We are looking for a Finance Specialist and a Manager of Administration in the Greater Toronto Area.
TD Park People Grants support local leaders to organize environmental education, sustainability or stewardship events that bring people together across Canada.
A guidance and resources to measure the impact of your park work on community health and wellbeing, integrating a social equity lens.
Learn more about green social prescribing, an evolving practice that encourages individuals to reestablish connections with nature and one another to enhance their mental, physical, and social wellbeing.
Connect, Support, Influence and Inspire your community parks - Get our newsletter and email updates!
By donating to Park People, you’ll support vibrant parks for everyone.
This case study is part of the 2022 Canadian City Parks Report, showcasing Inspiring projects, people, and policies from across Canada that offer tangible solutions to the most pressing challenges facing city parks.
______
Park engagement has been transformed by the pandemic. In our survey, 92% of cities said Covid has changed how they engage communities, and 23% said engagement has become a greater priority since the start of the pandemic.
As we’ve written elsewhere in the Canadian City Parks Report, it’s not just the format of engagement that has changed as cities shift from in-person to online methods. Cities are also sharpening their focus on building relationships with groups that have historically been left out, with 35% reporting that the pandemic has prompted more intentional outreach to equity-deserving groups.
“There is new awareness about systemic inequity, and creating equity in our park system means talking with those most affected.”
City staff, Gelph
This work is needed. Our public survey showed that equity-deserving groups face disproportionate barriers to participating in city-led park planning processes. Overall, the top three barriers respondents cited were: being unsure of how to get involved (36%), unsure if their participation would make a difference (31%), and not having enough time to participate (28%). These percentages were higher for respondents who identified as Black, Indigenous or a person of colour (BIPOC), at 48%, 35%, and 36%, respectively.
Cities and community groups across the country are responding to these barriers through creative methods that put equity at the fore.
It is vital to involve communities in deciding what the engagement process looks like, said Jennifer Chan, Co-founder and CEO of the Department of Imaginary Affairs (DIA) . Last summer, the organization led a project called A Tale of Two Parks to surface stories of safe and unsafe experiences that exist at the same park. Through the project, six racialized youth were hired as Social Researchers to engage park goers, especially BIPOC communities, in two Toronto parks.
Through conversations with community members at the park, the DIA team learned that park goers often have great ideas for changes they’d like to see, but community members often felt that “it doesn’t really matter what our ideas are, since the city doesn’t care about us” Chan said. “This statement really struck me in thinking about, how can we meaningfully engage with community when the starting perspective is that ‘the city doesn’t care about us?'”
In response, the DIA designed a participatory planning game called “What if Parks Were Designed By Us?” The game allows participants to experience and define a months-long planning process in a matter of minutes. It invites community members to work together to develop their own planning process, strengthening their ability as a community to identify issues, build a unified vision, and even practice dealing with monkey wrenches getting thrown into their plan.
By gamifying the planning process, DIA aims to reduce barriers to existing planning processes as well envision new possibilities for park engagement, shifting away from traditional mechanisms like town halls “where all the power is held by the city, not with the community,” Chan said.
The City of Toronto has been engaging residents for the Toronto Island Park Master Plan since 2020, which will set out a new vision for a beloved destination park accessible by ferry just minutes from downtown. It’s a signature project that involves many stakeholders, as the Island is meant to serve all Torontonians.
A key priority for the engagement team is embedding an equity lens throughout the process. “Equity really is framed by identifying who is and who isn’t at the table,” said Daniel Fusca, the city’s Manager of Consultation for Parks, Forestry and Recreation.
The process started with a pre-engagement phase—a new approach for the division. This involved meeting with relevant community organizations, Indigenous partners, and other departments within the city, to get a sense of their priorities and determine how they wanted to be involved.
The pre-engagement phase “goes against most people’s instincts of what is appropriate engagement,” Fusca said. There’s an expectation, rooted in conventional engagement practices, to “put something in front of the public for them to react to or else it’s a waste of their time.”
“It took a bit of work to convince everybody that this is actually a good idea,” Fusca said. “There’s a bit of getting people out of their comfort zone.”
The pre-engagement with the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation (MCFN) and other Indigenous partners was especially vital given the significance of the Islands as a sacred place of healing and ceremony. Through these conversations, the city heard about the importance of incorporating ceremony into the engagement events, and re-working their land acknowledgment to recognize the waters as well as the lands.
They also heard that each Indigenous partner had different collaboration preferences. Some rights holders preferred regular meetings with the city. For the urban Indigenous communities, they’ve held sharing circles during each phase which are led by an Indigenous facilitator—something the community identified as important.
Lori Ellis, Project Officer of Strategic Projects, acknowledged that the pre-engagement took time and required them to adjust their original scope of work. “But it’s worth its weight in gold in regards to building that foundation of trust and transparency,” she said, noting that the city is now looking to incorporate a pre-engagement phase into future projects.
It’s also laid a foundation for ongoing collaboration with different communities to share back how their input has been used. The project team has tried to make these touchpoints meaningful by tailoring them to the community’s specific interests and input, Fusca said. “We would hone in the presentation to just focus on the things that were most meaningful to them and try to reflect back anything they told us,” he shared.
Constantly scanning to “identify the key voices that are still missing, and to do our best to address that” has been another strategy at the heart of the city’s approach, Fusca said. For example, after identifying that youth and racialized communities living outside of the downtown core were underrepresented in the first phase of engagement, they developed a Youth Ambassador Program.
The program hired a team of 10 youth between the ages of 15 to 27 who collectively spoke nine different languages and lived in neighbourhoods outside of the downtown core. They were provided with training and a budget to design their own outreach program to engage their communities.
Pablo Muñoz, a Senior Public Consultation Coordinator for the city who has previous experience as a youth worker, noted the important role youth play as conduits of information to and from the community. “For a lot of immigrant and refugee families, children and youth tend to be the connection to the Canadian English-speaking world. They tend to be the translators, and in many ways, have a big leadership role,” he said. This is a finding echoed in recent Park People research that explored barriers to park engagement in Vancouver’s equity-deserving neighbourhoods.
