景观元素对城市公园滨水空间使用者安全感的影响——以南京市玄武湖公园为例

doi:10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202312005

国家林草科技领军期刊
中国精品科技期刊
中国高校百佳科技期刊
江苏省新闻出版政府奖期刊奖
RCCSE林学权威期刊（A+）
CSCD核心期刊
Scopus数据库收录期刊
中文核心期刊
SCD核心期刊

作者加群：102861116

微信公众号：南京林业大学学报

高级检索

南京林业大学学报（自然科学版） ›› 2025, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (3): 235-244.doi: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202312005

景观元素对城市公园滨水空间使用者安全感的影响——以南京市玄武湖公园为例

陈宇楠¹(), 丛昕¹, 张文豹², 荣晗琳², 张清海¹^,^*()

1.南京农业大学园艺学院,江苏南京 210095
2.南京滨江公园管理有限公司,江苏南京 210019

收稿日期:2023-12-01 接受日期:2024-03-24 出版日期:2025-05-30 发布日期:2025-05-27
通讯作者: *张清海(1043176787@qq.com),副教授。
作者简介:
陈宇楠(cyn2008@126.com)。
基金资助:
江苏省林业局科技创新与推广项目(LYKJ[2020]16);南京农业大学金埔园林科研创新项目(2023006)

The effect of landscape elements on users’ sense of security in urban park waterfront spaces: taking Nanjing Xuanwu Lake Park as an example

CHEN Yunan¹(), CONG Xin¹, ZHANG Wenbao², RONG Hanlin², ZHANG Qinghai¹^,^*()

1. College of Horticulture,Nanjing Agricultural University,Nanjing 210095,China
2. Nanjing Riverside Park Management, Nanjing 210019,China

Received:2023-12-01 Accepted:2024-03-24 Online:2025-05-30 Published:2025-05-27

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】环境安全感对于使用者的身心健康具有重要影响,是景观设计需要考虑的重要因素之一,而城市公园滨水空间是公众最容易聚集的场所之一,也是相对容易使公众感到不安全的场所,值得重点研究。探究城市公园滨水空间中景观元素的占比和配置对公园使用者安全感的影响,可为城市公园滨水空间安全设计提供理论支持。【方法】以南京市玄武湖公园为例,筛选66条滨水空间样本片段进行研究。拍摄样本照片,对景观元素进行分类,统计各元素在照片中的占比。采用Pearson相关性分析法、双因素方差分析法、多元线性回归法等数理统计方法,分析了滨水空间中景观元素与使用者安全感之间的耦合关系。【结果】①对滨水空间安全感最具有正向影响的景观元素为天空和水边围栏,其Pearson相关系数分别为0.571和0.552(P<0.01);最具有负向影响的元素为水岸乔木和水岸灌木/草花,其Pearson相关系数分别为-0.450和-0.357(P<0.01)。②滨水植物元素之间、滨水植物与天空元素之间均会交互影响,并共同作用于滨水空间使用者的安全感。③滨水空间荫蔽度与滨水空间自然度均会对安全感得分产生显著的负向影响。④不同人水关系的滨水空间中,自然景观元素和人工景观元素对安全感影响的程度不同。【结论】通过对景观元素的分类,并分析其与使用者安全感间的多重耦合关系,构建了更多滨水空间景观元素与空间使用者心理间的关系桥梁,有助于针对性地提出城市公园滨水空间的景观安全优化建议。

关键词: 城市公园, 滨水空间, 安全感, 景观设计元素, 相关性分析, 南京玄武湖

Abstract:

