IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v8y2019i12p188-d295555.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Use of Community Greenways: A Case Study on A Linear Greenway Space in High Dense Residential Areas, Guangzhou

Author

Listed:
  • Wenxiu Chi

    (South China University of Technology, School of Architecture, Department of Landscape Architecture, Guangzhou 510641, China)

  • Guangsi Lin

    (South China University of Technology, School of Architecture, Department of Landscape Architecture, Guangzhou 510641, China
    State Key Laboratory of Subtropical Building Science, Guangzhou 510641, China
    Guangzhou Municipal Key Laboratory of Landscape Architecture, Guangzhou 510641, China)

Abstract

The community greenway is a kind of greenway that goes through high-density residential areas in the city and is closely related to residents’ life. However, few scholars focus on how this type of greenways serves the everyday life of the community as an integrated resource. This aspect is important because the everyday life in the public space involves multiple activities. How to coordinate and satisfy these activities relates to the benefits of community greenways. Therefore, this paper takes a representative community greenway in Haizhu District of Guangzhou as an example, to study whether community greenways match the needs of necessary activities, optional activities and social activities. The usage patterns, the evaluation of the current status, the impact on everyday activities, and the importance of different construction factors were surveyed. The applied methods include site observation, questionnaires and interviews. The results show that more than 90% of users are from communities within 1 mile from the community greenway. More than half of the users (55%) are satisfied with the community greenways. Furthermore, the community greenways benefit the everyday activities of residents, such as transportation, recreation, social interaction and also other minor but important everyday activities. However, from the perspective of residents’ requirements for construction factors, the status of service facilities needs to be improved. The characteristics, overall benefits, and construction implications of community greenways are therefore discussed. Community greenways can be important open space for residents and this paper is significant on community greenways meeting the needs of residents’ everyday activities, thus, to provide a better community living environment and to build a better urban open space system.

Suggested Citation

  • Wenxiu Chi & Guangsi Lin, 2019. "The Use of Community Greenways: A Case Study on A Linear Greenway Space in High Dense Residential Areas, Guangzhou," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-19, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:8:y:2019:i:12:p:188-:d:295555
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/8/12/188/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/8/12/188/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Senes, Giulio & Rovelli, Roberto & Bertoni, Danilo & Arata, Laura & Fumagalli, Natalia & Toccolini, Alessandro, 2017. "Factors influencing greenways use: Definition of a method for estimation in the Italian context," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 175-187.
    2. Larson, Lincoln R. & Keith, Samuel J. & Fernandez, Mariela & Hallo, Jeffrey C. & Shafer, C. Scott & Jennings, Viniece, 2016. "Ecosystem services and urban greenways: What's the public's perspective?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 111-116.
    3. Julie Brunner & Paul Cozens, 2013. "'Where Have All the Trees Gone?' Urban Consolidation and the Demise of Urban Vegetation: A Case Study from Western Australia," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(2), pages 231-255, April.
    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. Yiwei Bai & Yihang Bai & Ruoyu Wang & Tianren Yang & Xinyao Song & Bo Bai, 2023. "Exploring Associations between the Built Environment and Cycling Behaviour around Urban Greenways from a Human-Scale Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, March.
    2. Bin Xu & Qingxia Shi & Yaping Zhang, 2022. "Evaluation of the Health Promotion Capabilities of Greenway Trails: A Case Study in Hangzhou, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-21, April.
    3. Abdulrahman A. Zawawi & Nicole Porter & Christopher D. Ives, 2023. "Influences on Greenways Usage for Active Transportation: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-37, July.
    4. Xiu-Juan Qiao & Yizhi Liu & Jing Feng, 2022. "Evaluating the Landscape Quality of Residential Communities: A Case Study of the Chinese City Yangling," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, December.

