Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ethnic Differences in Satisfaction with the Attractiveness of Tropical Urban Parks

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Sustainable Future for Human Security

Abstract

Urban park area is a potential resource for urban populations to experience nature in cities, including tropical cities. Differences in interests among people of different ethnicities have been debated in tropical multi-ethnic countries during the early stages of outdoor recreation research. However, the extent to which ethnicity is related to satisfaction with components of urban park environments remains unclear. In this study, we investigated the satisfaction of different ethnic groups with natural components of tropical urban parks. A total of 2110 respondents from three main ethnic groups (Malay, Chinese, and Indian) were surveyed based on non-probability convenience sampling at six major urban parks in Peninsular Malaysia. Our results showed that park features and several environmental factors affected their satisfaction with the urban parks. All ethnic groups in the urban parks shared a common pattern of park use. However, there were significant differences in the effects of natural landscapes on visitor satisfaction. The necessity of having upgraded facilities in natural landscapes indirectly suggests the importance of balancing nature conservation with green spaces in urban landscape design. This study contributes to the theoretical discussion on green spaces in urban cities and balancing nature conservation with green spaces in urban landscape design.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abdul Aziz NAB (2012) Green space use and management in Malaysia. Forest & Landscape, University of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg. (Forest & Landscape Research; No. 51/2012)

    Google Scholar 

  • Abdul Aziz NAB (2014) Park use for diverse communities – case study in Bintulu Sarawak. Oral presentation at Malaysian urban green space & IFPRA Asia Pacific conference; Parks as melting pots and venues for environmental learning. Penang, 24–28 June

    Google Scholar 

  • Abdul Malek N, Mariapan M (2009) Visitor’s perception on vandalism and safety issues in a Malaysian urban park. Theor Empir Res Urban Manag 4(13):97–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Bedimo-Rung AL, Mowen AJ, Cohen DA et al (2005) Am J Prev Med 28(2S2):159–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruton CM, Floyd MF (2014) Disparities in built and natural features of urban parks: comparisons by neighborhood level race/ethnicity and income. J Urban Health 91:894–907

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess J, Harrison CM, Limb M (1988) People, parks and the urban green: a study of popular meanings and values for open spaces in the city. Urban Stud 25:455–473

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiesura A (2004) The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landsc Urban Plan 68:129–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dallimer M, Davies ZG, Irvine KN, Maltby LL, Warren PH, Gaston KJ, Armsworth PR (2014) What personal and environmental factors determine frequency of urban greenspace use? Int J Environ Res Public Health 11:7977–7992

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flocks J, Escobedo F, Wade J, Varela S, Wald C (2011) Environmental justice implications of urban tree cover in Miami-dade county, Florida. Environ Justice 4:125–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giles-Corti B (2006) People or places: what should be the target? J Sci Med Sport 9:357–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giles-Corti B, Broomhall MH, Knuiman M, Collins C, Douglas K, Ng K, Lange A, Donovan RJ (2005) Increasing walking. How important is distance to, attractiveness, and size of public green space? Am J Prev Med 28(2S2):169–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gobster P (2002) Managing urban parks for a racially and ethnically diverse clientele. Leis Sci 24:143–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herzele AV, Wiedemann T (2003) A monitoring tool for the provision of accessible and attractive urban green spaces. Landsc Urban Plan 63:109–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Home R, Hunziker M, Bauer N (2012) Psychosocial outcomes as motivations for visiting nearby urban green spaces. Leis Sci 34(4):350–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoots TA, Buist LJ (1982) Recreation opportunity spectrum: a new management concept. Trends 17:28–31

    Google Scholar 

  • Jim CY, Chen WY (2006) Recreation-amenity use and contingent valuation of urban greenspaces in Guangzhou, China. Landsc Urban Plan 75:81–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jim CY, Shan X-Z (2013) Socioeconomic effect on perception of urban green spaces in Guangzhou, China. Cities 31:123–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jorgenson A, Hitchmough J, Calvert T (2002) Woodland spaces and adges: their impact on perception of safety and preference. Landsc Urban Plan 60:135–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaczynski A, Henderson K (2007) Environmental correlates of physical activity: a review of evidence about parks and recreation. Leis Sci 29(4):315–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamel AA, Ford PB, Kaczynski AT (2014) Disparities in park availability, features, and characteristics by social determinants of health within a U.S.-Mexico border urban area. Prev Med 69(Suppl 1):S111–S113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan S (1995) The restorative benefits of nature: toward and integrative framework. J Environ Psychol 15:169–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan R, Herbert EJ (1987) Cultural and sub-cultural comparisons in preferences for natural settings. Landsc Urban Plan 14:281–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan S, Kaplan R (1989) The experience of nature. A psychological perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 340

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan R, Talbot J (1988) Ethnicity and preference for natural settings: a review and recent findings. Landsc Urban Plan 15:107–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kweon B, Sullivan WC, Wiley AR (1998) Green common spaces and the social integration of inner city older adults. Environ Behav 20:832–858

