IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v12y2023i9p1664-d1225050.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preferences and Perception Influencing Usage of Neighborhood Public Urban Green Spaces in Fast Urbanizing Indian City

Author

Listed:
  • Shruti Ashish Lahoti

    (Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), Kanagawa 240-0115, Japan)

  • Ashish Lahoti

    (Independent Researcher, Tokyo 136-0073, Japan)

  • Shalini Dhyani

    (National Environmental Engineering Research Institute, Nagpur 440015, India)

  • Osamu Saito

    (Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), Kanagawa 240-0115, Japan)

Abstract

In rapidly expanding Indian cities, the current provisions for public urban green spaces (PUGS) falls below the minimum standards recommended by the WHO, linked with the well-being of urban dwellers. The local authorities are struggling to fulfill the supply side gap, with a disparity in PUGS provisions. Currently, the provisions focus on fulfilling the prerequisites identified by the planning agencies and do not appropriately address the urban greenspace demands. However, effective planning has been emphasized as a way to respond to the diverse, competing and changing demands of PUGS, allowing the incorporation of the needs and preferences of urban dwellers in the planning and management of PUGS to help determine their multifunctionality, usefulness, and popularity. In response, this study attempts to capture the demands of urban dwellers through local social data for neighborhood PUGS of the fast-urbanizing Nagpur. We attempt to assist local authorities in better understanding the provisions for planning and managing PUGS that can fulfil the growing PUGS needs of urban dwellers. Via a social survey of users and residents, we capture visitations, usage, activities, motives of visits, and perceptions about neighborhood PUGS characteristics. The findings highlight the determinants that influence the usage and favored activities. Urban dwellers have a strong tendency to use neighborhood “parks and gardens” due to their convenient proximity, emphasizing how crucial their location is in shaping urban residents’ engagement with these spaces. The socio-demographics shape the preference, and the locals hold negative perceptions about size, vegetation, amenities, as well as maintenance. The identified determinants (access and availability), influencing factors (socio-demographic), and the barrier to usage (negative perceptions) need prioritized attention from the local authorities to accommodate the diverse and competing demands of different sub-groups of the urban dwellers.

