IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i10p6216-d819719.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Matters Most for Neighborhood Greenspace Usability and Satisfaction in Riyadh: Size or Distance to Home?

Author

Listed:
  • Tahar Ledraa

    (Urban Planning Department, College of Architecture and Planning, King Saud University, Riyadh 11574, Saudi Arabia)

  • Abdulaziz Aldegheishem

    (Urban Planning Department, College of Architecture and Planning, King Saud University, Riyadh 11574, Saudi Arabia)

Abstract

Much research work has been carried out on larger urban parks. Smaller neighborhood greenspaces have not received as much academic attention, particularly in sprawling large cities of the developing world. This paper examines the frequency of use and user satisfaction with smaller urban greenspaces within the residential neighborhoods of Riyadh metropolitan city, Saudi Arabia. To measure use frequency and satisfaction level differentials among neighborhood residents, gap analysis using paired samples t -test was performed to assess the differences between mean score ratings of expected (pre-use) and experienced (post-use) feelings of user satisfaction with local greenspace features. A five-point Likert scale questionnaire was used to measure user satisfaction. Pearson r correlation coefficient, chi-square test and F-test were also used to examine the relationships between dependent (usability and satisfaction) and independent variables. The findings show that smaller size, close-to-home neighborhood greenspaces in Riyadh fell short of drawing many users or meeting user expectations. Larger local greenspaces however, managed to attract much more users even from relatively far-away neighborhoods. Size rather than closeness to home is a much stronger determinant affecting use frequency and user satisfaction with local neighborhood green spaces. It is therefore recommended to amend the city’s planning codes and regulations that require the provision of local greens based on service or catchment areas of 500–800 m. They should insist instead on the need for a minimum area requirement of such facilities if their usability and user satisfaction are to be enhanced.

Suggested Citation

  • Tahar Ledraa & Abdulaziz Aldegheishem, 2022. "What Matters Most for Neighborhood Greenspace Usability and Satisfaction in Riyadh: Size or Distance to Home?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-13, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:10:p:6216-:d:819719
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/6216/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/6216/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sugiyama, T. & Francis, J. & Middleton, N.J. & Owen, N. & Giles-CortI, B., 2010. "Associations between recreational walking and attractiveness, size, and proximity of neighborhood open spaces," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 100(9), pages 1752-1757.
    2. K M Atikur Rahman & Dunfu Zhang, 2018. "Analyzing the Level of Accessibility of Public Urban Green Spaces to Different Socially Vulnerable Groups of People," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-27, October.
    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. Yueshan Ma & Paul Brindley & Eckart Lange, 2022. "The Influence of Socio-Demographic Factors on Preference and Park Usage in Guangzhou, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-15, August.
    2. Lolwah Binsaedan & Habib M. Alshuwaikhat & Yusuf A. Aina, 2023. "Developing an Urban Computing Framework for Smart and Sustainable Neighborhoods: A Case Study of Alkhaledia in Jizan City, Saudi Arabia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-18, 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. S.M. Labib & Faysal Kabir Shuvo & Matthew H. E. M. Browning & Alessandro Rigolon, 2020. "Noncommunicable Diseases, Park Prescriptions, and Urban Green Space Use Patterns in a Global South Context: The Case of Dhaka, Bangladesh," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-23, May.
    2. Abdullah Addas & Ahmad Maghrabi, 2020. "A Proposed Planning Concept for Public Open Space Provision in Saudi Arabia: A Study of Three Saudi Cities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-36, August.
    3. Justyna Rubaszek & Janusz Gubański & Anna Podolska, 2023. "Do We Need Public Green Spaces Accessibility Standards for the Sustainable Development of Urban Settlements? The Evidence from Wrocław, Poland," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-26, February.
    4. 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.
    5. Abdullah Addas & Ahmad Maghrabi, 2021. "Social Evaluation of Public Open Space Services and Their Impact on Well-Being: A Micro-Scale Assessment from a Coastal University," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-19, April.
    6. Zehua Wang & Fachao Liang & Sheng-Hau Lin, 2023. "Can socially sustainable development be achieved through homestead withdrawal? A hybrid multiple-attributes decision analysis," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, December.
    7. Eun Jung Kim & Hyunjung Kim, 2020. "Neighborhood Walkability and Housing Prices: A Correlation Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-18, January.
    8. 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.
    9. Peter Barlow & Sean Lyons & Anne Nolan, 2021. "How Perceived Adequacy of Open Public Space Is Related to Objective Green Space and Individuals’ Opinions of Area-Level Quality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-15, July.
    10. Daniel T. C. Cox & Danielle F. Shanahan & Hannah L. Hudson & Richard A. Fuller & Karen Anderson & Steven Hancock & Kevin J. Gaston, 2017. "Doses of Nearby Nature Simultaneously Associated with Multiple Health Benefits," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-13, February.
    11. 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.
    12. Wenbin Luo & Mingming Su, 2018. "A Spatial-Temporal Analysis of Urban Parkland Expansion in China and Practical Implications to Enhance Urban Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.
    13. Xavier Delclòs-Alió & Oriol Marquet & Guillem Vich & Jasper Schipperijn & Kai Zhang & Monika Maciejewska & Carme Miralles-Guasch, 2019. "Temperature and Rain Moderate the Effect of Neighborhood Walkability on Walking Time for Seniors in Barcelona," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-11, December.
    14. Binyu Liu & Ye Chen & Meng Xiao, 2020. "The Social Utility and Health Benefits for Older Adults of Amenity Buildings in China’s Urban Parks: A Nanjing Case Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-26, October.
    15. Ilija Gubic & Oana Baloi, 2019. "Implementing the New Urban Agenda in Rwanda: Nation-Wide Public Space Initiatives," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(2), pages 223-236.
    16. Yunwon Choi & Heeyeun Yoon, 2020. "Do the Walkability and Urban Leisure Amenities of Neighborhoods Affect the Body Mass Index of Individuals? Based on a Case Study in Seoul, South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(6), pages 1-20, March.
    17. Huiying Li & Dianfeng Liu & Jianhua He, 2022. "Exploring Differentiated Conservation Priorities of Urban Green Space Based on Tradeoffs of Ecological Functions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-14, February.
    18. Kruno Lepoglavec & Olja Papeš & Valentina Lovrić & Andrea Raspudić & Hrvoje Nevečerel, 2023. "Accessibility of Urban Forests and Parks for People with Disabilities in Wheelchairs, Considering the Surface and Longitudinal Slope of the Trails," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-20, May.
    19. Matthew Browning & Kangjae Lee, 2017. "Within What Distance Does “Greenness” Best Predict Physical Health? A Systematic Review of Articles with GIS Buffer Analyses across the Lifespan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-21, June.
    20. Dong-ah Choi & Keunhyun Park & Alessandro Rigolon, 2020. "From XS to XL Urban Nature: Examining Access to Different Types of Green Space Using a ‘Just Sustainabilities’ Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-25, 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:14:y:2022:i:10:p:6216-:d:819719. 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.