Comprehensive assessment to residents’ perceptions to historic urban center in megacity: a case study of Yuexiu District, Guangzhou, China

Abstract

Understanding residents' perceptions of the urban form can guide efforts to improve the urban milieu. However, existing research on place perception of historic environment has overlooked the social dimension and focused on isolated historic quarters, resulting in "zones of gentrification." Thus, a comprehensive analytical framework to the urban image inquiry of a megacity historic urban center is proposed to address this gap. An online questionnaire is distributed among the residents of the Yuexiu District in Guangzhou, China. The collected data are processed using ArcGIS to create a 3D cognitive map and a 2D affective map. The relationships between environmental features, subjective evaluated qualities, and residents' perceptions are analyzed statistically where applicable. Results show that large natural features and public spaces are the most prominent for residents of a historic urban center, whereas designated historic districts are rarely noticed. In addition, districts are more imageable than landmarks, paths are frequently overlooked, and contextual sizable forms and functions are highly noticeable, different from conventional studies. Evaluations of walking environments, public spaces, and landscapes and green areas by residents are strongly correlated with their affective experiences. With the above findings, implications in improving socially-oriented urban design strategies in historic urban centers are discussed.

Quantitative Research of Street Interface Morphology in Urban Historic Districts:A Case Study of West Street Historic District,Quanzhou

“…In this field, the application of spatial syntax is prevalent, mainly used for analyzing spatial topological structures [34][35][36][37]. Scholars using GIS for Spatial Morphology research are also numerous, focusing on spatial patterns and features [38][39][40][41]. Some scholars use GIS to assess the landscape sensitivity of historical districts, as seen in the works of Fang et al [42] and Yang and Shen [43].…”

A Study on the Perception of Local Characteristics in Cultural Street Vending Spaces, Taking Xi’an Baxian Temple as an Example

“…From the perspective of social relationship networks, scholars have emphasised the importance of adapting the spatial and functional patterns of historic districts to the values and needs of their users [53]. In terms of differentiation from other areas of the city, historic districts reflect a stronger restorativeness in their positive emotional impact on pedestrians [54] as well as a different form of attraction for tourism [55], but the value needs of tourists often do not coincide with those of local residents [56]. In terms of resource integration, historical resource assessment tools [57], the relationship between historical architectural resources and street spaces [58] and cultural landscape resources [59] are also applied to conservation and regeneration tools.…”

Reproduction, cultural symbolism, and online relationship: Constructing city spatial imagery on TikTok

“…Imagery is an effective way of examining what impressions urban space leaves on visitors’ minds, and it is not just a static cognitive image in the mind; it has an impact on residents’ attitudes and behavior ( Hayllar and Griffin, 2005 ; Amore et al, 2020 ), making spatial imagery an important theory and method for studying the subjective perception of urban space. Residents are both influenced and constrained by their surroundings and at the same time use them dynamically, resulting in direct or indirect experiential perceptions of their surroundings, forming a subjective environmental space in their minds ( Pearce, 1999 ; Kitchin and Blades, 2002 ; Shoval, 2018 ; Balomenou and Garrod, 2019 ; Deng et al, 2021 ). Based on this beginning, urban spatial imagery has gradually progressed from basic research on imagery types, constituent elements, influencing factors, and formation mechanisms ( Appleyard, 1970 ; Walmsley and Jenkins, 1992 ; Li and Katsumata, 2020 ) to the study of differences within imagery ( Pacione, 2009 ; Koch and Latham, 2017 ).…”