IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i5p658-d1392593.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Military Service Member Preferences of Landscape Design Elements in Therapeutic Gardens

Author

Listed:
  • Alicia Thomas

    (Department of Plant and Soil Science, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA)

  • Muntazar Monsur

    (Department of Landscape Architecture, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA)

  • Carol S. Lindquist

    (Department of Sociology, Anthropology and Social Work, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA)

  • Thayne Montague

    (Department of Plant and Soil Science, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA)

  • Catherine R. Simpson

    (Department of Plant and Soil Science, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA)

Abstract

Military service members (MSVMs) suffer from mental and physical health ailments upon returning home from enlistment. Due to the enormity of these different and complex ailments, many unique therapeutic methods, like therapeutic gardens, have been utilized on MSVM populations to improve their overall wellbeing. Therapeutic gardens are built following a set of guidelines meant to serve general populations instead of target populations. There has been little research on the preferences of landscape design elements in therapeutic gardens by MSVMs. To determine if landscape design elements can be optimized for therapeutic gardens that serve MSVMs, a series of questions with pictures pertaining to preferences were created in an online survey that was released to civilians on social media and MSVMs through U.S. military organizations (N = 366, 90.6% completed). The average respondents were male, Caucasian, and 25–35 years old. The majority of MSVM respondents were or had enlisted in the Army branch, and were currently active duty, or honorably discharged. MSVMs and civilians had overall similar preferences of utilities and garden elements. While commonalities were found among the two respondent groups, with a preference for clear walkways, lighting wild and natural views, there were differences. In contrast to civilians, MSVMs also overwhelmingly preferred fences and gates, and the creation of privacy and prospect views instead of refuge views. Results indicate that an increased line-of-sight in fenced-in areas may make MSVMs more comfortable in therapeutic garden settings. These differences may assist urban planners and landscapers in the building of green spaces tailored to target populations like MSVMs and to illustrate the importance of building inclusive spaces for populations of concern.

