Journal of Contemporary Urban Affairs 2020, Volume 4, Number 1, pages 33– 46 Mitigating Environmental Sustainability Challenges and Enhancing Health in Urban Communities: The Multi-functionality of Green Infrastructure * Dr. Adedotun Ayodele Dipeolu 1 , Dr. Onoja Matthew Akpa 2 and Prof. Joseph Akinlabi Fadamiro 3 1 Department of Architecture, College of Engineering and Environmental Studies, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ogun State, Nigeria 2 Department of Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Nigeria 3 Department of Architecture, School of Environmental Technology, Federal University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria 1 E mail: [email protected], 2 E mail: [email protected] , 3 E mail: [email protected] A B S T R A C T A R T I C L E I N F O: Article history: Green Infrastructure (GI) facilities have capacity to enhance health and mitigate Received 26 March 2019 Environmental Sustainability Challenges (ESC). However, the extent of the Accepted 15 June 2019 mitigation and health benefits is unclear in developing countries. This study Available online 29 August examined the impact of GI on ESC and Perceived Health (PH) of urban residents 2019 in Lagos Metropolis, Nigeria. Multi-stage sampling technique was used to select 1858 residents of Lagos Metropolis who completed semi-structured Keywords: questionnaires. Descriptive statistics and chi-square test were used to explore data -Environmental sustainability challenges; distributions and assess association of the availability of GI with resident’s PH and - Green infrastructure; ESC. Odds ratio with 95% confidence interval (OR;95%CI) were estimated for - Perceived health; good health and ESC mitigation. Participants were mostly men (58.9%) and - Mitigating Environmental younger than 50 years old (86.3%). Good health (20.5%) and high mitigation of challenges; ESC (collection and disposal of waste-52.7% and official development assistance- Urban Communities 63.9%) were reported where GI is mostly available. Participants were more likely to report good health (OR:1.40; 95%CI:1.02-1.92) and high mitigation of ESC This work is licensed under a [water quality (OR:1.42; 95%CI:1.12-1.81) passenger transport mode (OR:1.41; Creative Commons Attribution - 95%CI:1.06-1.89)] where GI are mostly available. Availability of Green NonCommercial - NoDerivs 4.0. infrastructure is supporting health and mitigating environmental sustainability "CC-BY-NC-ND" challenges in the study area. Green infrastructure should be provided in urban areas where environmental sustainability is under threat. This article is published with Open Access at www.ijcua.com JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS (2020), 4(1), 33-46. https://doi.org/10.25034/ijcua.2020.v4n1-4 www.ijcua.com Copyright © 2019 Journal of Contemporary Urban Affairs. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction use of more energy, fertilizer and water (Jongman, Urban sprawl, rapid depletion of forest areas and 2003; Gutman, 2007). urban degradation among others has constituted *Corresponding Author: daunting challenges to the environment in recent Department of Architecture, College of Engineering and time. In addition, other more wide-spread land- Environmental Studies, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ogun State, uses, such as agriculture and industrial activities, Nigeria have split up valuable landscapes, intensified the Email address: [email protected] How to Cite this Article: Dipeolu, A. A., Akpa, O. M. and Fadamiro, J. A. (2020). Mitigating Environmental Sustainability Challenges and Enhancing Health in Urban Communities: The Multi-functionality of Green Infrastructure. Journal of Contemporary Urban Affairs, 4(1), 33-46. https://doi.org/10.25034/ijcua.2020.v4n1-4 JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 4(1), 33-46/ 2020 This uncurbed urbanisation and shift from forest Spreeuwenberg & Groenewegen, 2008; Maes et systems to mechanized and grey infrastructure al., 2015). Apart from that, in a recent study among laden environment has resulted in the reduction of poor black and minority ethnic (BME) communities species’ richness and weakened the capacity of in the UK, result suggested that health and ecosystems for natural food production, recreation policy in the UK needs to create more rejuvenation of human health, maintenance of opportunities and green facilities closer to BME aquatic and terrestrial resources, regulate micro- communities in order to address the health climate and air quality in the built environment inequalities experienced by these groups (Roe, (Tzoulas et al., 2007; Ward Thompson, 2011). To Aspinall, & Ward Thompson, 2016; Ward Thompson ameliorate some of these negative consequences et al., 2016). Also, availability of green spaces has of urbanization, strategies of green infrastructure been reported to enhance factors such as was proposed as solution to tackle environmental community cohesion and revitalization, improved sustainability and human well-being especially in housing conditions, neighbourhood pedestrian rapidly developing urban centres (Pakzada & corridors, job availability, and more active youths Osmonda, 2016). in productive ventures (Jennings, Baptiste, Jelks & Green infrastructure (GI) is a network of multi- Skeete, 2017). functional green space facilities that can increase In general, green infrastructure has the capacity to connectivity between existing natural areas, enhance health and mitigate environmental encourage ecological coherence while improving sustainability challenges (Pakzada & Osmonda, the quality of life and well-being. Various research 2016; Jennings et al., 2017), but the aspect or efforts in the built environment are currently dimension of the challenges, the extent of the geared towards improving ecosystem services mitigation and the effect that these will have on through the development of GI (Wolch, Byrne & the health of urban residents in developing nations Newell, 2014; Maes et al., 2015), mostly as a like Nigeria is unclear. The present study therefore, strategy to cope with divers’ environmental examined the mitigating effects of GI on selected sustainability challenges. However, in spite of the environmental sustainability issues as well as the numerous benefits of the green infrastructure, extent to which availability of GI can enhance self- rapid population growth and changes in land uses reported (perceived) health of urban residents in have put these facilities under pressure. This poses Lagos Nigeria. questions regarding the quantity and types of GI within a neighbourhood/community which are required to mitigate environmental sustainability 2. Methods challenges and enhance human health (Maes et 2.1. Participants and procedure al., 2015; Ward Thompson et al., 2016). A total of 1858 residents of Lagos state, Nigeria Specifically, empirical evidences show that participated in this study. Participants were activities or living around green spaces promotes household heads or adult representative who can physical health, psychological well-being, and the and were willing to provide the needed general public health of users (Takano, Nakamura, information. The sampling frame consisted of the Watanabe, 2002; Wolch et al., 2014; Maes et al., 16 Local Government Areas (LGAs) in Lagos 2015). Exposure to street trees, vegetation, green Metropolis. Selected LGAs were sub-divided into parks, gardens and other green spaces in urban participants’ neighbourhood defined by areas has been connected with multiple health Enumeration areas (EAs). In each EA, households benefits, including reduced mortality, morbidity, were systematically sampled from the list of mental fatigue, stress, and being more physically numbered houses (households) until the required active (Takano et al., 2002; de Vries et al., 2003; sample size allocated to the EA was reached. Maas et al., 2009). Other environment-related Consenting participants (household heads) were benefits range from carbon sequestration, given the study questionnaire to complete in improved air and water quality, control of air English language. Ethical approval (with number pollution to urban heat island effect (Gómez- MOE/OES/7250/52) for this study was obtained Mu˜noza, Porta-Gándarab & Fernándezc, 2010). from the Lagos State Ministry of Environment In addition, studies from Australia (Humpel et al., Ethical Review Committee. 2004; Sugiyama, Leslie, Giles-Corti & Owen, 2008) have identified that the quality of parks and 2.2. Measures landscapes in people’s neighbourhood may Demographic information contribute to more active lifestyles. Similar studies The study used a semi-structured questionnaire to in Netherlands demonstrated the benefits of green collect data on participant’s demography. Some spaces near homes and their impact on stress and of the information in the socio-demographic other patterns of morbidity associated with section of the questionnaire included gender, accessing distance green spaces (Maas, Verheij, age, family size, marital status, household size, Dr. Adedotun Ayodele Dipeolu, Dr. Onoja Matthew Akpa and Prof. Joseph Akinlabi Fadamiro 34 JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 4(1), 33-46/ 2020 ethic group, religion, occupation and rank in coefficient of 0.87 for the GHQ scale in a study occupation/income level. conducted in Iran, to assess the reliability and validity of the 12-item instrument. Availability of green infrastructure Preliminarily, participants were asked to specify if 2.2.4. Environmental Sustainability Challenges green infrastructure is available in their Five facets measuring general environmental neighbourhood, the approximate distance of the sustainability challenges were extracted from 27 GI facilities from their location, the type of GI facets of sustainability in a Report of the Joint facilities available in their neighbourhood, reasons UNECE/OECD/Eurostat working group on statistics for visiting GI sites and other related questions. To for sustainable development. measure the availability of GI in the (UNECE/OECD/Eurostat, 2008). The five facets neighbourhood; the literature was used to were selected (for their relevance to the issues of ascertain GI types (Takano et al., 2002; Wolch et environmental sustainability in the study setting) for al., 2014) while the authors verified and the present study: Air Pollution (APL), Collection documented all available GI types in the study and Disposal of Waste (CDW), Water