IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v7y2018i3p102-d167632.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Residents’ Perception of Informal Green Space—A Case Study of Ichikawa City, Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Minseo Kim

    (Department of Environment Science and Landscape Architecture, Graduate School of Horticulture, Chiba University, Chiba 271-8510, Japan)

  • Christoph D. D. Rupprecht

    (FEAST Project, Research Institute for Humanity and Nature, Kyoto 6038047, Japan)

  • Katsunori Furuya

    (Department of Environment Science and Landscape Architecture, Graduate School of Horticulture, Chiba University, Chiba 271-8510, Japan)

Abstract

Urban green space (UGS) has been proven to be essential for improving the health of residents. Local governments thus need to provide attractive UGS to enhance residents’ wellbeing. However, cities face spatial and finanical limitations in creating and managing UGS. As a result, greening plans often fail or are postponed indefinitely. To evaluate whether informal urban green space (IGS) can supplement existing UGS, we conducted a questionnaire survey of 567 residents in Ichikawa (Japan), a city currently providing only 3.43 m 2 green space per capita. In particular, we analyzed how residents’ existing green space activities affect IGS perception, as it may be difficult to recognize IGS as greenery because it is not an officially recognized space for recreation. Results show that residents took a favorable stance towards IGS, but perception differs depending on their green environment exposure. Residents who are frequently exposed to green environments in their daily lives highly recognized the environmental improvement aspects of IGS and significantly perceived spatial accessibility as an advantage of IGS. Willingness to participate in conservation activities of UGS was linked with a likelihood of recognizing IGS as UGS. Our results encourage understanding IGS as supplementary green space taking into account the attitude of residents to UGS, and contribute to introducing the IGS discourse into green space planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Minseo Kim & Christoph D. D. Rupprecht & Katsunori Furuya, 2018. "Residents’ Perception of Informal Green Space—A Case Study of Ichikawa City, Japan," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-20, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:7:y:2018:i:3:p:102-:d:167632
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/7/3/102/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/7/3/102/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de Vries, Sjerp & van Dillen, Sonja M.E. & Groenewegen, Peter P. & Spreeuwenberg, Peter, 2013. "Streetscape greenery and health: Stress, social cohesion and physical activity as mediators," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 26-33.
    2. Gil M Doron, 2000. "The Dead Zone and the Architecture of Transgression," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(2), pages 247-263.
    3. 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.
    4. Martina Artmann & Olaf Bastian & Karsten Grunewald, 2017. "Using the Concepts of Green Infrastructure and Ecosystem Services to Specify Leitbilder for Compact and Green Cities—The Example of the Landscape Plan of Dresden (Germany)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-26, February.
    5. Sjerp de Vries & Robert A Verheij & Peter P Groenewegen & Peter Spreeuwenberg, 2003. "Natural Environments—Healthy Environments? An Exploratory Analysis of the Relationship between Greenspace and Health," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 35(10), pages 1717-1731, October.
    6. Rupprecht, Christoph, 2017. "Informal urban green space: Residents’ perception, use, and management preferences across four major Japanese shrinking cities," SocArXiv ug86b, Center for Open Science.
    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. Polina Lemenkova & Olivier Debeir, 2023. "Quantitative Morphometric 3D Terrain Analysis of Japan Using Scripts of GMT and R," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-29, January.
    2. Yiming Liu & Xiangxiang Pan & Qing Liu & Guicai Li, 2023. "Establishing a Reliable Assessment of the Green View Index Based on Image Classification Techniques, Estimation, and a Hypothesis Testing Route," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-14, May.
    3. Duy Thong Ta & Katsunori Furuya, 2022. "Google Street View and Machine Learning—Useful Tools for a Street-Level Remote Survey: A Case Study in Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam and Ichikawa, Japan," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-18, December.
    4. Walter Dachaga & Walter Timo de Vries, 2021. "Land Tenure Security and Health Nexus: A Conceptual Framework for Navigating the Connections between Land Tenure Security and Health," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-21, March.
    5. Richard Smardon, 2020. "Thomas Panagopoulos. Landscape urbanism and green infrastructure," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 10(2), pages 208-209, June.
