IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i19p8128-d422809.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Differences in Environmental Information Acquisition from Urban Green—A Case Study of Qunli National Wetland Park in Harbin, China

Author

Listed:
  • Xun Zhu

    (School of Architecture, Harbin Institute of Technology, Key Laboratory of Cold Region Urban and Rural Human Settlement Environment Science and Technology, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Harbin 150006, China)

  • Yaqian Zhang

    (School of Architecture, Harbin Institute of Technology, Key Laboratory of Cold Region Urban and Rural Human Settlement Environment Science and Technology, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Harbin 150006, China)

  • Wei Zhao

    (School of Architecture, Harbin Institute of Technology, Key Laboratory of Cold Region Urban and Rural Human Settlement Environment Science and Technology, Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, Harbin 150006, China)

Abstract

(1) Environmental education in an urban setting is crucial in terms of building a harmonious relationship between man and nature. As a kind of special ecological habitat, urban wetland parks provide convenience to enhance education on the natural environment. (2) In this study, we chose Harbin Qunli National Wetland Park in China as the subject, and analyzed the visual attention area with eye tracking to explore the differences in obtaining information about the natural environment in tourists with varying degrees of environmental concern and purposes of visit. A model connecting the perception preference and factors that affect visual attention of tourists was constructed. (3) Studies have shown that eco-society-hedonic tourists, who focus on parent–child activities, tend to pay more attention to wetland plants and prefer exploratory paths, while eco-hedonic tourists, whose main purposes are to relax and exercise, are more concerned about explanatory signs and enjoy flat scenic paths more. In addition, social tourists, who pay their visit for social activities, would care more about bird watching structures. (4) This research aims to assist in improving the legibility of environmental education space through the planning, design, and management of urban wetland parks, and explore the potential of landscape elements in enhancing public awareness.

Suggested Citation

  • Xun Zhu & Yaqian Zhang & Wei Zhao, 2020. "Differences in Environmental Information Acquisition from Urban Green—A Case Study of Qunli National Wetland Park in Harbin, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-13, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:19:p:8128-:d:422809
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/19/8128/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/19/8128/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thiele, Julia & Albert, Christian & Hermes, Johannes & von Haaren, Christina, 2020. "Assessing and quantifying offered cultural ecosystem services of German river landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    2. Hutcheson, Walter & Hoagland, Porter & Jin, Di, 2018. "Valuing environmental education as a cultural ecosystem service at Hudson River Park," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 387-394.
    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. Ruochen Ma & Yuxin Luo & Katsunori Furuya, 2023. "Gender Differences and Optimizing Women’s Experiences: An Exploratory Study of Visual Behavior While Viewing Urban Park Landscapes in Tokyo, Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-14, February.

    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. Li-Pei Peng & Wei-Ming Wang, 2020. "Hybrid Decision-Making Evaluation for Future Scenarios of Cultural Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-20, August.
    2. Mārcis Saklaurs & Agnese Anta Liepiņa & Didzis Elferts & Āris Jansons, 2022. "Social Perception of Riparian Forests," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-12, July.
    3. Yuqian Li & Wei-Ling Hsu & Yuwen Zhang, 2022. "Evaluation Study on the Ecosystem Governance of Industry–Education Integration Platform in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-15, October.
    4. Richter, Franziska & Jan, Pierrick & El Benni, Nadja & Lüscher, Andreas & Buchmann, Nina & Klaus, Valentin H., 2021. "A guide to assess and value ecosystem services of grasslands," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    5. Wei Jiang & Rainer Marggraf, 2021. "Ecosystems in Books: Evaluating the Inspirational Service of the Weser River in Germany," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, June.
    6. Jiake Shen & Yuncai Wang & Xiaolu Guo, 2021. "Identifying and Setting Linear Water Space Priorities in Co-Urbanized Area Based on Multiple Levels and Multiple Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-27, July.
    7. Bin Fu & Naiwen Li, 2019. "Tradeoff between Hydropower and River Visual Landscape Services in Mountainous Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-20, October.
    8. Liangjian Yang & Kaijun Cao, 2022. "Cultural Ecosystem Services Research Progress and Future Prospects: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, September.
    9. Dengyue Zhao & Mingzhu Xiao & Chunbo Huang & Yuan Liang & Ziyue An, 2021. "Landscape Dynamics Improved Recreation Service of the Three Gorges Reservoir Area, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-16, August.

    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:12:y:2020:i:19:p:8128-:d:422809. 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.