Green space as a factor in improving depressed urban areas

[Naomi Sachs, ASLA, EDAC]

I’m sharing this Therapeutic Landscapes Network Blog post because I think that people outside of the Therapeutic Landscapes Network group may also benefit from the references cited. Urban planners, LAs who work in the public sector, and others who don’t usually specialize in “therapeutic landscapes” can use this information to build their case for why green spaces matter, and how they can improve human health and well-being, even (or especially) in depressed urban areas. If anyone has any personal experiences to share regarding this subject, I’d love to hear them here, or as comments on the Blog. Thanks!

[Trace One]

Is this even a question? I thought real estate agents had calculated the added value of green space decades ago..Concrete numbers, that are quite high, and quite realistic, as far as I know….And then in the eighties, New York went even farther, with the theory that green space that is built to high-end standards will be treated better,so investment in public space should not be built cheap, because it does not pay off, over time – people will vandalize it more..
Does any one doubt that green space adds value? Aren’t the numbers quite nailed down? This went along with the tree replacement numbers, which are quite high, in environmental calculations,and fairly well detailed.

[Naomi Sachs, ASLA, EDAC]

I totally agree. Not a question (among most), just further evidence, both anecdotal and quantitative. Ming Kuo’s team at the Landscape and Human Health Lab have contributed significantly to this field over the decades, and this recent article in the Hartford Courant seemed like a good vehicle to tap into the more “serious” research that they are doing. The TLN Blog audience runs the gamut from designers and health and human service providers to home gardeners and nature enthusiasts.

[Author]

Posts