【Objective】The perception of environmental safety significantly impacts users’ physical and mental well-being and is a key consideration in landscape design. Urban park waterfront spaces, being areas where the public congregates most and where a sense of insecurity is relatively easily experienced, merit special attention. Studying how the proportion and configuration of landscape elements in urban park waterfront spaces affect park users’ safety perception can provide theoretical support for safety-centered design of such spaces.【Method】Taking Nanjing’s Xuanwu Lake Park as a case, 66 sample segments of the waterfront space were selected. Sample photos were taken, landscape elements were classified, and the percentage of each element in the photos was calculated. Mathematical and statistical methods, such as Pearson correlation analysis, two-factor ANOVA, and multivariate linear regression, were used to analyze the coupling relationship between landscape elements and users’ sense of security in the waterfront space.【Result】(1) The landscape elements with the most significant positive impact on the sense of security in the waterfront space are the sky (0.571,P<0.01) and the waterfront fence (0.552,P<0.01), while those with the most significant negative impact are waterfront trees (-0.450,P<0.01) and waterfront shrubs/grass flowers (-0.357,P<0.01).(2) Waterfront plant elements interact with each other and with the sky element, jointly influencing the sense of security of waterfront space users.(3) Both the shade level in the waterfront space and the naturalness degree of the waterfront space have a significant negative impact on the safety perception score.(4) In different waterfront spaces with diverse human-water relationships, natural and artificial landscape elements have varying degrees of influence on the sense of security.【Conclusion】By categorizing landscape elements and analyzing their multiple coupling relationships with users’ sense of security, more connections between waterfront space landscape elements and users’ psychology were established. This is beneficial for proposing optimization suggestions for the landscape security of urban park waterfront spaces.

Key words: urban park, waterfront spaces, sense of security, landscape design elements, correlation analysis, Xuanwu Lake Park in Nanjing City

中图分类号:

TU985

陈宇楠,丛昕,张文豹,等. 景观元素对城市公园滨水空间使用者安全感的影响——以南京市玄武湖公园为例[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2025, 49(3): 235-244.

CHEN Yunan, CONG Xin, ZHANG Wenbao, RONG Hanlin, ZHANG Qinghai. The effect of landscape elements on users’ sense of security in urban park waterfront spaces: taking Nanjing Xuanwu Lake Park as an example[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Science Edition), 2025, 49(3): 235-244.DOI: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202312005.

图/表 12

图1

表1

图2

图3

表2

表3

图4

表4

图5

表5

景观元素与安全感线性回归结果"

项目 item	非标准化系数 non-standardized coefficients		标准化系数β standardized coefficients	t	p	共线性诊断 collinearity diagnosis
项目 item	B	SD	标准化系数β standardized coefficients	t	p	VIF	容忍度 tolerance
常数constant	453.380	25.118	—	18.05	<0.001^***	—		—
A₁	-0.048	0.016	-0.329	-3.05	<0.001^***	1.099		0.91
A₂	-0.111	0.031	-0.386	-3.584	<0.001^***	1.099		0.91
R²	0.334
$R a d j 2$	0.313
F	F (2,63)=15.786, P<0.001
D-W值D-W value	1.941

