IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ulb/ulbeco/2013-371425.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Integrating public perceptions of proximity and quality in the modelling of urban green space access

Author

Listed:
  • Amy Phillips
  • Dimitra Plastara
  • Ahmed Z. Khan
  • Frank Canters

Abstract

Access to urban green space (UGS) is associated with a number of physical and social benefits. Recognizing the importance of UGS access for people's wellbeing, several methods have been proposed to model UGS accessibility and highlight areas underserviced by UGS. However, existing methodologies have several limitations. Models often make use of universal, normative maximum travel distances, which may not reflect the distances people actually travel to reach UGS they regularly visit. Additionally, many of these analyses do not consider UGS quality, which will largely influence use and experience of these spaces and may act as a pull factor affecting the distance people are willing to travel to visit a UGS. Those methods that do integrate quality often rely on proxies, such as size or number of amenities, and fail to consider perceived quality. To address these limitations, we propose a methodology that integrates user perception and the actual distance people are prepared to travel into a quality-accessibility (QA) analysis applied at the building block scale. Information on travel distance and quality are gathered from a public participation GIS survey conducted in the Brussels Capital Region. The results of the analysis highlight inequalities in access to specific, essential UGS experiences throughout the region. Insights provided by this analysis can help planners prioritize interventions to improve access to experiences provided by UGS in parts of the city where interventions are most needed.

Suggested Citation

  • Amy Phillips & Dimitra Plastara & Ahmed Z. Khan & Frank Canters, 2023. "Integrating public perceptions of proximity and quality in the modelling of urban green space access," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/371425, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  • Handle: RePEc:ulb:ulbeco:2013/371425
    Note: SCOPUS: ar.j
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/371425/1/doi_355069.pdf
    File Function: Full text for the whole work, or for a work part
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bertram, Christine & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2015. "Preferences for cultural urban ecosystem services: Comparing attitudes, perception, and use," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 187-199.
    2. Elaine Hoffimann & Henrique Barros & Ana Isabel Ribeiro, 2017. "Socioeconomic Inequalities in Green Space Quality and Accessibility—Evidence from a Southern European City," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-16, August.
    3. Philip Stessens & Frank Canters & Marijke Huysmans & Ahmed Z. Khan, 2020. "Urban green space qualities: An integrated approach towards GIS-based assessment reflecting user perception," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/298795, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Stessens, Philip & Canters, Frank & Huysmans, Marijke & Khan, Ahmed Z., 2020. "Urban green space qualities: An integrated approach towards GIS-based assessment reflecting user perception," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    5. Philip Stessens & Ahmed Z. Khan & Marijke Huysmans & Frank Canters, 2017. "Analysing urban green space accessibility and quality: A GIS-based model as spatial decision support for urban ecosystem services in Brussels," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/284472, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    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. Amy Phillips & Ahmed Z. Khan & Frank Canters, 2021. "Use-Related and Socio-Demographic Variations in Urban Green Space Preferences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-22, March.
    2. Amy Phillips & Ahmed Z. Khan & Frank Canters, 2021. "Use-related and socio-demographic variations in urban green space preferences," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/326192, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. Liu, Hongxiao & Hamel, Perrine & Tardieu, Léa & Remme, Roy P. & Han, Baolong & Ren, Hai, 2022. "A geospatial model of nature-based recreation for urban planning: Case study of Paris, France," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    4. Philip Stessens & Frank Canters & Ahmed Z. Khan, 2021. "Exploring Options for Public Green Space Development: Research by Design and GIS-Based Scenario Modelling," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-52, July.
    5. Bohong Zheng & Rui Guo & Komi Bernard Bedra & Yanfen Xiang, 2022. "Quantitative Evaluation of Urban Style at Street Level: A Case Study of Hengyang County, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-28, March.
    6. Jaloliddin Rustamov & Zahiriddin Rustamov & Nazar Zaki, 2023. "Green Space Quality Analysis Using Machine Learning Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-25, May.
    7. Philip Stessens & Frank Canters & Marijke Huysmans & Ahmed Z. Khan, 2020. "Urban green space qualities: An integrated approach towards GIS-based assessment reflecting user perception," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/298795, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    8. Selda İnançoğlu & Havva Arslangazi Uzunahmet & Özge Özden, 2023. "The Effect of Green Spaces on User Satisfaction in Historical City of Nicosia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-18, August.
    9. Stessens, Philip & Canters, Frank & Huysmans, Marijke & Khan, Ahmed Z., 2020. "Urban green space qualities: An integrated approach towards GIS-based assessment reflecting user perception," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    10. Talib Hussain & Dake Wang & Benqian Li, 2024. "Stakeholder Perspectives on the Role of Social Media in Urban Green Space, Land Management, and Resilience in Gilgit-Baltistan," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-28, June.
    11. Kourtit, Karima & Nijkamp, Peter & Türk, Umut & Wahlstrom, Mia, 2022. "City love and place quality assessment of liveable and loveable neighbourhoods in Rotterdam," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    12. Tania Noël & Benoit Dardenne, 2022. "Relationships between Green Space Attendance, Perceived Crowdedness, Perceived Beauty and Prosocial Behavior in Time of Health Crisis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-18, June.
    13. Yiyang Guo & Guoping Lei & Luyang Zhang, 2023. "Quality Evaluation of Park Green Space Based on Multi-Source Spatial Data in Shenyang," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-15, June.
    14. Zhiming Li & Xiyang Chen & Zhou Shen & Zhengxi Fan, 2022. "Evaluating Neighborhood Green-Space Quality Using a Building Blue–Green Index (BBGI) in Nanjing, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-18, March.
    15. Mouratidis, Kostas & Yiannakou, Athena, 2022. "What makes cities livable? Determinants of neighborhood satisfaction and neighborhood happiness in different contexts," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    16. Jun Zhang & Jinghua Jin & Yimeng Liang, 2024. "The Impact of Green Space on University Students’ Mental Health: The Mediating Roles of Solitude Competence and Perceptual Restoration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-28, January.
    17. Wu, Chao & Du, Yihao & Li, Sheng & Liu, Pengyu & Ye, Xinyue, 2022. "Does visual contact with green space impact housing pricesʔ An integrated approach of machine learning and hedonic modeling based on the perception of green space," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    18. Peng Chen & Wei Wang & Chong Qian & Mengqiu Cao & Tianren Yang, 2024. "Gravity-based models for evaluating urban park accessibility: Why does localized selection of attractiveness factors and travel modes matter?," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 51(4), pages 904-922, May.
    19. Veerkamp, Clara J. & Schipper, Aafke M. & Hedlund, Katarina & Lazarova, Tanya & Nordin, Amanda & Hanson, Helena I., 2021. "A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    20. Chiara Cortinovis & Grazia Zulian & Davide Geneletti, 2018. "Assessing Nature-Based Recreation to Support Urban Green Infrastructure Planning in Trento (Italy)," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-20, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental justice; Green space equity; PPGIS; Urban green space accessibility; Urban green space quality; Urban green spaces;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ulb:ulbeco:2013/371425. 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: Benoit Pauwels (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecsulbe.html .

    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.