Accessibility and use of peri-urban green space for inner-city dwellers: A comparative study

Landscape and Urban Planning

Volumn 165, Issue , 2017, Pages 193-205

  Žlender, Vita ^a   Ward Thompson, Catharine ^b  

^a Independent Researcher   (Slovenia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SURVEYS; URBAN PLANNING;

COASTAL LANDSCAPES; COMPARATIVE STUDIES; EUROPEAN CITIES; FUTURE PLANNING; NATURAL LANDSCAPES; RURAL AND URBAN; TRANSIENT STATE; URBAN GREEN SPACES;

RURAL AREAS;

ACCESSIBILITY; COGNITION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; GREENBELT; GREENSPACE; HABITAT CORRIDOR; INNER CITY AREA; PERCEPTION; PERIURBAN AREA; PUBLIC ATTITUDE; QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY; SPACE USE; URBAN PLANNING; URBAN POPULATION;

EDINBURGH [SCOTLAND]; LJUBLJANA; SCOTLAND; SLOVENIA; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 84979662937     PISSN: 01692046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.06.011     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Ahern, J., Theories, methods and strategies for sustainable landscape planning. Tress, B., Tress, G., Fry, G., Opdam, P., (eds.) From landscape research to landscape planning: aspects of integration, education and application, 2005, Springer.
2. Allen, A., Understanding environmental change in the context of rural-urban interactions. Mcgregor, D.F., Simon, D., Thompson, D.A., (eds.) The peri-urban interface: approaches to sustainable natural and human resource use, 2006, Earthscan, London.
3. Bakhtiari, F., Jacobsen, J.B., Jensen, F.S., Willingness to travel to avoid recreation conflicts in Danish forests. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 13 (2014), 662–671.
4. Barker, K., Barker review of land use planning: final report—recommendations., 2006, The Stationery Office, London.
5. Bonaiuto, M., Fornara, F., Bonnes, M., Indexes of perceived residential environment quality and neighbourhood attachment in urban environments: a confirmation study on the city of Rome. Landscape and Urban Planning 65 (2003), 41–52.
6. Bramley, G., Hague, C., Kirk, K., Prior, A., Raemaekers, J., Smith, H., Review of green belt policy in scotland. 2004, Edinburgh, Scottish Executive Social Research.
7. Busck, A.G., Kristensen, S.P., Præstholm, S., Primdahl, J., Porous landscapes—the case of greater copenhagen. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 7 (2008), 145–156.
8. Countryside Agency (CA), The countryside in and around towns: a vision for connecting town and country in the pursuit of sustainable development. 2005, Countryside Agency, Cheltenham.
9. The City of Edinburgh Council (CEC), Edinburgh by numbers 2012/13. 2012, The City of Edinburgh Council, Edinburgh.
10. Cadieux, K.V., Political ecology of exurban lifestyle landscapes at Christchurch's contested urban fence. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 7 (2008), 183–194.
11. Carr, S., Francis, M., Rivlin, G.L., Stone, M.A., Public space. 1992, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
12. Chiesura, A., The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landscape and Urban Planning 68 (2004), 129–138.
13. Coombes, E., Jones, A.P., Hillsdon, M., The relationship of physical activity and overweight to objectively measured green space accessibility and use. Social Science & Medicine 70 (2010), 816–822.
14. EEA (European Environmental Agency), Urban sprawl in Europe: the ignored challenge. 2006, European Communities, Luxembourg.
15. EEA (European Environmental Agency), Transport at a crossroads: TERM 2008: indicators tracking transport and environment in the European Union. EEA report, 2008, EEA, (European Environment Agency), Copenhagen, 2009.
16. Frumkin, H., Beyond toxicity: human health and the natural environment. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 20 (2001), 234–240.
17. Gallent, N., Andersson, J., Bianconi, M., Planning on the edge: the context for planning at the rural-urban fringe. 2006, Routledge.
