IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i4p414-d1362740.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Differences in Emotional Preferences toward Urban Green Spaces among Various Cultural Groups in Macau and Their Influencing Factors

Author

Listed:
  • Mengyao Wang

    (Faculty of Innovation and Design, City University of Macau, Macau SAR, China)

  • Yu Yan

    (Faculty of Innovation and Design, City University of Macau, Macau SAR, China)

  • Mingxuan Li

    (Faculty of Innovation and Design, City University of Macau, Macau SAR, China)

  • Long Zhou

    (Faculty of Innovation and Design, City University of Macau, Macau SAR, China)

Abstract

This study explores the diversity in emotional tendencies and needs toward urban green spaces (UGSs) among people from different cultural backgrounds in the wave of cultural integration. We utilized social media data as research tools, gathering a wide range of perspectives and voices. Utilizing geolocation data from 176 UGSs in Macau, we collected 139,162 social media comments to analyze the emotional perceptions of different cultural groups. Furthermore, we conducted regression analysis on the number of posts and emotional intensity values from four linguistic groups—Chinese, English, Southeast Asian languages, and Portuguese—in UGSs, correlating them with ten locally relevant landscape features. Our findings reveal diverse attitudes, emotional inclinations, and functional and design needs of different linguistic groups toward UGSs, as follows: (1) there were significant differences in emotional intensity and tweet counts across 176 UGSs; (2) Chinese and Portuguese speakers showed a more positive attitude toward plazas and natural ecological areas, whereas English- and Southeast-Asian-language speakers tended to favor recreational areas and suburban parks; (3) Chinese speakers exhibited a more positive emotional intensity toward sports facilities, while English speakers placed more emphasis on green space areas, architecture, sports infrastructure, and plant landscapes; (4) there was no specific landscape feature preference for Portuguese- and Southeast-Asian-language speakers. This research not only deepens our understanding of the emotional perceptions and preferences of UGSs among different cultural groups but also explores the association between these groups and various urban landscape features. This provides important theoretical and practical insights for future UGS planning, construction, and promoting multicultural coexistence for sustainable urban development.

