南京林业大学学报(自然科学版) ›› 2021, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (5): 223-231.doi: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202006004
收稿日期:
2020-06-02
接受日期:
2021-04-19
出版日期:
2021-09-30
发布日期:
2021-09-30
基金资助:
WANG Zhipeng1(), WANG Wei1,2, XING Siyi1
Received:
2020-06-02
Accepted:
2021-04-19
Online:
2021-09-30
Published:
2021-09-30
摘要:
【目的】 城市公园绿地作为城市空间中的自然因素,对人群健康具有潜在促进效应,通过研究公园绿地特征和人群使用公园方式,探讨城市公园绿地对人群身心健康的影响效应。【方法】 选取合肥市逍遥津公园为研究地点,以人群使用公园时段为分层原则对公园使用者进行分层抽样调查。公园使用者个人特征信息和使用公园方式采用自行设计问卷获取,身心健康状况采用健康调查12条简表(SF-12)进行评估,公园绿地特征运用层次分析法和调查问卷进行评价,利用描述性统计分析、单因素分析及多元线性回归分析进行统计分析。【结果】 生理健康多元线性回归分析表明,每次使用公园时长(变量非标准化系数b=0.922, P<0.01)、每周使用公园频率(b=0.770, P<0.05)、公园生态特征(b=1.353, P<0.01)、服务特征(b=2.057, P<0.01)和美学特征(b=0.375, P<0.05)与使用者生理健康状况得分呈正相关;公园服务特征(标准化后的偏回归系数b'=0.437, P<0.01)对使用者生理健康状况得分的贡献高于生态特征(b'=0.276, P<0.01)和美学特征(b'=0.081, P<0.05)。心理健康多元线性回归分析发现,每次使用公园时长(b=1.402, P<0.01)、公园生态特征(b=1.763, P<0.01)、服务特征(b=0.791, P<0.05)和美学特征(b=3.398, P<0.01)与使用者心理健康状况得分呈正相关,公园美学特征(b'=0.453, P<0.01)对使用者心理健康状况得分的贡献高于生态特征(b'=0.139, P<0.05)和服务特征(b'=0.077, P<0.01)。【结论】 公园绿地对改善人群身心健康状况具有积极效应,绿地特征质量越高,对人群身心健康的促进效应越高,而个人所获得的健康效益因使用方式不同而存在差异性。提高使用公园频率和适当增加使用时间有利于改善人群生理健康状况;增加使用公园频率对改善人群心理健康无明显作用,适当增加使用公园时间和选择9:00—12:00之间使用公园更有利于人群心理健康。
中图分类号:
王志鹏,王薇,邢思懿. 城市公园绿地特征和使用方式与人群健康关系研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 45(5): 223-231.
WANG Zhipeng, WANG Wei, XING Siyi. A study on the relationship between the characteristics and usage of urban park green space and population health[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Science Edition), 2021, 45(5): 223-231.DOI: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202006004.
