Exploring the Distribution of Parks in Worcester,

MA in an Environmental Justice Perspective

through Equity Mapping Analysis
Sitian Xiong
Erica Issenberg
Fall 2017
Advanced Vector GIS
Clark University

1
 Park Distribution in an Urban Environment
Green Hill Park, Worcester MA
Source: Destination Worcester
➢ Parks within cities play an important role in improving the
quality of life for its citizens by providing a green,
recreational, and community space
➢ The spatial distribution of parks within a city often don’t
accommodate each citizen equally due to their positionality
within a city and their socioeconomic status, as older
neighborhoods and communities of color do not have as
many parks as newer neighborhoods and suburbs do. This
geographical unevenness in the distribution of parks is often
an indicator of environmental injustice in a city (Wolch, 2005).
Elm Park, Worcester MA
Source: City of Worcester
Terms
Environmental Justice: The equal and unbiased treatment of all people
regardless of race, nationality, religion, and income in regards to
development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies (Environmental Justice, EPA).
Equity Mapping: The geographical analysis of the uneven distribution of
amenities between areas of high opportunity and communities with high
concentrations of low-income and minority residents (Equity Mapping and
the Geography of Opportunity, National Neighborhood Indicators
Partnership)
2
Equity Mapping Analysis in Worcester, MA
Many of the ideas behind our project
are based on equity-mapping analysis
carried out in Los Angeles
Main finding: Neighborhoods dominated
by African American, Latinos, and Asian
populations have dramatically lower
levels of access to park resources then
white-dominated areas of the city
We would like to see if minority
populations in Worcester experience
the same inaccessibility to park space
and resources

Demographics per Census

Block Group
White - 69.2 %
African American - 11.5%
Asian - 5.9%
Hispanic - 21.4%

3
 Park Distribution in Worcester, MA
Area of City: 1071.68 square
kilometers

Park Space: 5.04 square kilometers

(1246.4 acres)

Number of Parks Evaluated: 80

*Note on Parks - Used Worcester

Open Space and Recreational Plan to
define which parks to use. Criteria
included a public space that anyone
could use for recreational purposes.
Excluded non-relevant spaces such as
conservation/wildlife areas,
cemeteries, and cultural/historical
place such as monuments)

4
 Research Objectives

1. Examine the general patterns of park distribution and accessibility

within the city boundary of Worcester

1. Spatial autocorrelation (BiLISA) of park accessibility and residents in

accordance to their race and socioeconomic status

5
 Data
United States Census Bureau American FactFinder

➢ 2010 Census Data (population)

➢ Race (2010 Redistricting Data SF,PL 94_171*)
➢ Median Household Income (ACS*, 2009-2013)
➢ Worcester City Boundary and Road Centerlines (TIGER*/Line shapefile)

Mass.gov

➢ Protected and Recreational Open Space (shapefile)

➢ 2010 Census Data (population) - census block group for Worcester (shapefile)

*TIGER: Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing system

*ACS: American Community Survey

*SF: Summary File; PL: Public Law

6
 Data Preparation
Dataset for City of Worcester

7
 Data Preparation
Accessible Park Areas

➢ 500m park service zone (park centroid)

➢ Intersect service area with census block group
➢ Add park’s area to the intersected census block group
➢ One census block group may have many accessible parks
➢ Then divided by population count

8
 Data Preparation
Accessible Park Areas (con’t)

➢ Large parks’ service zones were underestimated

9
 Study Area Calculated by Service Area Tool in Network
Analyst
2). Accessible Park Areas (con’t)

Solution-problem-re-solution:
➢ Use entrances for modeling large parks
➢ Entrances will be counted many times, duplicate
➢ Python script excluding duplicate

10
 Study Area Calculated by Service Area Tool in Network
Analyst
2). Accessible Park Areas (con’t)

The Python script

➢ Arcpy
➢ Find duplicates by same park name

11
 Research Objective #1: Examine the general patterns of park
distribution and accessibility within the city boundary of Worcester

12
Results - Global Autocorrelation/Moran’s I

Park Distribution Accessible Park Area (per capita, by census

block group)

13
 Results - Hot Spot Analysis
Local Statistics:

14
 Results - Hot Spot Analysis
Local statistics:

Local Geary Cluster

➢ More local clusters

15
Research Objective #2: Spatial autocorrelation (BiLISA) of park
accessibility and residents in accordance to their race and
socioeconomic status

16
 Spatial Autocorrelation
Bivariate Moran’s I and BiLISA
Average Park Accessibility and Percentage of White Population and per Census Block Group

17
 Bivariate Moran’s I and BiLISA
Average Park Accessibility Percentage and African American Population per Census Block Group

18
 Bivariate Moran’s I and BiLISA
Average Park Accessibility and Percentage of Asian Population per Census Block Group

19
 Bivariate Moran’s I and BiLISA
Average Park Accessibility and Percentage of Hispanic Population per Census Block Group

20
 Bivariate Moran’s I and BiLISA
Average Park Accessibility and Percentage of Median Household Income per Census Block Group

21
 Discussion
Research Objective #1: Examine the general patterns of park distribution and accessibility within the city
boundary of Worcester

➢ The park distribution itself is randomly distributed, while the accessible park area is clustered

Research Objective #2: Spatial autocorrelation of park accessibility and residents in accordance to their
race and socioeconomic status

➢ Percentage of Asian and Hispanic population per census block group have statistically
significant results - numerous “low-high” areas
➢ Median Household Income is statistically significant for percentage of White populations

22
 Future Research/Limitations
Limitations

➢ Our research was limited to public park space, and did not take into account private green spaces and yards
➢ Network Analyst - many smaller and potentially important roads were excluded, as well as other public areas
that could be used as passageways, e.g, Clark University’s Campus

Further Research

➢ Regression Analysis
➢ Environmental Racism

23
References
“Environmental Justice.” EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, 16 Nov. 2017,
www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice.

“Equity Mapping and the Geography of Opportunity.” National Neighborhood Indicators Partnership
https://www.neighborhoodindicators.org/activities/partner/equity-mapping-and-geography-opportunity

Mass.Gov http://www.mass.gov/anf/research-and-tech/it-serv-and-support/application-serv/office-of-geographic-
information-massgis/datalayers/osp.html

US Census Bureau
https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml

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.

24
 Bi-ISA
Park Map
Centroid
Network Analysis- Accessible Moran
Service area Park area Accessible Plot
park area
Bi-LISA
Random
Road ization

Racial
EDA Scatter
Group
Global plot
Global Moran’s I Moran’s I
Index Bi-ISA
Map
Accessible
park area
Bi-LISA Moran
Plot
Accessible Hot Spot Analysis
Hot spot Map Random
park area (Getis-Ord-Gi*)
ization
Median
Household EDA Scatter
Income
plot
Local
Local Geary’s C Geary’s C
Map

25
 Questions?

Source: James Hunt

Photography 26