Suggested Citation

  • Shruti Ashish Lahoti & Ashish Lahoti & Shalini Dhyani & Osamu Saito, 2023. "Preferences and Perception Influencing Usage of Neighborhood Public Urban Green Spaces in Fast Urbanizing Indian City," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-18, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:9:p:1664-:d:1225050
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/9/1664/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/9/1664/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shruti Lahoti & Mohamed Kefi & Ashish Lahoti & Osamu Saito, 2019. "Mapping Methodology of Public Urban Green Spaces Using GIS: An Example of Nagpur City, India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-23, April.
    2. Clare Rishbeth & Nissa Finney, 2006. "Novelty And Nostalgia In Urban Greenspace: Refugee Perspectives," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 97(3), pages 281-295, July.
    3. Kassahun Gashu & Tegegne Gebre-Egziabher & Mulatu Wubneh, 2020. "Local communities’ perceptions and use of urban green infrastructure in two Ethiopian cities: Bahir Dar and Hawassa," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 63(2), pages 287-316, January.
    4. Olumuyiwa Bayode Adegun, 2018. "When green is grievous: downsides in human-nature interactions in informal urban settlements," Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 347-361, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shruti Ashish Lahoti & Shalini Dhyani & Mesfin Sahle & Pankaj Kumar & Osamu Saito, 2024. "Exploring the Nexus between Green Space Availability, Connection with Nature, and Pro-Environmental Behavior in the Urban Landscape," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(13), pages 1-15, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrea Abraham & Kathrin Sommerhalder & Thomas Abel, 2010. "Landscape and well-being: a scoping study on the health-promoting impact of outdoor environments," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 55(1), pages 59-69, February.
    2. Emilio Ramírez-Juidías & José-Lázaro Amaro-Mellado & Jorge Luis Leiva-Piedra, 2022. "Influence of the Urban Green Spaces of Seville (Spain) on Housing Prices through the Hedonic Assessment Methodology and Geospatial Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-15, December.
    3. Pritam Ahirrao & Smita Khan, 2021. "Assessing Public Open Spaces: A Case of City Nagpur, India," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-24, April.
    4. Dalton Erick Baltazar & Jillian Labadz & Roy Smith & Andrew Telford & Marcello Di Bonito, 2022. "Socio-Cultural Valuation of Urban Parks: The Case of Jose Rizal Plaza in Calamba City, The Philippines," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-16, October.
    5. Halkos, George & Leonti, Aikaterini & Sardianou, Eleni, 2021. "Activities, motivations and satisfaction of urban parks visitors: A structural equation modeling analysis," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 502-513.
    6. Nápoles-Vértiz, Sonia & Caro-Borrero, Angela, 2024. "Conceptual diversity and application of ecosystem services and disservices: A systematic review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    7. Jenny Roe & Peter A. Aspinall & Catharine Ward Thompson, 2016. "Understanding Relationships between Health, Ethnicity, Place and the Role of Urban Green Space in Deprived Urban Communities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-21, July.
    8. Yannawut Uttaruk & Teerawong Laosuwan & Satith Sangpradid & Chetphong Butthep & Tanutdech Rotjanakusol & Wuttichai Sittiwong & Sutthicha Nilrit, 2024. "Thailand’s Urban Forestry Programs Are Assisted by Calculations of Their Ecological Properties and Economic Values," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-16, September.
    9. Ciesielski, Mariusz & Stereńczak, Krzysztof, 2021. "Using Flickr data and selected environmental characteristics to analyse the temporal and spatial distribution of activities in forest areas," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    10. Das, Arijit & Das, Manob, 2023. "Exploring the relationship between quality of living and green spaces in cities: Evidence from an Indian megacity region of global south," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    11. Buket Aydemir & Güney Çetinkaya & Abdullah Güngör & Ece Ömüriş, 2024. "Understanding the visitor complaints about urban green spaces: a thematic investigation of online reviews on nation gardens in Istanbul, Türkiye," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-10, December.
    12. Helen Roberts & Jon Sadler & Lee Chapman, 2019. "The value of Twitter data for determining the emotional responses of people to urban green spaces: A case study and critical evaluation," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 56(4), pages 818-835, March.
    13. Shruti Lahoti & Ashish Lahoti & Rajendra Kumar Joshi & Osamu Saito, 2020. "Vegetation Structure, Species Composition, and Carbon Sink Potential of Urban Green Spaces in Nagpur City, India," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-20, April.
    14. Gladkikh, Tatiana M. & Gould, Rachelle K. & Coleman, Kimberly J., 2019. "Cultural ecosystem services and the well-being of refugee communities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    15. Tianjiao Yan & Hong Leng & Qing Yuan, 2023. "The Role of “Nostalgia” in Environmental Restorative Effects from the Perspective of Healthy Aging: Taking Changchun Parks as an Example," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-21, September.
    16. Vera Ferreira & Ana Paula Barreira & Luís Loures & Dulce Antunes & Thomas Panagopoulos, 2020. "Stakeholders’ Engagement on Nature-Based Solutions: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-27, January.
    17. Weiqi Zhao & Yun Wang & Dan Chen & Ling Wang & Xiaomin Tang, 2021. "Exploring the Influencing Factors of the Recreational Utilization and Evaluation of Urban Ecological Protection Green Belts for Urban Renewal: A Case Study in Shanghai," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-18, September.
    18. Leïla Traoré & Bienvenue Belinga & Guillaume Lescuyer, 2023. "A Systematic Review of the Scope and Patterns of Green Consumption in Sub-Saharan Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-17, April.
    19. Edyta Łaszkiewicz & Piotr Czembrowski & Jakub Kronenberg, 2020. "Creating a Map of the Social Functions of Urban Green Spaces in a City with Poor Availability of Spatial Data: A Sociotope for Lodz," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-25, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:12:y:2023:i:9:p:1664-:d:1225050. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.