表1
公园绿地特征评价因子指标与权重及赋值依据"
评价类别 category | 评价因子 index | 分项权重 weight | 赋值依据 valuation basis | 问卷赋值标准 questionnaire valuation basis |
---|---|---|---|---|
生态特征 ecological feature | 植物年龄plant age | 0.133 | 植物生长状态plant growth state | 1=很差very bad 2=差bad 3=一般general 4=好good 5=很好very good |
植物多样性plant diversity | 0.293 | 植物品种数量number of plant varieties | ||
植物乡土性plant vernacular | 0.217 | 乡土树种数量number of indigenous tree | ||
植物结构多样性 plant configuration diversity | 0.357 | 常绿与落叶植物比例ratio of evergreen to deciduous plants | ||
服务特征 service feature | 可达性accessibility | 0.157 | 不同绿地间连通性connectivity between different green spaces | |
可滞留性lingering character | 0.328 | 活动空间面积activity space area | ||
抗干扰性noise immunity | 0.207 | 隔离外界程度degree of isolation | ||
设施多样性facility diversity | 0.308 | 服务设施数量与类别number and category of service facilities | ||
美学特征 aesthetic feature | 观赏多样性ornamental diversity | 0.354 | 开花植物种类及数量species and quantity of flowering plants | |
景观时序多样性 landscape sequential diversity | 0.107 | 植物花期连续性flowering continuity of plants | ||
平面构成多样性plane formation diversity | 0.122 | 景观空间丰富性richness of landscape space | ||
空间层次多样性spatial hierarchy diversity | 0.417 | 植物配置多样性diversity of plant configuration |
表2
变量赋值表"
变量 variable | 代码code | 赋值说明 assignment description | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
性别sex | X1 | 0=男male,1=女female | ||
年龄/a age | X2 | 1=<18,2=[18,23],3=[24,29],4=[30,50],5=>50 | ||
身高/cm height | X3 | 1=<150,2=[150,160),3=[160,170),4=[170,180],5=>180 | ||
体质量/kg weight | X4 | 1=<45,2=[45,55),3=[55,65),4=[65,75],5=>75 | ||
婚姻状况 marital status | X5 | 1=未婚unmarried,2=已婚married,3=离异divorced,4=丧偶widowed | ||
学历类型 education type | X6 | 1=小学primary school,2=初中junior high school,3=高中senior high school, 4=大专junior college, 5=本科及以上bachelor degree or above | ||
职业类型 occupation type | X7 | 1=学生student,2=文案工作者office worker,3=体力工作者 physical worker,4=退休人员retiree | ||
收入水平/(元·月-1) income level | X8 | 1=<1 550,2=[1 550,3 500),3=[3 500,5 000),4=[5 000,8 000],5=>8 000 | ||
使用公园时段 period of using the park | X9 | 1=[6:00, 9:00), 2=[9:00, 12:00), 3=[12:00, 14:00), 4=[14:00, 18:00], 5=18:00以后 | ||
住所距公园距离/km distance from residence to park | X10 | 1=<1.0,2=[1.0, 1.5),3=[1.5, 3.0),4=[3.0, 5.0],5=>5.0 | ||
每次使用公园时长/h duration of using the park each time | X11 | 1=<0.5, 2=[0.5, 1), 3=[1, 2), 4=[2, 3], 5=>3 | ||
每周使用公园频率/次 frequency of using the park per week | X12 | 1=0次,2=1次,3=2~3次,4=4~5次, 5=5次以上 | ||
公园绿地生态特征 ecological feature | X13 | 等级变量数据 grade variable data | ||
公园绿地服务特征 service feature | X14 | 等级变量数据 grade variable data | ||
公园绿地美学特征 aesthetic feature | X15 | 等级变量数据 grade variable data | ||
生理健康状况得分 physical health score | Y1 | 计量数据 measurement data | ||
心理健康状况得分 mental health score | Y2 | 计量数据 measurement data |
表3
调查对象一般情况和身心健康状况得分情况"
项目 item | 分类 sort | 人数 number | 占比/% ratio | 生理健康physical health | 心理健康mental health | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
得分score | Sig. | 得分score | Sig. | ||||||||||
性别 sex | 总体total | 279 | 100.00 | 49.71±6.61 | F =18.02 P <0.001 | 48.77±7.66 | F =5.42 P <0.001 | ||||||
男male | 137 | 49.10 | 52.29±5.29 | 43.77±7.02 | |||||||||
女female | 142 | 50.90 | 47.21±6.84 | 53.61±4.50 | |||||||||