Quality area. The available GI in the study areas were (WQT), Passenger Transport Mode (PTM) and grouped into four namely: Green spaces GI, Tree Official Development Assistance (ODA). Literature features GI, Water features GI and other spaces informed indicators or items relevant to the green infrastructure (consisting of green selected facets were used to measure infrastructure facilities that cannot be categorised sustainability challenges related to the facet (SCI, into any of the first three groups). Respondents 2012; Müller et al., 2009; Bonaiuto et al., 2003). were required to identify from the list of GIs in each Participants were required to show their group, all GI facilities present in their agreement or disagreement to the 21 indicators neighbourhood. (arranged within 5 facets) on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 7 = strongly 2.2.3. Health Benefits of Green Infrastructure agree. Examples of indicators include “residents’ (HBGI). health in this neighbourhood is threatened by air The Health Benefits of Green Infrastructure (HBGI) pollution” and “residents have access to clean was measured with the 12-item General Health drinkable water in this neighbourhood” Questionnaire (GHQ) developed by Goldberg. This (Supplementary Table S2). (GHQ) instrument is a measure of current mental health of participants. The GHQ has been previously used and validated in different nations, 2.3. Data Management and Statistical Analysis settings and cultures with very reliable results Techniques (Goldberg, 1992). Originally, the questionnaire was Initially, frequency tables and cross tabulations developed as a 60-item instrument but shortened were used to explore the distribution of the data versions of the questionnaire were later developed and to enhance data cleaning/editing. Total raw in response to some criticisms of the instrument. score was calculated for each group of the GI Such versions include GHQ-30, the GHQ-28, the type [i.e Total Green spaces GI (TGRS), Total Tree GHQ-20, and the GHQ-12. The scale assessed Features GI (TTRF), Total Water Features GI (TWTF) recent experiences of respondents on a particular and Total Other Spaces GI (TOTH)] as the sum of GI symptom or behaviour. Each item is rated on a 4- facilities available in the area as indicated by the point scale (1=less than usual, 2=no more than respondent. A GI availability index was created usual, 3=rather more than usual and 4=much more using the total raw score as a percentage of the than usual) (Golderberg et al., 1998). Examples of total GI facilities listed in the group. An overall GI items include “been able to enjoy your normal day index was created for each respondent as a total to day activities”, “been able to concentrate on of the group specific indices. The four groups of GI what you’re doing” etc (Supplementary Table S1). availability indices (TGRS, TTRF, TWTF, TOTH), were In the present study, HBGI of the participants was categorized into 3 using the mean (M) and the measured in relation to whether or not they visit standard deviation (SD) as follows: poorly green infrastructure sites over the past 4 weeks. This available (if score < M+SD), moderately available selected duration (one-month) was considered (if M-SD  score  M+SD), and mostly available (if sufficient to assess the health impacts of GI on score > M+SD). Similarly, the total score for the users based on recommendations of the British Health Benefits of GI (HBGI) was categorized into 3 Heart Foundation National Centre (Milton, Bull & using the mean (M) and the standard deviation Bauman, 2011). The 12-item GHQ has been used (SD) as follows: poor health (if score < M+SD), fair to assess health benefits in some settings with health (if M-SD  score  M+SD), and good health reasonable coefficient of reliability. In particular, (if score > M+SD). Each facet of the Environmental Montazeri et al. (2003) reported an alpha Sustainability Challenges were also categorized Dr. Adedotun Ayodele Dipeolu, Dr. Onoja Matthew Akpa and Prof. Joseph Akinlabi Fadamiro 35 JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 4(1), 33-46/ 2020 into 3 using the mean (M) and the standard depending on whether or not, there significant in deviation (SD) as follows: low mitigation (if score < the bivariate (Chi-sqaures) test. All analysis were M+SD), moderately mitigation (if M-SD  score  performed using IBM SPSS statistics version 20 with M+SD, and high mitigation if  M+SD (Issa & significance level set at 5%. Bayeiwu, 2006; Akpa & Bamgboye, 2015). The Chi-square test was used to assess whether level of mitigation of the environmental 3. RESULTS sustainability challenges and good health benefit 3.1. Participants’ Demography and Social were associated with availability of GI facilities in Factors the study area. The categories of the HBGI and More than half (58.9%) of the participants are men each facet of the Environmental sustainability while 41.1% of them are women. Participants are challenges were further dichotomized by mostly younger than 50 years (86.3%) and combining the two upper categories so as to form approximately 57% of them are married. Although only two outcomes. Binary logistic regression most of them had completed tertiary education analysis (Adjusted and unadjusted analyses) was (59.9%), 12% of them did not complete secondary performed to estimate the odds ratio (OR) and education. About 43% of the participants were their respective 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) for self-employed, 28.2% were employees of factors associated with HBGI and each facet of public/private organizations while 11.9% of them environmental sustainability challenges. are unemployed (Table 1). Covariates were included in the logistic regression Table 1: Socio-demographics Characteristics of Respondents (N=1858) Variables Frequency Percentage (%) Sex Male 1095 58.9 Female 763 41.1 Total 1858 Current Age ˂30 699 37.6 30-49 905 48.7 ˃=50 222 11.9 Not Reported 32 1.7 Total 1858 Marital Status Never Married 711 38.3 Married 1049 56.5 Formerly Married 85 4.6 Not Reported 13 0.7 Total 1858 Household Size <=4 1063 57.2 ˃4 786 42.3 Not Reported 9 0.5 Total 1858 Ethnic Group Yoruba 1298 69.9 Others 559 30.1 Not Reported 1 0.1 Total 1858 Highest Educational Qualification Less than Secondary Education 223 12.0 Secondary Education 516 27.8 Tertiary Non Degree Education 604 32.5 Tertiary Degree/Postgraduate Education 510 27.4 Not Reported 5 0.3 Total 1858 Occupation Unemployed 221 11.9 Self Employed 797 42.9 Private/Public Employees 524 28.2 Students & Others 316 17.0 Total 1858 Rank in Occupation/Income Level Junior Staff 478 25.7 Senior Staff 275 14.8 Management Staff/Business Owners 597 32.1 Not Reported 508 27.3 Total 1858 Dr. Adedotun Ayodele Dipeolu, Dr. Onoja Matthew Akpa and Prof. Joseph Akinlabi Fadamiro 36 JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 4(1), 33-46/ 2020 3.2. Factors associated with participants’ completed tertiary education (58.8%) reported perceived Health Benefits of Green Infrastructure perceived good health than those who did not The proportion (20.5%) of participants reporting have more than secondary school education perceived good health was significantly higher (41.1%). Poor health was mostly reported among among those reporting that GI (overall) is mostly participants who were not yet married (23.6%) available in their neighbourhood. Also, the (Table 2). proportion of younger participants, aged <50 years (85.1%) reporting perceived good health was significantly higher compared to participants aged > 50 years (14.8%). Participants who have Table 2: Factors associated with perceived Health Benefits of Green Infrastructure % with poor health % with fair health % with good health P Green Space GI 0.04 Poorly Available 33(17.0) 119(61.3) 42(21.6) Moderately Available 206(22.7) 559(61.5) 144(15.8) Mostly Available 136(19.3) 421(59.9) 146(20.8) Tree Feature GI 0.59 Poorly Available 120(20.3) 369(62.4) 102(30.7) Mostly Available 255(21.0) 730(60.1) 230(69.3) Water Feature GI 0.48 Moderately Available 220(19.7) 691(61.8) 208(81.6) Mostly Available 57(22.9) 145(58.2) 47(18.4) Other Spaces 0.22 Moderately Available 204(21.6) 580(61.4) 160(48.2) Mostly Available 171(19.8) 519(60.2) 172(51.8) Overall GI index 0.03 Poorly Available 72(25.5) 174(61.7) 36(12.8) Moderately Available 131(20.1) 403(61.9) 117(18.0) Mostly Available 172(19.7) 522(59.8) 179(20.5) Participants’ Demography Sex 0.29 Male 221(20.3) 679(62.4) 189(56.4) Female 168(22.1) 447(58.7) 146(43.6) Current Age 0.01 ˂30 173(24.9) 405(58.3) 117(35.3) 30-49 164(18.2) 572(63.5) 165(49.8) ˃=50 45(20.3) 128(57.7) 49(14.8) Marital Status 0.009 Never Married 166(23.6) 410(58.3) 127(38.4) Married 194(18.5) 666(63.5) 189(57.1) Formerly Married 27(31.8) 43(50.6) 15(4.5) Household Size 0.34 <=4 233(22.0) 644(60.8) 182(54.5) ˃4 156(19.9) 475(60.7) 152(45.5) Ethnic Group 0.98 Yoruba 270(20.9) 787(61.0) 234(69.9) Others 119(21.3) 338(60.6) 101(30.1) Highest Educational Qualification 0.04 Less than Secondary 41(18.5) 128(57.7) 53(15.9) Secondary 97(18.9) 332(64.7) 84(25.2) Tertiary Non Degree 138(22.9) 348(57.7) 117(35.1) Tertiary Degree/Postgrad 112(22.1) 316(62.3) 79(23.7) Occupation 0.17 Unemployed 59(26.8) 119(54.1) 42(12.5) Self Employed 149(18.7) 506(63.6) 140(41.8) Private/Public Employees 113(21.6) 318(60.7) 93(27.8) Students & Others 68(21.9) 183(58.8) 60(17.9) Rank in Occupation 0.32 Junior Staff 92(19.3) 296(62.1) 89(38.0) Senior Staff 56(20.4) 180(65.5) 39(16.7) Management Staff 135(22.7) 355(59.6) 106(45.3) Note: percentages were calculated based on the row total of the the 3 categories of each facet of the Environmental Sustainability challenges GI-Green Infrastructure Dr. Adedotun Ayodele Dipeolu, Dr. Onoja Matthew Akpa and Prof. Joseph Akinlabi Fadamiro 37 JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 4(1), 33-46/ 2020 The results of the logistic regression analyses are participants that are aged 30-49 years (OR: 1.49; presented as adjusted and unadjusted odd ratios 95%CI: 1.17-1.90) compared to participants that (OR and aOR) with their respective 95% are less than 30 years of age. Being formerly confidence intervals (CI) in Table 3. The odds of married (OR: 0.47; 95%CI: 0.28-0.81) and aged 30- reporting good health was higher for participants 49 years (OR: 1.39; 95%CI: 1.06-1.61) are in areas where GI (overall) are mostly available independently associated with perceived health (OR: 1.40; 95%CI: 1.02-1.92). Similarly, the odds of benefits of GI (Table 3). reporting good health was higher among Table 3: Association of Green Infrastructure with Perceived Health benefit of GI Odds of Adjusted Odds of Factors Good Health Good Health (95% CI) (95% CI) Green Space GI Poorly Available - - Moderately Available 0.70(0.47-1.05) 0.64(0.42-0.99) Mostly Available 0.86(0.56-1.30) 0.72(0.46-1.13) Overall GI Index Poorly Available Moderately Available 1.36(0.98-1.89) 1.39(0.98-1.96) Mostly Available 1.40(1.02-1.92) 1.37(0.95-1.97) Current Age ˂30 - 30-49 1.49(1.17-1.90) 1.39(1.06-1.61) ˃=50 1.30(0.90-1.89) 1.24(0.83-1.85) Highest Educational Qualification Less than Secondary - Secondary 0.97(0.65-1.46) 0.85(0.55-1.32) Tertiary Non Degree 0.76(0.52-1.13) 0.67(0.44-1.02) Tertiary Degree/Postgrad. 