explain the lowest socioeconomic disparities in those
areas. Despite a more extended metro network in the most popu-
lated areas of Montreal, the difference of access to GS through the
44 R. Ngom et al. / Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51
Fig. 7. Reduction of distance (beyond the minimal distance of 400 m) between individuals and green spaces.
metro and bus remains high between the most deprived and the
wealthier ones (see Appendix C, Fig. C.4). This result supports our
conclusions suggesting that the structure of the cities, particularly
that of Montreal, clearly shows a socioeconomic difference that
could be related to the structure of the city within which the ge-
ometry (shape) and geographic insertion of GS is important.
An observable phenomenon is that the size of GS are much
reduced in densest areas, this probably impacts on the ability of GS
in those areas to provide ecological services. This is testified by a
higher impact of Urban Heat Islands (UHI) in central zones. This
situation also highlights the importance of other GS social services
and leads to a higher competition for their access by the population.
Those transformations induced by the development of the popu-
lation are challenging for the sustainability of cities, since ecological
services of GS are an important part of this sustainability.
4.3. How to measure green space access and which of their
functions to develop?
In planning practice, attraction and accessibility are basic open
space standards measures. Attraction is usually measured in terms
of surface area, while accessibility is measured in terms of metric
distance (Stahle, 2010). Those basic measures have been used in the
USA (Lancaster, 1987) and in Europe (European Common Indicators
2003; Harrison, Burgess, Millward, & Dawe, 1995). Commonly, the
availability of and access to GS is measured in terms of their surface
per total population. Montreal with its 1.2 ha per 1000 inhabitants
(or 12 m2 per capita) is often treated as being the bad Canadian big
city, despite the fact that this figure exceeds the 9 m2 per capita
recommended by the World Health Organization (Montreal's
Urban Sustainability Experience, 2014; World Health
Organization, 2010). In comparison, Toronto offers 3.24 ha and
Ottawa 8 ha per 1000 inhabitants (Montreal's Urban Sustainability
Experience, 2014). While this approach allows a comprehensive
assessment of the availability of GS compared to the number of
inhabitants, it does not allow to measure the degree of equity in
actual physical access to GS, as access depends on several factors
such as physical transportation networks, natural barriers (e.g.
water bodies, slopes), artificial ones (e.g. highways) and socio-
political realities such as gentrification, as shown in this paper.
The measurement approach developed in this study un-
derlines the key role of transportation network specifically that
of biking/walking tracks, integrated as a functions of GS. It is
specifically the biking/walking tracks that allow an equitable
accessibility to GS in the CMA of Quebec City. The role of the
linear parks of Quebec City also underlines the necessity to
integrate multiple functions of GS in the definition and mea-
surement of a specific GS, which has been only partially done in
this study. Altogether, this suggests a complex imbrications be-
tween elements of attraction and those of accessibility with the
consequence that the GIS-based measurements should not be
exclusively centered on a specific polygon representing a given
GS, but also take into account the elements inside and sur-
rounding a GS that are relevant for one's analysis. In our specific
example, the importance of the St. Charles river lead to the
question to know if blue spaces should be integrated together
 R. Ngom et al. / Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51 45

Fig. 8. ANOVA models of distances to green space having biking/walking tracks and sport facilities functions.

