Brownfields to Greenfields - Linking Environment and Health: Derelict Lands, Deprivation, and Health Inequality in Glasgow Juliana Maantay, M.U.P., Ph.D. Department of Earth, Environmental, and Geospatial Sciences City University of New York, Lehman College juliana.maantay@lehman.cuny.edu Abstract The population of Glasgow, Scotland has very poor health, compared to Scotland as a whole and the rest of the U.K., and even compared to other post-industrial cities with similar levels of deprivation and unemployment. Glasgow also has an extremely high proportion of vacant and derelict land, much of which was formerly used for heavy industry and therefore likely contaminated. This study examines the association between this aspect of the built environment, namely, the concentration of vacant and derelict land (VDL), and the prevalence of adverse health outcomes. Our analyses found a spatial correspondence between the locations of VDL in Glasgow and several physical and mental health outcomes, and this is also correlated to socio-economic characteristics, demonstrating environmental injustice and health inequities. Using geospatial analytical methods, we found that many high-deprivation communities are disproportionately burdened with environmental impacts, adverse health outcomes, and psychosocial stressors associated with this land use. Areas with higher VDL densities tend to exhibit higher rates of respiratory disease, cancers, low birth weight infants, mental health disorders, and lower male life expectancy. Potential strategies are outlined for re-using derelict land for the communities’ public health benefit and neighbourhood regeneration, including urban agriculture/community gardens, urban forestation, active and passive recreation areas, and linkage to existing open space networks and natural areas. Prevention of urban environmental (or “green”) gentrification is also discussed in the re-use strategies. Keywords Health inequities, deprivation, Glasgow, post-industrial, vacant and derelict land, brownfields, environmental justice, PARDLI index, open space, urban agriculture, community gardens, community regeneration, urban planning, built environment, green gentrification

1

2

Background and Context Glasgow, or the “Dear Green Place” in Gaelic, is situated along the River Clyde in the

West Central Lowlands of Scotland, and it is Scotland’s most populous and densely-settled city, with about 600,000 people within 68 square miles (Figure 1). From the mid-18th until the mid-20th century, Glasgow was one of the main industrial cities in the United Kingdom, with textile production, ship building, steel making, dye works, and the manufacture of many other commodities used throughout the world. Most Glaswegians of working age were employed in these various industries, but now, in Glasgow’s more recent post-industrial incarnation, unemployment is very high. Although the economic outlook of the city has been steadily improving in the past decade, aspects of the city’s landscape still exhibit the residual effects of the economic decline, most notably the extent of vacant and derelict land (VDL) interspersed throughout many neighborhoods, and even dominating certain parts of the city, particularly in the less affluent sections. Glasgow has more VDL, in both absolute acreage amounts and as a percentage of its total land, than any other municipality in Scotland (Scottish Government, 2012). Overall, about 4% of Glasgow’s land is vacant or derelict, and Glasgow’s VDL constitutes about 12 % of all the vacant land in Scotland. Glasgow is also infamous for being the most unhealthy city in the U.K., with higher rates of most every adverse health outcome, and lower life expectancy, than other cities in the U.K. and Europe, even those with comparable post-industrial economies and similar levels of poverty and other socio-economic indicators (Gray, 2008; Hanlon et al, 2005; MacIntyre, 2007; Shaw et al, 2008; Taulbut et al, 2009; Walsh et al, 2010; World Health Organization, 2004, 2008).

Figure 1- Left: Satellite image of the Glasgow metropolitan region; Right: Population distribution within the city. Problem Statement and Specific Issues

This study examined the potential association between one aspect of the built environment, namely, the concentration of vacant and derelict land, and the prevalence of several adverse health outcomes, i.e., respiratory disease, cancer, low-birth-weight (LBW) infants, male life expectancy, and mental health disorders (using the proxy variable of mental health drug prescription rates), in Glasgow, Scotland. We were interested in observing whether or not there was a correlation between the health outcomes and the concentration of VDL, as well as if there was an association between the locations of the VDL and the socio-demographic characteristics of the host neighborhoods, potentially indicating an environmental justice concern (Figure 2).

3

To demonstrate these spatial relationships, we employed a number of spatial analytical and geostatistical methods as well as geovisualization techniques.

