‘It’s not necessarily a social space’ − Institutions, power and nature’s wellbeing benefits in the context of diverse inner-city neighbourhoods

Abstract

Urban nature is widely known to provide wellbeing benefits to people and communities, but evidence particularly from diverse and disadvantaged contexts suggests that these benefits are not experienced equally by all. This paper unpacks this complexity by focussing on how urban nature is interacted with to produce relational wellbeing on two diverse inner-city housing estates undergoing regeneration in London, UK. We focus on the role of both formal institutions and the perceptions that people form of spatial features and their meanings and functions, and the manner in which these intermediaries shape human-nature interactions and the co-production of nature’s wellbeing impact. Our findings from quantitative and qualitative data demonstrate that urban nature contributes to all aspects of a five-dimensional notion of wellbeing. But social housing residents’ and young peoples’ ability to experience these benefits is limited. Informal mechanisms of social control such as perceptions of ownership of space and its appropriate uses, and fear of conflict and crime limit the extent to which residents access greenspaces and the activities within them. Together with formal institutions such as tenancy types, housing targets and criteria for optimisation of site allocation, they produce hierarchies of use of public greenspaces and reinforce existing divisions between people of different demographic and socio-economic status. The findings underline the need to facilitate the establishment of shared and inclusive norms concerning access and appropriate uses of natural spaces in housing and greenspace delivery.