IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i14p7805-d593220.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of Space Configurational Attributes on Social Interactions in Urban Parks

Author

Listed:
  • Qiang Sheng

    (School of Architecture and Design, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China)

  • Dongyang Wan

    (School of Architecture and Design, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China)

  • Boya Yu

    (School of Architecture and Design, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China)

Abstract

Urban parks are one of the most common spaces for social interactions in modern cities. The design of park spaces, especially space configuration, has significant influences on people’s social behaviors in parks. In this study, the associations between space configurational attributes and social interactions were investigated using space syntax theory. An observation analysis of social behaviors was carried out in two urban parks in Beijing, China. Nine space configurational attributes, including depth to the gate, depth to the main road, connectivity, normalized angular integration (NAIN), and normalized angular choice (NACH) with three radii, were calculated using a segment model. The variance analysis and regression analysis reveal the strong joint effect of space type, space scale factors, and space configurational attributes on social interaction behaviors in parks. The personal interaction group contained 23% of the total observed people involved in social interactions. Pathway length, zone area, and NACH-10K (NACH with a radius of 10,000 m) are positively associated with the number of people involved in personal interactions. For the social interaction group (77% of the total observed people), the space scale and depth to main city road were found to have a positive and negative influence on social interaction intensity.

Suggested Citation

  • Qiang Sheng & Dongyang Wan & Boya Yu, 2021. "Effect of Space Configurational Attributes on Social Interactions in Urban Parks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-15, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:14:p:7805-:d:593220
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/7805/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/7805/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sugie Lee & Chisun Yoo & Kyung Wook Seo, 2020. "Determinant Factors of Pedestrian Volume in Different Land-Use Zones: Combining Space Syntax Metrics with GIS-Based Built-Environment Measures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-15, October.
    2. Lena Ali & Annegret Haase & Stefan Heiland, 2020. "Gentrification through Green Regeneration? Analyzing the Interaction between Inner-City Green Space Development and Neighborhood Change in the Context of Regrowth: The Case of Lene-Voigt-Park in Leipz," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-24, January.
    3. Bo-Xun Huang & Shang-Chia Chiou & Wen-Ying Li, 2020. "Accessibility and Street Network Characteristics of Urban Public Facility Spaces: Equity Research on Parks in Fuzhou City Based on GIS and Space Syntax Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-19, April.
    4. Siewe Siewe & Jacqueline M. Vadjunec & Beth Caniglia, 2017. "The Politics of Land Use in the Korup National Park," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-22, January.
    5. Kaczynski, A.T. & Potwarka, L.R. & Saelens P, B.E., 2008. "Association of park size, distance, and features with physical activity in neighborhood parks," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 98(8), pages 1451-1456.
    6. Dario Esposito & Stefania Santoro & Domenico Camarda, 2020. "Agent-Based Analysis of Urban Spaces Using Space Syntax and Spatial Cognition Approaches: A Case Study in Bari, Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-17, June.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. Isabelle Soares & Claudia Yamu & Gerd Weitkamp, 2020. "The Relationship between the Spatial Configuration and the Fourth Sustainable Dimension Creativity in University Campuses: The Case Study of Zernike Campus, Groningen, The Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, November.
    10. M. Reza Shirazi, 2020. "Compact Urban Form: Neighbouring and Social Activity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-18, March.
    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. Jun Li & Melasutra Md. Dali & Nikmatul Adha Nordin, 2023. "Connectedness among Urban Parks from the Users’ Perspective: A Systematic Literature Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-20, February.
    2. Jiahui Diao & Shaoming Lu, 2022. "The Culture-Oriented Urban Regeneration: Place Narrative in the Case of the Inner City of Haiyan (Zhejiang, China)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-23, June.

    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. Jie Ding & Zhengdong Gao & Shanshan Ma, 2022. "Understanding Social Spaces in Tourist Villages through Space Syntax Analysis: Cases of Villages in Huizhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, September.
    2. Monika Kopecká & Harini Nagendra & Andrew Millington, 2018. "Urban Land Systems: An Ecosystems Perspective," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-4, January.
    3. Kestutis Zaleckis & Szymon Chmielewski & Jūratė Kamičaitytė & Indre Grazuleviciute-Vileniske & Halina Lipińska, 2022. "Walkability Compass—A Space Syntax Solution for Comparative Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-25, February.
    4. Kumelachew Yeshitela, 2020. "Attitude and Perception of Residents towards the Benefits, Challenges and Quality of Neighborhood Parks in a Sub-Saharan Africa City," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-17, November.
    5. Liqin Zhang & Huhua Cao & Ruibo Han, 2021. "Residents’ Preferences and Perceptions toward Green Open Spaces in an Urban Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-23, February.
    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. Xiaohu Zhang & Scott Melbourne & Chinmoy Sarkar & Alain Chiaradia & Chris Webster, 2020. "Effects of green space on walking: Does size, shape and density matter?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(16), pages 3402-3420, December.
    8. Julian A. Reed & Rachel M. Ballard & Michael Hill & David Berrigan, 2020. "Identification of Effective Programs to Improve Access to and Use of Trails among Youth from Under-Resourced Communities: A Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-33, October.
    9. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Michael Lechner & Paul Downward, 2017. "Heterogeneous sports participation and labour market outcomes in England," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(4), pages 335-348, January.
    13. Mohammad Paydar & Asal Kamani Fard & Verónica Gárate Navarrete, 2023. "Design Characteristics, Visual Qualities, and Walking Behavior in an Urban Park Setting," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, September.
    14. Fangzheng Li & Fen Zhang & Xiong Li & Peng Wang & Junhui Liang & Yuting Mei & Wenwen Cheng & Yun Qian, 2017. "Spatiotemporal Patterns of the Use of Urban Green Spaces and External Factors Contributing to Their Use in Central Beijing," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, February.
    15. Razieh Zandieh & Javier Martinez & Johannes Flacke, 2019. "Older Adults’ Outdoor Walking and Inequalities in Neighbourhood Green Spaces Characteristics," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-18, November.
    16. Irina Iulia Năstase & Ileana Pătru-Stupariu & Felix Kienast, 2019. "Landscape Preferences and Distance Decay Analysis for Mapping the Recreational Potential of an Urban Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-19, July.
    17. Ying Xu & David Matarrita-Cascante & Jae Ho Lee & A.E. Luloff, 2019. "Incorporating Physical Environment-Related Factors in an Assessment of Community Attachment: Understanding Urban Park Contributions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-19, October.
    18. Teck Hong Tan, 2022. "Perceived Environmental Attributes: Their Impact on Older Adults’ Mental Health in Malaysia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-13, March.
    19. Simon Bell & Himansu Sekhar Mishra & Lewis R. Elliott & Rebecca Shellock & Peeter Vassiljev & Miriam Porter & Zoe Sydenham & Mathew P. White, 2020. "Urban Blue Acupuncture: A Protocol for Evaluating a Complex Landscape Design Intervention to Improve Health and Wellbeing in a Coastal Community," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-21, May.
    20. H. S. Gardsjord & M. S. Tveit & H. Nordh, 2014. "Promoting Youth's Physical Activity through Park Design: Linking Theory and Practice in a Public Health Perspective," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 70-81, February.

    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:13:y:2021:i:14:p:7805-:d:593220. 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.