年龄/a age | <18 | 20 | 7.17 | 55.49±3.17 | F =5.65 P <0.001 | 55.45±9.09 | F =2.61 P <0.05 | ||||||
18~23 | 61 | 21.86 | 49.56±6.82 | 49.29±8.01 | |||||||||
24~29 | 64 | 22.94 | 50.43±6.90 | 47.82±7.25 | |||||||||
30~50 | 103 | 36.92 | 48.91±5.87 | 45.39±7.16 | |||||||||
>50 | 31 | 11.11 | 47.42±7.70 | 53.89±8.13 | |||||||||
身高/cm height | <150 | 3 | 1.08 | 46.68±6.91 | F=0.49 P=0.742 | 50.08±9.17 | F=0.85 P=0.496 | ||||||
[150, 160) | 76 | 27.24 | 50.11±7.88 | 50.02±7.42 | |||||||||
[160, 170) | 121 | 43.37 | 49.96±5.94 | 48.58±7.78 | |||||||||
[170, 180] | 72 | 25.81 | 48.97±6.35 | 47.88±7.82 | |||||||||
>180 | 7 | 2.51 | 49.75±6.47 | 47.36±5.83 | |||||||||
体质量/kg weight | <45 | 13 | 4.66 | 54.59±4.42 | F=3.19 P<0.05 | 51.04±4.70 | F=0.54 P=0.706 | ||||||
[45, 55) | 91 | 32.62 | 50.68±6.35 | 48.90±7.96 | |||||||||
[55, 65) | 103 | 36.92 | 49.06±6.53 | 48.77±7.77 | |||||||||
[65, 75] | 53 | 19.00 | 48.65±6.66 | 47.80±8.25 | |||||||||
>75 | 19 | 6.81 | 48.14±7.94 | 49.46±5.37 | |||||||||
婚姻状况 marital status | 未婚 unmarried | 117 | 41.94 | 50.74±6.14 | F=2.83 P<0.05 | 50.91±8.27 | F=2.42 P<0.05 | ||||||
已婚 married | 136 | 48.75 | 48.55±6.95 | 54.69±7.17 | |||||||||
离异 divorced | 14 | 5.02 | 50.60±6.91 | 48.21±8.55 | |||||||||
丧偶 widowed | 12 | 4.30 | 51.69±5.36 | 46.88±6.17 | |||||||||
学历类型 education type | 小学primary school | 11 | 3.94 | 51.50±5.64 | F=0.13 P=0.870 | 51.52±6.49 | F=0.51 P=0.731 | ||||||
初中junior high school | 25 | 8.96 | 49.81±7.51 | 48.80±6.44 | |||||||||
高中senior high school | 40 | 14.34 | 49.27±6.06 | 49.24±7.97 | |||||||||
大专junior college | 93 | 33.33 | 49.41±7.51 | 48.85±7.82 | |||||||||
本科及以上bachelor degree or above | 110 | 39.43 | 49.90±5.94 | 48.27±7.82 | |||||||||
项目 item | 分类 sort | 人数 number | 占比/% ratio | 生理健康physical health | 心理健康mental health | ||||||||
得分score | Sig. | 得分score | Sig. | ||||||||||
职业类型 occupation type | 学生student | 40 | 14.34 | 50.69±5.67 | F=1.12 P=0.341 | 49.95±7.44 | F=1.06 P=0.368 | ||||||
文案工作者 office worker | 151 | 54.12 | 49.05±6.81 | 48.04±8.06 | |||||||||
体力工作者physical worker | 63 | 22.58 | 50.51±5.59 | 49.51±6.33 | |||||||||
退休人员retiree | 25 | 8.96 | 50.04±8.89 | 49.54±8.47 | |||||||||
收入水平/ (元·月-1) income level | <1 550 | 63 | 22.58 | 52.65±5.41 | F=4.53 P<0.01 | 49.16±7.48 | F=0.59 P=0.670 | ||||||
[1 550, 3 500) | 89 | 31.90 | 49.03±7.24 | 49.42±7.14 | |||||||||
[3 500, 5 000) | 69 | 24.73 | 48.20±6.66 | 47.63±8.42 | |||||||||
[5 000, 8 000] | 39 | 13.98 | 49.11±6.06 | 48.58±7.93 | |||||||||
>8 000 | 19 | 6.81 | 49.81±5.79 | 49.08±7.46 |
表4
身心健康状况不同组别人群使用公园方式比较"
项目 item | 组别 sort | 生理健康状况得分组别人数占比/% proportion of people in physical health score group | 心理健康状况得分组别人数占比/% proportion of people in mental health score group | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
<40 | ≥40~45 | ≥46~50 | ≥51~55 | >55 | χ2检验 chi-square test | <40 | ≥40~45 | ≥46~50 | ≥51~55 | >55 | χ2检验 chi-square test | |||
每次使用 公园时段 period of using the park | [6:00, 9:00) | 0.00 | 4.00 | 7.25 | 9.78 | 7.94 | χ2=16.87 P=0.394 | 13.89 | 0.00 | 11.76 | 8.64 | 3.33 | χ2=46.22 P<0.01 | |
[9:00, 12:00) | 16.67 | 20.00 | 13.04 | 17.39 | 23.81 | 16.67 | 25.49 | 9.80 | 20.99 | 15.00 | ||||
[12:00, 14:00) | 16.67 | 12.00 | 13.04 | 11.96 | 19.05 | 13.89 | 11.76 | 15.69 | 13.58 | 16.67 | ||||