Another learning from the process is that despite the breadth of audiences involved in the project, it’s been important to hold space to go deeper through small group workshops centred on equity.
Some workshops included visioning exercises guided by Bob Goulais, an Anishinaabe facilitator, where participants closed their eyes to envision the future of the Islands. “It’s a much different way than bureaucratic engagement, where we’re going inwards and acknowledging a little bit more of the soul and the spirit,” said Muñoz.
Other initiatives included an “equity and belonging deep-dive,” and a video interview with activists and historians about the LGBTQ2S+ history of Hanlan’s Point, a clothing-optional beach on the Islands.
At these sessions, “the turnout would be smaller, but the conversation would be much richer. None of these conversations ever went the way you thought that they were going to go. And they always were incredibly meaningful,” Muñoz said.
What other cities are doing:
Zahra Ebrahim, Co-founder of Monumental and Park People Board Chair, said that when it comes to deepening engagement, in many ways cities are “set up to fail.” Through research to inform the Making Space toolkit—a resource for engaging equity-deserving communities in planning processes—Ebrahim and her team learned that cities may face internal barriers to implementing meaningful processes.
However, many of these issues could be addressed through “simple intervention points,” Ebrahim said:
The ongoing discoveries of unmarked graves has forced Canada to reckon with its ongoing legacy of residential schools as part of the colonial tactics that strived for Indigenous erasure. Municipalities, street names, secondary and post-secondary institutions have all been under pressure to change names that step away from the colonial figures they were named after.Canada was born the moment settlers began claiming land, creating borders, and dispossessing First Nations, Métis and Inuit peoples. And while the ongoing effects of colonization can look vastly different across geographies, the prairies in particular trace land theft and displacement of Indigenous livelihood to agricultural opportunities that allowed white settlement to prosper. For Indigenous Peoples, this meant a violent history of land extraction, residential schools, and starvation methods through buffalo extinction and government policy.Inherently, cities remain a site of dispossession, and the land on which city parks exist are no exception. Nahomi Amberer reminds us of the pre-existing relationship with land Indigenous people held prior to contact, and how this relationship was undermined by land dispossession by European settlers, including land used today for parks. “Dividing up land was central to claiming ownership of a land already inhabited by Indigenous Peoples,” she wrote in last year’s Canadian City Parks Report. Indigenous Peoples continue to be reminded of these violent histories often; whether driving through the country or walking through an urban neighbourhood, place-names continue to honour colonial figureheads who played instrumental roles in the genocide against Indigenous populations. However, city spaces can also be a site of mass education. So, how do we create spaces that decentralize the colonial past and instead, promote Indigenous knowledges?
Over the past year, a handful of prairie city parks have taken steps towards decolonizing public spaces, making room for Indigenous histories in a way that hadn’t been done before. This is a particularly important step for prairie cities that reflect some of the highest urban Indigenous populations across the country. Further, city parks moving towards the process of decolonizing space provides urban Indigenous folks access to nature and ceremony without the barrier of having to leave the city.
Take Winnipeg – Canada’s largest urban Indigenous population – and the Indigenous Peoples Garden as a start. Anna Huard, Manager of Education and Programs at Assiniboine Park Conservancy described the Garden as a massive joint effort of community consultation, Matriarchs, Knowledge Keepers, Elders, and an Indigenous architecture firm. “It’s important that the consultation process on a project like this includes a lot of different connections,” she said. “As soon as others were able to help out, it started to feel like a community. We cannot just rely on one Indigenous spokesperson.”Native plant species helped guide the Garden’s development, and to further community inclusion, Indigenous youth also had a hand in planting trees and building boardwalks. The park includes fire and water nodes as well as interpretive signage that includes ancestral languages of Ojibway, Cree, Dakota, Oji-Cree, Michif, Dene and Inuktitut translations.
With last summer being the Garden’s launch, Huard is ready to see the space used more frequently for youth storytelling programs, language learning, and an Indigenous plants program that includes a guided tour and salve-making classes. Most importantly, Huard noted that the space provides urban Indigenous folks the opportunity to strengthen their understanding of land and culture within city limits.
The city of Regina also experienced a big leap forward in decolonizing park spaces recently. Last year, the city finally caved to public pressure to relocate the Sir. John A. MacDonald statue in Victoria Park in downtown Regina. Although grassroots initiatives and petitions for the statue’s removal have been circulating for a few years, the city’s website stated that in March of 2021, city council approved the relocation of the statue to storage, “while Administration proceeds with broader public engagement and working with partners to identify an appropriate future location and contextualization.”Further, the Buffalo Peoples Art Institute (BPAI), a grassroots community organization driven by social justice in Regina, played a significant role in advocating for the name change of an inner-city public park. In spring of last year, the city officially changed Dewdney Park in the North Central neighbourhood to Buffalo Meadows Park due to ongoing pressure from organizations like BPAI and public community support. The city also voted in favor to change Dewdney Pool to Buffalo Meadows Pool. Edgar Dewdney was a colonial figure who administered and oversaw residential school policies and the starvation crisis faced by Indigenous Peoples in Canada.Joely BigEagle-Kequahtooway, a member of the White Bear First Nation and a resident of Regina, said she started the Institute to help re-educate prairie learners about the significance of the buffalo’s presence before its erasure. She explained that Regina, often referred to as ‘Pile of Bones’ because of its creation literally being built on the bones of buffalo, must acknowledge the original histories of the land. “This was buffalo land before colonization,” she said.Advocating for the name change started a few years ago, and eventually led to public awareness campaigns through community barbeques and petition signing. After enough signatures were collected, the grassroots group and their allies presented the petition to the city council and the civic naming committee. The city vote to rename the park was successful, but the BPAI is still waiting for the approval to change a major street name, Dewdney Avenue to Buffalo Avenue, as well.The park’s name change encourages a reconnection to the land and is crucial for Regina’s north central community where many Indigenous people reside, BigEagle-Kequahtooway explained. “Even in an urban setting, our environment should reflect who we are as a community,” she said. “We need to determine whether the legacies of [colonial figures] are something we want to emulate or preserve for the future, and further question whether those names play a role moving forward in the spirit of Truth and Reconciliation.”
