| Literature DB >> 35719869 |
Cihan Erdönmez1, Erdoğan Atmiş2.
Abstract
With the advent of effects of the Covid-19 pandemic spreading far and wide throughout many countries in the world, both similar and differing measures are being taken in an effort to manage and curtail them. In addition to weekend lockdowns and closures of café's and public meeting places throughout Turkey in the early stages of the pandemic, public coasts and urban green spaces (UGS's) were also closed in order to maintain social distancing. The aim of the current study is to reveal the opinions of UGS users regarding the measures taken in general against the pandemic, and the measure of closing the coasts and UGS's for use. For this purpose, the distribution of a questionnaire to 239 UGS users was coordinated. The results indicate that people do not support both pandemic measures in general, and the measure of closing the coasts and UGS's for use. According to the findings based on the opinions of the survey participants, the Covid-19 pandemic has caused more psychological problems than physical problems. UGS's are very important in aiding the elimination of some of the negative effects the pandemic has helped create, as well as the effects of the measures taken in general against it. Covid-19 restrictions have given rise to the need to redesign UGS's, and the lessons learned from the pandemic and usage habits must be taken into account in new designs.Entities:
Keywords: Coastal areas; Istanbul; Lockdown; UGS; Urban forestry
Year: 2021 PMID: 35719869 PMCID: PMC9188747 DOI: 10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127295
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Urban For Urban Green ISSN: 1610-8167
Fig. 1Announcement by Bartın Governorship regarding the closure of greenspaces.
Fig. 2Greenspaces where questionnaires were conducted.
Fig. 3Views from greespaces where questionnaries were conducted.
Socio-cultural characteristics of the respondents by UGS’s.
| Moda Coast (%) NQ = 49 | Yoğurtçu Park (%) NQ = 71 | Kalamış Atatürk Park (%) NQ = 68 | Fenerbahçe Park (%) NQ = 51 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AGE | 18−25 | 31 | 14 | 31 | 8 |
| 26−35 | 31 | 32 | 8 | 20 | |
| 36−45 | 14 | 18 | 8 | 27 | |
| 46−55 | 6 | 13 | 9 | 10 | |
| 56−65 | 12 | 10 | 12 | 8 | |
| 65+ | 6 | 13 | 19 | 27 | |
| EDUCATION | Middle school or lower | 6 | 13 | 21 | 8 |
| High school | 8 | 23 | 21 | 27 | |
| Associate degree-Undergraduate | 55 | 46 | 44 | 41 | |
| Postgraduate | 21 | 56 | 6 | 22 | |
| Doctorate | 10 | 13 | 9 | 20 | |
| GENDER | Female | 55 | 50 | 30 | 43 |
| Male | 45 | 50 | 70 | 57 | |
| HOUSEHOLD INCOME (TL) | 4000 or lower | 27 | 16 | 13 | 0 |
| 4000−6000 | 22 | 20 | 30 | 14 | |
| 6000−10000 | 33 | 39 | 39 | 29 | |
| 10000−15000 | 9 | 17 | 9 | 39 | |
| 15,000 or higher | 9 | 8 | 9 | 18 |
NQ: Number of questionnaires.
Distribution of the respondents by demographic characteristics.
| Gender | Frequency | % |
|---|---|---|
| Female | 105 | 44,1 |
| Male | 133 | 55,9 |
| 100,0 |
Some respondents declined to report their income.
UGS users’ thought on pandemic restrictions.
| Question | Completely right | Right, but it was applied more than regquired | Right, but it was applied less than required | Completely wrong | Number of respondents |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| How do you evaluate the general curfew applied in the early stages of the pandemic? | 28,5 | 12,1 | 47,3 | 12,1 | 239 |
| How do you evaluate the curfew for people above the age of 65 applied in the early stages of the pandemic? | 38,5 | 28,5 | 19,7 | 16,3 | 239 |
| How do you evaluate the curfew for people belove the age of 18−20 applied in the early stages of the pandemic? | 33,9 | 24,7 | 19,7 | 16,3 | 239 |
| 33,9 | 24,7 | 23,4 | 18,0 |
One-way analysis of variance results regarding the variables affecting the opinions on measures taken against pandemic.
