PARKS AS A PLACE FOR INDIVIDUALS AND SOCIAL INTERACTIONS

For the National Outdoor Recreation Professionals Conference

Dr Christine Vogt

Cybil Kho Wei Ling

PLACE YOUR PHOTO HERE

Our study’s research problem is to quantify the social and health values of park use.

STUDY’S FOCUS

SOCIAL VALUES Demographic composition of

park users, their social interaction with park users,

and place attachment.

HEALTH VALUES Physical activity levels that occur in parks and mental restorative conditions from

park uses.

QUANTIFYING VALUE OF PARK USE

14% of land allocated for parks and

green space

276 mi sq land area

Population of

5.5 million

521 parks and green

spaces

ABOUT SINGAPORE

Greening and tree-planting

NATIONAL PARKS BOARD

1960s 1980s

1990s

Adding flowering species

Greater focus on recreation

Providing parks with different

themes

Parks & Trees Act

Parks and Recreation Department

1975

1996s

BACKGROUND AND METHODS

SITES SELECTION Age of Town & Density of Greenery

BEDOK • Mature towns • Pre-1980s • Park size: 41 ha • Population: 423,000

BISHAN-AMK • Middle-aged towns • 1980s and early 1990s • Park size: 65 ha • Population: 213,000

PUNGGOL WATERWAY • Young towns • Undergoing mass development • Park size: 16 ha • Population: 162,000

BEDOK RESERVOIR PARK

BISHAN-ANG MO KIO PARK

BISHAN-ANG MO KIO PARK

BEFORE AFTER

BISHAN-ANG MO KIO PARK

PUNGGOL WATERWAY PARK

Mental

restoration benefits

Data on greenery measures,

housing, and park features

Independent Variable Maturity of estates which parks are in [Including newly developed or renovated parks]

Social measurements and theories:

social interaction, social motivations,

people’s attachment to place

IN A GLANCE More about this study

Health measurement

tools for observations (SOPARC)

Physical Health

Benefits

Mental Health

Benefits

Social Benefits

Economic Benefits

Environmental Benefits

Physical Activity

within Park

Park Visit

User

Characteristics - Interpersonal - intrapersonal

Park

Characteristics - Structural

Benefits of parks and park

usage

Park use

Correlates of park use/non-use

PARK USER AND ASSOCIATED BENEFITS Bedimo-Rung, Mowen, Cohen (2005)

Mature districts compared to middle and younger districts, have: • Higher perception of greenery level by users • Higher levels of social interactions • Higher level of vigorous physical activity • Higher mental restoration benefits

HYPOTHESES

1,089 completed

surveys

Observations on 3,989 park user groups

A random sampling calendar

COLLECTING AND ANALYSING DATA Methods & Techniques

216 hours of survey and 72 hours of observations [1 completed survey per 5 minutes]

April- June All days of the week

7AM to 8PM

12 times per park, 4 hours of fieldwork each time

COLLECTING DATA Time spent at the Park

Bedok (n=1,353)

33%

Punggol Waterway (n=1,158)

30%

Bishan-AMK (n=1,478)

37%

PARK USE SAMPLE SIZE Total OBSERVATION Sample=3,989

Bedok (n=385),

35%

Bishan-AMK (n=359),

33%

Punggol (n=345),

32%

Recorded 761 Refusals

PARK USE SAMPLE SIZE Total SURVEY Sample=1,089

FINDINGS

Park users validated green cover at the three parks.

Bedok Bishan–AMK

Punggol

Number of mature trees for shade 3.8 3.4 2.9

Presence of aesthetically beautiful trees and plants 3.4 3.6 3.6 Opportunities to see animals (birds, butterflies, squirrels) 2.9 2.8 2.9

Scale: 1=Not many to 5= A lot

PERCEPTION OF ENVIRONMENT

Park Characteristic

3.8 3.4

2.9 3.4

3.6 3.6

2.9 2.8 2.9

Bedok Bishan-AMK Punggol

The playground was found to be the facility where most talking and socializing activity occurred.

Talking and Socializing Activities Observed Bedok Bishan-AMK Punggol

Playground 81% 87% 90%

Gazebo 47% 57% 73%

Bench 37% 43% 51%

Jetty 40% 40% 40%

Trail- Walking 29% 32% 21%

Trail- Cycling 16% 14% 16%

Trail- Jogging 5% 4% 5%

PARK FACILITIES FOR SOCIALIZING

A majority of park users positively responded to smiles; with Punggol Waterway being the friendliest.

FRIENDLINESS IN PARKS Measuring Social Outcomes

18%

19%

21%

16%

26%

19%

66%

55%

60%

Punggol

Bishan

Bedok

Unreachable with Smile Experiment were: 50%, 41%, 37% of respondents from Bedok, Bishan, and Punggol respectively.

PROXIMITY OF RESIDENCE User Characteristic

51% 26% 23%

16%

26% 22%

33% 48% 55%

Bedok Bishan Punggol

Distant districtNearby districtAdjacent

Social Interaction “When you visit this park, do you see other people you know?”

Bedok

Bishan –

AMK

Punggol Waterway

Often 9% 7% 8%

Sometimes 32 35 32

Infrequently 23 23 21

Never 36 36 39

Peters et al. (2010) reported in a study of 3 Dutch urban parks that few interactions occurred, but those that did occur were actively sought and valued as positive.

