IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i12p5581-d1681186.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Spatial Perception Differences in Mountain City Park for Youth Experience: A Case Study of Parks in Yuzhong District, Chongqing

Author

Listed:
  • Cong Gong

    (Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China
    Key Laboratory of New Technology for Construction of Cities in Mountain Area, Ministry of Education, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China)

  • Xinyu Yang

    (Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China)

  • Changjuan Hu

    (Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China
    Key Laboratory of New Technology for Construction of Cities in Mountain Area, Ministry of Education, Chongqing University, Chongqing 400045, China)

  • Xiaoming Gao

    (School of Architecture and Urban Planning, Shandong Jianzhu University, Jinan 250101, China)

Abstract

Traditional park designs no longer meet the diverse needs of young users amid rising visitor numbers and environmental challenges. Exploring the impact of mountain city parks on youth is crucial, yet localised studies on their spatial perceptions in such unique environments are lacking. Landscape design based on spatial perception evaluation offers a promising approach for renewing mountain parks to address these complex needs. Therefore, a pilot study was conducted in Chongqing’s Pipa Mountain and Eling Parks, involving questionnaire surveys and on-site spatial data collection. Using principal component analysis to select the visual and auditory indicators most related to environmental satisfaction in the overall park and various types of gathering spaces, the results showed that the first principal component of the visual environment in the entrance platform and key nodes (r = 0.41, r = 0.45), as well as the first principal component of the auditory environment in the entrance platform, path platform, and elevated points (r = 0.67, r = 0.85, r = 0.68), all showed significant positive correlations with environmental satisfaction ( p < 0.01). Moreover, naturalness and aesthetics were identified as the main factors influencing environmental satisfaction. A random forest model analysed nonlinear relationships, ranking spatial factors by importance. Simultaneously, SHAP analysis highlighted the effects of key factors like elevation changes, green view index, colour diversity, and natural elements. Elevation changes were positively correlated with satisfaction at elevated points but showed a negative correlation in the overall park environment and other gathering spaces. This study explored space-perception dynamics in mountain city parks, proposing strategies to improve environmental quality in various gathering spaces and the park. These findings support creating liveable mountainous environments and guide “human-centred health,” quality enhancement, and sustainable development in renewing mountain city parks.

