Abstract
Parks can offer varied services to human well-being, including recreational services (RS); however, there is insufficient understanding of park differences concerning the actual performance of their varied RS. To fill this gap, this study aimed to develop a set of performance indicators as a tool for comparing the functional efficacy of RS among different parks. The indicators covered three aspects of RS: recreational usage of various physical activities, their recreational satisfaction level and the collective performance rating. These indicators were applied in a case study of four parks in Guangzhou, China, based upon on-site observation and a questionnaire survey. The functional difference of these indicators was compared and the collective indicator was found to be able to effectively capture different efficacies of urban parks in supporting varied RS. Results show all the parks were far from reaching the maximum performance of designed RS, so it is worthy of consideration by urban managers to further improve their RS efficacy. In addition, the overall spatial design and configuration were inferred to be essential for improving the RS efficacy of urban parks, but not park size nor ornamental vegetation. The findings offered valuable evidence for the optimal spatial design and management of urban parks.
Highlights
Urban parks can supply a wide range of ecosystem services [1], including recreational services (RS), which are essential among cultural ecosystem services [2,3,4]
Abundant evidence has shown that park-based physical activities provide people substantial mental and physical health benefits, like stress reduction, attentional improvement and chronic disease prevention [6,7,8,9], which are paramount to public health, so urban parks play a vital role in creating the eco-liveable city [10,11]
Liuhuahu Park had the most types of recreational activity, with x = 12 types, followed by Tianhe Park and Renmin Park, with x = 10 types and Zhujiang Park had the least types of recreational activity, with x = 9 types
Summary
Urban parks can supply a wide range of ecosystem services [1], including recreational services (RS), which are essential among cultural ecosystem services [2,3,4]. Abundant evidence has shown that park-based physical activities provide people substantial mental and physical health benefits, like stress reduction, attentional improvement and chronic disease prevention [6,7,8,9], which are paramount to public health, so urban parks play a vital role in creating the eco-liveable city [10,11]. In urban planning and management, the number, area and spatial distribution of parks are common indicators to evaluate the service levels of urban parks [12,13,14]. Parkland area per capita, parkland service radius coverage and comprehensive park index per 10,000 people are important assessment indicators for National Garden. High-quality parks with good landscape settings and recreational functions can encourage a variety of users to walk, play and socialise [18,21,22]; a few built parks, even well-sited
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International journal of environmental research and public health
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
