IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i3p2790-d1056920.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research on Public Space Micro-Renewal Strategy of Historical and Cultural Blocks in Sanhe Ancient Town under Perception Quantification

Author

Listed:
  • Wenqing Ding

    (College of Forestry and Landscape Architecture, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei 230036, China)

  • Qinqin Wei

    (College of Forestry and Landscape Architecture, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei 230036, China)

  • Jing Jin

    (College of Forestry and Landscape Architecture, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei 230036, China)

  • Juanjuan Nie

    (College of Forestry and Landscape Architecture, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei 230036, China)

  • Fanfan Zhang

    (College of Forestry and Landscape Architecture, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei 230036, China)

  • Xiaotian Zhou

    (College of Resources and Environment, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei 230036, China)

  • Youhua Ma

    (College of Resources and Environment, Anhui Agricultural University, Hefei 230036, China)

Abstract

The public space environment of historical and cultural blocks is inseparable from human activities, which affects tourists’ behavior and perception activities. Through the evaluation of tourists’ environmental behavior perception, the relationship between spatial characteristics and tourists’ perception is fully considered, which plays an important role in the protection and development of public space in historical and cultural blocks. This paper takes the historical and cultural block of Sanhe Ancient Town in Hefei as the research area, focusing on the public space of the block. Through the analysis of the semantic differential method and eye movement legal quantitative analysis, from the angle of psychological perception and visual perception, we carried out an analysis of the historical and cultural block’s public space, and built the double sense of a comprehensive evaluation system of parsing the historical and cultural blocks with the whole situation of public space and the rule of the performance. The results show that: (1) the visual perception preference for spatial elements is in the order of architectural structure > green landscape > architectural decoration > commercial activities > participants > pavement > street furniture > others. (2) There is a significant correlation but not a complete convergence of psychological perception and visual perception. (3) Buildings, structures, and space formats play a key role in creating a sense of space scale, with the former playing a positive role and the latter a negative role. (4) The visual attraction of a green landscape is strong and can improve the visual quality of space. The research found that there are evaluation differences between the visual perception and psychological perception of spatial elements, which are significantly correlated but not fully convergent. Through quantitative analysis and the interpretation of tourists’ perception from different perspectives, we can take relevant improvement and optimization measures for many deficiencies of public space in historical and cultural districts.