0.80(0.54-1.19) 0.67(0.44-1.03) Marital Status Never Married - - Married 1.36(1.08-1.72) 1.19(0.91-1.55) Formerly Married 0.66(0.41-1.08) 0.47(0.28-0.81) 3.3. Adjusted Effects of Green Infrastructure on Environmental Sustainability Challenges and Participant’s Health Proportion reporting high mitigation of CDW (52.7%) and ODA (63.9) challenges were significantly higher in areas were GI (overall) are mostly available. High mitigation was equally reported for WQT (48.0%) and ODA (65.0%) challenges where tree features and green spaces GI were respectively mostly available in the study area (Table 4). Dr. Adedotun Ayodele Dipeolu, Dr. Onoja Matthew Akpa and Prof. Joseph Akinlabi Fadamiro 38 JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 4(1), 33-46/ 2020 Table 4: Association between Availability of GI and Environmental Sustainability challenges Official Collection and Passenger Development Air Pollution Disposal of waste Water Quality Transport Mode Assistance % % % % % reporting reporting reporting reporting reporting Green High High High High High Infrastructure mitigation P mitigation P mitigation P mitigation P mitigation P Green Space GI 0.16 0.52 0.80 0.71 0.03 Poorly Available 97(50.0) 102(52.6) 91(46.9) 111(57.2) 114(58.8) Moderately Available 474(52.1) 470(51.6.2) 437(48.0) 524(57.8) 520(57.4) Mostly Available 327(46.2) 384(54.2) 340(48.0) 387(55.0) 457(65.0) Tree Feature GI 0.89 0.25 0.007 0.78 0.76 Poorly Available 288(48.7) 327(55.3) 281(47.5) 333(56.6) 360(61.2) Mostly Available 610(50.0) 629(51.5) 587(48.1) 689(56.7) 731(60.2) Water Feature GI 0.33 0.33 0.38 0.99 0.49 Moderately Available 565(50.4) 583(52.0) 556(49.6) 647(58.1) 688(60.0) Mostly Available 119(48.0) 139(56.0) 112(45.2) 144(58.1) 159(64.1) Other Spaces 0.77 0.82 0.21 0.05 0.30 Moderately Available 473(49.9) 505(53.3) 468(49.4) 532(56.4) 563(59.7) Mostly Available 425(49.2) 451(52.2) 400(46.3) 490(57.0) 528(61.4) Overall GI Index <0.00 Poorly Available 158(55.8) 1 130(45.9) 0.02 142(50.2) 0.45 172(61.2) 0.23 161(57.3) 0.02 Moderately Available 323(49.5) 364(55.8) 312(47.9) 365(56.2) 372(57.3) Mostly Available 417(47.5) 462(52.7) 414(47.2) 485(55.6) 558(63.9) Note: percentages were calculated based on the row total of the 3 categories of each facet of the Environmental Sustainability Challenges GI- Green Infrastructure The results of the logistic regression further show (transportation systems in the cities) was higher in that the odds of reporting high mitigation of water neighbourhoods where other spaces GI are mostly quality challenges was higher in areas where tree available (OR: 1.41; 95%CI: 1.06-1.89) than where feature GI are mostly available (OR: 1.42; 95%CI: they are moderately available (Table 5). 1.12-1.81) than where they are poorly available. Similarly, the odds of reporting high mitigation of challenges relating to passenger transport mode Table 5: Association of Green Infrastructure with Mitigation of Environmental Sustainability Challenge Odds of APL Odds of CDW Odds of WQT Odds of PTM Odds of ODA (95% CI) (95% CI) (95% CI) (95% CI) (95% CI) Green Space GI Poorly Available - Moderately Available 0.92(0.58-1.45) Mostly Available 0.96(0.59-1.55) Tree Feature GI Poorly Available - Mostly Available 1.42(1.12-1.81) Other Spaces Moderately Available - Mostly Available 1.41(1.06-1.89) Overall GI Poorly Available - - - Moderately Available 0.44(0.29 -0.68) 1.08(0.75-1.54) 1.34(0.91-1.99) Mostly Available 0.63(0.41- 0.97) 1.29(0.91-1.82) 1.42(0.94-2.16) GI-Green Infrastructure, APL-Air Pollution, CDW- Collection and Disposal of waste, WQT-Water Quality, PTM- Passenger Transport Mode, ODA-Official Development Assistance Dr. Adedotun Ayodele Dipeolu, Dr. Onoja Matthew Akpa and Prof. Joseph Akinlabi Fadamiro 39 JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 4(1), 33-46/ 2020 4. Discussions previous studies have reported evidences of the In this study, we report comparative results for the positive effect gained by nearby green spaces mitigating effects of GI on selected environmental since this provides a place of contact between sustainability variables. We as well measured the people and nature, increases the potential of extent of self-reported improvement on health of meeting neighbours, and enables social well- urban residents in Lagos Metropolis, in relation to being and social cohesion (Kuo, Bacaicoa & the availability and access to green infrastructure. Sullivan 1998; Wolch et al., 2014). This study was premised on the literature (Takano