IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v6y2014i11p7833-7849d42033.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Citizen Assessment as Policy Tool of Urban Public Services: Empirical Evidence from Assessments of Urban Green Spaces in China

Author

Listed:
  • Xi-Zhang Shan

    (School of Geographical Sciences, South China Normal University, 55 Zhongshan Avenue West, Tianhe District, Guangzhou 510631, China)

  • Xijun Yu

    (State Environmental Protection Key Laboratory of Urban Ecological Environment Simulation and Protection, South China Institute of Environmental Sciences, Ministry of Environmental Protection, 7th West Street Yuancun, Guangzhou 510655, China)

Abstract

Efficient delivery and precision provision of urban public services concern quality of urban life and urban sustainability. Amid much debate regarding citizen assessments as a policy tool of public services, this study examines the validity of citizen assessments through user assessments of urban green spaces (UGSs) in Guangzhou, China. Users can distinguish the qualities of UGS across the dimensions and types, the assessment of individual UGSs matches the overall assessment of all UGSs in the city as a whole, and the overall assessment is only slightly influenced by personal backgrounds. Findings consistently support user assessments as a policy tool of UGSs and offer empirical evidence on the validity of citizen assessments. This positive evidence will encourage city managers to seriously consider citizen assessments and even institutionalize them as a standard management practice of (specific) urban public services, including UGSs, in China and abroad.

Suggested Citation

  • Xi-Zhang Shan & Xijun Yu, 2014. "Citizen Assessment as Policy Tool of Urban Public Services: Empirical Evidence from Assessments of Urban Green Spaces in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(11), pages 1-17, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:11:p:7833-7849:d:42033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/11/7833/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/11/7833/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thompson, Elizabeth, 2004. "The Importance of," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 58, pages 198-198, August.
    2. Marit Rosol, 2010. "Public Participation in Post‐Fordist Urban Green Space Governance: The Case of Community Gardens in Berlin," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 548-563, September.
    3. Pier Alda Ferrari & Giancarlo Manzi, 2014. "Citizens evaluate public services: a critical overview of statistical methods for analysing user satisfaction," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 236-252, September.
    4. Pier Alda Ferrari & Giancarlo Manzi, 2014. "Citizens evaluate public services: a critical overview of statistical methods for analysing user satisfaction," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor and Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 236-252, July.
    5. Efrat Eizenberg, 2012. "The Changing Meaning of Community Space: Two Models of NGO Management of Community Gardens in New York City," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 106-120, January.
    6. Judith Clifton & Daniel Díaz-Fuentes & Marcos Fernández-Gutiérrez, 2014. "The impact of socio-economic background on satisfaction: evidence for policy-makers," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 183-206, October.
    7. Shanshan Yang, 2008. "Public Participation In The Chinese Environmental Impact Assessment (Eia) System," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 10(01), pages 91-113.
    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. Lilliana L. H. Peng & C. Y. Jim, 2015. "Seasonal and Diurnal Thermal Performance of a Subtropical Extensive Green Roof: The Impacts of Background Weather Parameters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-16, August.
    2. Tian Gao & Rui Song & Ling Zhu & Ling Qiu, 2019. "What Characteristics of Urban Green Spaces and Recreational Activities Do Self-Reported Stressed Individuals Like? A Case Study of Baoji, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-16, April.
    3. Seyedeh-Samira SHAFIEE-MASULEH & Seyed Reza SHAFIEE MASOULEH, 2018. "Assessing Citizens’ Demands for Improving the Urban Environment," Chinese Journal of Urban and Environmental Studies (CJUES), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 6(01), pages 1-20, March.