Suggested Citation

  • Wenqing Ding & Qinqin Wei & Jing Jin & Juanjuan Nie & Fanfan Zhang & Xiaotian Zhou & Youhua Ma, 2023. "Research on Public Space Micro-Renewal Strategy of Historical and Cultural Blocks in Sanhe Ancient Town under Perception Quantification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-17, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:3:p:2790-:d:1056920
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/3/2790/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/3/2790/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fang Zhang & Qi Liu & Xi Zhou, 2022. "Vitality Evaluation of Public Spaces in Historical and Cultural Blocks Based on Multi-Source Data, a Case Study of Suzhou Changmen," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-25, October.
    2. Robert B. Noland & Marc D. Weiner & Dong Gao & Michael P. Cook & Anton Nelessen, 2017. "Eye-tracking technology, visual preference surveys, and urban design: preliminary evidence of an effective methodology," Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(1), pages 98-110, January.
    3. Helena Nordh & Caroline M. Hagerhall & Kenneth Holmqvist, 2013. "Tracking Restorative Components: Patterns in Eye Movements as a Consequence of a Restorative Rating Task," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(1), pages 101-116, 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. Yu Wu & Zhixiong Zhuo & Qunyue Liu & Kunyong Yu & Qitang Huang & Jian Liu, 2021. "The Relationships between Perceived Design Intensity, Preference, Restorativeness and Eye Movements in Designed Urban Green Space," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-16, October.
    2. Nawaf Saeed Al Mushayt & Francesca Dal Cin & Sérgio Barreiros Proença, 2021. "New Lens to Reveal the Street Interface. A Morphological-Visual Perception Methodological Contribution for Decoding the Public/Private Edge of Arterial Streets," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-21, October.
    3. Suling Guo & Wei Sun & Wen Chen & Jianxin Zhang & Peixue Liu, 2021. "Impact of Artificial Elements on Mountain Landscape Perception: An Eye-Tracking Study," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-18, October.
    4. Ruoshi Zhang & Weiyue Duan & Zhikai Zheng, 2024. "Multimodal Quantitative Research on the Emotional Attachment Characteristics between People and the Built Environment Based on the Immersive VR Eye-Tracking Experiment," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-27, January.
    5. Brzoska, P. & Grunewald, K. & Bastian, O., 2021. "A multi-criteria analytical method to assess ecosystem services at urban site level, exemplified by two German city districts," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    6. Chang Li & Yu Yuan & Changan Sun & Minkai Sun, 2022. "The Perceived Restorative Quality of Viewing Various Types of Urban and Rural Scenes: Based on Psychological and Physiological Responses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-21, March.
    7. Tingting Su & Kaiping Wang & Shuangshuang Li & Xinyan Wang & Huan Li & Huanru Ding & Yanfei Chen & Chenhui Liu & Min Liu & Yunlu Zhang, 2022. "Analysis and Optimization of Landscape Preference Characteristics of Rural Public Space Based on Eye-Tracking Technology: The Case of Huangshandian Village, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-25, December.
    8. Pinyue Ouyang & Xiaowen Wu, 2023. "Analysis and Evaluation of the Service Capacity of a Waterfront Public Space Using Point-of-Interest Data Combined with Questionnaire Surveys," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-19, July.
    9. James Simpson & Kevin Thwaites & Megan Freeth, 2019. "Understanding Visual Engagement with Urban Street Edges along Non-Pedestrianised and Pedestrianised Streets Using Mobile Eye-Tracking," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-17, August.
    10. Youngeun Kang & Eujin Julia Kim, 2019. "Differences of Restorative Effects While Viewing Urban Landscapes and Green Landscapes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-19, April.
    11. Xiaohuan Xie & Hanzhi Zhou & Zhonghua Gou & Ming Yi, 2021. "Spatiotemporal Patterns of the Use of Green Space by White-Collar Workers in Chinese Cities: A Study in Shenzhen," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-25, September.
    12. Mengyun Wu & Yu Gao & Zhi Zhang & Bo Zhang & Huan Meng & Weikang Zhang & Tong Zhang, 2023. "How Do Repeated Viewings in Forest Landscapes Influence Young People’s Visual Behaviors and Cognitive Evaluations?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(6), pages 1-25, March.
    13. Yangyang Shi & Jiao Zhang & Xinyue Shen & Liang Chen & Yunchen Xu & Rui Fu & Yang Su & Yiping Xia, 2022. "Designing Perennial Landscapes: Plant Form and Species Richness Influence the Gaze Perception Associated with Aesthetic Preference," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-17, October.
    14. Chang Li & Xiaohui Huang, 2022. "Differences in Visual Attraction between Historical Garden and Urban Park Walking Scenes," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, October.
    15. Anciaes, Paulo & Jones, Peter, 2020. "Transport policy for liveability – Valuing the impacts on movement, place, and society," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 157-173.
    16. Xuan Zhang & Haoying Han & Lin Qiao & Jingwei Zhuang & Ziming Ren & Yang Su & Yiping Xia, 2022. "Emotional-Health-Oriented Urban Design: A Novel Collaborative Deep Learning Framework for Real-Time Landscape Assessment by Integrating Facial Expression Recognition and Pixel-Level Semantic Segmentat," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-20, October.
    17. Peng Wang & Wenjuan Yang & Dengju Wang & Youjun He, 2021. "Insights into Public Visual Behaviors through Eye-Tracking Tests: A Study Based on National Park System Pilot Area Landscapes," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-19, May.

    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:15:y:2023:i:3:p:2790-:d:1056920. 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.