IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v169y2024ics1389934124001837.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can wild urban woodlands be integrated into urban green infrastructure? Insights from urbanites and new urbanites in Chongqing, China

Author

Listed:
  • Ma, Hao
  • Xing, Zhong
  • Cheng, Canhui
  • Zhao, Lu

Abstract

Wild urban woodlands (WUWs) are a novel category of urban forests and have been established as vital sources of diverse ecosystem services for local residents. Despite their potential to mitigate green gentrification, WUWs are often neglected in urban planning. Assessing whether different groups of residents accept WUWs as a part of urban green spaces and determining their preferred WUW type are critical for cities lacking green space supply. Therefore, a collection of photographs of 15 WUW patches was employed in this study to explore the preferences and attitudes of urbanites (n = 200) and new urbanites (i.e., individuals who have undergone a transition from rural to urban residency due to urban expansion; n = 206) toward five prevalent WUW categories and examine their perspectives on the future transformation of these WUWs. Accordingly, the following study results were obtained. (1) New urbanites exhibited greater support for integrating WUWs into urban green infrastructure compared to urbanites, primarily due to the limited supply of green spaces in their residential surroundings. (2) The one-way ANOVA shows significant differences in WUW preference scores between new urbanites and urbanites. Urbanites strongly preferred WUWs situated within stream corridors and the least for WUWs in urban villages. Conversely, new urbanites preferred WUWs on agricultural lands and found WUWs on industrial lands the least appealing. (3) Most participants expressed a desire to witness the planned transformation of WUWs. New urbanites preferred additional spaces for leisure activities, whereas urbanites hoped to witness visual improvements in the WUWs. (4) Multifactor ANOVA shows rural background significantly affects preferences scores. Spearman correlation indicates terrain ruggedness and surrounding construction intensity relate to preference. These findings underscore the substantial potential of WUWs in the urban greening in China. They contribute to urban managers' understanding of the diverse needs of the two urban resident groups regarding WUWs, thereby fostering equity in green space planning.

