IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i11p1912-d1520983.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Satisfaction Research Contributes to the Optimization of Urban Green Space Design—A Global Perspective Bibliometric Analysis from 2001 to 2024

Author

Listed:
  • Shaoying Zhang

    (Department of Architecture, Faculty of Built Environment, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia
    Faculty of Architecture, Chengdu College of Arts and Sciences, Chengdu 610401, China)

  • Mastura Adam

    (Department of Architecture, Faculty of Built Environment, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia)

  • Norafida Ab Ghafar

    (Department of Architecture, Faculty of Built Environment, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia)

Abstract

With rapid global sustainable growth and urbanization, green spaces—central to urban green infrastructure—provide essential ecosystem services that significantly enhance residents’ quality of life and well-being. This importance has grown even more evident during the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, the research on satisfaction with urban green spaces has become an essential topic for scholars in recent years. A systematic review could be helpful as research trends and effective optimization strategies are still unclear. To fill this gap, this study conducted a bibliometric analysis of 313 high-quality papers published on the Web of Science since 2001. The findings revealed: (1) Key journals and significant developments associated with this field of research, especially from China and the United States, emerging as the major contributors. (2) Keyword clustering analysis identified key themes, including public engagement, historic preservation, environmental justice, walkability, green space accessibility, and restorative environments. These findings emphasize the importance of data-driven and innovative planning strategies for enhancing residents’ well-being, tourism, and urban sustainability. (3) Research on satisfaction with urban green spaces has shifted from a singular to a more diversified focus, contributing to the optimization of urban green spaces through four main aspects: residents’ needs, ecological functions, management strategies, and research approaches. The conclusions offer strategies for researching the optimization of urban green spaces and provide valuable insights for residents, scholars, urban planners, and designers.

