| Literature DB >> 33182455 |
Shunwei Ji1, Renfeng Ma1,2,3, Liyan Ren1,2, Caijuan Wang1.
Abstract
Nature-based recreation in urban areas is essential for the well-being of citizens. Park green space (PGS) is a necessary urban infrastructure and a critical step of urban planning and policy-making. The existing research on PGS only focuses on service allocation problems existing in the current urban development, ignoring changes in residential communities accessibility. This research provides new ideas to evaluate PGS. Based on parks and residential communities' data, we adopt an improved Gaussian-based two-step floating catchment area (2SFCA) method to evaluate PGS accessibility in Ningbo (China) and its matching with different levels of residential areas. We present a case study in Ningbo, and discuss its implications for PGS management. This study contains two elements: (a) Compare the current and initial PGS accessibility of each community to accurately identify the communities with PGS vacancies. (b) Analyze and discuss the association between community accessibility and residential house prices. Compare the PGS coverage ratios of communities at different levels to determine the equity of PGS planning in Ningbo. We found that the level of PGS allocation in the central area of Ningbo is high. Obviously, high-value clusters are formed in Sanjiangkou, Zhenhai New Town, Southern and Eastern Yinzhou. The accessibility level in the middle area of Yinzhou is low, and there are super high accessibility residential communities in the outer city area. There is an exact period of green space vacancy in the middle and the outer area. The residential areas with ultra-high accessibility did not configure PGS services at the beginning of their construction. There is no noticeable difference in PGS accessibility of residential communities of different levels at present, but 149 low- and middle-income residential communities lack green space service when the construction was completed. High-end residential communities have priority on enjoying park green space services. Our study suggests that PGS accessibility should be studied temporally and spatially for each residential community. The Ningbo government should strengthen the balanced construction of green space in parks and guarantee green space services for low-end residential communities to improve green space equity.Entities:
Keywords: Ningbo; accessibility; green space allocation; park green space; residential area; spatiotemporal matching
Year: 2020 PMID: 33182455 PMCID: PMC7665149 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17218282
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Overview of the study area.
Figure 2Park type (a) and residential community population distribution (b) in Ningbo.
Park level and service supply radius.
| Type | Green Area/hm2 | Service Radius/m |
|---|---|---|
| Comprehensive park | ≥0.5 | 5000 |
|
| 3000 | |
|
| 2000 | |
| Community park |
| 1200 |
|
| 800 | |
| Recreational garden | ≥0.5 | 500 |
|
| 300 |
According to China’s “Standard of Urban Green Space Classification”.
Figure 3The population density of the residential community in the center of Ningbo.
Figure 4Technology flowchart.
Figure 5The Gaussian-based two-step floating catchment area (2SFCA) method.
Figure 6The current accessibility of PGS in Ningbo downtown area.
Figure 7The initial accessibility of residential community.
Figure 8The distribution of unserved communities.
Number and percentage of unserved communities.
| Inner Area | Middle Area | Outer Area | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unserved communities | 11 | 113 | 57 |
| Percentage | 2.07% | 18.61% | 29.53% |
Accessibility for residents of various houses.
| Year of Construction | >1998 | ≤1998 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Residential Community Level | First | Second | Third | Fourth | Fifth | Unit Communities |
| Price (¥/m2) | 48587–114240 | 32811–48586 | 25053–32810 | 18126–25052 | 7244–18125 | |
| Resident attributes | High | Mid to high | Medium | Mid to low | Low | |
| Current accessibility | 10.292574 | 9.008513 | 11.430455 | 13.258195 | 10.863257 | 15.878173 |
| Initial accessibility | 9.528793 | 7.879245 | 8.07011 | 8.496531 | 7.479777 | 10.738079 |
| Unserved communities | 0 | 2 | 44 | 85 | 23 | 27 |
Figure 9Distribution of different level communities and buffer zone.
The proportion of 500 m see gardens in residential communities.
| Community Level | First | Second | Third | Fourth | Fifth | Unit Community |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number | 36 | 251 | 1088 | 728 | 382 | 254 |
| Parks in the buffer | 5 | 48 | 87 | 74 | 54 | 43 |
| Coverage ratio (Cr) | 0.194 | 0.310 | 0.406 | 0.351 | 0.196 | 0.543 |