BPAI plans to continue to bring awareness to the buffalo’s history on the plains through public art installations, courses on preparing buffalo hides, and hosting an annual buffalo festival all in the newly named park.
The city of Edmonton also had a big year for centering Indigenous knowledges in parks as construction on the kihciy askiy park (Cree for Sacred Land) started in Whitemud Park last year.
The park has been 15 years in the making after the city received a proposal from the Indigenous Elders Cultural Resource Society outlining an urban cultural site where Indigenous people could practice cultural ceremony and learning opportunities. Although long overdue, the city’s website acknowledges that “long before becoming farmland, the kihciy askiy site was used for many centuries by the Indigenous people foraging for medicines for healing purposes.”After forming a Counsel of Elders in 2015 to work alongside a city project team, the city followed cultural leadership throughout the park’s entire design process. Alongside consultation from Elders and Knowledge Keepers, the city has also called upon the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Calls to Action, the MMIWG Calls for Justice, and United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to help guide the work.“Consistent with Indigenous culture of respecting the land, the project is designed to be completely synchronized within its location in the Edmonton River Valley,” Chelsea Burden, City of Edmonton’s Project Manager shared. With this in mind, the city also conducted an Environmental Impact Assessment to ensure the construction of the site results in minimal destruction to native plant and tree species along the River Valley.
The park’s development plans include spaces for ceremony and sweats, the opportunity to grow medicinal native species plants, and the infrastructure to host culture camps and talking circles. The park plans to officially open in early 2023.
As more graves continue to be uncovered, the urgency to recognize Indigenous history and presence must be prioritized. Acknowledging that colonialism continues to have a devastating impact while actively making changes led by the Indigenous community with ancestral ties to the land are two processes that can and should happen in tandem.
For example, in January of 2022, Vancouver’s Park Board chair Stuart McKinnon presented a motion that calls for the co-management of city parks that fall under the traditional territory of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh nations. “I think it’s important as we recognize reconciliation in this country, that the land Vancouver sits on was occupied land,” McKinnon shared in a CBC article.
There is still plenty of work left to undo the colonial violence of the past, and governments at the municipal, provincial and federal level should actively engage in meaningful Indigenous consultation to lead the creation of cultural learning spaces in city parks as a starting point. In order to achieve successful consultation, engagement strategies must build authentic relationships with multiple Indigenous community members and respectfully make space for varying Indigenous worldviews. Further, municipalities must acknowledge that empowering Indigenous community members to lead educational programming, park signage, language camps, and plant/medicine gardens also empowers the community as a whole. Doing so promotes a way forward that allows urban Indigenous presence to access aspects of ceremony and tradition, and in turn, allows non-Indigenous people to learn more about the original stewards of the lands they occupy.
And perhaps above all, working alongside one another in mutual respect is one way to honour the spirit in which Treaty relationships were built upon.
Parks are not “nice to haves,” they are critical social, health, and environmental infrastructure for Toronto. City parks are lifelines in extreme heat waves. Social connectors in an age of increasing polarization. Keepers of biodiversity despite ever fragmenting urban landscapes.
To meet the biggest challenges we face in Toronto—climate change, biodiversity loss, social polarization, rising inequality—we need whole new ways to plan, design, manage, program, and govern parks.
This shift requires doing things differently. It requires ensuring proper funding, sharing decision-making power, addressing inequities head-on, and prioritizing action on truth and reconciliation with Indigenous peoples.
As Toronto faces upcoming municipal elections, we urge candidates for Mayor and Council to accelerate the transition to a more equitable, resilient future for city parks by working with us on the ideas presented in this platform.
All of the ideas in this platform require us to invest more time and money into city parks. In our 2022 survey of residents of Canadian cities, 87% said they support more investment in parks.
Responsible for 60% of Canada’s infrastructure, municipalities like Toronto receive only 10 cents on every tax dollar. That means our three levels of government, each of which has responsibilities for our natural environment and human health, all need to come to the table.
This is easier said than done. The multiple benefits of parks—health, environmental, social, economic—actually make it harder to invest at the scale we need to. Why? Because the benefits of investing in parks are distributed across many different ministries and government departments, each of which is accountable for its own budgets and plans. That is why we need to support governments to pursue an ambitious, whole-of-government approach to investment in Toronto parks.
Investing more in city parks is not an imposition or an obligation. It is an opportunity to transform Toronto for the better.
There is a clear and growing disparity in who has access to quality green spaces in Toronto. As COVID laid bare, equity-deserving communities face complex, interrelated health crises. Toronto must recognize how race, income and the built environment conspire to make parks a pressing environmental justice issue in our city.
Park Policy Directions:
Usable parks are the bar for entry. Toronto’s parks maintenance and operating budget have not kept pace with use and demand. There’s an urgent need to increase park operating budgets to ensure basic amenities like bathrooms and water are the standard in every single Toronto park.
Spending on park operating budgets must start to keep pace with demand. It is basic: amenities like bathrooms and water must be the standard in every single Toronto park, with a priority focus on equity-deserving and high-use parks. Investments in basic amenities that promote park use must include:
Further reading:
Towards equitable parks, Canadian City Parks Report 2020
People living in Toronto will need to adapt to hotter, wetter and more unpredictable climates. Climate change is here and is already impacting our city. With the right investment, parks can serve as climate infrastructure and provide people with critical places of refuge in hot, dense cities where a major health crisis is looming.
At the same time, people are seeking out nature more for its mental and physical health benefits. People want more places to experience nature close to home: 71% of survey respondents said they value visiting naturalized spaces within a 10-minute walk of homes, such as a native plant garden or small meadow. In fact, 87% of respondents said they were in favour of more native plant species within parks—the second most requested amenity after public washrooms. Toronto’s Ravine Strategy offers a strong road map for ensuring these vital biodiversity and natural habitats are safeguarded for the future and enjoyed by residents, but funding has remained limited.
Policy Directions:
Invest in the co-benefits of naturalized spaces as climate resilience infrastructure, urban biodiversity habitat and vital nature connections in Toronto.