    6. Yun Hye Hwang & Ivan Kurniawan Nasution & Deepika Amonkar & Amy Hahs, 2020. "Urban Green Space Distribution Related to Land Values in Fast-Growing Megacities, Mumbai and Jakarta–Unexploited Opportunities to Increase Access to Greenery for the Poor," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-17, June.
    7. Daria Sikorska & Piotr Sikorski & Piotr Archiciński & Jarosław Chormański & Richard J. Hopkins, 2019. "You Can’t See the Woods for the Trees: Invasive Acer negundo L. in Urban Riparian Forests Harms Biodiversity and Limits Recreation Activity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-16, 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. Christopher B. Riley & Kayla I. Perry & Kerry Ard & Mary M. Gardiner, 2018. "Asset or Liability? Ecological and Sociological Tradeoffs of Urban Spontaneous Vegetation on Vacant Land in Shrinking Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-19, June.
    2. Jing Jing, 2022. "Seeing Streetscapes as Social Infrastructure: A Paradigmatic Case Study of Hornsbergs Strand, Stockholm," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(4), pages 510-522.
    3. Kaowen Grace Chang & William C. Sullivan & Ying-Hsuan Lin & Weichia Su & Chun-Yen Chang, 2016. "The Effect of Biodiversity on Green Space Users’ Wellbeing—An Empirical Investigation Using Physiological Evidence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-15, October.
    4. Matthew Dennis & David Barlow & Gina Cavan & Penny A. Cook & Anna Gilchrist & John Handley & Philip James & Jessica Thompson & Konstantinos Tzoulas & C. Philip Wheater & Sarah Lindley, 2018. "Mapping Urban Green Infrastructure: A Novel Landscape-Based Approach to Incorporating Land Use and Land Cover in the Mapping of Human-Dominated Systems," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-25, January.
    5. Habibi, Tahereh & Ponedelnik, Alena A. & Yashalova, Natalia N. & Ruban, Dmitry A., 2018. "Urban geoheritage complexity: Evidence of a unique natural resource from Shiraz city in Iran," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 85-94.
    6. 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).
    7. Jiang, Wenhao & Stickley, Andrew & Ueda, Michiko, 2021. "Green space and suicide mortality in Japan: An ecological study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    8. Bertram, Christine & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2015. "The role of urban green space for human well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 139-152.
    9. 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.
    10. Carolina Mayen Huerta & Ariane Utomo, 2022. "Barriers Affecting Women’s Access to Urban Green Spaces during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, April.
    11. Phi-Yen Nguyen & Thomas Astell-Burt & Hania Rahimi-Ardabili & Xiaoqi Feng, 2021. "Green Space Quality and Health: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-38, October.
    12. Siqi Lai & Brian Deal, 2022. "Parks, Green Space, and Happiness: A Spatially Specific Sentiment Analysis Using Microblogs in Shanghai, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, December.
    13. Kaiser, Nina N. & Ghermandi, Andrea & Feld, Christian K. & Hershkovitz, Yaron & Palt, Martin & Stoll, Stefan, 2021. "Societal benefits of river restoration – Implications from social media analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    14. Catarina Patoilo Teixeira & Cláudia Oliveira Fernandes & Jack Ahern, 2021. "Novel Urban Ecosystems: Opportunities from and to Landscape Architecture," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-12, August.
    15. Martí, Pablo & García-Mayor, Clara & Nolasco-Cirugeda, Almudena & Serrano-Estrada, Leticia, 2020. "Green infrastructure planning: Unveiling meaningful spaces through Foursquare users’ preferences," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    16. Maram Tawil & Yasemin Utku & Kawthar Alrayyan & Christa Reicher, 2019. "Revierparks as an integrated green network in Germany: An option for Amman?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-24, December.
    17. Annemarie Ruijsbroek & Sigrid M. Mohnen & Mariël Droomers & Hanneke Kruize & Christopher Gidlow & Regina Gražulevičiene & Sandra Andrusaityte & Jolanda Maas & Mark J. Nieuwenhuijsen & Margarita Trigue, 2017. "Neighbourhood green space, social environment and mental health: an examination in four European cities," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 62(6), pages 657-667, July.
    18. Zhong, Sinan & Lee, Chanam & Foster, Margaret J. & Bian, Jiahe, 2020. "Intergenerational communities: A systematic literature review of intergenerational interactions and older adults’ health-related outcomes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    19. Carla M. Kayanan, 2022. "A critique of innovation districts: Entrepreneurial living and the burden of shouldering urban development," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 54(1), pages 50-66, February.
    20. Mduduzi Biyase & Tajul Ariffin Masron & Talent Zwane & Thomas Bilaliib Udimal & Frederich Kirsten, 2023. "Ecological Footprint and Population Health Outcomes: Evidence from E7 Countries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-18, May.

    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:7:y:2018:i:3:p:102-:d:167632. 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.