Fig. 9. ANOVA models of distances to green space with fairs and other fun functions.
46 R. Ngom et al. / Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51
with GS. Said in other words, the semantic and conceptual def-
initions of GS will strongly influence planning and measurements
methods necessary to improve environmental equity.
However, achieving a better access to the social services of GS
does not resolve the equation satisfying both the social and
ecological services offered by GS. It is therefore difficult to
establish a consensual measurement method to evaluate a
response to these multiple expectations. In this case, a calculation
of distances weighted by the transportation network as done in
this paper will neglect the potential ecological benefits of GS,
since the measurement of GS response to ecological issues such
as pollution and urban heat do not follow the same geographic
rules. Bringing into the equation the variables of ecological ser-
vices could somewhat tilt the balance towards other consider-
ations such as size and biodiversity.
5. Conclusions
Our results showed a better social equity in the access to GS for
people in the Que
bec CMA, partly due to the development of linear
parks with long distance walking/cycling tracks along blue spaces
(rivers). In contrast, the Montreal CMA which appears to have
focused the development of the most attractive GS in the densest
areas of the island of Montreal in recent years, is showing higher
social disparities in the access to GS with the poorest always being
the most distant from GS. The wealthiest have not only improved
their access to GS but have access to GS that promote physical ac-
tivity such as those with sports equipment and cycling/walking
tracks. This configuration of the GS in the CMA of Montreal reflects
a socio-political reality probably driven by a gentrification process
with a negligible contribution of age and gender.
These results underline the limits of policies and measure-
ment standards that promote the development of GS availability
based mostly on their total surface. They suggest that the quality
Fig. A.1. Median age of the population in the study site.
and geographic access to GS could be of higher importance than a
simple consideration of total GS surface per capita. They also
suggest that the integration of multiple functions and elements
surrounding a GS such as blue spaces could lead to a higher
attractiveness and accessibility (and overall public health bene-
fits), despite a violation of what is commonly qualified as GS.
Measurements challenges are remaining complex however,
because of other social and ecological expectations. In terms of
sustainability and considering their complex agenda, challenges
are even more demanding for a metropolis.
With the current worldwide epidemic of obesity, diabetes and
chronic diseases, it is more than urgent to consider ways to effec-
tively use GS as an opportunity for primary prevention. A thorough
consideration of methods of measuring the availability and access
to GS over time is therefore important, as shown here.
5.1. Limitations of this study
An endogeneity issue might exist. In fact, gentrification might be
a result as well as a cause of green space development. As our data
does not allow assessing causal relationships over time between
gentrification and GS development, it remains difficult to elaborate
on the situation.
Acknowledgments
We thank the Fonds vert of the Quebec Government for financing
this project. Thanks to Louis Rochette, Belkacem Abdous, Erwan
Gloaguen, Ve
ronique Bouzaglou and the team of the unit « Sur-

terminants » at the
veillance des maladies chroniques et de leurs de

publique du Que
Institut national de sante
bec for their assistance.
Appendix A. Sociodemographic description of the study site
 R. Ngom et al. / Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51 47

Table A.1
Ratio of men to women by population densities and CMA.

Population density category CMA Ratio of men to women

P1 P2 P3

1 (Less dense) Montreal 1.01 1.00 1.01

1 Quebec 1.01 1.00 1.00
2 Montreal 0.99 0.98 0.98
2 Quebec 0.99 0.98 0.98
3 Montreal 0.98 0.97 0.98
3 Quebec 0.97 0.96 0.99
4 (Most dense) Montreal 0.96 0.97 0.97
4 (Most dense) Quebec 0.98 0.96 0.96

Fig. A.2. Median deprivation of the population in the study site.

Appendix B. Description of Desktop Managing technologies
Inc (DMTI) data
We used the CanMap product suite which is the richest, most
detailed mapping content available for Canada. Companies like
Garmin and Google Allstream depend upon DMTI data (http://
www.dmtispatial.com/canmap/). This implies that the
spatial resolution of the data that were used in this study is exactly
the same that one can visualize in Garmin or google products.
The CanMap Postal Code Suite is the most complete postal ge-
ography available in the market. The Six Digit Postal Code File
which is a precision-based point file representation of postal codes
across Canada. Scale is 1:50,000.
The CanMap Parks and Recreation produced by DMTI, represents
over 1600 national, provincial and territorial parks and over 14,000
recreation areas across Canada. Includes: National, Provincial, Ter-
ritorial, ecological reserves, Wilderness parks and areas, Wildland
parks, Grizzly bear sanctuaries, recreational areas, municipal parks,
private parks and golf courses, protected areas, heritage parks,
natural parks, park reserve boundaries and points.
CanMap Route Logistics, based on the highest quality street
map data available, provides an accurate map fabric that includes
among others road directions, type, transportation route re-
strictions layer, travel time and travel speed estimates based on
road elevations.
The Enhanced Points of Interest (EPOI) file is a national database
of over 1 million Canadian business and recreational points of in-
terest. Engineered using CanMap® Streetfiles, each EPOI has been
accurately geocoded and precisely placed. Nationwide features
available include Coordinate location (x, y).
48 R. Ngom et al. / Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51

Appendix C. Additional description of green spaces and their

accessibility

Fig. C.1. green spaces location in 2001.

R. Ngom et al. / Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51 49

Fig. C.2. green spaces location in 2005.

Fig. C.3. green spaces location in 2011.

50 R. Ngom et al. / Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51

Fig. C.4. ANOVA models of distances to green spaces having various functions.
 R. Ngom et al. / Applied Geography 66 (2016) 35e51 51

Table C.1
Significant values of ANOVA models for additional Green spaces functions.

