Green infrastructure (GI) is increasingly recognized as a transformative approach to urban planning that promotes social well-being. Defined as a network of natural and semi-natural systems providing ecosystem services, GI encompasses parks, greenways, urban forests, and green roofs, among others (Tzoulas et al., 2007). Unlike traditional grey infrastructure, which prioritizes mechanical solutions, GI integrates ecological and social benefits. Research highlights its role in reducing stress, improving mental health, and fostering social cohesion. For instance, studies by Kuo and Sullivan (2001) demonstrate that urban neighborhoods with higher green cover report reduced levels of aggression and anxiety, underlining the psychological benefits of accessible green spaces. The High Line in New York City, a converted railway line, exemplifies how GI can create inclusive urban spaces that encourage social interactions while enhancing the city’s aesthetic and ecological value.

Beyond mental health, green infrastructure profoundly impacts physical well-being and climate resilience. GI offers opportunities for outdoor activities, promoting active lifestyles that combat sedentary behavior and its associated health risks. Bogotá’s Ciclovía program, which transforms streets into car-free green corridors on Sundays, has led to measurable improvements in public health and community engagement (Montero, 2020). Moreover, GI addresses urban environmental challenges such as heat islands, flooding, and air pollution. Singapore’s Park Connector Network, a system of green corridors linking residential neighborhoods with parks, illustrates how cities can combine functionality and livability. These pathways not only encourage physical activity but also improve air quality and reduce urban heat stress, benefiting marginalized populations who are disproportionately affected by environmental hazards (World Health Organization [WHO], 2016).

Despite its transformative potential, GI faces implementation challenges, including limited funding, land scarcity, and socio-political constraints. Addressing these barriers requires innovative financing, cross-sector collaboration, and community involvement. For example, Pune’s Pashan Lake Restoration Project shows the power of community-led efforts in converting degraded landscapes into thriving green spaces. Such initiatives highlight the importance of participatory planning in ensuring equitable access to GI. Additionally, policymakers must integrate GI into urban frameworks to ensure sustained investment and maintenance. As cities grow increasingly dense and climate risks escalate, prioritizing GI is essential not only for environmental sustainability but also for fostering healthier and more equitable urban societies.

References

1. Kuo, F. E., & Sullivan, W. C. (2001). Environment and Crime in the Inner City: Does Vegetation Reduce Crime? Environment and Behavior, 33(3), 343–367.
2. Montero, S. (2020). Worlding Bogotá’s Ciclovía: From Urban Experiment to International “Best Practice.” Latin American Perspectives, 47(4), 71–89.
3. Tzoulas, K., Korpela, K., Venn, S., Yli-Pelkonen, V., Kaźmierczak, A., Niemelä, J., & James, P. (2007). Promoting Ecosystem and Human Health in Urban Areas Using Green Infrastructure: A Literature Review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 81(3), 167–178.
4. World Health Organization (WHO). (2016). Urban Green Spaces and Health: A Review of Evidence. Geneva: WHO.