IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v9y2020i11p450-d445974.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Attitude and Perception of Residents towards the Benefits, Challenges and Quality of Neighborhood Parks in a Sub-Saharan Africa City

Author

Listed:
  • Kumelachew Yeshitela

    (Ethiopia Institute of Architecture, Building Construction and City Development, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia)

Abstract

Urban parks provide various environmental, socio-cultural and economic benefits, also called ecosystem services, as well as challenges. Urban park planning and management needs to consider the perception and attitude of people towards the benefits, challenges and quality of the parks. However, such information is largely lacking for cities of Sub-Saharan Africa. The objectives of this study are to understand the perception and attitude of residents towards the benefits, challenges and qualities of neighborhood parks in a formal settlement area in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, and to investigate whether these aspects are affected by the socio-demographic characteristics of respondents. Data were collected through a household survey ( n = 398) and three focus group discussions. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Chi-square tests. The focus group discussion resulted in the selection of 18 ecosystem services (benefits) and five challenges. Supported by a very high response rate (96.6%), the household survey shows that respondents recognize the environmental, socio-cultural and economic benefits provided by neighborhood parks, but that the socio-cultural and environmental benefits are perceived as more important than the economic benefits. The socio-demographic characteristics of age, gender and education level were found to have no significant effect on perceptions or attitudes. The cost of managing neighborhood parks and the attraction of nuisance insects were the two most important challenges, respectively. The majority of respondents rated the quality of the existing neighborhood parks excellent or good, with the existing safety condition and the presence of high plant diversity receiving the highest number of high scores. The availability of park facilities was the aspect of park quality considered poor by the most respondents. This study highlights the importance of place-based studies for assessing the perceived benefits that attract people to use urban parks, as well as the challenges that deter use. One important lesson that cities in Sub-Saharan Africa could draw from the development and management of neighborhood parks in Addis Ababa is the vital importance of public participation in urban park development and management.

Suggested Citation

  • Kumelachew Yeshitela, 2020. "Attitude and Perception of Residents towards the Benefits, Challenges and Quality of Neighborhood Parks in a Sub-Saharan Africa City," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-17, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:9:y:2020:i:11:p:450-:d:445974
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/9/11/450/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/9/11/450/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rojas, Carolina & Páez, Antonio & Barbosa, Olga & Carrasco, Juan, 2016. "Accessibility to urban green spaces in Chilean cities using adaptive thresholds," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 227-240.
    2. Du, Mengbing & Zhang, Xiaoling, 2020. "Urban greening: A new paradox of economic or social sustainability?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    3. Kaczynski, A.T. & Potwarka, L.R. & Saelens P, B.E., 2008. "Association of park size, distance, and features with physical activity in neighborhood parks," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 98(8), pages 1451-1456.
    4. Harrison, Paula A. & Dunford, Rob & Barton, David N. & Kelemen, Eszter & Martín-López, Berta & Norton, Lisa & Termansen, Mette & Saarikoski, Heli & Hendriks, Kees & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Czúcz, Báli, 2018. "Selecting methods for ecosystem service assessment: A decision tree approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 481-498.
    5. Somajita Paul & Harini Nagendra, 2017. "Factors Influencing Perceptions and Use of Urban Nature: Surveys of Park Visitors in Delhi," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-23, April.
    6. Lyu, Rongfang & Zhang, Jianming & Xu, Mengqun & Li, Jijun, 2018. "Impacts of urbanization on ecosystem services and their temporal relations: A case study in Northern Ningxia, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 163-173.
    7. Sofia Olivero-Lora & Elvia Meléndez-Ackerman & Luis Santiago & Raúl Santiago-Bartolomei & Diana García-Montiel, 2019. "Attitudes toward Residential Trees and Awareness of Tree Services and Disservices in a Tropical City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, December.
    8. Ruckelshaus, Mary & McKenzie, Emily & Tallis, Heather & Guerry, Anne & Daily, Gretchen & Kareiva, Peter & Polasky, Stephen & Ricketts, Taylor & Bhagabati, Nirmal & Wood, Spencer A. & Bernhardt, Joanna, 2015. "Notes from the field: Lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world decisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 11-21.
    9. Votsis, Athanasios, 2017. "Planning for green infrastructure: The spatial effects of parks, forests, and fields on Helsinki's apartment prices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 279-289.
    10. Larissa Larsen & Kumelachew Yeshitela & Tilahun Mulatu & Sisay Seifu & Hayal Desta, 2019. "The Impact of Rapid Urbanization and Public Housing Development on Urban Form and Density in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-13, 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. Antonios Kolimenakis & Alexandra D. Solomou & Nikolaos Proutsos & Evangelia V. Avramidou & Evangelia Korakaki & Georgios Karetsos & Georgios Maroulis & Eleftherios Papagiannis & Konstantinia Tsagkari, 2021. "The Socioeconomic Welfare of Urban Green Areas and Parks; A Literature Review of Available Evidence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-26, July.