Furthermore, we found that availability of street et al., 2002; Tzoulas et al., 2007; Pakzada & trees, green garden and parks, private garden or Osmonda, 2016; Ward Thompson et al., 2016; allotment, fountain, streams and other GI facilities Jennings et al., 2017) addressing links between even when available moderately, have provided access to GI facilities and health, particularly levels improved health to residents in the study area. The of reported good health in areas with green link between green spaces and health has been spaces and poor health induced by demonstrated in a number of studies. For instance, environmental sustainability challenges in urban Payne et al. (1998) found that park users reported centres. We explored potential mitigating effects better general perceived health, higher levels of of GI on selected environmental sustainability activity and improved ability to relax than non- issues as well as the extent to which availability of users. Also, it has been shown in previous studies GI can enhance self-reported (perceived) health that those who visit green spaces at least once a of urban residents in Lagos Nigeria. month in winter reported significantly better health First, we attempted to discover the socio- than those who refused to visit green spaces (Ward demographical factors associated with perceived Thompson et al., 2016). In fact, research has also health benefits of GI facilities so as to isolate the been focussed on the effect of nearby trees and independent capacity of GI to impact health in grass visible from apartment buildings on residents’ the study area. A number of socio-demographic effectiveness in facing major life problems characteristics of the study participants were including intra-family aggression by enhancing found to impact perceived health. For instance, mental health (Kuo & Sullivan, 2001; Tzoulas et al., health benefit of GI was reported mostly among 2007). However, it must be acknowledged that, younger participants and individuals who have even though these and other related studies were completed tertiary education. In particular, more controlled for possible confounders, it is impossible of participants aged 30-49 years reported health to completely exclude the possibility of benefit of GI than any other age group. Actually, confounding factors; especially in relation to the links between socio-economic and lifestyle that may inform health in demographic status and health are well neighbourhoods/communities near parks. ascertained (e.g. Dunn & Hayes, 2000; Ross, 2000; The impact of green infrastructure on Tzoulas et al., 2007). The 30-39 years age group environmental sustainability in the present setting is consists of energetic and productive individuals unclear. Participants in the present study reported compared to ages below or above the range. high mitigation of environmental sustainability Consequently, participants within this age group challenges (including collection and disposal of have higher opportunity and possibly better waste, poor water quality, passenger transport emotional and social orientations to enjoy access mode and official development assistance) in to green infrastructure facilities in their neighbourhoods where green infrastructure are neighbourhood compared to other individuals moderately or mostly available. Previous studies in (Conedera et al., 2015). When controlled for age, this area/direction confirmed that green sex, marital and socio-economic status, among infrastructure helps to maintain a healthy urban older adults, past studies have provided evidence environment by using trees and other vegetations of a positive association between self-reported to screen and providing clean air, improving the health (including longevity) and green space (de urban climate and preserving the delicate Vries et al., 2003; Takano et al., 2002). balance of nature (Tzoulas et al., 2007; Nowak, Although we also observed that married Crane & Stevens, 2006). It is therefore not surprising participants and those who were formerly married to found in the present study, that participants reported health benefit of GI than those who had from areas where tree feature GI are mostly never being married, we are unable to provide available where 42% more likely to report high any immediate explanation for this. However, this mitigation of water quality challenges than where result seems to suggest that people are more likely they are poorly available. There are many to benefit from their recreation/outdoor activities evidences in the literature supporting our findings. and access to GI facilities when they engage in Tavakol-Davani et al. (2015) reported that GI such activities with other people than doing so facilities can reduce the amount of storm water alone. This finding is not alien to the literature as entering urban drainage systems and thus improve Dr. Adedotun Ayodele Dipeolu, Dr. Onoja Matthew Akpa and Prof. Joseph Akinlabi Fadamiro 40 JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 4(1), 33-46/ 2020 water quality at urban centres. Many other studies habitat quality and enhances landscape have also evaluated the roles of various types of connectivity for urban flora and fauna. GI on storm water management, carbon sinks