Study site Green spaces functions Proximity of bus/ Proximity of roads Green spaces with
metro stations to to the nearest GS natural functions
the nearest GS

Variables Coef. P>t Coef. P>t Coef. P>t

CMA of Montreal Most dense compared to the least dense (base) .06 .000 .46 .000 .17 .000
Most deprived compared to least deprived (base) .18 .000 .14 .000 .11 .000
CMA of Montreal Most dense compared to the least dense (base) .30 .000 .20 .000 .30 .000
Most deprived compared to least deprived (base) .11 .005 .01 .046 .04 .005

CMA ¼ Census Metropolitan Area.

Footnotes Obesity Rev, 11(2), 109e117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-789X.2009.00611.x.

1 GS: Green spaces
2 CMA: Census Metropolitan Areas
3 QICDSS: Integrated Chronic Disease Surveillance System
4 P1: Period 1(1996 to 2000)
5 P2: Period 2(2001 to 2005)
6 P3: Period 3(2006 to 2011)
7 DA: Dissemination Area
8 ESRI: Environmental System Research Institute
9 DMTI: Desktop Managing technologies Inc.
10 RTC: Re
seau de Transport de la Capitale, Quebec City
11 STM: Socie
te

de transport de Montre
al
12 TCJC: Transport Collectif de La Jacques-Cartier, near Quebec City
References
Aytur, S., Rodriguez, D., Evenson, K., & Catellier, D. (2008). Urban containment
policies and physical activity. A time-series analysis of metropolitan areas,
1990e2002. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 34(4), 320e332. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.01.018.
Boarnet, M. G., Greenwald, M., & McMillan, T. E. (2008). Walking, urban design, and
health e toward a cost-benefit analysis framework. Journal of Planning Education
and Research, 27(3), 341e358. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0739456X07311073.
Costanza, R., De Groot, R., Sutton, P., Van der Ploeg, S., Anderson, S. J.,
Kubiszewskia, I., et al. (2014). Value of ecosystem services global. Environmental
Change. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.002.
Coutts, C., Horner, M., & Chapin, T. (2010). Using geographical information system to
model the effects of green space accessibility on mortality in Florida. Geocarto
International, 25(6), 471e484.
Dahmann, N., Wolch, J., Joassart-Marcelli, P., Reynolds, K., & Jerrett, M. (2010). The
active city? Disparities in provision of urban public recreation resources. Health
and Place, 16(3), 431e445.
European Common Indicators (ECI). (2003). Towards a local sustainability profile.
Milano: Ambiente Italia Research Institute.
Getis, A., & Ord, K. (2010). The analysis of spatial association by use of distance
statistics. In L. Anselin, & S. J. Rey (Eds.), Perspectives on spatial data analysis,
advances in spatial science (pp. 127e145). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01976-0_10.
Gill, S. E., Handley, J. F., Ennos, A. R., & Pauleit, S. (2007). Adapting cities for climate
change: the role of the green infrastructure. Built Environment, 30, 97e115.
Glass, R. (1964). London: Aspects of change. London: Centre for Urban Studies,
University College.
Gordon-Larsen, P., Nelson, M. C., Page, P., & Popkin, B. M. (2006). Inequality in
the built environment underlies key health disparities in physical activity
and obesity. Pediatrics, 117(2), 417e424. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/
peds.2005-0058.
Harrison, C., Burgess, J., Millward, A., & Dawe, G. (1995). Accessible natural green
space in towns and cities: A review of appropriate size and distance criteria.
Peterborough: English Nature. Research Report No.153.
Institut de la Statistique du Que
bec, http://www.stat.gouv.qc.ca/statistiques/
population-demographie/index.html.
Institut de la statistique du Que
bec. Portrait social du Que
bec, e