表5

表6

表7

参考文献 27

[1]	CINAR E A, CUBUKCU E. The influence of micro scale environmental characteristics on crime and fear[J]. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2012, 35:83-88.DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.02.065.
[2]	SAEEDNIA Y, NOR M M D. Measuring hierarchy of basic needs among adults[J]. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2013, 82:417-420.DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.285.
[3]	MADGE C. Public parks and the geography of fear[J]. Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie, 1997, 88(3):237-250.DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9663.1997.tb01601.x.
[4]	朱丽衡, 曹磊, 袁瑞伯. 基于游客安全感的城市公园空间环境安全评价研究:以唐山市凤凰山公园为例[J]. 室内设计与装修,2020(1) :136-137.
	ZHU L H, CAO L, YUAN R B. Study on spatial environmental safety evaluation of urban parks based on tourist's security sense[J]. Interior Design + Construction, 2020(1):136-137.
[5]	GREEN G, GILBERTSON J M, GRIMSLEY M F J. Fear of crime and health in residential tower blocks: a case study in Liverpool,UK[J]. European Journal of Public Health, 2002, 12(1):10-15.DOI:10.1093/eurpub/12.1.10.
[6]	MOLNAR B E, GORTMAKER S L, BULL F C, et al. Unsafe to play? Neighborhood disorder and lack of safety predict reduced physical activity among urban children and adolescents[J]. American Journal of Health Promotion, 2004, 18(5):378-386.DOI:10.4278/0890-1171-18.5.378.
[7]	FLEMING C M, MANNING M, AMBREY C L. Crime,greenspace and life satisfaction:an evaluation of the New Zealand experience[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2016, 149:1-10.DOI:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.12.014.
[8]	NAGHIBI M S, FAIZI M, KHAKZAND M, et al. Achievement to physical characteristics of security in residential neighborhoods[J]. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2015, 201:265-274.DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.08.175.
[9]	SCHROEDER H W, ANDERSON L M. Perception of personal safety in urban recreation sites[J]. Journal of Leisure Research, 1984, 16(2):178-194.DOI:10.1080/00222216.1984.11969584.
[10]	MAK B K L, JIM C Y. Examining fear-evoking factors in urban parks in Hong Kong[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2018, 171:42-56.DOI:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.11.012.
[11]	JORGENSEN A, HITCHMOUGH J, CALVERT T. Woodland spaces and edges:their impact on perception of safety and preference[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2002, 60(3):135-150.DOI:10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00052-X.
[12]	DENG L, LI X, LUO H, et al. Empirical study of landscape types,landscape elements and landscape components of the urban park promoting physiological and psychological restoration[J]. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2020,48:126488.DOI:10.1016/j.ufug.2019.126488.
[13]	莫小云, 林静瑜, 林雪玲, 等. 私密性景观空间的设计元素研究[J]. 重庆科技学院学报(自然科学版), 2018, 20(1):115-120.
	MO X Y, LIN J Y, LIN X L, et al. Research on design elements of private landscape space[J]. Journal of Chongqing University of Science and Technology (Natural Sciences Edition), 2018, 20(1):115-120.DOI:10.19406/j.cnki.cqkjxyxbzkb.2018.01.026.
[14]	CAI K Y, HUANG W W, LIN G S. Bridging landscape preference and landscape design:a study on the preference and optimal combination of landscape elements based on conjoint analysis[J]. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2022,73:127615.DOI:10.1016/j.ufug.2022.127615.