Suggested Citation

  • Ma, Hao & Xing, Zhong & Cheng, Canhui & Zhao, Lu, 2024. "Can wild urban woodlands be integrated into urban green infrastructure? Insights from urbanites and new urbanites in Chongqing, China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:169:y:2024:i:c:s1389934124001837
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103329
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934124001837
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2024.103329?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ana Nikezić, 2022. "Enhancing Biocultural Diversity of Wild Urban Woodland through Research-Based Architectural Design: Case Study—War Island in Belgrade, Serbia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-23, September.
    2. Liu, Wan-Yu & Tsao, Chen & Lin, Chun-Cheng, 2023. "Tourists' preference for colors of forest landscapes and its implications for forest landscape planning policies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    3. Galati, Antonino & Coticchio, Alessandro & Peiró-Signes, Ángel, 2023. "Identifying the factors affecting citizens' willingness to participate in urban forest governance: Evidence from the municipality of Palermo, Italy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    4. Vujcic, Maja & Tomicevic-Dubljevic, Jelena, 2018. "Urban forest benefits to the younger population: The case study of the city of Belgrade, Serbia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 54-62.
    5. Li Cong & Yujun Zhang & Ching-Hui (Joan) Su & Ming-Hsiang Chen & Jinnan Wang, 2019. "Understanding Tourists’ Willingness-to-Pay for Rural Landscape Improvement and Preference Heterogeneity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-20, December.
    6. Linjia Wu & Qidi Dong & Shixian Luo & Wenyuan Jiang & Ming Hao & Qibing Chen, 2021. "Effects of Spatial Elements of Urban Landscape Forests on the Restoration Potential and Preference of Adolescents," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    7. Trentanovi, Giovanni & Campagnaro, Thomas & Kowarik, Ingo & Munafò, Michele & Semenzato, Paolo & Sitzia, Tommaso, 2021. "Integrating spontaneous urban woodlands into the green infrastructure: Unexploited opportunities for urban regeneration," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    8. Marjanne Sevenant & Marc Antrop, 2011. "Landscape Representation Validity: A Comparison between On-site Observations and Photographs with Different Angles of View," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(3), pages 363-385.
    9. Xinxin Wang & Susan Rodiek, 2019. "Older Adults’ Preference for Landscape Features Along Urban Park Walkways in Nanjing, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-22, October.
    10. Tavárez, Héctor & Elbakidze, Levan, 2019. "Valuing recreational enhancements in the San Patricio Urban Forest of Puerto Rico: A choice experiment approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    11. Tian Gao & Huiyi Liang & Yuxuan Chen & Ling Qiu, 2019. "Comparisons of Landscape Preferences through Three Different Perceptual Approaches," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-13, November.
    12. Sato, Masayuki & Aoshima, Ippei & Chang, Youngho, 2021. "Connectedness to nature and the conservation of the urban ecosystem: Perspectives from the valuation of urban forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    13. Wudong Zhao & Liwei Zhang & Xupu Li & Lixian Peng & Pengtao Wang & Zhuangzhuang Wang & Lei Jiao & Hao Wang, 2022. "Residents’ Preference for Urban Green Space Types and Their Ecological-Social Services in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-20, December.
    14. Ingo Kowarik & Anne Hiller & Greg Planchuelo & Birgit Seitz & Moritz von der Lippe & Sascha Buchholz, 2019. "Emerging Urban Forests: Opportunities for Promoting the Wild Side of the Urban Green Infrastructure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-27, November.
    15. Mikaël J. A. Maes & Monica Pirani & Elizabeth R. Booth & Chen Shen & Ben Milligan & Kate E. Jones & Mireille B. Toledano, 2021. "Benefit of woodland and other natural environments for adolescents’ cognition and mental health," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 4(10), pages 851-858, October.
    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. Henry Lippert & Ingo Kowarik & Tanja M. Straka, 2022. "People’s Attitudes and Emotions towards Different Urban Forest Types in the Berlin Region, Germany," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-21, May.
    2. Baldi, Lucia & Trentinaglia, Maria Teresa & Thrassou, Alkis & Galati, Antonino, 2025. "Growing green: Exploring the drivers of citizens’ participation in Italian urban and peri-urban forestation governance," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    3. Gianni Talamini & Ting Liu & Roula El-Khoury & Di Shao, 2023. "Visibility and symbolism of corporate architecture: A multi-method approach for visual impact assessment," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 50(9), pages 2407-2429, November.
    4. Xiaojia Liu & Xi Chen & Yan Huang & Weihong Wang & Mingkan Zhang & Yang Jin, 2023. "Landscape Aesthetic Value of Waterfront Green Space Based on Space–Psychology–Behavior Dimension: A Case Study along Qiantang River (Hangzhou Section)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-22, February.
    5. Ai, Hongshan & Zhou, Zhengqing, 2023. "Green growth: The impact of urban forest construction on economic growth in China," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    6. Jaewon Han & Sugie Lee, 2023. "Verification of Immersive Virtual Reality as a Streetscape Evaluation Method in Urban Residential Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, January.
    7. Aleksandra Lis & Karolina Zalewska & Marek Grabowski & Magdalena Zienowicz, 2025. "Signs of Children’s Presence in Two Types of Landscape: Residential and Park: Research on Adults’ Sense of Safety and Preference: Premises for Designing Sustainable Urban Environments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-26, May.
    8. Galati, Antonino & Coticchio, Alessandro & Peiró-Signes, Ángel, 2023. "Identifying the factors affecting citizens' willingness to participate in urban forest governance: Evidence from the municipality of Palermo, Italy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    9. Yifan Duan & Shuhua Li, 2022. "Effects of Plant Communities on Human Physiological Recovery and Emotional Reactions: A Comparative Onsite Survey and Photo Elicitation Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(2), pages 1-19, January.
    10. 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.
    11. Elli Papastergiou & Dionysis Latinopoulos & Myrto Evdou & Athanasios Kalogeresis, 2023. "Exploring Associations between Subjective Well-Being and Non-Market Values When Used in the Evaluation of Urban Green Spaces: A Scoping Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-31, March.
    12. Tavárez, Héctor & Elbakidze, Levan, 2021. "Urban forests valuation and environmental disposition: The case of Puerto Rico," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    13. Zhang, Yingjie & Zhang, Tianzheng & Zeng, Yingxiang & Cheng, Baodong & Li, Hongxun, 2021. "Designating National Forest Cities in China: Does the policy improve the urban living environment?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    14. Julie Bayle-Cordier & Loïc Berger & Rayan Elatmani & Massimo Tavoni, 2023. "Breath, Love, Walk? The Impact of Mindfulness Interventions on Climate Policy Support and Environmental Attitudes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-29, July.
    15. 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.
    16. Park, Mi Sun & Shin, Seongmin & Lee, Haeun, 2021. "Media frames on urban greening in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    17. Halkos, George E & Aslanidis, Panagiotis-Stavros & Landis, Conrad & Papadaki, Lydia & Koundouri, Phoebe, 2024. "A review on primary and cascading hazards by exploring individuals’ willingness-to-pay for urban sustainability policies," MPRA Paper 122262, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Hagedoorn, Liselotte C. & Koetse, Mark J. & van Beukering, Pieter J.H. & Brander, Luke M., 2021. "Reducing the finance gap for nature-based solutions with time contributions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    19. Yujuan Chen & De’Etra Young & Jason de Koff & Kofi Britwum, 2023. "Extension Agents’ Perceptions, Practices, and Needs of Urban Forestry: A Case Study from Tennessee, United States," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-15, October.
    20. Mariana Cernicova-Buca & Vasile Gherheș & Ciprian Obrad, 2023. "Residents’ Satisfaction with Green Spaces and Daily Life in Small Urban Settings: Romanian Perspectives," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, March.

    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:eee:forpol:v:169:y:2024:i:c:s1389934124001837. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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.