[14:00, 18:00] | 60.00 | 52.00 | 40.58 | 41.30 | 31.74 | 44.44 | 43.14 | 45.10 | 35.80 | 45.00 | ||||
>18:00 | 6.66 | 12.00 | 26.09 | 19.57 | 17.46 | 11.11 | 19.61 | 17.65 | 20.99 | 20.00 | ||||
每次使用 公园时长/h duration of using the park each time | <0.5 | 23.34 | 24.00 | 1.45 | 0.00 | 0.00 | χ2=292.54 P<0.001 | 30.56 | 5.88 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | χ2=182.26 P<0.001 | |
[0.5, 1) | 13.33 | 28.00 | 26.09 | 3.26 | 0.00 | 36.11 | 25.49 | 7.84 | 2.47 | 0.00 | ||||
[1, 2) | 3.33 | 40.00 | 49.27 | 57.61 | 14.29 | 30.56 | 54.90 | 66.67 | 23.46 | 25.00 | ||||
[2, 3] | 0.00 | 0.00 | 20.29 | 39.13 | 85.71 | 2.77 | 13.73 | 23.53 | 62.96 | 55.00 | ||||
>3 | 60.00 | 8.00 | 2.90 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.96 | 11.11 | 20.00 | ||||
每周使用 公园频率/次 frequency of using the park per week | 0 | 90.00 | 76.00 | 10.14 | 0.00 | 0.00 | χ2=200.47 P<0.001 | 30.56 | 21.57 | 25.49 | 11.11 | 15.00 | χ2=31.07 P<0.01 | |
1 | 10.00 | 24.00 | 79.71 | 7.61 | 0.00 | 30.56 | 13.73 | 19.61 | 30.86 | 30.00 | ||||
2~3 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 8.70 | 75.0 | 0.00 | 22.22 | 33.33 | 29.41 | 25.93 | 23.33 | ||||
4~5 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.45 | 17.39 | 25.40 | 13.89 | 11.76 | 3.92 | 8.64 | 21.67 | ||||
>5 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 74.60 | 2.77 | 19.61 | 21.57 | 23.46 | 10.00 |
表5
公园绿地特征和使用方式与身心健康状况回归模型系数表"
自变量 | 生理健康physical health | 心理健康mental health | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
b | t | 95% CI | VIF | b | t | 95% CI | VIF | ||
[9:00, 12:00)△ | -0.387 | -0.64 | -1.576~0.802 | 3.39 | 1.498** | 2.29 | 0.211~3.784 | 3.31 | |
[12:00, 14:00)△ | -0.474 | -0.75 | -1.720~0.772 | 3.07 | 1.308** | 2.91 | 0.040~3.657 | 3.19 | |
[14:01, 18:00]△ | -0.535 | -0.96 | -1.628~0.559 | 4.55 | 1.069** | 2.78 | 0.114~3.252 | 3.84 | |
>18:00△ | 0.034 | 0.06 | -1.151~1.218 | 3.28 | 1.258** | 2.93 | 0.024~3.540 | 3.24 | |
住所距公园距离distance from residence to park | -0.696** | -2.49 | -1.247~-0.146 | 2.90 | -1.746*** | -5.77 | -2.342~-1.150 | 2.87 | |
每次使用公园时长duration of using the park each time | 0.922*** | 4.54 | 0.522~1.332 | 2.77 | 1.402*** | 6.38 | 0.970~1.835 | 2.59 | |
每周使用公园频率frequency of using the park per week | 0.770** | 2.58 | 0.183~1.357 | 2.50 | -0.229 | -0.71 | -0.864~0.406 | 2.34 | |
公园生态特征ecological feature | 1.353*** | 3.19 | 0.717~1.989 | 2.98 | 1.763*** | 2.02 | 0.900~2.626 | 3.11 | |
公园服务特征service feature | 2.057*** | 3.08 | 1.260~2.855 | 3.23 | 0.791** | 2.26 | 0.103~1.478 | 3.01 | |
公园美学特征aesthetic feature | 0.375** | 1.94 | 0.233~2.426 | 3.56 | 3.398*** | 3.23 | 2.986~3.811 | 3.37 | |
常数constant | 44.112*** | 8.83 | 40.132~48.092 | 39.785*** | 8.19 | 35.478~44.093 | |||
F | 26.722 | 31.738 | |||||||
P | 0.000 | 0.000 |
[1] | World Health Organization. Ten threats to global health in 2019[EB/OL]. [2020-05-20]. https://www.who.int/emergencies/ten-threats-to-global-health-in-2019 . |
[2] |
MARKEVYCH I, SCHOIERER J, HARTIG T, et al. Exploring pathways linking greenspace to health: theoretical and methodological guidance[J]. Environ Res, 2017, 158:301-317. DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2017.06.028.
doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2017.06.028 |
[3] |
VAN DEN BOSCH M, ODE SANG Å. Urban natural environments as nature-based solutions for improved public health: a systematic review of reviews[J]. Environ Res, 2017, 158:373-384.DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2017.05.040.
doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2017.05.040 |
[4] | 章陆杨, 何侃, 林涛, 等. 城市公园绿地可达性对居民公共健康的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2020, 48(18):148-153. |
ZHANG L Y, HE K, LIN T, et al. Impact of accessibility of urban park green space on residents’ public health[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 48(18):148-153. DOI: 10.15889/j.issn.1002-1302.2020.18.029.
doi: 10.15889/j.issn.1002-1302.2020.18.029 |
|
[5] | 张金光, 赵兵. 基于可达性的城市公园选址及布局优化研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2018, 42(6):151-158. |
ZHANG J G, ZHAO B. Location and layout optimization of urban parks based on accessibility[J]. J Nanjing For Univ (Nat Sci Ed), 2018, 42(6):151-158. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201710022.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201710022 |
|
[6] | 陈瑶, 蔡广鹏, 韩会庆, 等. 居民对城市湿地公园生态系统服务功能认知的分析[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2017, 41(6):147-152. |
CHEN Y, CAI G P, HAN H Q, et al. Residents’ cognition to ecosystem service functions of urban wetland parks[J]. J Nanjing For Univ (Nat Sci Ed), 2017, 41(6):147-152. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201611031.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201611031 |
|
[7] |
MCCORMACK G R, ROCK M, TOOHEY A M, et al. Characteristics of urban parks associated with park use and physical activity:a review of qualitative research[J]. Heal Place, 2010, 16(4):712-726.DOI: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2010.03.003.
doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2010.03.003 |
[8] |
COLLINS R M, SPAKE R, BROWN K A, et al. A systematic map of research exploring the effect of greenspace on mental health[J]. Landsc Urban plan, 2020, 201:103823.DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103823.
doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103823 |
[9] |
BURROWS E, O’MAHONY M, GERAGHTY D. How urban parks offer opportunities for physical activity in Dublin, Ireland[J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2018, 15(4):815. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15040815.
doi: 10.3390/ijerph15040815 |
[10] |
REID C E, CLOUGHERTY J E, SHMOOL J L C, et al. Is all urban green space the same?A comparison of the health benefits of trees and grass in New York City[J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2017, 14(11):1411. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph14111411.
doi: 10.3390/ijerph14111411 |
[11] |
COHEN D A, HAN B, EVENSON K R, et al. The prevalence and use of walking loops in neighborhood parks:a national study[J]. Environ Health Perspect, 2017, 125(2):170-174.DOI: 10.1289/EHP293.