| Factor | Sum of squares | df | Mean square | F | Sig |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Education level | 24.545 | 4 | 6.136 | 7.774 | 0.000 |
| Professions | 17.428 | 6 | 2.905 | 3.334 | 0.004 |
| Age | 30.294 | 5 | 6.059 | 7.883 | 0.000 |
| Household income | 12.107 | 4 | 3.027 | 3.439 | 0.010 |
| Thoughts on general curfew | 56.682 | 3 | 18.894 | 29.506 | 0.000 |
| Increase in physical disorders due to restrictions | 13.478 | 2 | 6.739 | 8.099 | 0.000 |
| Increase in psychological disorders due to restrictions | 18.457 | 2 | 9.228 | 11.398 | 0.000 |
| Frequency of UGS usage | 14.679 | 4 | 3.670 | 4.399 | 0.002 |
Fig. 4Visit frequency before the first wave of the pandemic.
Fig. 5Change of visit frequency after the first wave of the pandemic.
Change of visit freqeuncy after the first wave of the pandemic according to UGS usage purpose.
| Visit frequency after the first wave of the pandemic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UGS usage purpose | Not changed (%) | Increased (%) | Decreased (%) | Number of respondents |
| Getting fresh air | 47,5 | 32,8 | 19,8 | 177 |
| Being alone | 46,8 | 27,8 | 25,3 | 79 |
| Having a picnic | 69,4 | 21,0 | 9,7 | 62 |
| Doing physical exercise | 58,4 | 36,6 | 5,0 | 101 |
| Taking my kids or grandchildren around in the park | 37,2 | 55,8 | 7,0 | 43 |
| Being with friends and family members | 40,7 | 36,1 | 23,1 | 108 |
| Walking the dog | 50,0 | 36,8 | 13,2 | 38 |
| Breaking away from everyday life | 50,0 | 31,4 | 18,6 | 70 |
| Enjoying nature | 54,5 | 33,6 | 11,9 | 143 |
| Getting to know nature | 50,0 | 33,3 | 16,7 | 30 |
| Lack of better leisure time options | 7,1 | 28,6 | 64,3 | 14 |
Fig. 6Number of respondents' preferences for UGS usage purposes.
Relationship between UGS usage purposes and usage frequency.
| UGS usage frequency | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UGS usage purpose | Everyday or more frequently | Every few days | Once a week | Once a month | Total |
| Getting fresh air | 44 | 77 | 37 | 19 | |
| Being alone | 30 | 27 | 15 | 7 | |
| Having a picnic | 9 | 23 | 26 | 4 | |
| Doing physical exercise | 36 | 47 | 11 | 7 | |
| Taking my kids or grandchildren around in the park | 13 | 25 | 5 | 0 | |
| Being with friends and family members | 25 | 55 | 17 | 11 | |
| Walking the dog | 20 | 18 | 0 | 0 | |
| Breaking away from everyday life | 15 | 25 | 20 | 10 | |
| Enjoying and getting to know nature | 42 | 77 | 38 | 16 | |
| Lack of better leisure time options | 3 | 5 | 1 | 5 | |
The respondents were able to choose more than one UGS usage purpose.
One-way analysis of variance results regarding the variables affecting the opinions on the closure of the coasts and UGS’s.
| Factor | Sum of squares | df | Mean square | F | Sig |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 89.204 | 4 | 22.301 | 7.786 | 0.000 |
| Professions | 65.288 | 6 | 10.881 | 8.874 | 0.000 |
| Frequency of UGS usage | 22.704 | 3 | 7.568 | 5.661 | 0.001 |
| Change of frequency of UGS usage after the pandemic | 34.758 | 2 | 17.379 | 13.575 | 0.000 |
| Increase in physical disorders due to restrictions | 8.630 | 1 | 8.630 | 6.231 | 0.013 |
| Increase in psychological disorders due to restrictions | 23.863 | 1 | 23.863 | 18.067 | 0.000 |
Fig. 7Applicability of social distance in greenspaces after pandemic (Yeniçağ, 2020).