Cross-sectional survey explores gender-based disparities in urban green space perception among Chennai residents, suggesting implications for environmental discourse.
Green spaces offer valuable and essential services to the urban population, ranging from leisure to environmental benefits. The differences in knowledge, attitude, and perception towards urban green spaces vary from one gender to another, and they have the potential to influence the urban environmental discourse. Previous studies and scholarly works have indicated that women tend to be more active and closely associated with urban green spaces and the environment compared to men. This study aims to investigate the disparities in knowledge and attitude towards urban green spaces between men and women in Chennai. This perpetual knowledge gap between these genders could provide ramifications for urban environmental discussions based on gender. This study employs a cross-sectional quantitative methodology, utilizing a structured questionnaire and a convenience sampling technique to collect data from 438 participants from the proximities of urban green spaces in Chennai. Data analysis was conducted through descriptive statistics using SPSS version 21, and a 5-point Likert scale was employed to comprehend their perceptions. Findings revealed that there is no significant difference in the knowledge about urban green spaces between men and women; however, their attitudes towards urban green spaces exhibit variations among them. Despite men’s greater engagement in urban environments, their attitude towards the appropriate usage of this urban environment lags behind that of women. These findings imply the intersection of gender and urban environments, highlighting the gender-based disparities in urban environmental engagement. Furthermore, this study underscores the need for sustainable and gender-inclusive urban planning to foster the urban environment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mukesh et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: