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

doi:10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202312005

JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY ›› 2025, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (3): 235-244.doi: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202312005

Previous Articles Next Articles

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
Contact: ZHANG Qinghai E-mail:cyn2008@126.com;1043176787@qq.com

Abstract

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

CLC Number:

TU985

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, 2025, 49(3): 235-244.

Figures/Tables 12

Fig. 1

Table 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Table 2

Table 3

Fig. 4

Table 4

Fig. 5

Table 5

Linear regression results of landscape elements and safety perception"

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

Table 5

Table 6

Table 7

References 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.

Related Articles 15

[1]	WANG Wei, MU Hongna, YANG Huimin, SUN Taoze. The influence of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) inoculation on the growth status and photosynthetic characteristics of Leucojum aestivum [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2025, 49(3): 205-212.
[2]	YE Yongxiang, CUI Tingting, CHEN Xin, ZHU Liying. Spatial and temporal characteristics and factors influencing the network attention degree of urban parks based on multi-source data [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2024, 48(6): 183-192.
[3]	LIU Yanfen, HUANG Ruxian, AI Jinwen, YANG Liuqing, YU Kunyong, LIU Jian. The cold island effect and its influence on urban parks in Fuzhou City, China [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2024, 48(3): 295-303.
[4]	YANG He, MI Feng. Associations between urban green space accessibility and mental health of residents from the perspective of socio-economic status [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2024, 48(1): 248-256.
[5]	YANG Yunfeng, YANG Jiaqi. Ecological renovation design of urban parks in subtropical regions based on mosquito prevention and control [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2023, 47(6): 211-218.
[6]	FAN Yaoyuwei, Renzeng Langjia, DONG Jianmei, REN Yuan, GE Dapeng, ZHAO Xueqing, YUAN Zhaohe. Comprehensive evaluation on important traits of wild pomegranate fruits from Tibet [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2023, 47(4): 73-80.
[7]	GUO Lili, ZHANG Chenjie, WANG Fei, SHEN Jiajia, ZHANG Kaiyue, HE Lixia, GUO Qi, HOU Xiaogai. Analysis of bacterial community characteristics in the rhizosphere soil of wild tree peony [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2023, 47(3): 45-55.
[8]	ZHANG Yinfeng, CAI Hongyue, PENG Jingen, LIU Xuejun, XIE Lijuan, ZHANG Hua, WANG Yanmei. Effects of different planting environments on the growth of Rhododendron moulmainense in Shenzhen urban parks [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2023, 47(2): 197-204.
[9]	HUANG Shuo, ZHNEG Yu, CHENG Linli, JI Chunyue, WANG Shan, DONG Jianwen. The impact mechanism of urban park health benefit evaluation based on landscape preference [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2022, 46(5): 221-228.
[10]	HOU Xiujuan, YAN Xiaoyun, WANG Bo, LI Xinyuan, BAO Hongguang. Variation characteristics of the air anion and air particulate matter in arid and semi-arid urban park green spaces during summer [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2022, 46(4): 212-220.
[11]	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, 2021, 45(5): 223-231.
[12]	ZHENG Lingyu, PU Haixia, JIANG Zeping. A study on spatial satisfaction of urban parks based on visible green index [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2020, 44(4): 199-204.
[13]	ZHANG Xiaoyan, JI Xinyue, WANG Lei, ZHANG Qiwen, NERVO Giuseppe, LI Jinhua. Genetic variation in growth traits at different sites and correlationship among growth traits and leaf traits of Section Aigeiros clones [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2020, 44(3): 65-73.
[14]	ZHANG Jinguang, WEI Wei, CHENG Yingyi, ZHAO Bing. Study on site selection of small and medium-sized city parks based on GIS suitability evaluation [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2020, 44(1): 171-178.
[15]	TIAN Yaowu,LIU Yifeng,WANG Cong,WANG Gang,HE Wuyuheng. Correlation between forest soil organic carbon density and environmental factors in Funiu Mountain, Henan Province [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2019, 43(01): 83-90.

Metrics

Comments

www.nldxb.njfu.edu.cn

Edited ＆ Published by Editorial Department of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Sciences Edition)
Address： No.159 Longpan Road,Nanjing 210037 Jiangsu,P.R.China
E-mail ：xuebao@njfu.edu.cn , xuebao@njfu.com.cn
Telephone +86-25-85428247,85427076
Distributed by China International Book Trading Corporation P.O. Box 399, Beijing ,P.R. China

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^***

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

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 12

References 27

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

Author

Reader

Reviewer

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