Suggested Citation

  • Cong Gong & Xinyu Yang & Changjuan Hu & Xiaoming Gao, 2025. "Spatial Perception Differences in Mountain City Park for Youth Experience: A Case Study of Parks in Yuzhong District, Chongqing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-22, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:12:p:5581-:d:1681186
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/12/5581/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/12/5581/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daixin Dai & Mingyang Bo & Youmei Zhou, 2022. "How Do the Young Perceive Urban Parks? A Study on Young Adults’ Landscape Preferences and Health Benefits in Urban Parks Based on the Landscape Perception Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-25, November.
    2. Rosario Padial-Ruz & Mª Esther Puga-González & Álvaro Céspedes-Jiménez & David Cabello-Manrique, 2021. "Determining Factors in the Use of Urban Parks That Influence the Practice of Physical Activity in Children: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-23, March.
    3. Yanlong Guo & Ke Wang & Han Zhang & Zuoqing Jiang, 2022. "Soundscape Perception Preference in an Urban Forest Park: Evidence from Moon Island Forest Park in Lu’an City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Fan Zhang & Xiumin Sun & Chang Liu & Bing Qiu, 2024. "Effects of Urban Landmark Landscapes on Residents’ Place Identity: The Moderating Role of Residence Duration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-20, January.
    5. Tongfei Jin & Jiayi Lu & Yuhan Shao, 2024. "Exploring the Impact of Visual and Aural Elements in Urban Parks on Human Behavior and Emotional Responses," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-21, September.
    6. Xin Cheng & Sylvie Van Damme & Pieter Uyttenhove, 2022. "Assessing the Impact of Park Renovations on Cultural Ecosystem Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-18, April.
    7. Angeliki Paraskevopoulou & Andreas Klados & Chrysovalantis Malesios, 2020. "Historical Public Parks: Investigating Contemporary Visitor Needs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-27, November.
    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. Chunyan Zhu & Jingzhu Li & Jinming Luo & Xi Li & Tianhui Li & Wei Wang & Shanshan Fu & Weizhen Zeng, 2024. "An Investigation of the Restorative Benefits of Different Spaces in an Urban Riverside Greenway for College Students—A Simple Autumn Outdoor Experiment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-21, September.
    2. Xi Lu & Jiamin Xu & Eckart Lange & Jingwen Cao, 2025. "Which Factors Enhance the Perceived Restorativeness of Streetscapes: Sound, Vision, or Their Combined Effects? Insights from Four Street Types in Nanjing, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-21, April.
    3. Yanlong Guo & Xingmeng Ma & Yelin Zhu & Denghang Chen & Han Zhang, 2023. "Research on Driving Factors of Forest Ecological Security: Evidence from 12 Provincial Administrative Regions in Western China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-21, March.
    4. Ilona Zourková & Lenka Hromková & Jiří Schneider & Jitka Fialová, 2024. "Identification and Evaluation of Cultural Ecosystem Service Resources in the Territory of the Local Action Group Lednice–Valtice Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-29, December.
    5. Yunan Lin & Hongpeng Fu & Qikang Zhong & Zitu Zuo & Sihong Chen & Ziqiang He & Hao Zhang, 2024. "The Influencing Mechanism of the Communities’ Built Environment on Residents’ Subjective Well-Being: A Case Study of Beijing," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-21, June.
    6. Cristina Ayala-Azcarraga & Daniel Diaz & Tania Fernandez & Fernando Cordova-Tapia & Luis Zambrano, 2023. "Uneven Distribution of Urban Green Spaces in Relation to Marginalization in Mexico City," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-14, August.
    7. Abdullah Al Mamun & Marvello Yang & Naeem Hayat & Jingzu Gao & Qing Yang, 2025. "The nexus of environmental values, beliefs, norms and green consumption intention," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, December.
    8. Nuan Han & Roziya Binti Ibrahim & Mohd Sallehuddin Bin Mat Noor, 2025. "Assessing Cultural Ecosystem Services in Sponge City Infrastructure: A Systematic Review and Framework Proposal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-23, June.
    9. Titus Bazac & Sorin Marin & Cosmin Olteanu & Anca Hotoi, 2023. "Sustainable Management Decisions for Urban Historical Parks: A Case Study Based on Online Referential Values of Carol I Park in Bucharest, Romania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-26, October.
    10. Ziyi Li & Xiaolu Wu & Jing Wu & Huihui Liu, 2025. "The Influence of Urban Landscape Ecology on Emotional Well-Being: A Case Study of Downtown Beijing," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-27, March.
    11. Thapa, Manish & Jebin, Sharmin & Ababil, Saify, 2024. "Exploring the Resilience of Urban Green Infrastructure: A Comparative Assessment of Resilience in Bangkok Metro Forest Project and The National Garden, Athens," MPRA Paper 122419, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 24 Jul 2024.
    12. Nacho Sánchez-Valdivia & Carmen Pérez-del-Pulgar & Jeroen de Bont & Isabelle Anguelovski & Antonio López-Gay & Andrea Pistillo & Margarita Triguero-Mas & Talita Duarte-Salles, 2022. "Residential Proximity to Urban Play Spaces and Childhood Overweight and Obesity in Barcelona, Spain: A Population-Based Longitudinal Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-16, October.
    13. Liguo Zeng & Chunqing Liu, 2023. "Exploring Factors Affecting Urban Park Use from a Geospatial Perspective: A Big Data Study in Fuzhou, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-21, February.
    14. Yi Ren & Qiusheng Yang, 2023. "Research on the Factors Influencing the Perception of Urban Park Recreational Behavior Based on the “Homo Urbanicus” Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-20, April.
    15. Wenlong Lan & Junyi Li & Jiayi Wang & Yuxin Wang & Zhendong Lei, 2025. "Cultural Diversity Conservation in Historic Districts via Spatial-Gene Perspectives: The Small Wild Goose Pagoda District, Xi’an," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-34, March.
    16. Aida Nosrati & Mahdieh Pazhouhanfar & Chongxian Chen & Patrik Grahn, 2024. "Designing Stress-Relieving Small Inner-City Park Environments for Teenagers," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-24, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:12:p:5581-:d:1681186. 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.