Suggested Citation

  • Mengyao Wang & Yu Yan & Mingxuan Li & Long Zhou, 2024. "Differences in Emotional Preferences toward Urban Green Spaces among Various Cultural Groups in Macau and Their Influencing Factors," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-22, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:4:p:414-:d:1362740
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/4/414/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/4/414/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maria Sinou & Katerina Skalkou & Roumpini Perakaki & Sébastien Jacques & Zoe Kanetaki, 2023. "Holistic Strategies Based on Heritage, Environmental, Sensory Analysis and Mapping for Sustainable Coastal Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-20, June.
    2. Virginia Harris & Dave Kendal & Amy K. Hahs & Caragh G. Threlfall, 2018. "Green space context and vegetation complexity shape people’s preferences for urban public parks and residential gardens," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 150-162, January.
    3. Viniece Jennings & Omoshalewa Bamkole, 2019. "The Relationship between Social Cohesion and Urban Green Space: An Avenue for Health Promotion," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-14, February.
    4. Viniece Jennings & Cassandra Johnson Gaither, 2015. "Approaching Environmental Health Disparities and Green Spaces: An Ecosystem Services Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, February.
    5. Michelle C. Kondo & Jaime M. Fluehr & Thomas McKeon & Charles C. Branas, 2018. "Urban Green Space and Its Impact on Human Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-28, March.
    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. Yonatal Tefera & Veronica Soebarto & Courtney Bishop & John Kandulu & Carmel Williams, 2023. "A Scoping Review of Urban Planning Decision Support Tools and Processes That Account for the Health, Environment, and Economic Benefits of Trees and Greenspace," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(1), pages 1-28, December.
    2. Na’Taki Osborne Jelks & Viniece Jennings & Alessandro Rigolon, 2021. "Green Gentrification and Health: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(3), pages 1-23, January.
    3. Adriano Bressane & Mirela Beatriz Silva & Ana Paula Garcia Goulart & Líliam César de Castro Medeiros, 2024. "Understanding How Green Space Naturalness Impacts Public Well-Being: Prospects for Designing Healthier Cities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(5), pages 1-11, May.
    4. Jean C. Bikomeye & Sima Namin & Chima Anyanwu & Caitlin S. Rublee & Jamie Ferschinger & Ken Leinbach & Patricia Lindquist & August Hoppe & Lawrence Hoffman & Justin Hegarty & Dwayne Sperber & Kirsten , 2021. "Resilience and Equity in a Time of Crises: Investing in Public Urban Greenspace Is Now More Essential Than Ever in the US and Beyond," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-39, August.
    5. Xinyang Li & Marek Kozlowski & Sumarni Binti Ismail & Sarah Abdulkareem Salih, 2024. "Spatial Distribution Characteristics of Leisure Urban Spaces and the Correlation with Population Activity Intensity: A Case Study of Nanjing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-21, August.
    6. Celina Koh & Michelle C. Kondo & Heather Rollins & Usama Bilal, 2022. "Socioeconomic Disparities in Hypertension by Levels of Green Space Availability: A Cross-Sectional Study in Philadelphia, PA," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-13, February.
    7. Tian Dong & Churan Feng & Bangguo Yue & Zhengdong Zhang, 2024. "An Evaluation Model of Urban Green Space Based on Residents’ Physical Activity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-26, May.
    8. Argyro Anna Kanelli & Margarita Kokkinaki & Marios-Dimitrios Sinvare & Chrisovalantis Malesios & Panayiotis G. Dimitrakopoulos & Olga-Ioanna Kalantzi, 2023. "Keep Calm and Go Out: Urban Nature Exposure, Mental Health, and Perceived Value during the COVID-19 Lockdown," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-20, May.
    9. S.M. Labib & Faysal Kabir Shuvo & Matthew H. E. M. Browning & Alessandro Rigolon, 2020. "Noncommunicable Diseases, Park Prescriptions, and Urban Green Space Use Patterns in a Global South Context: The Case of Dhaka, Bangladesh," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-23, May.
    10. Argyro Anna Kanelli & Maria Lydia Vardaka & Chrisovaladis Malesios & Zainab Jamidu Katima & Olga-Ioanna Kalantzi, 2024. "Can Campus Green Spaces Be Restorative? A Case Study from Tanzania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-21, January.
    11. Angie Campbell & Victoria Chanse & Mirjam Schindler, 2024. "Developing a Conceptual Framework for Characterizing and Measuring Social Resilience in Blue-Green Infrastructure (BGI)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-32, May.
    12. Viniece Jennings & Omoshalewa Bamkole, 2019. "The Relationship between Social Cohesion and Urban Green Space: An Avenue for Health Promotion," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-14, February.
    13. Paudel, Uttam & Pant, Krishna Prasad, 2023. "Understanding vitality of public space: A review with an example of capital city Kathmandu in Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    14. Viniece Jennings & Alessandro Rigolon & Jasmine Thompson & Athena Murray & Ariel Henderson & Richard Schulterbrandt Gragg, 2024. "The Dynamic Relationship between Social Cohesion and Urban Green Space in Diverse Communities: Opportunities and Challenges to Public Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(6), pages 1-17, June.
    15. S. Brent Jackson & Kathryn T. Stevenson & Lincoln R. Larson & M. Nils Peterson & Erin Seekamp, 2021. "Outdoor Activity Participation Improves Adolescents’ Mental Health and Well-Being during the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-18, March.
    16. Shi Chen & Yi Sun & Bo Kyong Seo, 2022. "The Effects of Public Open Space on Older People’s Well-Being: From Neighborhood Social Cohesion to Place Dependence," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-16, December.
    17. 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).
    18. Amber L. Pearson & Victoria Breeze & Aaron Reuben & Gwen Wyatt, 2021. "Increased Use of Porch or Backyard Nature during COVID-19 Associated with Lower Stress and Better Symptom Experience among Breast Cancer Patients," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-13, August.
    19. Malik, Khyati & Kim, Sowon & Cultice, Brian J., 2023. "The impact of remote work on green space values in regional housing markets," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    20. Fei Qin & Yiqing Song & George P Nassis & Lina Zhao & Yanan Dong & Cuicui Zhao & Yiwei Feng & Jiexiu Zhao, 2020. "Physical Activity, Screen Time, and Emotional Well-Being during the 2019 Novel Coronavirus Outbreak in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-16, July.

    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:4:p:414-:d:1362740. 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.