IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i2p816-d722922.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research on the Matching Relationship between the Supply of Urban Ecological Recreational Space and the Demand of Residents—A Case Study of an Urban Development Area in Wuhan

Author

Listed:
  • Xin Xu

    (The College of Urban and Environmental Science, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, China
    Wuhan Branch of China Tourism Academy, Wuhan 430079, China)

  • Jing Hu

    (The College of Urban and Environmental Science, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, China
    Wuhan Branch of China Tourism Academy, Wuhan 430079, China)

  • Li Lv

    (The College of Urban and Environmental Science, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, China
    Wuhan Branch of China Tourism Academy, Wuhan 430079, China)

  • Jiaojiao Yin

    (The College of Urban and Environmental Science, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, China
    Wuhan Branch of China Tourism Academy, Wuhan 430079, China)

  • Xiaobo Tian

    (The College of Urban and Environmental Science, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, China
    Wuhan Branch of China Tourism Academy, Wuhan 430079, China)

Abstract

An urban ecological recreational space (UERS), which connects the natural environment with urban residents, is an important guarantee for developing a livable city and improving the well-being of residents. However, there is a serious imbalance between the supply of UERSs and the demand of residents in many big, rapidly developing cities. Previous studies usually used indicators such as scale or quantity to measure the supply level of UERS enjoyed by residents, ignoring its own quality differences. Therefore, taking the urban development area of Wuhan as the research object, we measured the quality of UERS from four dimensions using the entropy method and designed a method to measure the supply service level under the hierarchical travel threshold to analyze the supply level of UERSs based on a community unit. Finally, combined with the demand characteristics of different groups, the matching relationship between supply and demand of UERSs in each community is quantitatively analyzed. The results show the following: (1) The quality of UERS in urban development area of Wuhan varies greatly and its distribution is extremely uneven. (2) The level of supply services and the demand level vary greatly, and the overall performance has a trend of decreasing from the city center to the periphery. (3) The overall matching relationship between supply and demand of UERS is not ideal, and more than half of the communities are in supply deficit or without services. Our study provides a novel perspective on quantifying the supply–demand relationship of UERS. It can more accurately guide decision-makers and planners in determining areas with mismatches between the supply and demand of UERSs and in making targeted layouts of UERSs and relevant policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Xin Xu & Jing Hu & Li Lv & Jiaojiao Yin & Xiaobo Tian, 2022. "Research on the Matching Relationship between the Supply of Urban Ecological Recreational Space and the Demand of Residents—A Case Study of an Urban Development Area in Wuhan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(2), pages 1-19, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:2:p:816-:d:722922
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/2/816/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/2/816/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arne Arnberger & Renate Eder, 2011. "The influence of age on recreational trail preferences of urban green-space visitors: a discrete choice experiment with digitally calibrated images," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(7), pages 891-908, November.
    2. Jiayu Wu & Qingsong He & Yunwen Chen & Jian Lin & Shantong Wang, 2020. "Dismantling the fence for social justice? Evidence based on the inequity of urban green space accessibility in the central urban area of Beijing," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(4), pages 626-644, May.
    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. Qidi Dong & Heng Lu & Xiaohong Luo & Pengman He & Di Li & Linjia Wu & Yundi Wei & Xuli Chen, 2023. "Evaluation and Optimization of Green Space Fairness in Urban Built-Up Areas Based on an Improved Supply and Demand Model: A Case Study of Chengdu, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-22, October.

    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. Mai-Thi Ta & Léa Tardieu & Harold Levrel, 2022. "Characterizing the Demand Side of Urban Greening to Inform Urban Planning -A Discrete Choice Experiment in the Paris Metropolitan Region [Qualifier la demande de renaturation urbaine pour mieux ren," Post-Print hal-04210911, HAL.
    2. Ling Qiu & Qujing Chen & Tian Gao, 2021. "The Effects of Urban Natural Environments on Preference and Self-Reported Psychological Restoration of the Elderly," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-14, January.
    3. Liu, Zhaoyang & Hanley, Nick & Campbell, Danny, 2020. "Linking urban air pollution with residents’ willingness to pay for greenspace: A choice experiment study in Beijing," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    4. Benjamin Guinaudeau & Mark Brink & Beat Schäffer & Martin A. Schlaepfer, 2023. "A Methodology for Quantifying the Spatial Distribution and Social Equity of Urban Green and Blue Spaces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-20, December.
    5. Wang, Ruoyu & Cao, Mengqiu & Yao, Yao & Wu, Wenjie, 2022. "The inequalities of different dimensions of visible street urban green space provision: A machine learning approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    6. Zelin Zhang & Xiaomin Tang & Yun Wang, 2023. "Evaluation of the Intergenerational Equity of Public Open Space in Old Communities: A Case Study of Caoyang New Village in Shanghai," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-26, July.
    7. Juliana Melo & Ana Isabel Ribeiro & Susana Aznar & Andreia Pizarro & Maria Paula Santos, 2021. "Urban Green Spaces, Greenness Exposure and Species Richness in Residential Environments and Relations with Physical Activity and BMI in Portuguese Adolescents," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-14, June.
    8. 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.
    9. Yi-Ya Hsu & Zih-Hong Lin & Chong-En Li, 2023. "Realising the Sustainable Development Goal 11.7 in the post-pandemic era – A case study of Taiwan," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 50(1), pages 162-181, January.
    10. Nadine Schuurman & Leah Rosenkrantz & Scott A. Lear, 2021. "Environmental Preferences and Concerns of Recreational Road Runners," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-19, June.
    11. Kinga Kimic & Paulina Polko, 2022. "The Use of Urban Parks by Older Adults in the Context of Perceived Security," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-20, March.
    12. Fruth, Erik & Kvistad, Michele & Marshall, Joe & Pfeifer, Lena & Rau, Luisa & Sagebiel, Julian & Soto, Daniel & Tarpey, John & Weir, Jessica & Winiarski, Bradyn, 2019. "Economic valuation of street-level urban greening: A case study from an evolving mixed-use area in Berlin," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    13. Chang Wang & Siyuan Wang & Yilun Cao & Haojun Yan & Yunyuan Li, 2023. "The Social Equity of Urban Parks in High-Density Urban Areas: A Case Study in the Core Area of Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-21, September.
    14. Yi-Ya Hsu & Scott Hawken & Samad Sepasgozar & Zih-Hong Lin, 2022. "Beyond the Backyard: GIS Analysis of Public Green Space Accessibility in Australian Metropolitan Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-25, April.
    15. Renate Eder & Arne Arnberger, 2016. "How heterogeneous are adolescents’ preferences for natural and semi-natural riverscapes as recreational settings?," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(5), pages 555-568, July.
    16. Xiaoling Li & Chunliang Xiu & Ye Wei & Hong S. He, 2020. "Evaluating Methodology for the Service Extent of Refugee Parks in Changchun, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-16, July.
    17. Elin P. Sundevall & Märit Jansson, 2020. "Inclusive Parks across Ages: Multifunction and Urban Open Space Management for Children, Adolescents, and the Elderly," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-17, December.
    18. Gosal, Arjan S. & Geijzendorffer, Ilse R. & Václavík, Tomáš & Poulin, Brigitte & Ziv, Guy, 2019. "Using social media, machine learning and natural language processing to map multiple recreational beneficiaries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    19. Piaggio, Matías, 2021. "The value of public urban green spaces: Measuring the effects of proximity to and size of urban green spaces on housing market values in San José, Costa Rica," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    20. Marianne Lefebvre & Pauline Laille & Masha Maslianskaia-Pautrel, 2020. "Individual preferences regarding pesticide-free management of green-spaces: a discret choice experiment with French citizens," Working Papers 2020.02, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.

    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:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:2:p:816-:d:722922. 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.