SYMP 14-2 - Urban social inequities and biodiversity often converge but not always: A global meta-analysis

Thursday, August 15, 2019: 2:00 PM
Ballroom D, Kentucky International Convention Center
Paige S. Warren, Department of Environmental Conservation, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA, Evan R. Kuras, Env Conservation, Univ of Massachusetts, Amherst, Amherst, MA, Myla FJ Aronson, Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Natural Resources, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, Sarel Cilliers, Unit of Environmental Sciences and Development, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa, Mark A. Goddard, Sustainability Research Institute, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom, Charles Nilon, School of Natural Resources, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, Richelle Winkler, Social Sciences, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI and John Zinda, Developmental Sociology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY
Background/Question/Methods

As cities expand globally, it is important to understand how human activities and institutions shape biodiversity and conversely, how ecological processes shape human outcomes. Research in some cities reveals a positive association between socioeconomic status (SES) and species diversity. Yet, other studies show that residents with lower SES enjoy greater biodiversity or that SES and biodiversity appear unrelated. We identified and coded 84 case studies from 34 cities in which researchers assessed SES-biodiversity relationships. We used fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) to evaluate combinations of city-level and study design factors that explain why SES-biodiversity relationships vary city to city and between plants and animals.

Results/Conclusions

While the majority of cases demonstrated increased biodiversity in higher SES neighborhoods, we identified circumstances in which inequality in biodiversity was ameliorated or negated by urban form, social policy, or collective human preference. Overall, the meta-analysis highlights the contributions of residential and municipal decisions in differentially promoting biodiversity along socioeconomic lines. With a more nuanced and global understanding of how biodiversity aligns with socioeconomic inequality in cities, we can better address inequality of nature exposures and experiences now and in the future while at the same time promoting biodiversity conservation and urban sustainability.