[15]	ZHOU S T, GAO Y, ZHANG Z, et al. Visual behaviour and cognitive preferences of users for constituent elements in forest landscape spaces[J]. Forests, 2022, 13(1):47.DOI:10.3390/f13010047.
[16]	邱瑶, 罗涛, 王艳云, 等. 基于视觉关注度与审美偏好的城市景观元素感知特征研究[J]. 中国园林, 2023, 39(6):82-87.
	QIU Y, LUO T, WANG Y Y, et al. Study on the perceptual features of urban landscape elements based on visual attention and aesthetic preference[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2023, 39(6):82-87.DOI:10.19775/j.cla.2023.06.0082.
[17]	赵静, 宣国富. 城市居民公园游憩体验质量及性别差异:以南京玄武湖公园为例[J]. 中国园林, 2015, 31(7):113-116.
	ZHAO J, XUAN G F. Experience quality and gender differences of the urban park-based recreation:a case study of Xuanwu Lake Park in Nanjing[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2015, 31(7):113-116.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1000-6664.2015.07.024.
[18]	LAPHAM S C, COHEN D A, WILLIAMSON S, et al. How important is perception of safety to park use? A four-city survey[J]. Urban Studies, 2016, 53(12):2624-2636.DOI:10.1177/0042098015592822.
[19]	冼宁, 方虹博. 简述城市滨水空间景观人性化设计[J]. 设计, 2017(13):68-69.
	XIAN N, FANG H B. Humanized design of the city waterfront space landscape[J]. Design, 2017(13):68-69.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1003-0069.2017.13.032.
[20]	杨雨雯, 董叶文, 刘雪鸣, 等. 健康城市视角下的城市中心区滨水空间:理论机制、科学证据、关键要素[J]. 上海城市规划, 2020(2):57-63.
	YANG Y W, DONG Y W, LIU X M, et al. Investigating the urban central waterfront space from the perspective of healthy city:theoretical mechanisms,scientific evidence,and critical characteristics[J]. Shanghai Urban Planning Review, 2020(2):57-63.DOI:10.11982/j.supr.20200210.
[21]	苏春雨, 武凤文. 基于儿童友好的滨水空间安全感设计策略[J]. 北京规划建设, 2020(3):30-34.
	SU C Y, WU F W. Design strategy of waterfront space security based on child-friendliness[J]. Beijing Planning Review, 2020(3):30-34.
[22]	ZAVADSKAS E K, BAUSYS R, MAZONAVICIUTE I. Safety evaluation methodology of urban public parks by multi-criteria decision making[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2019, 189:372-381.DOI:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.05.014.
[23]	STANISLAV A, CHIN J T. Evaluating livability and perceived values of sustainable neighborhood design:new urbanism and original urban suburbs[J]. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2019,47:101517.DOI:10.1016/j.scs.2019.101517.
[24]	SHAFER E L, BRUSH R O. How to measure preferences for photographs of natural landscapes[J]. Landscape Planning, 1977,4:237-256.DOI:10.1016/0304-3924(77)90027-2.
[25]	符兴源, 杨盼, 姜珊, 等. 不同景观设计元素及其组合对景观安全感的影响[J]. 城市问题, 2019(9):37-44.
	FU X Y, YANG P, JIANG S, et al. Influences on the sense of landscape security by different landscape environment design elements and constitution[J]. Urban Problems, 2019(9):37-44.DOI: 10.13239/j.bjsshkxy.cswt.190905.
[26]	段文, 袁媛, 陶楠. 商业型历史文化街区街道空间风貌管控研究:以昆明南强街为例[J]. 室内设计与装修, 2024(6):114-116.
	DUAN W, YUAN Y, TAO N. Research townscape control at street scale in commercial historic areas:a case of Nanqiang Street in Kunming[J]. Interior Design + Construction, 2024(6):114-116.
[27]	LU D, BURLEY J, CRAWFORD P, et al. Quantitative methods in environmental and visual quality mapping and assessment: a Muskegon, Michigan watershed case study with urban planning implications[M]//BURIAN J. Advances in Spatial Planning. London:InTech, 2012.