Suggested Citation

  • Alicia Thomas & Muntazar Monsur & Carol S. Lindquist & Thayne Montague & Catherine R. Simpson, 2024. "Evaluation of Military Service Member Preferences of Landscape Design Elements in Therapeutic Gardens," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-15, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:5:p:658-:d:1392593
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/5/658/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/5/658/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jingwei Zhuang & Lin Qiao & Xuan Zhang & Yang Su & Yiping Xia, 2021. "Effects of Visual Attributes of Flower Borders in Urban Vegetation Landscapes on Aesthetic Preference and Emotional Perception," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-13, September.
    2. Emily Rabung & Eric Toman, 2022. "Soldiers in the garden: managing the US military training landscape," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(5), pages 598-610, July.
    3. 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.
    4. Andrew M.H. Siu & Michael Kam & Ide Mok, 2020. "Horticultural Therapy Program for People with Mental Illness: A Mixed-Method Evaluation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-15, January.
    5. Vsevolod Rozanov & Vladimir Carli, 2012. "Suicide among War Veterans," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-16, July.
    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. Mengyixin Li & Rui Liu & Xin Li & Shiyang Zhang & Danzi Wu, 2023. "The Effect of Perceived Real-Scene Environment of a River in a High-Density Urban Area on Emotions," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Kelei Li & Wenpeng Du & Zhiqi Yang & Huimin Yan & Yutong Mu, 2024. "Spatio-Temporal Pattern of Urban Green Space in Chengdu Urban Center under Rapid Urbanization: From the Policy-Oriented Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, March.
    3. Adrian Buttazzoni & Leia Minaker, 2023. "Associations between adolescent mental health and pedestrian- and transit-oriented urban design qualities: Evidence from a national-level online Canadian survey," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 60(10), pages 1968-1986, August.
    4. Pei-Chun Tu & Wen-Chen Cheng & Ping-Cheng Hou & Yu-Sen Chang, 2020. "Effects of Types of Horticultural Activity on the Physical and Mental State of Elderly Individuals," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-13, July.
    5. Elena Prioreschi & Nici Zimmermann & Michael Davies & Irene Pluchinotta, 2024. "Interrelationships and Trade-Offs between Urban Natural Space Use and Biodiversity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-29, May.
    6. Anna Staniewska, 2022. "Gardens of Historic Mental Health Hospitals and Their Potential Use for Green Therapy Purposes," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-23, September.
    7. Lennon, Mick & Douglas, Owen & Scott, Mark, 2019. "Responsive environments: An outline of a method for determining context sensitive planning interventions to enhance health and wellbeing," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 68-78.
    8. Lilly Joschko & Anna María Pálsdóttir & Patrik Grahn & Maximilian Hinse, 2023. "Nature-Based Therapy in Individuals with Mental Health Disorders, with a Focus on Mental Well-Being and Connectedness to Nature—A Pilot Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-24, January.
    9. Maria Ignatieva & Duy Khiem Tran & Rosangela Tenorio, 2023. "Challenges and Stakeholder Perspectives on Implementing Ecological Designs in Green Public Spaces: A Case Study of Hue City, Vietnam," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-18, September.
    10. Yuanyuan Luo & Jun He & Yuelin Long & Lu Xu & Liang Zhang & Zhuoran Tang & Chun Li & Xingyao Xiong, 2023. "The Relationship between the Color Landscape Characteristics of Autumn Plant Communities and Public Aesthetics in Urban Parks in Changsha, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-27, February.
    11. Wu, Zhen & Chen, Ruishan & Meadows, Michael E. & Sengupta, Dhritiraj & Xu, Di, 2019. "Changing urban green spaces in Shanghai: trends, drivers and policy implications," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    12. 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.
    13. Saranathan Pragati & Radhakrishnan Shanthi Priya & Chandramouli Pradeepa & Ramalingam Senthil, 2023. "Simulation of the Energy Performance of a Building with Green Roofs and Green Walls in a Tropical Climate," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-17, January.
    14. Xiaoqi Feng & Thomas Astell-Burt, 2022. "Perceived Qualities, Visitation and Felt Benefits of Preferred Nature Spaces during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Australia: A Nationally-Representative Cross-Sectional Study of 2940 Adults," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-16, June.
    15. Jiao Zhang & Danqing Li & Shuguang Ning & Katsunori Furuya, 2023. "Sustainable Urban Green Blue Space (UGBS) and Public Participation: Integrating Multisensory Landscape Perception from Online Reviews," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-29, July.
    16. Aleksandra Lis & Łukasz Pardela & Wu Can & Anna Katlapa & Łukasz Rąbalski, 2019. "Perceived Danger and Landscape Preferences of Walking Paths with Trees and Shrubs by Women," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-22, August.
    17. Marianne Lefebvre & Pauline Laille & Masha Maslianskaia-Pautrel, 2020. "Individual preferences regarding pesticide-free management of green-spaces: a discret choice experiment with French citizens," Working Papers 2020.02, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    18. Marianne Lefebvre & Masha Maslianskaia-Pautrel & Pauline Laille, 2022. "Alternative adaptation scenarios towards pesticide-free urban green spaces: Welfare implication for French citizens," Post-Print hal-03694169, HAL.
    19. Hui-Ying Chu & Hui-Shan Chan & Mei-Fang Chen, 2021. "Effects of Horticultural Activities on Attitudes toward Aging, Sense of Hope and Hand–Eye Coordination in Older Adults in Residential Care Facilities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-28, June.
    20. Yangyang Shi & Jiao Zhang & Xinyue Shen & Liang Chen & Yunchen Xu & Rui Fu & Yang Su & Yiping Xia, 2022. "Designing Perennial Landscapes: Plant Form and Species Richness Influence the Gaze Perception Associated with Aesthetic Preference," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-17, 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:5:p:658-:d:1392593. 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.