4.7 Article

Quantity or quality? Exploring the association between public open space and mental health in urban China

期刊

LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING
卷 213, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104128

关键词

Public open space; Quality; Mental health; POST; Zhuhai; China

资金

  1. Social Science Foundation of China [18ZDA082]
  2. Developing and Guiding Fund for Building Worldclass Universities (Disciplines) of Renmin University of China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examined the association between both the quantity and quality attributes of Public Open Spaces (POS) and residents' mental health in urban China through a survey in Zhuhai. The findings suggest that POS quality, particularly activity and environmental attributes, are significantly associated with better mental health outcomes, highlighting the importance of considering POS quality in urban planning for promoting mental wellbeing.
Public open space (POS) is a component of the urban built environment that is considered crucial for people's mental health. Most studies, however, have focused on the quantity of POS, and those investigating the association between POS quality and mental health are limited. Through a 2018 survey of 590 residents and 160 POSs in Zhuhai, this study explored the association between both the quantity and quality attributes of POS and residents' mental health in urban China. We employed an audit tool (POST) to measure POS quality and decomposed it into four attributes: activity, environmental quality, amenities, and safety. The statistical analyses suggest that POS quality is important for positive mental wellbeing, while, among the four attributes, activity and environment attributes are significantly associated with better mental health. The findings not only shed light on the potential mechanism of POS' impact on mental health, but also help urban planners and policymakers develop an evidence-based approach to healthy cities.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据