IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i12p5249-d1418686.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Examining How Urban Public Spaces and Virtual Spaces Affect Public Opinion in Beijing, China

Author

Listed:
  • Lingfang Shao

    (School of Architecture, Southeast University, No. 2 Sipailou Road, Nanjing 210026, China)

  • Zhengxian Liu

    (School of Architecture, Southeast University, No. 2 Sipailou Road, Nanjing 210026, China)

  • Zijin Zhou

    (Department of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Phase 8 (Block Z), Hong Kong 999077, China)

Abstract

Urban public spaces significantly influence public perceptions and experiences. This study, conducted in Beijing, China, employs structural equation modeling (SEM) and Friedman testing to analyze key criteria—safety, attractiveness, facilities, activities, and social environment—that impact perceptions of both virtual and physical public spaces. The findings reveal that attractiveness is the most influential criterion, significantly shaping public opinion. Facilities and activities follow, highlighting the necessity for well-equipped amenities and engaging social activities. The social environment also plays a crucial role, emphasizing the need for spaces that foster social interactions. Safety, while important, is less influential compared to the other criteria. These results underscore the importance of aesthetic considerations, well-equipped amenities, and vibrant social environments in urban design. This study provides actionable insights for urban designers and planners, advocating for a balanced approach that prioritizes these criteria to enhance the quality of life in urban areas. By focusing on these aspects, urban planners can create more effective and satisfying public spaces that meet the diverse needs of the community, ensuring that both physical and virtual spaces contribute positively to urban living.

Suggested Citation

  • Lingfang Shao & Zhengxian Liu & Zijin Zhou, 2024. "Examining How Urban Public Spaces and Virtual Spaces Affect Public Opinion in Beijing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-19, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:12:p:5249-:d:1418686
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/12/5249/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/12/5249/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John F. Forester, 1999. "The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262561220, April.
    2. Keunhyun Park, 2017. "Psychological park accessibility: a systematic literature review of perceptual components affecting park use," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(5), pages 508-520, 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. E. Melanie DuPuis & Brian J. Gareau, 2008. "Neoliberal Knowledge: The Decline of Technocracy and the Weakening of the Montreal Protocol," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1212-1229, December.
    2. Makena Coffman & Karen Umemoto, 2010. "The triple-bottom-line: framing of trade-offs in sustainability planning practice," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 12(5), pages 597-610, October.
    3. te Brömmelstroet, Marco, 2017. "Towards a pragmatic research agenda for the PSS domain," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 77-83.
    4. Primmer, Eeva & Kyllonen, Simo, 2006. "Goals for public participation implied by sustainable development, and the preparatory process of the Finnish National Forest Programme," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(8), pages 838-853, November.
    5. Liz Barry, 2022. "Community science and the design of climate governance," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 1-17, April.
    6. Davies-Colley, Christian & Smith, Willie, 2012. "Implementing environmental technologies in development situations: The example of ecological toilets," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 1-8.
    7. Ahmed Z. Khan & Frank Moulaert & Jan Schreurs & Konrad Miciukiewicz, 2014. "Integrative Spatial Quality: A Relational Epistemology of Space and Transdisciplinarity in Urban Design and Planning," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 393-411, August.
    8. Füg, Franz & Ibert, Oliver, 2020. "Assembling social innovations in emergent professional communities. The case of learning region policies in Germany," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 28(3), pages 541-562.
    9. Crystal Legacy & Ryan van den Nouwelant, 2015. "Negotiating Strategic Planning's Transitional Spaces: The Case of ‘Guerrilla Governance’ in Infrastructure Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(1), pages 209-226, January.
    10. Peter Munthe-Kaas, 2015. "Agonism and co-design of urban spaces," Urban Research & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 218-237, July.
    11. Peter Dithan Ntale & Jude Ssempebwa & Badiru Musisi & Genza Gyaviira Musoke & Kimoga Joseph & C. B. Mugimu & Ngoma Muhammed & Joseph Ntayi, 2020. "Gaps in the structuring of organizations in the graduate employment context in Uganda," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    12. Corianne Payton Scally & J. Rosie Tighe, 2015. "Democracy in Action?: NIMBY as Impediment to Equitable Affordable Housing Siting," Housing Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(5), pages 749-769, July.
    13. Czarnecki, Adam & Nowak, Maciej J., 2024. "Spatial conflicts. Between the geographical-economic and legal dimensions," International Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Technology (IJAGST), SvedbergOpen, vol. 203(2), July.
    14. Derk Jan Stobbelaar, 2020. "Impact of Student Interventions on Urban Greening Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-19, July.
    15. Patricia Molina Costa, 2014. "From plan to reality: Implementing a community vision in Jackson Square, Boston," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 293-310, September.
    16. Ratka ÄŒolić & Ä orÄ‘e Milić & Jasna Petrić & NataÅ¡a ÄŒolić, 2022. "Institutional capacity development within the national urban policy formation process – Participants’ views," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 40(1), pages 69-89, February.
    17. Einsiedel, Edna F. & Boyd, Amanda D. & Medlock, Jennifer & Ashworth, Peta, 2013. "Assessing socio-technical mindsets: Public deliberations on carbon capture and storage in the context of energy sources and climate change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 149-158.
    18. Jongwng Ju & Jaecheol Kim, 2023. "Applying the Delphi Approach to Incorporate Voiceless Stakeholders in Community Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    19. repec:lib:000cis:v:5:y:2017:i:1:p:26-34 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Maie Kiisel, 2013. "Local Community Participation in the Planning Process: A Case of Bounded Communicative Rationality," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 232-250, February.
    21. Deborah F. Shmueli, 2017. "Community Plan Making in the Face of Ethnic Conflict in Israel: Lessons for Collaborative Planning Processes," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 83(2), pages 131-144, April.

    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:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:12:p:5249-:d:1418686. 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.