Figure 2 – Upper: Vacant and Derelict Land in Glasgow, with 100- and 500-meter proximity buffers, indicating areas of potential impact/exposures. For the analyses, only the 100-meter buffer was used. Lower: Vacant and Derelict Land in Relation to Health Decile. Data Sources: UK Ordnance Survey (basemap layers); Vacant and Derelict Land Survey, Scottish Government, 2012 (VDL data); Scottish Neighbourhood Statistics, Scottish Government, 2010 (health data).

4

Another important goal of the study was to provide the city planning agencies, environmental groups, and community-based organizations with a consistent quantitative tool to help prioritize neighborhood revitalization, providing them with some concrete ammunition about where the need was greatest for planning and implementation in a pro-active way, rather than just relying on reactive planning in response to developers’ proposals. An index was developed, combining neighborhood deprivation measures, proximity to VDL, and health outcome data, to pinpoint areas having the greatest need for planning interventions and resource allocation.

Many areas of Glasgow have become little more than “sacrifice zones” - areas where the physical conditions are so poor that in an urban planning triage situation, given limited resources, some planners and economists consider that the sensible thing to do is to put the resources where there seems to be a hope of a turnaround, rather than throwing good money after bad, as it were. Thus, the very worst areas in terms of deprivation and health frequently do not get the additional resources to make a difference. Another related problem, which is common in virtually all cities and is not particular to Glasgow alone, is that governmental resource allocation is often not based on a rational objective assessment of need, but is decided on a more case-by-case basis, often driven by political expediency, or from opportunities that arise unpredictably from private investment. This analysis seeks to replace or at least supplement the subjective approach by providing decision-makers with a reliable and objective method to prioritize planning and implementation efforts.

Environmental justice (EJ) is the concept that environmental benefits and protections should be distributed equally amongst all populations, and environmental burdens should not disproportionately impact any subpopulation (Hofrichter, 1993). Most often, however, low-income communities, immigrant neighbourhoods, and communities of color bear a disproportionate burden of our pollution problems, whilst experiencing fewer environmental benefits and protection. There is a substantial body of evidence from previous research that has accumulated over the past 2 decades, as evaluated in a 2010 comprehensive review of the literature by Brender, Maantay, and Chakraborty, that has found that proximity to environmental pollution is linked to poor health outcomes, and that this tends to disproportionately affect poor and minority populations. This research aimed to determine if there were environmental justice concerns in Glasgow involving vacant and derelict land.

Methods and Findings

Descriptive statistics and exploratory spatial data analysis of the variables of interest revealed that there is a strong spatial correspondence between the locations of VDL and areas with high rankings in the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD), with high SIMD numbers indicating high levels of deprivation (Figure 3). This was statistically verified by running a simple Pearson Correlation between VDL density and the SIMD score by Data Zone (DZ), a census enumeration unit similar to the U.S. census block group, with an average of 750 residents. (n = 690; 4 DZs were omitted due to very low populations; r = .521, p<.001) (Maantay and Maroko, 2015). This positive association suggests that areas with elevated deprivation scores tend to also have higher exposures to vacant and derelict land, confirming the presence of an environmental justice issue in terms of potential exposure to environmental stressors. There is also clear spatial correspondence between the locations of VDL and the worst health decile in Glasgow, according to census data. Odds Ratios and Relative Risk analyses confirm that higher rates of the adverse health outcomes examined are more likely in High Deprivation areas, which typically are in close proximity to VDL (within 100 meters) (Table 1).

5

Figure 3 – Left: Glasgow Data Zones in Lowest (Worst 15%) of SIMD. Right: Graph of % VDL in Glasgow located within three broad categories of SMID data zones. 69% of VDL is in the High Deprivation DZs. Data Sources: UK Ordnance Survey; Vacant and Derelict Land Survey, Scottish Government, 2012 (VDL data); Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation, General Report and Technical Report, Scottish Government Census, 2009 (SIMD data).

Likewise, the specific adverse health outcomes were also statistically and spatially correlated with the VDL locations (Figures 4, 5, 6, and Table 1). Cluster analysis (Moran’s I) and Geographically Weighted Regressions (GWR) were also run on the variables and were mapped, establishing the connections between the adverse health effects, high deprivation, and VDL, and although clearly connected spatially, causality cannot be proved by these analyses.