    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. Bastianin, Andrea & Castelnovo, Paolo & Florio, Massimo, 2018. "Evaluating regulatory reform of network industries: a survey of empirical models based on categorical proxies," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 115-128.
    2. Giancarlo MANZI & Pier Alda FERRARI, "undated". "Statistical methods for evaluating satisfaction with public services Abstract: Contrary to private enterprises, public enterprises can be unaware of the impact of their performance when providing serv," CIRIEC Working Papers 1404, CIRIEC - Université de Liège.
    3. Andrea Bastianin & Paolo Castelnovo & Massimo Florio, 2017. "The Empirics of Regulatory Reforms Proxied by Categorical Variables: Recent Findings and Methodological Issues," Working Papers 2017.22, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    4. Marius Sorin Dincă & Gheorghiţa Dincă & Maria Letiţia Andronic, 2016. "Efficiency and Sustainability of Local Public Goods and Services. Case Study for Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-24, August.
    5. Chica-Olmo, Jorge & Gachs-Sánchez, Héctor & Lizarraga, Carmen, 2018. "Route effect on the perception of public transport services quality," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 40-48.
    6. Amalia Vanacore & Maria Sole Pellegrino, 2022. "A weighted distance metric for assessing ranking dissimilarity and inter-group heterogeneity," METRON, Springer;Sapienza Università di Roma, vol. 80(2), pages 175-185, August.
    7. Andreas Wesener & Runrid Fox-Kämper & Martin Sondermann & Daniel Münderlein, 2020. "Placemaking in Action: Factors That Support or Obstruct the Development of Urban Community Gardens," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-29, January.
    8. Musharraf Cyan & Michael Price & Mark Rider, 2017. "Building up Municipal Services from a Scratch: Immediate Gains in Citizen Perceptions and Level of Trust in Militancy Prone Tribal City of North-Western Pakistan," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1706, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    9. Thomas Krikser & Ingo Zasada & Annette Piorr, 2019. "Socio-Economic Viability of Urban Agriculture—A Comparative Analysis of Success Factors in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-12, April.
    10. Dennis, Matthew & James, Philip, 2017. "Ecosystem services of collectively managed urban gardens: Exploring factors affecting synergies and trade-offs at the site level," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 17-26.
    11. Levasseur, Mélanie & Richard, Lucie & Gauvin, Lise & Raymond, Émilie, 2010. "Inventory and analysis of definitions of social participation found in the aging literature: Proposed taxonomy of social activities," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(12), pages 2141-2149, December.
    12. White, James T. & Bunn, Christopher, 2017. "Growing in Glasgow: Innovative practices and emerging policy pathways for urban agriculture," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 334-344.
    13. Bayarmaa Enkhbold & Kenichi Matsui, 2021. "Community Perceptions about Participating in Urban Park Establishment in Ulaanbaatar City, Mongolia," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, November.
    14. Marit Rosol & Vincent Béal & Samuel Mössner, 2017. "Greenest cities? The (post-)politics of new urban environmental regimes," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(8), pages 1710-1718, August.
    15. Oona Morrow, 2019. "Community Self-Organizing and the Urban Food Commons in Berlin and New York," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-17, July.
    16. Lee Liu & Jie Liu & Zhenguo Zhang, 2014. "Environmental Justice and Sustainability Impact Assessment: In Search of Solutions to Ethnic Conflicts Caused by Coal Mining in Inner Mongolia, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-19, December.
    17. Trillas, Francesc & Xifré, Ramon, 2016. "Institutional reforms to integrate regulation and competition policy: Economic analysis, international perspectives, and the case of the CNMC in Spain," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 75-87.
    18. Chiara Certomà & Lorenzo Chelleri & Bruno Notteboom, 2020. "The ‘fluid governance’ of urban public spaces. Insights from informal planning practices in Rome," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(5), pages 976-995, April.
    19. Nicole Rogge & Insa Theesfeld & Carola Strassner, 2018. "Social Sustainability through Social Interaction—A National Survey on Community Gardens in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-18, April.
    20. Clifton, Judith & Fuentes, Daniel Diaz & Warner, Mildred, 2016. "The loss of public values when public shareholders go abroad," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 134-143.

    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:6:y:2014:i:11:p:7833-7849:d:42033. 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.