    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. Julian Bolleter, 2016. "On the verge: re-thinking street reserves in relation to suburban densification," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 195-212, April.
    2. Bolaños-Valencia, Ingrid & Villegas-Palacio, Clara & López-Gómez, Connie Paola & Berrouet, Lina & Ruiz, Aura, 2019. "Social perception of risk in socio-ecological systems. A qualitative and quantitative analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Clara García-Mayor & Pablo Martí & Manuel Castaño & Álvaro Bernabeu-Bautista, 2020. "The Unexploited Potential of Converting Rail Tracks to Greenways: The Spanish Vías Verdes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-25, January.
    4. Francesco Pinna & Valeria Saiu, 2021. "Greenways as Integrated Systems: A Proposal for Planning and Design Guidelines Based on Case Studies Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-17, October.
    5. Abramowicz Dawid & Stępniewska Małgorzata, 2020. "Public Investment Policy as a Driver of Changes in the Ecosystem Services Delivery by an Urban Green Infrastructure," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 39(1), pages 5-18, March.
    6. Bin Xu & Qingxia Shi & Yaping Zhang, 2022. "Evaluation of the Health Promotion Capabilities of Greenway Trails: A Case Study in Hangzhou, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-21, April.
    7. Gianni Petino & Giuseppe Reina & Donatella Privitera, 2021. "Cycling Tourism and Revitalization in the Sicilian Hinterland: A Case Study in the Taormina–Etna District," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-19, September.
    8. Xie, Bo & Pang, Zhe & He, Dongsheng & Lu, Yi & Chen, Yujie, 2023. "Effects of neighborhood environment on different aspects of greenway use: Evidence from East Lake Greenway, China," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    9. Natalia Fumagalli & Matteo Maccarini & Roberto Rovelli & Rita Berto & Giulio Senes, 2020. "An Exploratory Study of Users’ Preference for Different Planting Combinations along Rural Greenways," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-19, March.
    10. Weiying Gu & Yiyong Chen & Muye Dai, 2019. "Measuring Community Greening Merging Multi-Source Geo-Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-14, February.
    11. Dickinson, Dawn C. & Hobbs, Richard J., 2017. "Cultural ecosystem services: Characteristics, challenges and lessons for urban green space research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 179-194.
    12. Stępniewska, Małgorzata, 2021. "The capacity of urban parks for providing regulating and cultural ecosystem services versus their social perception," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    13. Zhicheng Zhang & Hongjuan Zhang & Juan Feng & Yirong Wang & Kang Liu, 2021. "Evaluation of Social Values for Ecosystem Services in Urban Riverfront Space Based on the SolVES Model: A Case Study of the Fenghe River, Xi’an, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-26, March.
    14. Junga Lee & Hyung-Sook Lee & Daeyoung Jeong & C. Scott Shafer & Jinhyung Chon, 2019. "The Relationship between User Perception and Preference of Greenway Trail Characteristics in Urban Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-16, August.
    15. Yawen Sun & Shaohua Tan & Qixiao He & Jize Shen, 2022. "Influence Mechanisms of Community Sports Parks to Enhance Social Interaction: A Bayesian Belief Network Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-22, January.
    16. Immerzeel, Bart & Vermaat, Jan E. & Juutinen, Artti & Pouta, Eija & Artell, Janne, 2022. "Appreciation of Nordic landscapes and how the bioeconomy might change that: Results from a discrete choice experiment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    17. Rovelli, Roberto & Senes, Giulio & Fumagalli, Natalia & Sacco, Jessica & De Montis, Andrea, 2020. "From railways to greenways: a complex index for supporting policymaking and planning. A case study in Piedmont (Italy)," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    18. Clara García-Mayor & Almudena Nolasco-Cirugeda, 2023. "New Approach to Landscape-Based Spatial Planning Using Meaningful Geolocated Digital Traces," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-22, April.
    19. Xiaomin Xiao & Qiaoru Ye & Xiaobin Dong, 2024. "Using Importance–Performance Analysis to Reveal Priorities for Multifunctional Landscape Optimization in Urban Parks," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-26, April.
    20. McGreevy, Michael & Harris, Patrick & Delaney-Crowe, Toni & Fisher, Matt & Sainsbury, Peter & Riley, Emily & Baum, Fran, 2020. "How well do Australian government urban planning policies respond to the social determinants of health and health equity?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).

    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:8:y:2019:i:12:p:188-:d:295555. 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.