dition 2010. Online
at: http://www.stat.gouv.qc.ca/statistiques/conditions-vie-societe/portrait-
social2010.pdf#page¼29.
Institut de la statistique du Que
bec. Panorama des regions du Que
bec, edition 2013.
Online at: http://www.stat.gouv.qc.ca/statistiques/profils/panorama-regions-
2013.pdf.
Jennings, V., Johnson-Gaither, C., & Gragg, R. S. (2012). Promoting environmental
justice through urban green space access: a synopsis. Environmental Justice,
5(1), 1e7.
Kirk, S. F. L., Penney, T. L., & McHugh, T. L. F. (2010). Characterizing the obesogenic
environment: the state of the evidence with directions for future research.
Krueger, R., & Gibbs, D. (2007). The sustainable development paradox. New York:
Guilford.
Lancaster, R. A. (1987). Recreation, Parks, and open space standards and guidelines.
New York: National Recreation and Park Association.
Leal, C., & Chaix, B. (2011). The influence of geographic life environments on car-
diometabolic risk factors: a systematic review, a methodological assessment
and a research agenda. Obesity Rev, 12(3), 217e230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/
j.1467-789X.2010.00726.x.
Lee, A. C., & Maheswaran, R. (2010). The health benefits of urban green spaces: a
review of the evidence. Journal of Public Health, 212e222. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1093/pubmed/fdq068.
Luber, G., & McGeehin, M. (2008). Climate change and extreme heat events.
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35(5), 429e435. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.amepre.2008.08.021.
Montreal's Urban Sustainability Experience, 2014. http://musemcgill.wordpress.com/.
Oliveira, S., Andrade, H., & Vaz, T. (2011). The cooling effect of green spaces as a
contribution to the mitigation of urban heat: a case study in Lisbon. Building
and Environment, 46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2011.04.034.
Omer, I. (2006). Evaluating accessibility using house-level data: a spatial equity
perspective. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2005.06.004.
Pampalon, R., Hamel, D., & Raymond, G. (2004). Indice de d
efavorisation pour l'

etude
de la sant

e et du bien-^ etre au Qu
 jour 2001. Institut national de sante
ebec - Mise a

publique du Que
bec.
Pampalon, R., & Raymond, G. A. (2000). A deprivation index for health and welfare
planning in Quebec. Chronic Diseases in Canada, 21, 104e113.
Plan me
tropolitain d'ame
nagement et de de
veloppement, 2014. http://pmad.ca/suivi-
des-actions/trame-verte-et-bleue-du-grand-montreal (Accessed on 23.06.14).
Pont, K., Ziviani, J., Wadley, D., Bennett, S., & Abbott, R. (2009). Environmental cor-
relates of children's active transportation: a systematic literature review. Health
& Place, 15(3), 849e862. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2009.02.002.
Richardson, E. A., Mitchell, R., Hartig, T., De Vries, S., Astell-Burt, T., & Frumkin, H.
(2012). Green cities and health: a question of scale? Journal of Epidemiology and
Community Health, 66, 160e165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech.2011.137240.
re vivante. (2009). Mouvement pour restaurer et naturaliser la rivi
Rivie ere Saint-
Charles. M
emoire d
epos
e par riviere vivante au bureau d'audiences publiques sur
l'environnement a  l'occasion de la consultation publique sur la gestion de l'eau au
Qu
ebec.
Stahle, A. (2010). More green space in a denser city: critical relations between user
experience and urban form. Urban design international, 15, 47e67. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1057/udi.2009.27.
Statistics Canada, 2014a. www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/93-600-x/2010000/definitions-fra.
htm.
Statistics Canada, 2014b. www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/ref/dict/
geo021-eng.cfm.
Thompson, C. W., Roeb, J., Aspinall, P., Mitchell, R., Clowd, A., & Miller, D. (2012).
More green space is linked to less stress in deprived communities: evidence
from salivary cortisol patterns. Landscape Urban Plan. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.landurbplan.2011.12.015.
Van den Berg, A. E., Maas, J., Verheij, R. A., & Groenewegenb, P. P. (2010). Green
space as a buffer between stressful life events and health? Social Science and
Medicine. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.01.002.
Villeneuve, P. J., Jerrett, M., Su, J. G., Burnett, R. T., Chen, H., Wheelere, A. J., et al.
(2012). A cohort study relating urban green space with mortality in Ontario,
Canada? Environmental Research. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2012.03.003.
Ville de Que
bec, 2014. http://www.ville.quebec.qc.ca/rivierestcharles/
environnement.aspx.
Wolch, J. R., Byrne, J., & Newell, J. P. (2014). Urban green space, public health, and envi-
ronmental justice: the challenge of making cities ‘just green enough’. Landscape and
Urban Planning. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.01.017.
World Health Organization, Urban planning, environment and Health: From evi-
dence to policy action, 2010. http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/
0004/114448/E93987.pdf?ua¼1.
Zhang, X., Lu, H., & Holt, J. B. (2011). Modeling spatial accessibility to parks: a na-
tional study. International Journal of Health Geographics, 10, 31. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1186/1476-072X-10-31. Changes in the global.