18. Giffinger, R., Fertner, C., Kramar, H., Meijers, E., City-ranking of European medium-sized cities. 2007, Centre of Regional Science, Vienna UT.
19. Groome, D., Green corridors: a discussion of a planning concept. Landscape and Urban Planning 19 (1990), 383–387.
20. Guzelj, T. & Košak, T. 2003. Anketa po gospodinjstvih. Raziskava potovalnih navad prebivalcev ljubljanske regije. In: Urbi d.o.o., Pnz-Projekt Nizke Zgradbe d.o.o. & Ninamedia d.o.o. (eds.), Mestna občina, Ljubljana.
21. Halden, D., McGuigan, D., Nisbet, A., Mckinnon, A., Accessibility: review of measuring techniques and their application. 2000, Scottish Executive Central Research Unit.
22. Hall, C., McVittie, A., Moran, D., What does the public want from agriculture and the countryside? A review of evidence and methods. Journal of Rural Studies 20 (2004), 211–225.
23. Hornis, W., Ritsema Van Eck, J., A typology of peri-urban areas in the Netherlands. Tijdschrift Voor Economische En Sociale Geografie 99 (2008), 619–628.
24. Jenks, M., Burton, E., Williams, K., The compact city: a sustainable urban form?. 1996, Routledge, London.
25. Kühn, M., Greenbelt and Green Heart: separating and integrating landscapes in European city regions. Landscape and Urban Planning 64 (2003), 19–27.
26. Kaplan, R., Kaplan, S., The experience of nature: a psychological perspective. 1989, Cambridge University Press.
27. Municipality of Ljubljana (MOL). 2010. OPN MOL SD (Odlok o občinskem prostorskem načrtu Mestne občine Ljubljana −strateški del. Ljubljana).
28. Maat, K., De Vries, P., The influence of the residential environment on green-space travel: testing the compensation hypothesis. Environment and Planning A 38 (2006), 2111–2127.
29. McGregor, D.F., Simon, D., Thompson, D.A., The peri-urban interface: approaches to sustainable natural and human resource use. 2006, Earthscan/James & James, London.
30. Meeus, S.J., Gulinck, H., Semi-urban areas in landscape research: a review. Living Reviews in Landscape Research 2 (2008), 1–45.
31. Natural England, Green infrastructure and the urban fringe: learning lessons from the countryside in and around towns programme. 2007, Natural England.
32. Natural England, Green infrastructure guidance. 2009, Natural England.
33. Nature and Countryside within the Urban Fringe. (2012). European Periurban areas: Characterization and a management recommendations, European Federation of Metropolitan and Periurban Natural and Rural Spaces (Fedenatur).
34. Neuvonen, M., Sievänen, T., Tönnes, S., Koskela, T., Access to green areas and the frequency of visits—a case study in Helsinki. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 6 (2007), 235–247.
35. Nilsson, K., Pauleit, S., Bell, S., Aalbers, C., Nielsen, T.S., Peri-urban futures: scenarios and models for land use change in Europe. 2013, Springer Science & Business Media.
36. Palang, H., Spek, T., Stenseke, M., Digging in the past: new conceptual models in landscape history and their relevance in peri-urban landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 100 (2011), 344–346.
37. Pennington, M., Liberating the land: the case for private land-use planning. 2002, The Institute of Economic Affairs, London.
38. Phillips, D., Williams, K., Al, E., Literature review on peri-urban conceptualisation and management approaches. Final technical report for project R6949, 1999, School of Geography, University of Nottingham, UK, Nottingham.
39. Pinho, P., Silva, C., Næss, P., Sousa, F., Reis, J.P., Giulietti, F., et al. MOPUS: mobility patterns and urban structure. 2010, Faculty of Engineering of the University of Porto, Porto.
40. Qviström, M., Saltzman, K., Exploring landscape dynamics at the edge of the city: spatial plans and everyday places at the inner urban fringe of Malmö, Sweden. Landscape Research 31 (2006), 21–41.