Further reading
Deepening the conservation conversation, Canadian City Parks Report 2020
There is an urgent need for new models of Toronto park governance rooted in shared decision-making power. We need a new way of managing city parks that are more inclusive, community-focused, and respects the land rights of Indigenous peoples and the knowledge of communities.
Park planning and design practices
Over the past several years, communities have been actively working to decentralize power in institutional spaces.
It is time for Toronto to give communities more decision-making power on the park issues that affect them most, particularly in equity-deserving communities.
Abundance, the theme of Park People’s 2022 Conference, is an invitation to radically reimagine city parks. For three days, September 21-23, the virtual event will focus our collective attention on the transformational park work charting a new path forward in cities.
Community park groups, park non-profits and park professionals are recognizing parks as essential urban infrastructure and building new approaches to collaboration, community engagement and nature connections. The Park People Conference is an invitation to engage with the incredible people, places and projects that manifest abundance in our city parks.
We’ve identified 4 key pathways to generating abundance in parks: decolonizing practices and narratives, engaging in power sharing, recognizing parks as sites of healing and justice, and cultivating human/nature connections.
Indigenous leaders and allies are calling for settlers to reckon with colonialism and decentre settler approaches in park work. We’re hosting numerous sessions during the Park People Conference that feature people and organizations that are leading the movement to collectively decolonize Canada’s city parks.
How can municipalities, community groups, non-profits and residents meaningfully work together to create spaces that address community needs in parks? The Park People Conference features several sessions that approach collaboration as an act of power-sharing where the process is just as important as the project itself.
What would parks look like if we saw everyone as equally worthy of having their needs met in shared spaces? Inclusion and access look much different from the perspective of those who are too often viewed as outsiders. But, their experience in parks tells us much about our communities, our cities and ourselves.
Several Park People Conference presenters demonstrate how centring nature builds both community and ecological resilience.
Check out the whole agenda, and 100+ speakers bringing together the incredible people, places and projects that manifest abundance in city parks.
See you at the Park People Conference!
This case study is part of the 2020 Canadian City Parks Report, showcasing inspiring projects, people, and policies from across Canada that offer tangible solutions to the most pressing challenges facing city parks.
________
Take a walk in a park. It’s something many of us intuitively do when we’re feeling anxious, which, as COVID-19 courses through our lives, is a growing collective emotional state. Nature is even something doctors have begun prescribing. But are all parks created equal in their benefits to our psychological well-being?
Pioneering research from the 1990s showed how exposure to nature—even getting a glimpse of it out of a window—could reduce stress, improve concentration, and help us heal faster. However, this research often painted nature with a broad brush: green space was green space whether it was a wild space or a treed lawn.
Recent research has been going deeper by exploring people’s response to different natural environments. Studies have looked at the length of time spent in biodiverse areas (the longer time the greater the positive effect), the types of vegetation present (bright flowers were stimulating, green plantings were soothing), and whether the presence of park furniture like benches reduced the well-being impacts of natural areas (it didn’t).
Overall, the research has found that people report a greater sense of well-being in areas that they perceive to be more biodiverse—a finding that has deep implications for how we plan and engage people in urban biodiversity.
The importance of access to nature and biodiversity for our mental health becomes even more urgent in light of COVID-19. As the pandemic increased stress and severed personal support networks for many, half of Canadians reported worsening mental health and the Canadian Mental Health Association warned of a potential “echo pandemic” of mental illness.
People were left trying to balance government direction to “stay home” with a desire to get some fresh air and clear their heads. A global survey of 2,000 people found mental and physical health were key drivers of public space use during the pandemic. The same survey found that people took refuge in places close to home, highlighting the pressing need to ensure natural areas are equitably distributed throughout our cities.
The benefits of biodiversity are often couched in environmental impacts and ecosystem services—the work that natural areas do to help clean the air, provide food, mitigate flooding, control extreme temperatures, and more. Viewing nature as green infrastructure is critical, but it misses how these same spaces are also psychological infrastructure.
“The intersection of the richness of life on earth with human well-being is now well established in science and is fast becoming an imperative in design and planning practice,” said Nina-Marie Lister, Associate Professor and Director of the Ecological Design Lab at Ryerson University, who added that the area is a “new frontier.”
“Never before have our parks and public green spaces been more important to city dwellers, especially in terms of the mental health and wellness benefits of urban nature,” she said. “From birdsong to sunshine, wildflowers and shady walks, we now know that the ability to safely access the outdoors is a critical necessity—and a vital prescription for wellness.”
“The sooner we recognize that we take psychological solace being in nature, the better we are able to protect nature for our own well-being,” she added.
Don Carruthers Den Hoed, a researcher at Mount Royal University who also manages the Canadian Parks Collective for Innovation and Leadership, has conducted his own studies on the connection between biodiversity and well-being. He argued that the well-being narrative can be a “doorway” through which to get more people involved in conversations about parks and biodiversity, noting the Canadian Index of Well-being as a model for how to talk about the multiple benefits of parks.
Understanding how parks contribute to Index areas like leisure and environment are a “no-brainer,” Carruthers Den Hoed said. But what about democratic engagement and community vitality? Through the Index, cities can make the case that volunteer stewardship programs aren’t just about natural restoration work, he said, but also about strengthening community vitality and well-being.
The impacts of well-being and biodiversity often depend as much on people’s perceptions as on actual levels of biodiversity present in a natural area.
For example, one 2012 study found people reported high levels of well-being in areas they perceived to be more natural, even if their perception did not align with actual levels of biodiversity.
This leads to an opportunity, the researchers pointed out. Closing the gap between perception and reality through natural education and stewardship initiatives could “unlock win-win scenarios” that “can maximize both biodiversity conservation and human well-being.”
In other words, the more we improve the biodiversity of our city and provide people ways to learn and steward these areas, the more people are able to appreciate natural spaces and the better they will feel as a result.
Robin Wall Kimmerer wrote of this reciprocal relationship between land stewardship and human well-being in her book, Braiding Sweetgrass, which weaves together Indigenous knowledge and natural science.
