Landscape Aesthetic Value of Waterfront Green Space Based on Space–Psychology–Behavior Dimension: A Case Study along Qiantang River (Hangzhou Section)

Abstract

As an important part of urban green infrastructure, the landscape effect of the urban waterfront green space varies, and sometimes, the green space with an excellent landscape aesthetic value fails to serve the needs of most citizens. This seriously affects the construction of a green ecological civilization and the implementation of the concept of “common prosperity” in China. Based on multi-source data, this study took the Qiantang River Basin as an example, selected 12 representative waterfront green spaces along the river as the research objects, and used qualitative and quantitative analysis methods to determine the landscape aesthetic value of the research area from the different dimensions of space, psychology, and physiology. We examined the relationship between each dimension so as to objectively and comprehensively reflect the landscape value characteristics of the waterfront green space in the study area and provide a reasonable theoretical framework and practical development path for future urban waterfront green space landscape design. We obtained the following results: (1) The results of the spatial dimension research indicated that the spatial value index of the waterfront green space in the study area was three-dimensional space > vertical space > horizontal space, and the overall spatial value was low; Qianjiang Ecological Park obtained the highest value (0.5473), and Urban Balcony Park obtained the lowest value (0.4619). (2) The results of the psychological dimension indicated that people’s perceptions of the waterfront green space in the study area were relatively weak, mainly focusing on visual perception, but the waterfront green space with a relative emotional value greater than one accounted for 75%, and the overall recognition of the landscape was high. (3) The results of the behavioral dimension showed that the overall heat of the waterfront green space in the study area was insufficient (1.3719–7.1583), which was mainly concentrated in low-heat levels, and the population density was unevenly distributed (0.0014–0.0663), which was mainly concentrated in the medium-density level. The main purpose of users was to visit, and they stayed an average of 1.5 h. (4) The results of the coupling coordination analysis of the spatial–psychological–behavioral dimensions showed that the landscape value of the waterfront green space in the study area presented a form of ‘high coupling degree and low coordination degree’.

Exploring Factors Influencing Recreational Experiences of Urban River Corridors Based on Social Media Data

“…(2) Duration of stay The majority of findings suggested that visitors' duration of stay along urban river corridors is typically short, approximately one hour [70][71][72][73][74][75][76]. However, this study reveals diverse visitor stay duration.…”

The Usage and Constraints of Urban River Corridor from a Socio-ecological Perspective: a Systematic Review

“…The majority of these studies consistently reported that walking is the predominant mode of transportation for individuals accessing urban river corridors (Gong et al, 2019;Ouyang & Wu,2023;Xie et al, 2023;Zhang et al, 2022;Zhao et al, 2021;Zhou et al, 2022). Other modes of transportation were found, including public transportation, private vehicles, sightseeing buses, and multi-bikes (Liu et al, 2023;Othman et al, 2021;Völker & Kistemann,2013;Zhang et al, 2022b). A study investigating the preferences and attitudes of citizens towards urban riversides revealed that individuals residing farther from the river corridors primarily relied on private vehicles, which may raise concerns regarding traffic connectivity and parking availability (Wang et al, 2020).…”

“…An equal number of studies examine personal motivation as a variable (n=29, 49%). Individuals visit urban riversides primarily for physical exercise, recreation and leisure, including activities such as walking or jogging, cycling, swimming, dancing, skateboarding, rowing, dragon boat racing, water marathons, dog walking, picnicking, dining, photography, social gatherings, commuting, chess, and camping (e.g., Chen & Ma, 2023;Gargiulo et al, 2020;Guo et al, 2022;Gong et al, 2019;Liu et al, 2023;Meng et al 2020;Vierikko & Yli-Pelkonen, 2019;wade et al, 2023;Wu et al, 2019a;Yu et al, 2022;Zhang et al, 2022b;Zingraff-Hamed et al, 2022). Furthermore, two studies also discussed the motivation for restoration (Gargiulo et al, 2020;Jakstis et al, 2023).…”

“…Moreover, 19 studies (32%) specifically examined the duration of visitor stays. The majority of these studies indicated that visitors spend approximately one hour on urban river corridors (Garrett et al, 2019;Liu et al, 2023;Luo et al, 2022;Mansournia et al, 2021;Rakonjac et al, 2022;Vierikko & Yli-Pelkonen, 2019;Wang et al, 2020;Zhang et al, 2022b). Some individuals seeking proximity to the water may invest several hours sitting along the riverbank, observing the water flow (Völker & Kistemann, 2013).…”