    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. Qiang Sheng & Dongyang Wan & Boya Yu, 2021. "Effect of Space Configurational Attributes on Social Interactions in Urban Parks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-15, July.
    2. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    3. Binglu Wu & Wenzhuo Liang & Jiening Wang & Dongxu Cui, 2022. "Rural Residents’ Perceptions of Ecosystem Services: A Study from Three Topographic Areas in Shandong Province, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-21, July.
    4. Carme Miralles-Guasch & Javier Dopico & Xavier Delclòs-Alió & Pablo Knobel & Oriol Marquet & Roser Maneja-Zaragoza & Jasper Schipperijn & Guillem Vich, 2019. "Natural Landscape, Infrastructure, and Health: The Physical Activity Implications of Urban Green Space Composition among the Elderly," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-14, October.
    5. Dunford, Rob & Harrison, Paula & Smith, Alison & Dick, Jan & Barton, David N. & Martin-Lopez, Berta & Kelemen, Ezsther & Jacobs, Sander & Saarikoski, Heli & Turkelboom, Francis & Verheyden, Wim & Hauc, 2018. "Integrating methods for ecosystem service assessment: Experiences from real world situations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 499-514.
    6. Barton, D.N. & Kelemen, E. & Dick, J. & Martin-Lopez, B. & Gómez-Baggethun, E. & Jacobs, S. & Hendriks, C.M.A. & Termansen, M. & García- Llorente, M. & Primmer, E. & Dunford, R. & Harrison, P.A. & Tur, 2018. "(Dis) integrated valuation – Assessing the information gaps in ecosystem service appraisals for governance support," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 529-541.
    7. Jax, Kurt & Furman, Eeva & Saarikoski, Heli & Barton, David N. & Delbaere, Ben & Dick, Jan & Duke, Guy & Görg, Christoph & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & Harrison, Paula A. & Maes, Joachim & Pérez-Soba, Mart, 2018. "Handling a messy world: Lessons learned when trying to make the ecosystem services concept operational," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 415-427.
    8. Saarikoski, Heli & Primmer, Eeva & Saarela, Sanna-Riikka & Antunes, Paula & Aszalós, Réka & Baró, Francesc & Berry, Pam & Blanko, Gemma Garcia & Goméz-Baggethun, Erik & Carvalho, Laurence & Dick, Jan , 2018. "Institutional challenges in putting ecosystem service knowledge in practice," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 579-598.
    9. Zhang, Yingjie & Zhang, Tianzheng & Zeng, Yingxiang & Cheng, Baodong & Li, Hongxun, 2021. "Designating National Forest Cities in China: Does the policy improve the urban living environment?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    10. Zhang, Pengyan & Yang, Dan & Qin, Mingzhou & Jing, Wenlong, 2020. "Spatial heterogeneity analysis and driving forces exploring of built-up land development intensity in Chinese prefecture-level cities and implications for future Urban Land intensive use," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    11. Srijana Shrestha & Khem Narayan Poudyal & Nawraj Bhattarai & Mohan B. Dangi & John J. Boland, 2022. "An Assessment of the Impact of Land Use and Land Cover Change on the Degradation of Ecosystem Service Values in Kathmandu Valley Using Remote Sensing and GIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-18, November.
    12. 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).
    13. Andrés M. García & Inés Santé & Xurxo Loureiro & David Miranda, 2020. "Spatial Planning of Green Infrastructure for Mitigation and Adaptation to Climate Change at a Regional Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-22, December.
    14. Mutlu, Asli & Roy, Debraj & Filatova, Tatiana, 2023. "Capitalized value of evolving flood risks discount and nature-based solution premiums on property prices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    15. Klein, Thomas Michael & Drobnik, Thomas & Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne, 2016. "Shedding light on the usability of ecosystem services–based decision support systems: An eye-tracking study linked to the cognitive probing approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 65-86.
    16. Xiaohu Zhang & Scott Melbourne & Chinmoy Sarkar & Alain Chiaradia & Chris Webster, 2020. "Effects of green space on walking: Does size, shape and density matter?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(16), pages 3402-3420, December.
    17. Zhao, Ziyang & Wang, Hongrui & Wang, Cheng & Li, Wangcheng & Chen, Hao & Deng, Caiyun, 2020. "Changes in reference evapotranspiration over Northwest China from 1957 to 2018: Variation characteristics, cause analysis and relationships with atmospheric circulation," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    18. Lamprinakis, L. & Rodriguez, D. G. P. & Prestvik, A. S. & Veidal, A. & Klimek, B., 2017. "31 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18461/pfsd.2017.1705 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL ON FOOD SYSTEM DYNAMICS A Mixed Methods Approach Towards Mapping and Economic Valuation of the Divici-Pojejena Wetland Ecosystem," 2018 International European Forum (163rd EAAE Seminar), February 5-9, 2018, Innsbruck-Igls, Austria 276889, International European Forum on System Dynamics and Innovation in Food Networks.
    19. Julian A. Reed & Rachel M. Ballard & Michael Hill & David Berrigan, 2020. "Identification of Effective Programs to Improve Access to and Use of Trails among Youth from Under-Resourced Communities: A Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-33, October.
    20. Pettenella, Davide & Thiene, Mara & Scarpa, Riccardo & Masiero, Mauro & Mattea, Stefania & Franceschinis, Cristiano, 2016. "First economic assessment of ecosystem services from Natura 2000 network in Lombardy (Northern Italy)," 2016 Fifth AIEAA Congress, June 16-17, 2016, Bologna, Italy 242326, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).

    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:9:y:2020:i:11:p:450-:d:445974. 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.