Suggested Citation

  • Shaoying Zhang & Mastura Adam & Norafida Ab Ghafar, 2024. "How Satisfaction Research Contributes to the Optimization of Urban Green Space Design—A Global Perspective Bibliometric Analysis from 2001 to 2024," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-32, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:11:p:1912-:d:1520983
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/11/1912/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/11/1912/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Honghao Ren & Henk Folmer, 2017. "Determinants of residential satisfaction in urban China: A multi-group structural equation analysis," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(6), pages 1407-1425, May.
    2. Claudia Canedoli & Craig Bullock & Marcus J. Collier & Deirdre Joyce & Emilio Padoa-Schioppa, 2017. "Public Participatory Mapping of Cultural Ecosystem Services: Citizen Perception and Park Management in the Parco Nord of Milan (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-27, May.
    3. Deirdre Pfeiffer & Meagan M. Ehlenz & Riley Andrade & Scott Cloutier & Kelli L. Larson, 2020. "Do Neighborhood Walkability, Transit, and Parks Relate to Residents’ Life Satisfaction?," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 86(2), pages 171-187, April.
    4. Krekel, Christian & Kolbe, Jens & Wüstemann, Henry, 2016. "The greener, the happier? The effect of urban land use on residential well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 117-127.
    5. Venter, Zander & Barton, David & gundersen, vegard & Figari, Helene & Nowell, Megan, 2020. "Urban nature in a time of crisis: recreational use of green space increases during the COVID-19 outbreak in Oslo, Norway," SocArXiv kbdum, Center for Open Science.
    6. Yang Zhang & Agnes E. Van den Berg & Terry Van Dijk & Gerd Weitkamp, 2017. "Quality over Quantity: Contribution of Urban Green Space to Neighborhood Satisfaction," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-10, May.
    7. Deyi Kong & Zujian Chen & Cheng Li & Xinhui Fei, 2022. "Investigating the Usage Patterns of Park Visitors and Their Driving Factors to Improve Urban Community Parks in China: Taking Jinan City as an Example," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-20, November.
    8. Anton J. Nederhof, 2006. "Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the Social Sciences and the Humanities: A Review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 66(1), pages 81-100, January.
    9. Luis Loures & Thomas Panagopoulos & Jon Bryan Burley, 2016. "Assessing user preferences on post-industrial redevelopment," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 43(5), pages 871-892, September.
    10. Say-Wah Lee & Chuen-Wah Seow & Ke Xue, 2021. "Residents’ Sustainable City Evaluation, Satisfaction and Loyalty: Integrating Importance-Performance Analysis and Structural Equation Modelling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-14, June.
    11. Delphine Labbé & Yochai Eisenberg & Devon Snyder & Judy Shanley & Joy M. Hammel & Jon E. Froehlich, 2023. "Multiple-Stakeholder Perspectives on Accessibility Data and the Use of Socio-Technical Tools to Improve Sidewalk Accessibility," Disabilities, MDPI, vol. 3(4), pages 1-18, November.
    12. Yuxin Liu & Chenjing Fan & Dongdong Xue, 2024. "A Review of the Effects of Urban and Green Space Forms on the Carbon Budget Using a Landscape Sustainability Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-29, February.
    13. Pilvi Nummi, 2018. "Crowdsourcing Local Knowledge with PPGIS and Social Media for Urban Planning to Reveal Intangible Cultural Heritage," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 3(1), pages 100-115.
    14. Samreen Ayaz & Nayyer Masood & Muhammad Arshad Islam, 2018. "Predicting scientific impact based on h-index," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 993-1010, March.
    15. Jaloliddin Rustamov & Zahiriddin Rustamov & Nazar Zaki, 2023. "Green Space Quality Analysis Using Machine Learning Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-25, May.
    16. Cosimo Talò & Terri Mannarini & Alessia Rochira, 2014. "Sense of Community and Community Participation: A Meta-Analytic Review," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 117(1), pages 1-28, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Julia Rehling & Christiane Bunge & Julia Waldhauer & André Conrad, 2021. "Socioeconomic Differences in Walking Time of Children and Adolescents to Public Green Spaces in Urban Areas—Results of the German Environmental Survey (2014–2017)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-12, February.
    2. Chensong Lin & Chenjie Jia & Baisen Wang & Shuhao Kang & Hongyu Chen & Di Li & Longfeng Wu, 2024. "Evaluating Policy Shifts on Perceived Greenspace Quality: Applying Regression Discontinuity During the COVID-19 Reopening Period," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-18, October.
    3. J. C. Kitch & T. T. Nguyen & Q. C. Nguyen & Y. Hswen, 2023. "Changes in the relationship between Index of Concentration at the Extremes and U.S. urban greenspace: a longitudinal analysis from 2001–2019," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-10, December.
    4. Mayke van Dinter & Mieke Kools & Gamze Dane & Minou Weijs-Perrée & Kynthia Chamilothori & Eveline van Leeuwen & Aloys Borgers & Pauline van den Berg, 2022. "Urban Green Parks for Long-Term Subjective Well-Being: Empirical Relationships between Personal Characteristics, Park Characteristics, Park Use, Sense of Place, and Satisfaction with Life in The Nethe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, April.
    5. Wai Soe Zin & Aya Suzuki & Kelvin S.-H. Peh & Alexandros Gasparatos, 2019. "Economic Value of Cultural Ecosystem Services from Recreation in Popa Mountain National Park, Myanmar: A Comparison of Two Rapid Valuation Techniques," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-20, December.
    6. Andrew E. Clark, 2018. "Four Decades of the Economics of Happiness: Where Next?," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 64(2), pages 245-269, June.
    7. Deming Lin & Tianhui Gong & Wenbin Liu & Martin Meyer, 2020. "An entropy-based measure for the evolution of h index research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2283-2298, December.
    8. Otrachshenko, Vladimir & Tyurina, Elena & Nagapetyan, Artur, 2022. "The economic value of the Glass Beach: Contingent valuation and life satisfaction approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    9. Bruno Marques & Jacqueline McIntosh & Chitrakala Muthuveerappan & Krzysztof Herman, 2022. "The Importance of Outdoor Spaces during the COVID-19 Lockdown in Aotearoa—New Zealand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-17, June.
    10. Hui, Ling Chui & Jim, C.Y., 2022. "Urban-greenery demands are affected by perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices, and socio-demographic and environmental-cultural factors," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    11. Metwaly Ali Mohamed Eldakar, 2019. "Who reads international Egyptian academic articles? An altmetrics analysis of Mendeley readership categories," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 105-135, October.
    12. Yuxiang Lan & Qunyue Liu, 2023. "The Restorative and Contingent Value of Biophilic Indoor Environments in Healthcare Settings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-15, July.
    13. Ramón A. Feenstra & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2022. "Philosophers’ appraisals of bibliometric indicators and their use in evaluation: from recognition to knee-jerk rejection," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 2085-2103, April.
    14. Walters, William H., 2017. "Do subjective journal ratings represent whole journals or typical articles? Unweighted or weighted citation impact?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 730-744.
    15. Cosimo Talò, 2024. "Modelling and Measuring Local Community Engagement (LCE)," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 173(2), pages 475-498, June.
    16. Luyang Chen & Lingbo Liu & Hao Wu & Zhenghong Peng & Zhihao Sun, 2022. "Change of Residents’ Attitudes and Behaviors toward Urban Green Space Pre- and Post- COVID-19 Pandemic," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-16, July.
    17. Jinfeng Zhang, 2019. "How Community Participation Promotes the Relocation Adjustment of Older Women: A Moderated Mediation Analysis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 143(2), pages 637-655, June.
    18. Daniela De Filippo & Fernanda Morillo & Borja González-Albo, 2023. "Measuring the Impact and Influence of Scientific Activity in the Humanities and Social Sciences," Publications, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-17, June.
    19. Sándor Soós & Zsófia Vida & András Schubert, 2018. "Long-term trends in the multidisciplinarity of some typical natural and social sciences, and its implications on the SSH versus STM distinction," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 795-822, March.
    20. Zoltán Krajcsák, 2021. "Researcher Performance in Scopus Articles ( RPSA ) as a New Scientometric Model of Scientific Output: Tested in Business Area of V4 Countries," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-23, October.

    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:13:y:2024:i:11:p:1912-:d:1520983. 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.