“Restoring land without restoring relationship is an empty exercise,” she wrote. “It is relationship that will endure and relationship that will sustain the restored land. Therefore, reconnecting people and the landscape is as essential as reestablishing proper hydrology or cleaning up contaminants. It is medicine for the earth.”
Lister views the public health and well-being impacts of biodiversity as a “missed opportunity” in Canada. “For a country rich in biodiversity, we are behind on protection strategies that can improve human well-being. I think it’s an urgent necessity to put biodiversity and health together in our public policies.”
Carruthers Den Hoed pointed out that park managers often speak about the spiritual benefits of nature and yet “that’s not mentioned in any management plans. It’s one of the really important values people come to nature for and yet it’s just kind of shuffled to the side of the table.”
Our review of Canadian biodiversity strategies found that while they mention the human well-being benefits of biodiversity, they do so often only in general terms rather than in policy or recommended actions.
However, that doesn’t mean cities aren’t thinking about the connection between biodiversity and public health. Recognizing the scientific link between mental health and biodiversity, Vanessa Carney, Calgary’s Landscape Analysis Supervisor, said that one of the goals of the city’s work mapping ecological networks “is to help find ways to expand Calgarians’ access to park spaces to include more easily accessible nature experiences.”
The well-being benefits of experiencing biodiversity and nature raise important questions about equitable access to these spaces—especially given rising mental health pressures due to COVID-19.
As health researcher Nadha Hassen found, racial and socioeconomic inequities in access to quality green spaces can be a determinant of mental health outcomes. “In urban settings, neighbourhoods with low-income, newcomer, and racialized populations tend to have lower access to available, good quality green spaces compared to other groups that are higher income or white,” she wrote.
Equity is a “massive piece of work,” Carruthers Den Hoed noted. Indeed, equity is a missing lens from many biodiversity strategies. He argued that equity should not just be about access (do people have nearby nature to enjoy?), but about inclusion (how involved are people in shaping those natural spaces?).
“Where’s the equity focusing on the decision-making, the employment, the economic benefits of the things that are happening in that park?” Carruthers Den Hoed said. “That’s where I think the most interesting work will go.”
When we think of healthcare, we frequently picture hospitals, prescription drugs, and waiting areas. But what if the journey to recovery also included strolls in the park or gardening with your neighbours?
Park People views community and connection as a powerful tool for improving health and wellbeing. This is the essence of green social prescribing, an evolving practice that encourages individuals to reestablish connections with nature and one another to enhance their mental, physical, and social wellbeing.
“The thing about parks and ravines and natural areas is that they really deliver on a lot of public good. I mentioned physical health. Obviously, you’re active, you’re getting exercise, fresh air. Mental health is huge. You know, I live close to High Park, which is close to St Joseph’s Hospital, and I think of St Joe’s and High Park as the two key health care providers in my neighborhood, physical health, mental health, social cohesion, particularly in a city like Toronto.”
City of Toronto staff
Green social prescribing involves connecting individuals to nature-based programs and activities in the community, such as gardening, cultural gatherings, walking clubs, or arts in the park, to enhance their overall wellbeing1.
It’s about healing through connection with nature, with those around us, and with ourselves.
Such programs are not limited to clinics. They happen on the ground where individuals reside and gather. They are led by community leaders and passionate residents who understand what matters most to their neighbourhoods.
Traditionally, this model follows a pathway: a healthcare professional identifies a need, a link worker supports the person in exploring their interests and then connects them to community-based, nature-focused activities2. In this pathway, community programs serve as the social intervention, which allows the prescription to come to life.
A Link Worker (also referred to as a community connector, navigator, or coordinator) is a committed support person who ridges health and social care. They work with individuals to identify needs, set goals, and overcome barriers, while connecting them to community resources. Link Workers establish trust, co-create plans, and work alongside healthcare and social service providers, offering wraparound support as part of broader care team.
The prevalence of social isolation, anxiety, and burnout is increasing4. For numerous individuals, particularly those from racialized, immigrant, and low-income communities, accessing mental health services continues to be a challenge and poses several barriers5.
That’s where green social prescribing provides something impactful:
Research indicates that time spent in nature can alleviate stress, anxiety, and depression6. A study discovered that spending as little as 20 minutes in a park can greatly reduce cortisol levels, the hormone associated with stress.
Yet, beyond the scientific aspects, what Park People offers is this: supports for individuals reconnect with the environment, their culture, and one another.
Park People’s Sparking Change program wasn’t launched as a “green social prescribing” initiative. Rather, it represents the social intervention side of the pathway, the very kinds of community-led activities that people could one day be referred to in a healthcare-linked system.
Through cultural events, gardening, peer-led walks, and more, community champions are offering their own version of care rooted in place, culture, and joy. The program supports people to form groups that can organize activities in their local parks regularly over time, builds their capacity to advocate for improvements in their green spaces, and fosters partnerships to expand the range of activities and opportunities that community groups can take part in.
“We have witnessed firsthand the positive impacts that well-maintained parks and greenspace have on the health and wellbeing of our neighborhood’s residents. Through Sparking Change, we have worked to ensure that outdoor spaces are more inclusive and accessible, promoting physical activity, mental health, and bringing people together.”
Community member
In 2024, Sparking Change supported over 50 groups to activate greenspaces across Toronto. Together, they organized 110 days of programming and reached 3,300+ people. Nearly all participants (96%) reported stronger community connections7 and a large majority (80%) also said that through Sparking Change they feel a sense of belonging to their community.
Green social prescribing does not aim to replace traditional healthcare, rather, it seeks to expand our understanding of the various ways care can be experienced. It serves as a reminder that wellness does not only exist in clinics or hospitals, but can also be found in everyday settings: a nearby ravine, a community garden, or a group of neighbours gathered in the park.
At Park People, we’ve seen how community-led initiatives can reduce isolation, improve mental health, and bring joy through simple acts of gathering, caring, and connecting to nature.
“It’s been an eye opener and adventure locating and navigating Toronto’s beautiful parks, our seniors group facial expressions after entering the park, and seing such a wonderful site of luscious greenspaces with some of nature’s animals all around. Conversations of how good it feels to be in such a peaceful and serene place, offers a sense of wellbeing for us all. Thank you Park People.”
