IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/esprep/231722.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Accessibility and patronage of urban open spaces in a south-western Nigeria city

Author

Listed:
  • Ajayi, Ayodeji Olusola
  • Amole, Oludolapo Olutosin

Abstract

This paper examines the patronage and utilization of urban open spaces in Osogbo, Nigeria. Data were obtained through a multi-stage sampling technique. The study area was divided into high, medium and low density areas and 553 (5%) of buildings were systematic selected from 11,022 buildings identified through preliminary survey and satellite images. One teenager and two adults (a male and female) were selected in each building resulting in the total sample size of 1,659. Information on respondent's socio-economic characteristics, frequency of utilization open spaces, travel time, means of transportation and time spent in open spaces were obtained from the questionnaire. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the data. The results show that most of the respondents (60.8%) were occasional users of open spaces, 2.2% of respondents never used the open spaces while 37% were frequent users. In addition, the most frequently used open space was the neighborhood park (42.1%), followed by school playgrounds (39.2%) and pocket parks (32.7%). Incidental open spaces had the lowest proportion of patronage(20.9%). The longest duration of use occurred in school playgrounds while the neighbourhood park was the most accessible to the respondents. The frequency of use varies across typologies and residential densities. The mean travel time of respondents across all open spaces was 13.62 seconds, the variations in travel time across typologies were not statically significant (F=3.802, p =.010). Recommendations to make open spaces more accessible were suggested.

Suggested Citation

  • Ajayi, Ayodeji Olusola & Amole, Oludolapo Olutosin, 2021. "Accessibility and patronage of urban open spaces in a south-western Nigeria city," EconStor Preprints 231722, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:esprep:231722
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/231722/1/patronage-and-accessibility--urban-open-spaces-in-osogbo-ECONSTOR.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrea Abraham & Kathrin Sommerhalder & Thomas Abel, 2010. "Landscape and well-being: a scoping study on the health-promoting impact of outdoor environments," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 55(1), pages 59-69, February.
    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. Völker, Sebastian & Kistemann, Thomas, 2013. "Reprint of: “I'm always entirely happy when I'm here!” Urban blue enhancing human health and well-being in Cologne and Düsseldorf, Germany," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 141-152.
    2. Fabiana R. Sousa-Mast & Arianne C. Reis & Marcelo C. Vieira & Sandro Sperandei & Luilma A. Gurgel & Uwe Pühse, 2017. "Does being an Olympic city help improve recreational resources? Examining the quality of physical activity resources in a low-income neighborhood of Rio de Janeiro," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 62(2), pages 263-268, March.
    3. 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.
    4. Mehdi Rezaei & Doohwan Kim & Ahad Alizadeh & Ladan Rokni, 2021. "Evaluating the Mental-Health Positive Impacts of Agritourism; A Case Study from South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-16, August.
    5. Kulczyk, Sylwia & Woźniak, Edyta & Derek, Marta, 2018. "Landscape, facilities and visitors: An integrated model of recreational ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 491-501.
    6. William A. V. Clark & William Lisowski, 2018. "Wellbeing across individuals and places: How much does social capital matter?," Journal of Population Research, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 217-236, September.
    7. Bruns, Diedrich & Münderlein, Daniel, 2018. ""Paysage à votre santé". Gesundheitsfördernde Landschaften - Eine Betrachtung von Naturparken," Arbeitsberichte der ARL: Aufsätze, in: Weber, Florian & Weber, Friedericke & Jenal, Corinna (ed.), Wohin des Weges? Regionalentwicklung in Grossschutzgebieten, volume 21, pages 250-281, ARL – Akademie für Raumentwicklung in der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft.
    8. Sanaz Memari & Mahdieh Pazhouhanfar & Patrik Grahn, 2021. "Perceived Sensory Dimensions of Green Areas: An Experimental Study on Stress Recovery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-19, May.
    9. Haifeng Li & Wenbo Chen & Wei He, 2015. "Planning of Green Space Ecological Network in Urban Areas: An Example of Nanchang, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-16, October.
    10. Denise Dillon & Sean T. H. Lee & Eunice W. L. Tai, 2024. "Flourishing or Frightening? Feelings about Natural and Built Green Spaces in Singapore," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(3), pages 1-19, March.
    11. Wendy McWilliam & Andreas Wesener & Anupriya Sukumar & Robert D. Brown, 2020. "Reducing the Incidence of Skin Cancer through Landscape Architecture Design Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-18, November.
    12. Tsai-Chiao Wang & Ta-Wei Tang & Chia-Liang Tsai, 2022. "The Visual Attention and Psychological Responses from Older Customers to Wellness Service Pictures of Hotels," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-12, January.
    13. Joanna Badach & Elżbieta Raszeja, 2019. "Developing a Framework for the Implementation of Landscape and Greenspace Indicators in Sustainable Urban Planning. Waterfront Landscape Management: Case Studies in Gdańsk, Poznań and Bristol," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-26, April.
    14. Hermes, Johannes & Albert, Christian & von Haaren, Christina, 2018. "Assessing the aesthetic quality of landscapes in Germany," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 296-307.
    15. Beyer, Kirsten & Bizub, Jessica & Szabo, Aniko & Heller, Beth & Kistner, Amy & Shawgo, Erin & Zetts, Corey, 2015. "Development and validation of the attitudes toward outdoor play scales for children," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 253-260.
    16. Weber, Florian & Weber, Friedericke & Jenal, Corinna (ed.), 2018. "Wohin des Weges? Regionalentwicklung in Grossschutzgebieten [Where are we heading? Regional development in large-scale protected areas]," Arbeitsberichte der ARL, ARL – Akademie für Raumentwicklung in der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft, volume 21, number 21, January.
    17. Amirafshar Vaeztavakoli & Azadeh Lak & Tan Yigitcanlar, 2018. "Blue and Green Spaces as Therapeutic Landscapes: Health Effects of Urban Water Canal Areas of Isfahan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.
    18. Shiwang Yu & Na Guo & Caimiao Zheng & Yu Song & Jianli Hao, 2021. "Investigating the Association between Outdoor Environment and Outdoor Activities for Seniors Living in Old Residential Communities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(14), pages 1-16, July.
    19. Daniela Haluza & Stana Simic & Jan Höltge & Renate Cervinka & Hanns Moshammer, 2014. "Connectedness to Nature and Public (Skin) Health Perspectives: Results of a Representative, Population-Based Survey among Austrian Residents," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, January.
    20. Claus, Karla & Rousseau, Sandra, 2010. "Public versus Private Incentives to Invest in Green Roofs: A Cost Benefit Analysis for Flanders," Working Papers 2010/30, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Open space typologies; Accessibility; Urban neighbourhoods; Open space utilization; Proximity;
    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:zbw:esprep:231722. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.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.