41. Qviström, M., Saltzman, K., Ephemeral landscapes at the rural-urban fringe. European landscapes and lifestyles. The mediterranean and beyond, 2007, Edições Universitárias Lusófonas, Lisboa, Portugal, 165–172.
42. Qviström, M., Saltzman, K., Ambiguous edgelands: landscape studies beyond rural-urban divides and disciplinary trench-lines. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 7 (2008), 143–144.
43. Qviström, M., Shadows of planning: on landscape/planning history and inherited landscape ambiguities at the urban fringe. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography 92 (2010), 219–235.
44. Rupprecht, C.D., Byrne, J.A., Ueda, H., Lo, A.Y., ‘It's real, not fake like a park’: Residents’ perception and use of informal urban green-space in Brisbane, Australia and Sapporo, Japan. Landscape and Urban Planning 143 (2015), 205–218.
45. Schipperijn, J., Stigsdotter, U.K., Randrup, T.B., Troelsen, J., Influences on the use of urban green space—a case study in Odense, Denmark. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 9 (2010), 25–32.
46. Schrijnen, P.M., Infrastructure networks and red-green patterns in city regions. Landscape and Urban Planning 48 (2000), 191–204.
47. Schroeder, H.W., Environment, behavior, and design research on urban forests. Zube, E.H., Moore, G.T., (eds.) Advances in environment, behavior, and design, Vol. 2, 1988, Plenum Press, New York.
48. Scott, A., Carter, C., Reed, M., Larkham, P., Adams, D., Morton, N., et al. Disintegrated development at the rural-urban fringe: re-connecting spatial planning theory and practice. Progress in Planning 83 (2013), 1–52.
49. Semm, K., Palang, H., Landscape accessibility: spaces for accessibility or spaces for communication?. Living Reviews in Landscape Research, 4, 2010.
50. Shoard, M., Edgelands of promise. Landscapes 1 (2000), 74–93.
51. Simon, D., McGregor, D., Thompson, D., Contemporary perspectives on the peri-urban zones of cities in developing areas. Mcgregor, D.F., Simon, D., Thompson, D.A., (eds.) The peri-urban interface: approaches to sustainable natural and human resource use, 2006, Earthscan, London.
52. Sotoudehnia, F., Comber, L., Measuring perceived accessibility to urban green space: an integration of GIS and participatory map. The 14th AGILE international conference on geographic information science, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2011.
53. Sugiyama, T., Francis, J., Middleton, N.J., Owen, N., Giles-Corti, B., Associations between recreational walking and attractiveness, size, and proximity of neighborhood open spaces. American Journal of Public Health, 100, 2010, 1752.
54. Swaffield, S., Primdahl, J., Spatial concepts in landscape analysis and policy: some implications of globalisation. Landscape Ecology 21 (2006), 315–331.
55. Swanwick, C., Society's attitudes to and preferences for land and landscape. Land Use Policy 26 (2009), S62–S75.
56. The Scottish Government, Reasons for travel [Online]. The scottish government. 2013 Available: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Transport-Travel/TrendReasonsforTravel (accessed 15.4.13.).
57. Tjallingii, S.P., Ecology on the edge: landscape and ecology between town and country. Landscape and Urban Planning 48 (2000), 103–119.
58. Tyrväinen, L., Mäkinen, K., Schipperijn, J., Tools for mapping social values of urban woodlands and other green areas. Landscape and Urban Planning 79 (2007), 5–19.
59. Van Herzele, A., De Clercq, E.M., Wiedemann, T., Strategic planning for new woodlands in the urban periphery: through the lens of social inclusiveness. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 3 (2005), 177–188.
60. Yin, R.K., Case study research: design and methods. 2009, SAGE Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, California.
61. Žlender, V., Open space on the edge of the city: exploring how people's perceptions and usage can inform management of peri-urban open spaces, focusing on case studies of Ljubljana and Edinburgh. Ph.D. thesis. 2014, University of Edinburgh.