Figure 4: Male Life Expectancy (MLE), by Glasgow Intermediate Zone. Data Sources: UK Ordnance Survey (basemap layers); Scottish Neighbourhood Statistics, Scottish Government, 2010 (health data).

High Deprivation

69%

Medium

Deprivation

23%

Low

Deprivation

8%

% Vacant and Derelict Land (VDL)

6

Figure 5 – Upper: Hospitalization Rates per 100,000 in Glasgow for Cancer and Respiratory Diseases, by High, Medium, and Low Deprivation Areas; Middle: Percentage of Low Birth Weight Infants in Glasgow, by High, Medium, and Low Deprivation Areas; Lower: Male Life Expectancy, by High, Medium, and Low Deprivation Areas, showing the dramatically lower life expectancy for men living in the High Deprivation areas.

7

Figure 6 - Upper: Respiratory Disease Hopitalisation Rates per 100,000 by Glasgow Datazones. Lower: Cancer Hopitalisation Rates per 100,000 by Glasgow Datazones. Data Sources: UK Ordnance Survey (basemap layers); Scottish Neighbourhood Statistics, Scottish Government, 2010 (health data).

Table 1: Odds Ratios and Relative Risks for Health Outcomes in Glasgow’s High Deprivation Areas. 95% CI, with p = < 0.0001. An OR of 5.5 means that the likelihood of being hospitalized for respiratory disease is 51/2 times higher for those in high deprivation areas (and thus typically in closer proximity to VDL), 30%

higher for cancer hospitalizations, and 60% higher for low birth weight infants. .

Health Outcome Odds Ratio Relative Risk Respiratory Hospitalization 5.5 5.1

Cancer Hospitalization 1.3 1.3

Low Birth Weight Infants 1.6 1.5

8

Using the variables of interest, i.e., SIMD scores, rates of adverse health outcomes, and proximity to VDL (within 100 meters), an index was created to pinpoint areas that were in most need of attention in terms of planning and resource allocation. The PARDLI (Priority Areas for Re-use of Derelict Lands Index) is an unweighted index which generates a score for each data zone. Five areas were identified as priority areas for more detailed studies, based on their data zones’ high PARDLI scores and other ancillary considerations, reflecting, for example, visualizations of social housing locations and existing open space and natural areas. (Figure 7).

Figure 7 – Upper: Priority Areas for Reuse of Derelict Land Index (PARDLI). Lower: Vacant and Derelict Land showing 100-meter Exposure Areas with PARDLI Scores. Data Sources: UK Ordnance Survey (basemap layers); Vacant and Derelict Land Survey, Scottish Government, 2012 (VDL data); Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation, General Report and Technical Report, Scottish Government Census, 2009 (SIMD data); Maantay (PARDLI scores).

9

The proximity to social (public) housing projects in Glasgow was not formally part of the PARDLI scores, but was also taken into account in selecting the priority areas (Figure 8).

Figure 8: Social Housing locations in Glasgow and relationship to PARDLI areas.

Additionally, Glasgow’s parks, open spaces, natural areas, and planning initiatives were mapped and considered in the selection of the priority areas, with the expectation that some of the VDL could be linked up with existing networks (Figure 9).

This study was based on the locations and density of VDL, and did not take into account the quality of the VDL. Clearly, people living in proximity to VDL being used as dumping grounds will be affected differently than those nearby VDL that has reverted to native vegetation. This is a topic that is potentially fruitful to investigate further, since all VDL is not the same, and they do not share the same characteristics, with some VDL sites more benign-seeming than others.

Other analytical methods were used, including more detailed case studies of specific smaller areas (Figure 10), and qualitative analyses using archival map documents and Google Earth data to understand prior and current uses of VDL in several comparison pilot areas to see if the quality of the VDL made a difference in the potential for acting as a psycho-social stressor, or had any impact on the potential health effects of the VDL. Although it is possible that the former industrial uses of the sites may pose direct threats to health due to the potential presence of toxic materials, it is also possible that the psycho-social stressors associated with these sites may vary in a way unrelated to previous use or level of toxicity. This effect may play an important role in the influence of VDL on health, as suggested by the difference in GWR output as well as differences in visual impacts between the sites, if, for example, the current conditions of a site appears more bucolic and less demoralizing than other blighted VDL.