The challenge and opportunity is to build stronger bridges between community-led interventions like Sparking Change and the healthcare system. How can initiatives like Sparking Change be more connected to the healthcare system? What would it look like for healthcare providers to prescribe a walking group in a local park? How might link workers and healthcare providers collaborate with community champions to ensure people get referred to programs that reflect their needs, languages, and culture?
To make this vision possible, future steps could include:
By making these connections, cities can unlock the potential of green social prescribing.
Because when we invest in community care in every aspect, we’re not only creating healthier cities;
We’re fostering a sense of belonging.
With support from Parks Canada, Park People recently hosted a series of stakeholder engagement sessions to help inform a future national network of urban parks.
In these sessions, participants responded to one very important question:
What are the key components of an inclusive, accessible and welcoming national urban park network?
The participants were selected to reflect diverse perspectives, voices, areas of expertise and geographies. We heard from stakeholders from nature-based groups, as well as city-based organizations serving people with physical and developmental disabilities, youth, adults experiencing homelessness, newcomers, Black, Indigenous and people of colour.
Taken together, participants’ answers helped Park People identify 9 key elements that contribute to more inclusive, accessible and welcoming large urban park experiences.
Here’s what participants told us about the kind of spaces and experiences they feel help create inclusive, accessible and welcoming urban parks.
Because parks serve such a diverse range of needs, session participants told us that parks need to be flexible spaces that can simultaneously serve a number of different purposes and functions. Participants highlighted that if parks are to serve these purposes, they must have:
The participants we spoke to shared their reflections on the terms “park” and “urban park.”
In these conversations, we heard that the term ‘park’ is broad enough to reflect a wide range of users’ needs and interests.
The participants shared their reflections on the term “urban park.” In these conversations, participants found the term “urban park” confusing because the term “urban” may suggest that a park space has fewer natural or wild elements. They felt that this terminology might make more sense in Toronto or Vancouver, but is less applicable to parks in places like Winnipeg or Saskatoon.
When visitors enter a park they are likely to encounter many “unknowns.” The session participants we spoke to told us that these “unknowns” or unexpected elements or experiences can pose a significant barrier to visiting or enjoying a park visit. In some instances, they emphasized, these unknowns can pose very real safety risks.
Participants talked about the need for parks to be accessible to people with a range of abilities.
They particularly highlighted that to truly be inclusive, accessible and welcoming, parks must address the needs of individuals with varying mental and physical ability requirements, and people who experience language barriers.
Physically accessible trails, green spaces and amenities were all seen to support more inclusive and welcoming park experiences. The participants we spoke to emphasized that these amenities should be complemented by a variety of wayfinding experiences, including signage with text, pictograms and QR codes.
People had different preferences when it comes to the natural elements and nature-based experiences they want to see in urban parks. Some participants expressed that they prefer to experience “untouched” or pristine nature, while others enjoy experiences that invite people to engage directly with nature through activities like nature-based education and programming.
Some participants cited the need for greater integration of technology in nature, such as free wi-fi and tech-supported ways of finding and learning to build nature connections.
An emerging theme among participants was the need to balance the ecological integrity of urban parks with the social needs of individuals and communities. Participants in the sessions emphasized that education, programming and communication tools can help strike a balance between the ecological integrity of a park and its use and enjoyment.
Participants voiced the need for easy access to and within urban parks. Various transportation requirements that were highlighted as helping people access parks were car access and accompanying parking spaces as well as public transit, biking, scooter and walking routes.
Not only do visitors need convenient ways to get to parks, but they need to easily move within the park so they can travel to and from amenities and activities.
Although participants used the term “access” broadly, taken together, their comments suggest improvements in the following areas:
Participants shared how a sense of belonging is integral to park use and enjoyment. In order for people to feel they belong in a place, they need to feel safe, welcomed and able to easily envision themselves there.
Often racialized and Indigenous park users as well as those who have lived experience with homelessness encounter park rangers, police and bylaw officers who communicate and enforce park rules. The presence of park enforcement is seen as an extension of the long history of oppression and racism in policing practices generally. In this context, the presence of park rangers, police and bylaw officers often makes BIPOC and unhoused park users feel both unsafe and unwelcome in parks.
Participants pointed out several ways that parks can be more integrated into the fabric of neighbourhoods and communities. We heard that parks would feel more integrated into people’s daily lives if places like libraries and community centres promoted park activities such as programs or volunteer opportunities.
Also, participants emphasized that community organizations and groups should be encouraged to host their programs in local parks.
Participants discussed the opportunity to better learn about and better integrate Indigenous stewardship practices and environmental education into parks.
Some participants shared their belief that the use of technology should not be encouraged in natural settings, while others said that technology can better connect people to nature. Participants mentioned that technology could be used to enhance safety and information sharing in parks, and felt that self-guided park tours and access to wifi, especially in no service zones, would be welcomed.
People mentioned that the data generated through park-based technology could help build insights to improve park activities, build more engagement in parks and could be leveraged so that park users can share any issues they encounter while in the park.
Participants told us that they want to see more creative partnerships in parks.
From concept, to design, to activation and governance, park users want to see more power sharing, collaboration and joint decision making between various levels of government and park-based NGOs and grassroots organizations.
The key findings from the stakeholder engagement sessions offer rich insight into how Canadian park-aligned organizations envision the future of large urban parks. We heard that Canadians are eager to see new approaches to parks that prioritize park users and diverse communities, offer a rich array of activities and amenities, and provide opportunities for both environmental stewardship and nature connectedness.
There was strong support and enthusiasm from stakeholders around Parks Canada’s efforts to better connect people to nature in cities through their future Urban Park Policy and Network. It was especially rewarding to hear from urban stakeholders who have not traditionally been part of past park engagement efforts.
It is abundantly clear that there are many opportunities ahead for all of us to build on these relationships and deepen engagement efforts as part of creating more inclusive, accessible and welcoming urban parks.
In the lead-up to The Park People Conference, happening September 21-23, 2022, Park People met with Betty Lepps, Vancouver Park Board’s new Director of Urban Relationships. In her previous role at BC Housing, Betty co-led the housing of over 280 folks from Strathcona Park. She was also instrumental in developing the first Indigenous restorative justice court in Calgary. With a background in Childcare Leadership and Social Work, Betty’s work on systemic change with vulnerable populations is highly lauded at municipal, ministerial, community and national levels.
Betty Lepps: Everyone who lives in a city is a constituent. As a constituent, each person is entitled to basic rights, well-being and dignity. The city provides indoor and outdoor amenities that exist to support the well-being of its constituents. That extends to everyone – including those who are sheltering in parks.
It’s about thinking in terms of equity vs. equality. We can’t give each individual park user what they need. But in terms of equality, everyone deserves to be able to experience the well-being benefits that parks exist to offer. Parks are a human service that exists to support people’s well-being. We need to make sure that human service is universally available to everyone who lives in a city.
That’s equality and that has to hold true whether you’re in the park walking, pushing a stroller, using a wheelchair, biking, or whether the park is where you shelter.
But, I want to emphasize that supporting the well-being of constituents in a city is not just the responsibility of the people who run the city. It’s the responsibility of every person who lives in that city. People sheltering in parks are part of the life of the city and their rights and well-being are the responsibility of every person who lives there.
BL: Four things: communication, understanding, respect and collaboration.
Listen, everyone has a story. Building relationships is about hearing each others’ stories so we can break down stigma, shame and false narratives.
In my role as Director of Urban Relationships, the first of its kind in the country, I see myself as a conduit bringing different people together to really hear each other’s stories.
One thing I’ve learned working in community development for 35 years, it takes a long time to create systemic change. But the conversation is what keeps it going.
Without communication and understanding, people create their own narratives about each other. They become deeply disconnected and start to believe false narratives. They may think: “these people are not like me”, “these people are unsafe,” or “this is what these people need.” We have a lot of colonial practices that are barriers to listening and understanding each other.
Unhoused people living in parks is not a one-system issue. Vancouver Park Board has to be involved, fire has to be involved, health has to be involved, the city, the province, housing, and people that live in the neighbourhood. So many parties have to be involved. But, it’s an incredible opportunity to create systemic change. If we build toward collaboration, communication, understanding, and respect, we can keep the conversation going.
BL: Most importantly, we need to change our culture. For us to have parks and recreation services that serve the people they’re intended to serve we need to effectively listen and hear each other’s stories.
That’s the only way we can change the story that’s in our heads and change the culture.
Right now, we think this issue is everyone else’s responsibility or jurisdiction to “deal with.” Yes, we need to have bylaws and set boundaries, but how can we do that without a heavy hand? Without ticketing? How about conversation? Let’s start with conversation.
There’s no simple way to “deal with it.” The only way to “deal with it” is systemic change and that takes deep listening. When that happens, diverse people will be able to enjoy parks that serve their spiritual, physical and emotional needs. Parks will be places where everyone feels safe and welcome, and where we enjoy making memories, in the way they need to.
That’s equity and humanitarian responsibility, and that’s where we need to go when it comes to people sheltering in our parks.
Sparking Change explores the social impacts of communities in underserved neighbourhoods becoming involved in animating and improving their local park, and identifies common strategies taken by both community members and partner organizations to support this work. The report tells the story of communities that have taken action through spearheading improvements, engaging diverse community members, and organizing events and activities that draw people into the park—a process we refer to as park engagement.
Through interviews with community volunteers, partner organizations, and city staff in seven different North American cities, including Toronto, we highlight five major social impacts of park engagement.
“Parks are not simply green places of respite with grass and trees–they are critical pieces of the social infrastructure of our cities. And we believe they have a role to play in creating more inclusive, equitable places that are shaped by and for the people living there.”
Social impacts of communities becoming involved in animating and improving their local park
This case study is part of the 2021 Canadian City Parks Report, showcasing Inspiring projects, people, and policies from across Canada that offer tangible solutions to the most pressing challenges facing city parks.
As Canadians spent more time outdoors during the pandemic, the benefits of parks were clear. They helped us de-stress, stay active, and connect safely with others. But parks are critical for tackling another looming urban crisis: climate change.
Parks provide a number of climate change mitigation and adaptation benefits, such as cleaning the air, protecting against flooding, and regulating local temperatures. As climate change brings heavier storms and hotter weather, parks become even more important.
However, urban green spaces–and thus their benefits–are not equally distributed.
If you live in a neighbourhood with plentiful parks and trees then you also likely live in a neighbourhood that is whiter and higher income. Multiple studies show that lower income, racialized communities have fewer green spaces, making these communities more vulnerable to climate change impacts.
Sherry Yano, formerly of the David Suzuki Foundation, argued that these communities are also often located closer to more polluted and disaster prone areas. This reality, described as environmental racism, is documented in recent Canadian research:
In response to inequities like these, Canadian advocates have called for centring justice in climate action. These calls follow a long history of the environmental justice movement, which works to redress environmental harms and ensure both negative and positive environmental impacts are equitably distributed.
This movement also includes city parks. We spoke with experts about what taking a justice approach looks like at the scale of the urban park, allowing more people to share in the climate resilience benefits of green space.
While a new federal bill seeks to address environmental racism in Canada, a 2020 study found that “environmental justice indicators are not yet routinely incorporated into policy decision-making at the local, provincial or federal level.” The gap goes deeper: “Even in cases where consideration of equity dimensions is encouraged in planning, guidance on how to measure and monitor those dimensions can be limited.”
This finding reflects our review of Canadian climate change and park system plans. While plans mention equity as a general principle, few carry this forward into policy and even fewer specifically acknowledge racial inequities.
Some cities, however, have begun to step forward:
By taking an equity-based approach to park development, and particularly focusing on communities that may be more vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, these plans, if implemented, work towards cities that allow more residents to share in the climate resilience benefits of green spaces.
When we talk about green space inequities, we often point out which neighbourhoods have fewer parks. But, as Setha Low has written, distributional justice is only one aspect of environmental justice in parks. We must also examine whether decision-making processes are fair (procedural justice) and whether people are treated respectfully (interactional justice).
This means asking questions such as:
These questions of process, power, and respect can have a profound impact on a city’s ability to address inequities.
As Vancouver Park Board Senior Planner Chad Townsend said, “it helps to have a master plan policy that recognizes inequity,” like Vancouver’s Initiative Zones, but it “doesn’t immediately change where the loud voices come from.”
In our survey, just 34% of Canadians said they felt they had the ability to influence what went on in their parks.
Reforming how and who we engage is no small matter. The distributional inequities we see today are the result of decision-making power imbalances, Sherry Yano argued, privileging some voices over others. “If you keep reinforcing the same systems, you are reinforcing the way we got to these problems.”
We can start by providing opportunities for a range of people in affected communities to be meaningfully involved in influencing outcomes, rather than positioning engagement solely as a way to seek feedback.
Canadian placemaker Jay Pitter has said that “if the community engagement process hasn’t served the larger purpose of building bridges across difference and fostering new relationships, then it hasn’t served the community.” She suggested smaller gatherings and walking workshops as ways to create opportunities for dialogue.
Larissa Crawford, Founder of Future Ancestors Services, a youth-led Indigenous and Black-owned social enterprise advancing climate justice, advocated for engaging with diverse youth and giving them decision-making power. “These young minds are required to think of sustainability in a way that older generations and even my generation didn’t have to,” she said.
Diversity is not just about race and identity, Crawford added, but about bringing in diverse experiences. This means not prioritizing people based on academic or professional credentials, but widening our scope to value the contributions of people with different lived experiences, including Indigenous land stewardship practices.
“When we only value one way of knowing, and one kind of experience in these environmental spaces, then we’re having conversations with ourselves,” she said.
Parks provide social infrastructure and can strengthen support networks during times of need. We’ve seen this play out with COVID-19, where 71% of Canadians in our survey said parks were critical to their sense of social connection during the pandemic.
Experts say these social connections are also critical when it comes to climate change.
Florence Lecour-Cyr is the Agente de programmation, planification et recherche at CIUSSS du Centre-Sud-de-l’Île-de-Montréal. She argued that the connections people create in parks can act as social support networks, especially for people who are more vulnerable, such as older adults or people with less mobility.
As one study pointed out, the social connections afforded by parks “may be a lifeline [for isolated individuals] in extreme temperatures.” Having a neighbour check in during a heat wave or having a place to stay when the power goes out can, in some circumstances, be the difference between life and death.
It’s important, especially in relation to climate change, for cities to measure social connections, argued Anne Pelletier, Service environnement urbain et saines habitudes de vie, Direction régionale de santé publique du CIUSSS du Centre-Sud de Montréal. But she acknowledged that it’s “not a phenomenon that is easy to capture.” Some initiatives have sprung up, such as the U.S.-based Reimagining the Civic Commons project’s measurement framework, and the Toronto Foundation’s Social Capital Study.
Complex challenges like climate change defy the compartmentalized ways in which we often approach problems and in which cities divide up work.
“There’s such a focus on siloes of learning. The mechanics, or the policy, or the science” Sheila Boudreau a landscape architect and Founder of SpruceLab said. “I think cities need to break out of siloed departments,” creating cross-disciplinary working groups.
If we don’t think holistically and broadly about climate change, Boudreau added, then “we’re going to fail in our efforts.” A narrow environmental focus in a project may foster short-term gains, but it may not work long-term or address the social needs of a community.
For example, Boudreau spoke about how confronting discrimination is critical in promoting access to the climate change benefits of parks. If someone feels unwelcome accessing a newly created green space–for example because of a fear of discrimination based on race or because they are an unhoused park user–then they aren’t able to reap its benefits of air quality and cooler temperatures.
The potential for green gentrification is another example of why thinking across disciplines is necessary when pursuing green space projects. Green gentrification occurs when investments in green spaces in lower income neighborhoods result in property value increases, which can displace the residents the investments were meant to benefit.
While new green spaces bring climate-resilience and social benefits, they can also spark concern. For example, a green laneway built in Montreal’s Saint-Henri neighborhood to help mitigate heat caused concern among activists that rising rents could push out local residents. Similar conversations have played out in Vancouver related to a proposed downtown waterfront park nearby the lower-income Downtown Eastside.
Florence Lecour-Cyr said that for green space investments to curb the gentrification process they must coincide with social and housing policies that target affordability. Anne Pelletier argued that involving local communities in the planning and animation of parks will make it possible to create spaces that foster a sense of belonging–a point also made by the National Recreation and Parks Association in their briefing on equitable park development.
Indigenous ways of knowing and approaches to land stewardship have important lessons for thinking about climate change, but are not often reflected in city policies.
Participants at Toronto’s Indigenous Climate Action Summit argued for a more holistic approach that recognizes spiritual and justice concerns. “If the city does not account for and address colonization in its policies it will keep repeating the same problematic behaviours,” the session notes stated. For example, rather than simply quantitative indicators (e.g., counting species), participants suggested measuring success against wider questions, such as whether we are being good ancestors.
“When we aren’t acknowledging how significant a role Indigenous peoples need to play in [conversations about climate change], we cannot produce the most effective and the most reliable outcomes,” said Larissa Crawford.
She pointed towards successful co-management regimes at the national park level between Parks Canada and Indigenous Nations. “Those are some of the most innovative park management regimes I’ve encountered and that are being recognized, especially for their ability to assess environmental health in a completely new way.”
The importance of Indigenous land stewardship practices was highlighted by a 2019 University of British Columbia study which found biodiversity was highest on Indigenous-managed lands—finding a 40% greater number of unique species.
Crawford argued this process must start by acknowledging the harm that’s been caused, and the history of Indigenous land dispossession behind the establishment of parks–a history that is often hidden from view.
Only once we’ve taken the time to acknowledge that harm, can “we seek to establish concrete and meaningful relationships with those original caregivers,” Crawford said.
“Not only are we going to be working towards the spirit of restorative relationships,” she said. “But we’re also going to tap into the plethora of expertise that Indigenous peoples have, especially with regards to the land and its sustainability, and the ecosystem and our roles as humans in that ecosystem.”