SEEING PEOPLE IN PARKS Measuring Social Outcomes

MEASURING SOCIAL OUTCOMES

Bishan VS Punggol

Frequent

Infrequent

BISHAN-AMK PUNGGOL

Distance Distance

MEASURING SOCIAL OUTCOMES

by Park Frequency and Proximity

1. Frequent users indicated they were more likely to “often” see people they knew during a visit than infrequent users.

2. When frequency was controlled, the proximity and social interaction weakened but was still significant.

3. Those who live distant and infrequently use the park were more likely to be socially inactive when at a park.

Trails are the dominant facility used in parks. The park in the most mature district had higher usage of benches, playgrounds and jetty than the other parks studied.

Facility

Bedok Bishan – AMK Punggol

Trail-Sidewalk-Path

64% 87% 86%

Bench 12 5 4

Gazebo 4 2 1

Playground 6 1 3

Jetty 7 --- 1

Nature Areas (i.e., grass, shoreline)

7 5 5

DOMINANT PARK FACILITY

Park Characteristic

Pull factors Greenery

Tranquil areas Trails and park

facilities Accessibility from

home

Push factors Getting away from everyday life Talking with family or friends Spending time with spouse or boy/girlfriend Having fun with others Being around other people

MOTIVATIONS

Measured with 5-point Likert Scale,

1) Pull motives are stronger than Push motives.

2) Pull: Greenery, tranquil areas and accessibility from home were the strongest motives.

3) Push: Getting away from everyday life was the strongest motive.

Bedok

Bishan–

AMK

Punggol

Pull 4.1 4.2 4.2

Push 3.1 3.0 3.2

Scale: 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree

MOTIVATIONS

Based on means from 5-point Likert Scale,

Exercise is the most popular reason to use parks, followed by relaxation, socialization, transport, and programming.

Bedok Bishan–AMK Punggol

Exercise 64% 62% 64% Relaxation 22 21 20

Socialize 7 8 10

Transport – Short Cut

3 3 3

Program 1 1 1

Other 3 6 2

MAIN REASON FOR PARK USE

Solo park uses are most common.

SOLO OR ACCOMPANIED Park Visit

50% 53%

45%

34% 36% 36%

17%

11%

16%

Bedok Bishan Punggol

Solo

Family

Friends/colleagues

Particularly male solo use.

SOLO PARK VISITS

Males

Females

38% 39% 35%

12% 14%

10%

Bedok Bishan Punggol

50% 45%

53%

Males make up about 75% of solo park

use.

Vigorous physical activities were a greater proportion of park uses at Punggol Waterway. Sedentary activities were the lowest proportion of park uses at the 3 parks studied.

Bedok

Bishan – AMK

PunggolW

Vigorous 62% 53% 76%

Moderate 57% 66% 42%

Sedentary 21% 21% 18%

LEVEL OF PHYSICAL ACTIVITIES

Physical and Health Outcomes

ACTIVITIES AT THE PARK

based on Intensity Level of Activity

12%

53%

16%

5%

20%

40%

8%

52%

36%

13%

6%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Cycling Jogging Walking Exercising Playground Walkingdog

Resting Eating

BedokBishanPunggol

Cycling Jogging Walking Exercising Playground Walking

dog

Resting Eating

VIGOROUS SEDENTARY MODERATE

For vigorous physical activities, • Cycling is the most popular at Punggol. • Jogging is popular at Bedok.

For moderately physical activity, • Walking is popular at Bishan-AMK Park.

All 3 parks offered a less active option for park users.

ACTIVITIES AT THE PARK

based on Intensity Level of Activity

Singaporean park users scored high on a mental restoration scale, compared to Finnish subjects (Korpela et al., 2010).

Means

Bedok Bishan-AMK Punggol Overall restoration scale ROS (Finnish study 3.5)

4.1

4.1

4.1

Specific elements of “restoration”

Calming 4.2 4.2 4.1

Restored and relaxed 4.2 4.2 4.1

New enthusiasm and energy for routines

4.0 4.1 4.1

Increased concentration and alertness

4.0 4.0 4.1

Worries forgotten 3.9 3.9 4.0

Clearing and clarifying thoughts

4.1 4.1 4.0

Scale: 1=not at all; 5=completely

MENTAL RESTORATION

Physical and Health Outcomes

Mature districts compared to middle and younger districts, have: (1) Higher perception of greenery level by users Supported (2) Higher level of social interactions Unsupported (3) Higher level of vigorous physical activity Unsupported The newest park garnered the highest level of vigorous physical activity. (4) Higher mental restoration benefits Unsupported All of the parks were similarly high in mental restoration benefits.

HYPOTHESES

Conclusion

1. Many physical activities were carried out at each of the parks. The design of each park were found to influence the type of activity and extent of physical activity.

2. Proximity of the parks from home strongly motivated people to use the parks, particularly at the mature and middle age parks.

3. Restorative outcomes were high for the many who go to parks by themselves, as well as with friends and family. Greenery and tranquil areas in parks contributed to this restorative condition.

4. Extensive connectivity to nearby parks and the park connector system can draw park users from further districts to a park.

5. Moderate levels of social value were found in parks. Yet, there could be more opportunities to create informal and formal meeting places.

CONCLUSION

THANK YOU DR CHRISTINE VOGT

Christine.vogt@asu.edu

CYBIL KHO

Kho_cybil@nparks.gov.sg

Check out our Research Technical Notes on

our CUGE Website

THANK YOU