10

Figure 9 – Upper: Glasgow’s Open Space. There are 33 separate categories of public open space designated, including parks, gardens, sports areas, amenity spaces within developments, green corridors, protected natural areas, nature reserves, historic landscapes, and ancient woodlands (the 33 categories have been collapsed and combined for cartographic clarity). Glasgow is well-endowed with open space, including an extensive greenbelt. However, the open space quantity is not necessarily an indication of quality. Data Sources: UK Ordnance Survey (basemap layers); Planning Advice Notice (PAN) 65 Planning and Open Space, Scottish Government, 2008 (open space data). Lower: Percentage Greenspace in Ward. Data Sources: UK Ordnance Survey (basemap layers); Developing Summary Measures of Health-Related Multiple Physical Environmental Deprivation for Epidemiological Research, Richardson, et al, 2010 (CRESH model data). Also mapped (not shown here) were the “Networks for People Outputs,” showing connectivity to Greenspace, derived from the work by the Glasgow and Clyde Valley Green Network Partnership, 2011; as well as Regional Planning Initiatives: VDL in private and public ownership, Transformational Regeneration Areas (TRAs), Stalled Spaces Initiatives, Community Growth Areas, and Flagship Areas.

11

Figure 10: The proposed Govan Priority Area – An example of looking at the health data at the local (neighbourhood) level. Brown areas are the VDL. The darker the blue, the lower the male life expectancy (MLE). Most of Govan is in the worst or second worst MLE class, out of the original five classes mapped for the whole city. Data Sources: UK Ordnance Survey (basemap layers); Vacant and Derelict Land Survey, Scottish Government, 2012 (VDL data); Scottish Neighbourhood Statistics, Scottish Government, 2010 (health data). Making Glasgow more livable

For policy and planning initiatives, we need to start thinking differently about how best to serve these communities that have ended up in this analysis with the highest PARDLI scores. Perhaps it is worthwhile to examine the differences between re-use of VDL for “regeneration,” versus using it for “development,” and think more seriously about who usually benefits most from regeneration or development. In the parts of the city where VDL is most prevalent, it seems unlikely that there will be high interest from private investors to construct profit-making facilities (i.e., “development”). These areas frequently coincide with concentrations of social housing, contributing to a lack of private investment interest. It might be better to acknowledge this and move on to realistic re-use concepts for the VDL, and plan for uses that would more directly benefit the surrounding community and serve their needs directly, as opposed to being held for a regional use or general tax-generating purpose. Regeneration for primarily community use can result in substantial gains in many aspects, including health and other more non-quantifiable benefits. It can also have an economic multiplier effect and may serve to bolster the local economy, and even have ripple and spill-over effects to neighbouring communities. Regeneration of this nature should not be discounted just because it does not involve constructing a commercial hub or residential building complex. There are also valid reasons for not encouraging housing to be built on VDL sites, as argued by Greenberg (2002) in “Should housing be built on former brownfield sites?” It is important for the community to not only participate and be involved in the decision-making process, but to actually take the lead on devising plans and implementation strategies for the VDL. This needs to be a bottom-up planning initiative, not one led mainly by professional planners. This will better ensure community satisfaction with the eventual project, as well as serve to bolster capacity building in the community, so that the end product can be self-sustaining and successful, and engender a sense of community ownership and a source of local pride.

12

More than half of the VDL sites in Glasgow are in public ownership (572 of 927 sites), representing approximately 783 of the 1,300 total hectares of VDL (Scottish Government, 2012). This means that Glasgow city government could effectively grant high deprivation communities more than 700 hectares of land to be used for community good. This might be urban agriculture in the form of communal gardens (as opposed to individual “allotments,” as is most common in European cities). In New York City, and in other cities around the world, community gardens have proved to be an effective way to get some very positive constructive results without substantial financial outlays, and the health and other benefits of community gardens and urban agriculture have been well-documented (Armstrong, 2000; Cumbers et al, 2017; Holland, 2004; MacKeen, 2011; Ottmann et al, 2010; Schukiske, 2000). Other potential uses for VDL include urban forestry, natural corridor linkages for wildlife species and ecological purposes, passive or active recreation spaces, market spaces for weekly “flea” markets or farmers’ markets, and cleaned up natural areas that might connect with other open space networks.

