Evaluation-perception of site attributes and plant species selection in the public urban green space of a compact city
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4240569 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Caroline Law (0000-0002-9896-9965), Ling Chui Hui (0000-0001-9670-6814), C Y Jim (0000-0003-4052-8363) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Volume | 28 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Publication date | 2023-01-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Conservation Ecology (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1195-5449 • E-ISSN: 1708-3087 |
| Publisher | Resilience Alliance (PUBLISHER • CA) |
| DOI | 10.5751/es-14222-280322 |
| OpenAlex | W4387046968 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 19 |
Understanding citizens’ evaluation of public urban green space (UGS) attributes and plant species features can inform greenspace design to meet public expectations. This study evaluated the public’s responses to UGS attributes and plant species in Hong Kong using a questionnaire survey of 827 adult respondents. Principal component analysis followed by cluster analysis were applied to analyze the data. The respondents were differentiated into three groups (ecological, eclectic, and pragmatic users) based on the evaluations of UGS attributes. Additionally, three clusters (conservation supporters, all-round perfectionists, and safety defenders) were classified based on evaluating plant species features. Plant knowledge and gender were the main factors associated with respondents’ evaluation profiles. Respondents with different expectations of UGS attributes harbored different evaluations of plant species features. The respondent groups agreed unanimously that similar plant species composition was deployed across UGS sites in Hong Kong. Respondents attaching importance to the conservation value of plant species (i.e., “conservation supporters”) were more concerned about plant species selection. The conservation supporters were dissatisfied with the current plant selection strategy. A zonation strategy for large UGS could cater to a broad range of user demands and create a socially-inclusive venue for residents. Alternatively, a collection of small UGS in a given district can cover a range of functions. The findings could inform a modified approach to UGS design and plant selection to satisfy the residents’ disparate expectations and needs
Biology · Environmental resource management · Geography · Introduced species · Native plant · Perception · Plant species · Political science · Respondent · Urban green space · Computer Science · Engineering · Environmental Science · Land Use and Ecosystem Services · Psychology · Urban Agriculture and Sustainability · Urban Green Space and Health · Ecology
Is biodiversity attractive?—On-site perception of recreational and biodiversity values in urban green space
Urban forests and pollution mitigation
Perception and Attitude of Residents Toward Urban Green Spaces in Guangzhou (China)
Towards an integrated understanding of green space in the European built environment
Challenges and strategies for urban green-space planning in cities undergoing densification
Green justice or just green? Provision of urban green spaces in Berlin, Germany
The effects of naturalness, gender, and age on how urban green space is perceived and used
Woodland spaces and edges
The role of ‘nativeness’ in urban greening to support animal biodiversity
Demographic groups’ differences in visual preference for vegetated landscapes in urban green space
A Quantitative Review of Urban Ecosystem Service Assessments
Urban landscaping choices and people’s selection of plant traits in Cape Town, South Africa
Classifying and valuing ecosystem services for urban planning
Farmers’ perceptions of climate change
Citizen attitude and expectation towards greenspace provision in compact urban milieu
Differential community effects on perception and use of urban greenspaces
Cultural Differences in Attitudes towards Urban Parks and Green Spaces
Gardener demographics, experience, and motivations drive differences in plant species richness and composition in urban gardens
Imagining social justice and the false promise of urban park design
| Highly cited | No |
|---|