分段代号 code	分段名 spatial segmentation	长度/ km length	滨水空间带长度/km length of waterfront space zone	选择片段数 number of selected segments
TC	太阳宫—翠洲门段	1.4	1.4	12
CN	翠洲门—南京站段	1.5	1.3	12
NX	南京站—玄武门段	2.7	2.7	18
XJ	玄武门—解放门段	1.8	1.8	15
JT	解放门—太阳宫段	2.5	1.8	9
全段total	全段	9.9	9.0	66

类型 classification	空间特点描述 description of spatial characteristics	空间典型照片 typical spatial photographs	空间示意图 spatial schematic diagram
人水邻接型(AD型) adjacency type	此类样本片段照片中,使用者活动空间可与水体直接接触,相邻但不相交
人水分隔型(SE型) separation type	此类样本片段照片中,使用者活动空间与水体间有一定阻隔,如大片绿地/较大高差等。水体与人分离,不易接触
人水交互型(IN型) intersect type	此类空间中,使用者活动空间会有一部分与水体交互,穿水面而过,或探入水面

景别 scenic grade	元素类别 classification	景观元素 landscape elements	Pearson相关系数 Pearson correlation coefficient	P	相关性 correlation relationship
水岸(前景) waterfront (foreground)	自然景观	水岸乔木V1	-0.450^***	<0.01	极显著负相关
		水岸灌木/草花V2	-0.357^***	0.003	极显著负相关
		水岸草坪V3	-0.296^**	0.016	显著负相关
		水岸山石V4	-0.348^***	0.004	极显著负相关
		水岸硬质V5	0.210^*	0.090	弱显著正相关
		监控/警示牌V6	-0.053	0.672	无明显相关性
	人工景观	功能设施V7	0.079	0.530	无明显相关性
		小品构筑V8	0.174	0.162	无明显相关性
		水上通道V9	0.269^**	0.029	显著正相关
水体(中景) waterbody (medium view)	自然景观	水面V10	-0.023	0.853	无明显相关性
		水生植物V11	-0.107	0.394	无明显相关性
	人工景观	水边围栏V12	0.552^***	<0.01	极显著正相关
		水上设施V13	-0.169	0.175	无明显相关性
对岸(远景) across the river (distant view)	自然景观	远景山体、植物V14	0.086	0.493	无明显相关性
		天空V15	0.571^***	<0.01	极显著正相关
	人工景观	远景构筑V16	0.293^**	0.017	显著正相关

景观元素 landscape elements	元素占比/% ratio of elements
景观元素 landscape elements	安全感较弱 weak sense of security	安全感较强 strong sense of security	安全感最强 the strongent sense of security
水岸乔木V1 waterfront tree	(20,30],(50,60],(60,70]	(10,20],(40,50]	(0,10]
水岸灌木/草花V2 waterfront shrubs and grasses (flowers)	(15,20],(20,30],(30,50]	(5,10],(10,15]	(0,5]
水边围栏V12 waterfront fences	(0,2.5],(7.5,10.0]	(2.5,5.0],(10.0,17.5]	>17.5
天空V15 skies	(0,10],(20,30]	(10,20](30,40]	(40,50]

类别(中位数) category (median)		检验统计量 test statistic		P
类别(中位数) category (median)		U	z	P
分离(338.565,n=24)	邻接(363.380,n=21)	167	-1.934	0.053^*
交互(389.040,n=18)	邻接(363.380,n=21)	148	-1.155	0.248
交互(389.040,n=18)	分离(338.565,n=24)	109	-2.720	0.007^***

景观元素对城市公园滨水空间使用者安全感的影响——以南京市玄武湖公园为例

The effect of landscape elements on users’ sense of security in urban park waterfront spaces: taking Nanjing Xuanwu Lake Park as an example

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 12

参考文献 27

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

作者

读者

审稿

元素分类 element classification	人水邻接型adjacency		人水分离型separation		人水交互型intersect
元素分类 element classification	R	P	R	P	R	P
水岸自然waterfront natural	-0.513^**	0.017	-0.423^**	0.039	-0.361	0.141
水岸人工waterfront artificial	0.398^*	0.074	0.536^***	0.007	0.176	0.485
水体自然water area natural	-0.141	0.542	0.041	0.850	-0.646^***	0.004
水体人工water area artificial	0.464^**	0.034	0.442^**	0.030	0.526^**	0.025
对岸自然opposite natural	0.422^*	0.057	0.348^*	0.096	0.646^***	0.004
对岸人工opposite artificial	0.342	0.129	0.073	0.736	0.295	0.234

[1]	王炜, 母洪娜, 杨慧敏, 孙陶泽. 接种丛枝菌根真菌(AMF)对夏雪片莲生长状况和光合特性的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2025, 49(3): 205-212.
[2]	叶永祥, 崔亭亭, 陈馨, 朱里莹. 基于多源数据的城市公园网络关注度时空特征与影响因素研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(6): 183-192.
[3]	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.
[4]	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.
[5]	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.
[6]	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.
[7]	樊瑶羽薇, 仁增朗加, 董建梅, 任媛, 葛大朋, 招雪晴, 苑兆和. 西藏野生石榴果实重要性状与综合评价[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2023, 47(4): 73-80.
[8]	郭丽丽, 张晨洁, 王菲, 沈佳佳, 张凯月, 何丽霞, 郭琪, 侯小改. 牡丹野生种根际土壤细菌群落特征分析[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2023, 47(3): 45-55.
[9]	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.
[10]	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.
[11]	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.
[12]	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.
[13]	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.
[14]	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.
[15]	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.