The relationship between the density of VDL and the rate of adverse health outcomes is not necessarily a causal one, but the strong association between the two variables points to a good opportunity to transform neighborhoods’ VDL from a potential environmental stressor to a positive environmental benefit for the proximate populations. Urban planning and budgetary decisions by government and their private development partners should be driven by the health and safety concerns of the community, and not be based solely upon the attraction of profit-seeking investments to decaying neighborhoods. Many times community improvements in vacant and derelict land have the unfortunate side-effects of raising property values, thus creating interest amongst property developers, and stimulating the gentrification process and the consequent displacement of the original residents, which are undesirable outcomes and counter-productive to the goal of improving life for the community residents (Maantay, 2013). A recent school of thought on this matter has posited that it might be in the best interests of the community to make use of VDL as informal greenpaces that would still benefit the current community but not necessarily attract gentrification. In this way, the VDL stays provisional and transitional, retaining some of its marginal qualities and not appearing totally “domesticated,” whilst still being at least partially under the control of the neighborhood residents. Curran and Hamilton (2012) and Wolch et al. (2014) present this strategy as “just green enough” interventions.

Whether considered for informal or more “managed” initiatives, vacant land should be seen as an opportunity for transforming neighborhoods and contributing to social capacity building, community development, empowerment, and engagement. VDL can be appropriated for a number of urban ecological infrastructure uses, such as food production, absorbing air and water pollution, carbon sequestration, temperature regulation, urban heat island effect mitigation, and providing habitat for biodiversity, as well as cultural ecosystems services, including providing active and passive recreational and mental health rejuvenation spaces, hastening disease/health recovery, and aiding in crime reduction (Kremer et al., 2013; McPhearson et al., 2013).

Community-led neighborhood stabilization and revitalization can be encouraged by public policy. There can be modest economic incentives for re-use of vacant lots by the community, or by not-for-profit development organizations. The city can turn over publicly-owned VDL to a community group for use, either on a temporary or permanent basis, as passive open space, community garden, playground, or center for the elderly or children, depending upon the need and the site constraints. The relationship between VDL and inequitable health outcomes presents an opportunity for communities, urban planners, and governmental authorities

13

to improve a neighborhood’s physical condition, which in turn will reduce the negative effects of stressors, thereby increasing resilience amongst the population, making them less vulnerable and more likely to stay healthier, both mentally and physically. As this study has found, the spatial distribution of vacant and derelict land helps to create and maintain a disparate pattern of blight and poor health, which disproportionately affects communities having higher deprivation levels amongst their populations. Without innovative and corrective policy initiatives and mitigation efforts, with the goal of fostering community involvement, at-risk places and their populations are likely to continue to bear unequal burdens.

As in Glasgow, much of New York City’s vacant land is located in the poorer neighbourhoods. A major issue in NYC with re-use of vacant and derelict land for development is the displacement of poor people through gentrification. Ironically, this has often occurred in areas where community gardens have improved property values, enhanced neighbourhood aesthetics, and reduced crime rates sufficiently to interest developers in investing in the neighbourhood, whereby the community rightfully feels as though their hard work has sown the seeds of their own destruction (Smith and DeFilippis, 1999; Von Hassel, 2002). Policies must be in place for community-led improvements in vacant and derelict land to benefit the community and not punish them. In addition to the potentially adverse gentrifying effects of community-led greening initiatives, the greening of marginalized neighborhhoods as part of developer-instigated “regeneration” efforts has also frequently resulted in an expedited gentrification process (Checker, 2011; 2015; in press). Creating “green” amenities in less affluent neighborhoods as part of a marketing strategy to appeal to a more up-scale type of resident has been a documented trend in cities, and termed environmental gentrification. “As marginalized neighborhoods benefit from cleanup and environmental amenities often brought by municipal sustainability planning, recent trends of land revaluation, investments, and gentrification are posing a conundrum and paradox for environmental justice (EJ) activists... [L]ocally unwanted land uses can be reconceptualized from contamination sources to new green amenities because of the displacement they seem to trigger or accelerate,” (Anguelovski, 2016).