and emission controls (Liu, Chen & Peng, 2014; Liu et al., Acknowledgement 2015). The roots of some trees have also been This research received no specific grant from any reported to serve as filters for underground water funding agency in the public, commercial, or not- and thus improving the quality of drinking water. for-profit sectors. (Dong, Guo & Zeng, 2017). Also, participants from areas where other spaces GI (such as non green Conflict of Interest open spaces, non green Parks, school yards etc) The authors have no conflict of interest to report for are mostly available were 41% more likely to report this research. high mitigation of challenges relating to passenger transport mode (transportation systems in the References cities) than where they are moderately available. Akpa, O. M., & Bamgboye, E. A. (2015). Correlates of Similarly, recent studies have advocated for more the Quality of life of Adolescents in families street trees to create tree corridors where affected by HIV/AIDS in Benue State, Nigeria. pedestrian can treck or cycle to various Vulnerable Child Youth Studies, 10(3), 225–242. destination in the city (Singh, 2016; Thaiutsa et al., https://doi.org/10.1080/17450128.2015.1066914 2008). This measure has been suggested as a Bonaiuto, M., Fornara, F., & Bonnes, M. (2003). mitigation strategy against environmental Indexes of perceived residential environment challenges related to passenger transport mode quality and neighbourhood attachment in urban or the transportation systems within the cities. The environments: A confirmation study on the city of approach is seen as a sustainable transport mode Rome. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65, 41-52. that can eventually encourage sustainability in the https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-2046(02)00236-0 cities. Conedera, M., Biaggio, A. D., Seeland, K. Morettia, M., & Home, R. (2015). Residents’preferences and 5. Strengths and limitations use of urban and peri-urban green space in a The present study is a strong and comprehensive Swiss mountainous region of the Southern Alps. contribution to literature on the impact of GI Urban Forestry and Urban Greening 14, 139–147. availability on health and environmental https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2015.01.003 sustainability challenges from this study setting. The de Vries, S. ,Verheij, R. A., Groenewegen, P. P., & epidemiological nature of the study provides a Spreeuwenberg, P. (2003). Natural great opportunity for targeted policy and environments—healthy environments? intervention strategies. The major limitation of this Environmental Planning 35, 1717–1731. study may be the self-administered nature of the https://doi.org/10.1068/a35111 questionnaires which might have introduced some Dong, X., Guo, H., & Zeng, S. (2017). Enhancing future biases. Also, the GHQ-12 version of the General resilience in urban drainage system: Green versus Health Questionnaire adopted for this study may grey infrastructure, Water Research, 4(7), 12-33, equally provide a limitation to the robustness of our https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2017.07.038 findings as we considered no criteria in our Dunn, J. & Hayes, M. (2000). Social inequality, selection of the GHQ-12 among several other population health, and housing: a study of two versions (GHQ-60, GHQ-30, GHQ-28, GHQ-20) of Vancouver neighbourhoods. Soc. Sci. Med. 51, the scale. There were no local studies with which 563–587. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277- to immediately compare our findings, this may 9536(99)00496-7 confer some contextual limitations on the Gutman, P. (2007). Ecosystem services: foundations conclusion of the present study. for a new rural urban compact. Ecological Economics, 62(3–4), 383–387. 6. Conclusion https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.02.027 Green infrastructure plays an integral role in Goldberg, D. (1992). General Health Questionnaire supporting health in the urban communities (GHQ-12). Windsor, UK: NFER-Nelson. studied, through the provision of environmental, www.sciepub.com/reference/128768 social and economic benefits. There are also Golderberg, D., & Williams, P. (1988). A user's guide evidences that green infrastructure mitigates to the General Health questionnaire. Windsor, UK: environmental sustainability challenges in the NFER-Nelson. urban communities studied. In particular, green www.scirp.org/(S(351jmbntvnsjt1aadkposzje))/ref infrastructure improves the liveability of the built erence/ReferencesPapers.aspx? environment through maintenance of ecosystems, Gómez-Mu˜noza, V. M., Porta-Gándarab, M. A., & storm water reduction, improved air, water and Fernándezc, J. L. (2010). Effect of tree shades in urban planning in hot-arid climatic regions. Dr. Adedotun Ayodele Dipeolu, Dr. Onoja Matthew Akpa and Prof. Joseph Akinlabi Fadamiro 41 JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY URBAN AFFAIRS, 4(1), 33-46/ 2020 Landscape and Urban Planning. 94, 149–157. 203–208. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2009.09.002 https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.2009.068395 Humpel, N., Owen, N., Iverson, D., Leslie, E., & Montazeri, A., Harirchi, A. M., Shariati, M., Bauman, A. (2004). Perceived environment Garmaroudi, G., Ebadi, M., & Fateh, A. (2003). The attributes, residential location, and walking for 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12): particular purposes. Am. J. Prev. Med. 26(2), 119– translation and validation study of the Iranian 125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2003.10.005 version. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, Issa, B. A., & Baiyewu, O. (2006). Quality of life of 1(66), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-1- patients with Diabetes mellitus in a Nigerian 66 Teaching Hospital. Hong Kong Journal of Müller, M. M., Kals, E., & Pansa, R. (2009). Psychiatry, 16, 27–33 Adolescents’ emotional affinity toward nature: academicjournals.org/journal/JDE/article-full- A cross-societal study. Developmental Processes, text-pdf/A5CF86C46816 4(1), 59-69. Jennings, V., Baptiste, A. K., Jelks, N. O., & Skeete, R. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/citations;jse (2017). Urban Green Space and the Pursuit of ssionid=F42C17D3468186157F77C8716652BF3F?d Health Equity in Parts of the United States. oi=10.1.1.465.963 International Journal of Environmental Research Nowak, D., Crane, D., & Stevens, J. (2006). Air and Public Health, 14, 1432-1449. pollution removal by urban trees and shrubs in the https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14111432 United States. Urban Forestry and Urban Jongman, R. H. G. (2003). Ecological networks and Greening, 4, 115–123. greenways in Europe: Reasoning and Concepts. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2006.01.007 Environmental Sciences, 15(2), 173-181. Pakzada, P., & Osmonda, P. (2016). Developing a assets.cambridge.org/97805218/27768/frontmatt sustainability indicator set for measuring green er/9780521827768_frontmatter.pdf infrastructure performance. Procedia - Social and Kuo, F. E., Bacaicoa, M., & Sullivan, W. C. (1998). Behavioural Sciences, 216, 68–79. Transforming inner-city neighborhoods: trees, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.12.009 sense of safety, and preference. Environment and Payne, L., Orsega-Smith, B., Godbey, G., & Roy, M. Behaviour, 30, 28–59. (1998). Local parks and the health of older adults: https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916598301002 results from an exploratory study. Parks Kuo, F. E., & Sullivan,W. C., (2001). Aggression and Recreation, 33(10), 64–71. violence in the inner city. Effects of environment https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2537/2b65cb1c via mental fatigue. Environment and Behaviour, 15a253d43304e43cbe56e14ae9b7.pdf 33, 543–571. Roe, J., Aspinall, P. A., & Thompson, C. W. (2016). https://doi.org/10.1177/00139160121973124 Understanding Relationships between Health, Liu, W., Chen, W., & Peng, C. (2014). Assessing the Ethnicity, Place and the Role of Urban Green effectiveness of green infrastructures on urban Space in Deprived Urban Communities. flooding reduction: A community scale study. International Journal of Environmental Research Ecology Modelling, 291, 6-14. and Public Health, 13, 681-702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.07.012 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph13070681 Liu, W., Chen, W., & Peng, C. (2015). Influences of Ross, C. (2000). Walking, exercising and smoking: setting sizes and combination of green Does neighbourhood matter? Soc. Sci. Med. 51, infrastructures on community’s stormwater runoff 265–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0277- reduction. Ecology Modelling, 318, 236-244. 9536(99)00451-7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.11.007 Singh, R. (2016). Factors affecting walkability of Maas, J., Verheij, R.A., Spreeuwenberg, P., & neighborhoods. Procedia - Social and Groenewegen, P. P. (2008). ‘Physical activity as a Behavioural Sciences 216, 643 – 654. possible mechanism behind the relationship https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.12.048 between green space and health: a multilevel Sugiyama, T., Leslie, E., Giles-Corti, B., & Owen, N., analysis’. BMC Public Health, 8, 206. (2008). Associations of neighbourhood greenness https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-8-206 with physical and mental health: do walking, Maes, J., Barbosa, A., Baranzelli, C., Zulian, G., Silva, social coherence and local social integration F. B., Vandecasteele, I. et al. (2015). More green explain the relationships? Epidemiology and infrastructure is required to maintain ecosystem Community Health, 62, (e9). services under current trends in land-use change https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2007.064287 in Europe. Landscape Ecology, 30, 517–534. Sustainable Cities International (2012). Indicators for https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-014-0083-2 Sustainability. How cities are monitoring and Milton, K., Bull, F.C., & Bauman, A. (2011). Reliability evaluating their success. Retrieved September 16, and validity testing of a single-item physical 2018, http://www.grida.no/graphicslib/detail/dp activity measure. British Journal of Sports Med., 45, Dr. Adedotun Ayodele Dipeolu, Dr. Onoja Matthew Akpa and Prof. Joseph Akinlabi Fadamiro 42