Performance Assessment Indicators for Comparing Recreational Services of Urban Parks

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.

Performance evaluation of public open space recreational services based on GIS technology in Dongguan, China

“…Then the entropy value and weight are calculated using Equation [3][4][5]. m represents the number of indicators.…”

Study on landscape evaluation and optimization strategy of Central Park in Qingkou Town

“…As the embodiment of the second level, the three-level index layer mainly includes park construction, infrastructure setting, landscape quality, garden atmosphere, and tourist behavior. Considering the accuracy of comprehensive park evaluation in small towns, the three-level index layer was used to obtain 19 related indexes after expert advice and screening 20 .…”

“…These evaluations will help improve the usability of the parks and find a suitable solutions for outdated park facilities 19 .Taking the Central Park of Qingkou Town, Minhou District, Fuzhou City as an example, this article focuses on how to cost-effectively intervene in the conditions of comprehensive parks in small towns and proposes corresponding optimization suggestions for improving urban green public spaces and park designs. The research refers to LSP and divides park benefits into three categories 20 : environmental performance (such as park planning, infrastructure, healthy trails, and vegetation), health performance (such as cultural education, park activities, and traffic accessibility), and economic performance (such as tourist consumption and stimulating the development of surrounding construction). In addition, other factors are considered that affect the behavior of tourists in the space and the interest in and popularity of the park so that these factors can be adjusted and enhanced to benefit the activities of tourists (such as walking, jogging, and picnics) or improve mental health (such as reducing stress and depression).…”

Assessment of Ecosystem Service Supply, Demand, and Balance of Urban Green Spaces in a Typical Mountainous City: A Case Study on Chongqing, China

“…Temperature regulation is also included because the extreme heat has adverse effects on human health around the world [35], and the problem is even more serious due to the temperature inversion effect in mountainous cities [52]. (3) Cultural services are reflected by the recreation services of green spaces [10,[53][54][55]. Nature-based recreation is an important function of ecosystems since it benefits people in many ways-such as increasing aesthetic experience [56], improving physical and mental health [57], and enhancing social cohesion [58].…”