Recently, Glasgow has adopted an active “greening” agenda, incorporating planning and implementation strategies to enhance/promote resiliency, sustainability, biodiversity, habitat conservation, historic landscape preservation, and public health. “Now, once again, the city is transforming itself - from the carbon-belching centre of a global economic revolution to the low carbon smart city of a new, greener future,” (Our Resilient Glasgow, A City Conversation, 2015).

Actively promoting the re-use and re-purposing of vacant and derelict land in high deprivation areas with vulnerable populations can have long-term beneficial use to the residents, and can be an important step in combating health inequities and environmental injustice in these communities. Initiatives such as Sustainable Glasgow (2010), membership in the 100 Resilient Cities Network (2014), the Glasgow City Development Plan (March, 2017), and the extensive public-private canal and waterfront rejuvenation plans are all worthy endeavors to make Glasgow once again the “Dear Green Place.” But Glasgow’s greening plans need to ensure that this new greener future will benefit all the residents of the city, and not follow the all-too-common trajectory of exclusion, displacement, and expulsion of the poor and otherwise marginalized people from the improved areas. This, unfortunately, only results in a different but equally pernicious type of environmental injustice.

14

References Anguelovski, I. (2016). From toxic sites to parks as (green) LULUs? New challenges of inequity,

privilege, gentrification, and exclusion for urban environmental justice. Journal of Planning Literature CPL bibliography 31(1):23-36.

Armstrong, D. (2000). A survey of Community Gardens in Upstate New York: Implications for Health Promotion and Community Development. Health and Place, 6(4), 319-317.

Brender, J., Maantay, J., and Chakraborty, J. (2011). Residential Proximity to Environmental Hazards and Adverse Health Outcomes. American Journal of Public Health 101 (S1): S37-S52.

Checker, M. (In Press). A Bridge Too Far: Environmental Sacrifice and the Consequences of Industrial Gentrification. In The City is the Factory. Lewis, P. and Greenberg, M., eds. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Checker, M. (2015). Green is the New Brown: ‘Old School Toxics’ and Environmental Gentrification on a New York City Waterfront. In Sustainability in the Global City: Myth and Practice. Isenhour, C., McDonough, G., and Checker, M., eds. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Checker, M. (2011). Wiped Out by the ‘Greenwave’: Environmental Gentrification and the Paradoxical Politics of Urban Sustainability, City & Society 23: 210-229.

Cumbers, A., Shaw, D., Crossan, J., and McMaster, R. (2017). The Work of Community Gardens: Reclaiming Place for Community in the City. Work, Employment and Society, Sage Publishers, pp 1–17.

Curran, W. and Hamilton, T. (2012). Just green enough: contesting environmental gentrification in Greenpoint, Brooklyn. Local Environment 17 (9): 1027-1042.

Glasgow City Council (2010). Sustainable Glasgow. Glasgow City Council (2016). Our Resilient Glasgow, A City Conversation. Glasgow City Council (March, 2017). Glasgow City Development Plan. Gould, K. and Lewis, T. (2016). Green Gentrification: Urban Sustainability and the Struggle for

Environmental Justice. New York:Routledge. Gray, L. (2008). Comparisons of health-related behaviours and health measures in Greater

Glasgow with other regional areas in Europe. Glasgow: Glasgow Centre for Population Health. Greenberg, M.R. (2002). Should housing be built on former brownfield sites? American Journal of

Public Health 92: 703-5. Hanlon, P., Lawder, R.S., Buchanan, D., Redpath, A., Walsh, D., Wood, R., Bain, M., Brewster,

D.H., and Chalmers, J. (2005). Why is mortality higher in Scotland than in England & Wales? Decreasing influence of socioeconomic deprivation between 1981 and 2001 supports the existence of a 'Scottish Effect'. Journal of Public Health 27(2):199-204.

Hofrichter, R., (ed.). (1993). Toxic struggles: The theory and practice of environmental justice. Philadelphia, PA: New Society Publishers.

Holland, L. (2004). Diversity and Connection in Community Gardens: a contribution to local sustainability. Local Environment, 9(3): 285-305.

Kremer P., Hamstead Z., and McPhearson T. (2013). A social-ecological assessment of vacant lots in New York City. Landscape and Urban Planning: 218-233.

Maantay, J.A. (2013). The collapse of place: derelict land, deprivation, and health inequality in Glasgow, Scotland. Cities and the Environment 6: 54 pages.

Maantay, J.A. and Maroko, A.R. (2015). ‘At-Risk’ Places: inequities in the distribution of environmental stressors and prescription rates of mental health medications in Glasgow, Scotland. Environmental Research Letters 10: 16 pages.

MacIntyre, S. (2007). Inequalities in health in Scotland: What they are and what can we do about them? Glasgow: Medical Research Council, Social and Public Health Sciences Research Unit.

15

MacKeen, D. (2011). Making a Way Out of No Way. From Glasgow to Detroit: Urban Gardening and Community Building. 20 pages. Glasgow: Discussion paper of the Peter Gibson Memorial Fund.

McPhearson, T., Kremer, P., and Hamstead, Z. (2013). Mapping ecosystem services in New York City: applying a socialecological approach in urban vacant land. Ecosystem Services.

Ottmann, M., Maantay, J., and Grady, K. (2010). Urban Agriculture, Green Infrastructure, and Urban Ecology: A Case Study of the South Bronx, NYC. Cities and the Environment 3(1): article 20.

Schukoske, J. (2000). Community Development Through Gardening: State and Local Policies Transforming Urban Open Space. Legislation and Public Policy 3: 351-392.

Scottish Government (2012). Vacant and Derelict Land Survey. Statistical Bulletin Planning Series. Edinburgh: A National Statistics Publication for Scotland.

Shaw, M., Thomas, B., Smith, G., and Dorling, D. (2008). Grim Reaper’s Road Map: An Atlas of Mortality in Britain. Bristol: Policy Press.

Smith, N., and DeFilippis, J. (1999). The Reassertion of Economics: 1990s Gentrification in the Lower East Side. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 23(4): 638-653.

Taulbut, M., Walsh, D., Parcell, S., Hanlon, P., Hartmann, A., Poirier, G., and Strniskova, D. (2009). The Aftershock of Deindustrialisation – trends in mortality in Scotland and other parts of post-industrial Europe. Glasgow: Glasgow Centre for Population Health.

Von Hassel, M. (2002). The struggle for Eden: Community Gardens in New York City. Connecticut: Bergin & Garvey.

Walsh, D., Bendel, N., Jones, R. and Hanlon, P. (2010). It’s not ‘just deprivation’: why do equally deprived UK cities experience different health outcomes? Public Health 124(9):487– 495.

Wolch, J., Byrne, J., and Newell, J. (2014). Urban green-space, public health and environmental justice: the challenge of making cities ‘just green enough.’ Landscape and Urban Planning 125 234–44.

World Health Organization (WHO). (2004). Global Burden of Disease: 2004 Update. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization Press, Department of Health Statistics and Informatics in the Information, Evidence and Research Cluster of WHO.

World Health Organization (WHO) Commission on Social Determinants of Health (2008). Closing the Gap in a Generation: Health Equity Through Action on the Social Determinants of Health. Geneva: World Health Organization.

Acknowledgements Thanks are due to the following institutions and individuals within them for supporting this research: The Urban Lab, Glasgow School of Art/Mackintosh School of Architecture, Glasgow; Glasgow City Council’s Development and Regeneration Services (DRS); City University of New York, Department of Earth, Environmental, and Geospatial Sciences, Lehman College; CUNY Graduate School of Public Health; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Cooperative Remote Sensing Science and Technology Center (NOAA-CREST); Glasgow Centre for Population Health. This research was initially made possible through a Distinguished Chair Award received by Dr. Maantay from the US-UK Fulbright Commission 2011–2012, and sponsored by the Mackintosh School of Architecture’s Urban Lab and the Glasgow DRS. Also, thanks to Dr. Gretchen Culp for transforming many of my working maps into expert cartographic designs.