Due to the various social and environmental benefits provided by urban parks and open spaces, ensuring that residents have equitable access to high-quality parks is paramount for planners and allied professionals. While research has identified inequities in park access based on race, ethnicity, and income, previous studies primarily focus on objective measures of access such as proximity to parks. Additionally, previous research typically includes single study regions that do not capture differences in distinct places. Relying on survey data from six metropolitan areas of the U.S., we address these gaps by investigating how subjective perceptions of parks vary by race/ethnicity and income (while controlling for other factors). Specifically, we employ linear mixed models to test for interaction effects between race/ethnicity and the six metro regions. We also compare subjective views of parks to ParkScore® rankings and metrics that represent park access. Overall, we found that perceived problems with park availability and quality were highest in the Baltimore area, as well as Los Angeles, Miami, and Boston; they were lowest is Phoenix and Minneapolis–St. Paul. Meanwhile, residents perceived significantly more improvements in park availability and quality in Miami and Minneapolis–St. Paul, followed by the other regions. Compared to objective ParkScore® measures, subjective perceptions of parks do not always follow the relative rankings of metrics for park access and quality. Additionally, Black and Hispanic residents perceived greater park problems than White residents, and Hispanic residents perceived more improvements than White residents. However, distinctions in public perceptions of parks by racial/ethnic groups and regions did not hold up in our mixed, multivariate models. Instead, our results highlight regionally distinct perceptions by race/ethnicity, suggesting that subjective views of park quality are context-dependent. In contrast, income is a more dominant driver of perceived improvements in local parks and open spaces. As a whole, this research underscores the need to consider both objective and subjective measures in particular geographic contexts to fully understand and plan for the equitable distribution of high-quality parks across diverse people and places.

由于城市公园和开放空间提供了各种社会和环境效益，因此确保居民能够公平地使用高质量的公园对于规划者和相关专业人士来说至关重要。虽然研究已经确定了基于种族、民族和收入的公园访问不公平，但之前的研究主要集中在访问公园的客观衡量标准上。此外，以前的研究通常包括单个研究区域，这些区域没有捕捉到不同地方的差异。依靠来自美国六个大都市区的调查数据，我们通过调查对公园的主观看法如何因种族/民族和收入而变化（同时控制其他因素）来解决这些差距。具体来说，我们采用线性混合模型来测试种族/民族与六个都会区之间的相互作用效应。我们还将公园的主观观点与 ParkScore® 排名和代表公园访问的指标进行比较。总体而言，我们发现巴尔的摩地区以及洛杉矶、迈阿密和波士顿的公园可用性和质量问题最为严重。他们最低的是凤凰城和明尼阿波利斯-圣。保罗。与此同时，居民认为迈阿密和明尼阿波利斯-圣路易斯的公园可用性和质量有了显着改善。保罗，其次是其他地区。与客观 ParkScore® 测量相比，对公园的主观看法并不总是遵循公园访问和质量指标的相对排名。此外，黑人和西班牙裔居民比白人居民认为公园问题更大，西班牙裔居民比白人居民认为改善更多。然而，在我们的混合多变量模型中，种族/民族群体和地区对公园的公众看法的差异并没有成立。相反，我们的结果突出了种族/民族对区域的不同看法，表明对公园质量的主观看法取决于环境。相比之下，收入是当地公园和开放空间感知改善的更主要驱动力。总的来说，