doi: 10.1289/EHP293 |
[12] |
VÖLKER S, KISTEMANN T. The impact of blue space on human health and well-being-salutogenetic health effects of inland surface waters:a review[J]. Int J Hyg Environ Health, 2011, 214(6):449-460. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijheh.2011.05.001.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijheh.2011.05.001 |
[13] |
COHEN D A, MARSH T, WILLIAMSON S, et al. Parks and physical activity:why are some parks used more than others?[J]. Prev Med, 2010, 50(S1):9-12.DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.08.020.
doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.08.020 |
[14] | 郄光发, 王成, 房城, 等. 城市公园绿地享用方式与居民心境健康关系[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2011, 39(11):111-113. |
QIE G F, WANG C, FANG C, et al. Relationship between tourist’s mood state and method of enjoying parks[J]. J Northeast For Univ, 2011, 39(11):111-113.DOI: 10.13759/j.cnki.dlxb.2011.11.010.
doi: 10.13759/j.cnki.dlxb.2011.11.010 |
|
[15] | 黄巧玲. 基于人群健康的城市公园绿地空间布局评价:以昆明市五华区为例[D]. 昆明:云南财经大学, 2019. |
HUANG Q L. Evaluation of spatial distribution of urban park green space based on population health:a case study of Wuhua District,Kunming City[D]. Kunming:Yunnan University of Finance and Economics, 2019. | |
[16] | 何荣晓, 张宏巍, 闫蓬勃, 等. 多属性视角下的新版《城市绿地分类标准》分析[J]. 林业资源管理, 2018(5):29-34,98. |
HE R X, ZHANG H W, YAN P B, et al. Analysis of standard for classification of urban green space(CJJ/T 85—2017) in the perspective of multiple attributes[J]. For Resour Manag, 2018(5):29-34,98.DOI: 10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2018.05.006.
doi: 10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2018.05.006 |
|
[17] | 张鹏岩, 杨丹, 李二玲, 等. 人口城镇化与土地城镇化的耦合协调关系:以中原经济区为例[J]. 经济地理, 2017, 37(8):145-154. |
ZHANG P Y, YANG D, LI E L, et al. The coupled coordination relationship between land urbanization and population urbanization:a case study of the Central Plains economic region[J]. Econ Geogr, 2017, 37(8):145-154.DOI: 10.15957/j.cnki.jjdl.2017.08.019.
doi: 10.15957/j.cnki.jjdl.2017.08.019 |
|
[18] | 徐欣, 胡静. 基于GPS数据城市公园游客时空行为研究:以武汉东湖风景区为例[J]. 经济地理, 2020, 40(6):224-232. |
XU X, HU J. Study on spatiotemporal behavior of urban park tourists based on GPS data:a case study of Wuhan East Lake scenic area[J]. Econ Geogr, 2020, 40(6):224-232.DOI: 10.15957/j.cnki.jjdl.2020.06.024.
doi: 10.15957/j.cnki.jjdl.2020.06.024 |
|
[19] | 王海棠, 任利民, 刘瑶, 等. SF-12健康调查量表的评价研究现状[J]. 中华全科医师杂志, 2015, 14(7):574-576. |
WANG H T, REN L M, LIU Y, et al. The research status of evaluation of SF-12 Health Survey Scale[J]. Chin J Gen Pract, 2015, 14(7):574-576.DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-7368.2015.07.025.
doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-7368.2015.07.025 |
|
[20] | 何燕, 赵龙超, 刘丹萍, 等. SF-36和SF-12在人群生命质量调查中的性能比较研究[J]. 现代预防医学, 2017, 44(5):852-862. |
HE Y, ZHAO L C, LIU D P, et al. Psychometric properties of SF-36 and SF-12 as measures of population health status survey[J]. Mod Prev Med, 2017, 44(5):852-862. | |
[21] |
WARE J Jr, KOSINSKI M, KELLER S D. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey:construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity[J]. Med Care, 1996, 34(3):220-233.DOI: 10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003.
doi: 10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003 |
[22] |
HOYLE H, HITCHMOUGH J, JORGENSEN A. All about the ‘Wow Factor’? The relationships between aesthetics,restorative effect and perceived biodiversity in designed urban planting[J]. Landsc Urban Plan, 2017, 164:109-123. DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.03.011.
doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.03.011 |
[23] | 唐东芹, 杨学军, 许东新. 园林植物景观评价方法及其应用[J]. 浙江林学院学报, 2001, 18(4):394-397. |
TANG D Q, YANG X J, XU D X. Study on the method applied in garden plant landscape evaluation[J]. J Zhejiang For Coll, 2001, 18(4):394-397. | |
[24] |
HAZER M, FORMICA M K, DIETERLEN S, et al. The relationship between self-reported exposure to greenspace and human stress in Baltimore,MD[J]. Landsc Urban Plan, 2018, 169:47-56.DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.08.006.
doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.08.006 |
[25] |
HITCHINGS R. Studying the preoccupations that prevent people from going into green space[J]. Landsc Urban Plan, 2013, 118:98-102. DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.09.006.
doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.09.006 |
[26] |
CLEARY A, FIELDING K S, BELL S L, et al. Exploring potential mechanisms involved in the relationship between eudaimonic wellbeing and nature connection[J]. Landsc Urban Plan, 2017, 158:119-128. DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.10.003.
doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.10.003 |
[27] |
HEGETSCHWEILER K T, DE VRIES S, ARNBERGER A, et al. Linking demand and supply factors in identifying cultural ecosystem services of urban green infrastructures: a review of European studies[J]. Urban For Urban Green, 2017, 21:48-59.DOI: 10.1016/j.ufug.2016.11.002.
doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2016.11.002 |
[28] |
ROE J, ASPINALL P. The restorative benefits of walking in urban and rural settings in adults with good and poor mental health[J]. Heal Place, 2011, 17(1):103-113. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2010.09.003.
doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2010.09.003 |
[1] | 刘艳芬, 黄茹鲜, 艾婧文, 杨柳青, 余坤勇, 刘健. 福州市城市公园的冷岛效应及其影响因素[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2024, 48(3): 295-303. |
[2] | 朱云凤, 王红, 覃书鸿, 杨易, 汪逸聪. 基于多源数据的南京市公园降温效应研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2024, 48(3): 285-294. |
[3] | 杨赫, 米锋. 社会经济地位下城市绿地可达性对居民心理健康的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2024, 48(1): 248-256. |
[4] | 杨云峰, 杨家琪. 基于蚊患防控的亚热带地区城市公园生态整治设计[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2023, 47(6): 211-218. |
[5] | 张银凤, 蔡洪月, 彭金根, 刘学军, 谢利娟, 张华, 王艳梅. 深圳城市公园不同栽植环境对毛棉杜鹃生长的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2023, 47(2): 197-204. |
[6] | 梁文超, 步行, 罗思谦, 谢寅峰, 张往祥, 胡加玲. 氮磷钾复合肥对增温促花后‘长寿冠’海棠生理特性的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 46(5): 81-88. |
[7] | 黄硕, 郑宇, 成林莉, 季春悦, 王姗, 董建文. 基于景观偏好的城市公园景观健康效益评价机制研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 46(5): 221-228. |
[8] | 侯秀娟, 闫晓云, 王波, 李心愿, 包红光. 夏季干旱半干旱城市公园绿地空气负离子与空气颗粒物变化特征[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 46(4): 212-220. |
[9] | 史可, 左国良, 胡海辉. 基于公众审美的哈尔滨城市公园植物色彩评价[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 46(1): 233-240. |
[10] | 吴文清, 许克福. 合肥环城公园开放空间与游憩行为关系研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 45(6): 217-224. |
[11] | 郑凌予, 蒲海霞, 江泽平. 基于绿视率的城市公园空间满意度调查研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2020, 44(4): 199-204. |
[12] | 张金光, 韦薇, 承颖怡, 赵兵. 基于GIS适宜性评价的中小城市公园选址研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2020, 44(1): 171-178. |
[13] | 叶洁楠,王浩. 城市公园绿地灾时避难功能结构和空间布局转换的可行性分析[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2018, 42(03): 175-181. |
[14] | 陈荻,邱冰,刘滨谊. 基于分层思想的城市公园有机更新模式探讨——以上海黄兴公园改造方案为例[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2014, 38(04): 153-157. |
[15] | 刘源,张凯云,王浩. 城市公园绿地整体性发展分析[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2013, 37(06): 101-106. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||