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee J-H, Scott D, Moore RL (2002) Predicting motivations and attitudes of users of a multi-use suburban trail. J Park Recreat Adm 20(3):18–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Matsuoka RH, Kaplan R (2008) People needs in the urban landscape: analysis of landscape and urban planning contributions. Landsc Urban Plan 84(1):7–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazlina M, Ismail S, Ismail M (2012) Experiential contacts with green infrastructure’s diversity and well-being of urban community. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 49:257–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCormack GR, Rock M, Toohey AM, Hignell D (2010) Characteristics of urban parks associated with park use and physical activity: a review of qualitative research. Health Place 16(4):712–726

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohamed N, Othman N (2012) Push and pull factor: determining the visitors’ satisfaction at urban recreational area. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 49:175–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mustafa, KMSA (1994) Cross-cultural comparison of visual landscape preferences for the natural environment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Colorado State University

    Google Scholar 

  • Nasution DA, Zahrah W (2012) Public open space privatization and quality of life, case study Merdeka Square Medan. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 36:466–475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oku H, Fukamachi K (2006) The differences in scenic perception of forest visitors through their attributes and recreational activity. Landsc Urban Plan 75:34–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orsega-Smith E, Mowen AJ, Payne LL, Godbey G (2004) The interaction of stress and park use on psycho-physiological health in older adults. J Leis Res 36(2):232–256

    Google Scholar 

  • Özgüner H (2011) Cultural Differences in Attitudes towards Urban Parks and Green Spaces. Landsc Res 36(5):599–620

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Özgüner H, Kendle AD (2006) Public attitudes towards naturalistic versus designed landscapes in the city of Sheffield (UK). Landsc Urban Plan 74:139–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne LL, Mowen AJ, Orsega-Smith E (2002) An examination of park preferences and behaviors among urban residents: the role of residential location, race and age. Leis Sci 24(2):181–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters K (2010) Being together in urban parks: connecting public space, leisure and diversity. Leis Sci 32:418–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters K, Elands B, Buijs A (2011) Social interactions in urban parks: stimulating social cohesion? Urban For Urban Green 9:93–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schipperijn J, Ekholm O, Stigsdotter UK, Toftager M, Bentsen P, Kamper-Jørgensen F et al (2010) Factors influencing the use of green space: results from a Danish national representative survey. Landsc Urban Plan 95(3):–130, 137

    Google Scholar 

  • Suminski RR, Connolly EK, May LE, Wasserman J, Olvera N, Lee RE (2012) Park quality in racial/ethnic minority neighborhoods. Environ Justice 5:271–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talbot JF, Kaplan R (1984) Needs and fears: the response to trees and nature in the inner city. J Arboric 10:222–228

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson CW (2002) Urban open space in the 21st century. Landsc Urban Plan 60:59–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Todorova A, Asakawa S, Aikoh T (2004) Preferences for and attitudes towards street flowers and trees in Sapporo, Japan. Landsc Urban Plan 69:403–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vagias WM (2006) Likert-type scale response anchors. Clemson International Institute for Tourism and Research Development, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management. Clemson University

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughan KB, Kaczynski AT, Stanis SAW, Besenyi GM, Bergstrom R, Heinrich KM (2013) Exploring the distribution of park availability, features, and quality across Kansas City, Missouri by income and race/ethnicity: An environmental justice investigation. Ann Behav Med 45(Suppl 1):S28–S38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geography_of_Malaysia

  • Wolch J, Wilson JP, Fehrenbach J (2005) Parks and park funding in Los Angeles: an equity-mapping analysis. Urban Geogr 26:4–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woolley H (2003) Urban open spaces. Spon Press, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author wish to thank Kuala Lumpur City Hall, Shah Alam City Council, Municipal Council of Penang Island, Kuantan City Council, Taiping City Council, and Johor Bahru City Council for their kind collaboration and assistance. Appreciation to the trained enumerators for their assistance during fieldwork and numerous anonymous individuals who participated in the survey. Financial support has been received from the Malaysian Government under Tenth Malaysian Plan (RMK10) budget.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Tourism Science, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo, Japan

    Huda Farhana Mohamad Muslim, Shinya Numata & Tetsuro Hosaka

  2. Forest Research Institute Malaysia, FRIM, Kepong, Malaysia

    Huda Farhana Mohamad Muslim & Noor Azlin Yahya

Authors
  1. Huda Farhana Mohamad Muslim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Noor Azlin Yahya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shinya Numata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tetsuro Hosaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Huda Farhana Mohamad Muslim .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Energy Science, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan

    Benjamin McLellan

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mohamad Muslim, H.F., Yahya, N.A., Numata, S., Hosaka, T. (2018). Ethnic Differences in Satisfaction with the Attractiveness of Tropical Urban Parks. In: McLellan, B. (eds) Sustainable Future for Human Security. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5433-4_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation