Restorative Experience Perceived by the Users
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The recreational forests are facing pressure by surrounding developments such as highway and housing. Urban development has implications for the benefits offered by recreational forests, endangered biodiversity, water quality and wildlife to result a place that is no longer enjoyable to visit. It is important to conserve the recreational forests that can contribute to the urbanites quality of life. Based on the results from the site observations, self-administered questionnaires and in-depth interviews at two recreational forests (The Ampang and Kanching Recreational Forests), this paper describes recreational forest users’ experience and what makes they perceived restored while being in the forest.
Metrics
Article Details
License
Copyright (c) 2018 Norhuzailin Hussain, Faziawati Abdul Aziz
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Bratman, G.N., Daily, G.C., Levy, B.J., & Gross, J.J. (2015). The benefits of nature experience: Improved affect and cognition. Landscape and Urban Planning, 138, 41-50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.02.005
De Vellis, R.F. (2003). Scale Development: Theory and Applications (2nd ed.). London, Sage Publications Inc.
Forestry Commission Wales. (2009). Woodlands for Wales. Welsh Assembly Government, United Kingdom. ISBN 978-0-7504-5034-8.
Grinde, B., & Patil, G.G. (2009). Biophilia: Does visual contact with nature impact on health and well-being?. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 6, 2332-2342. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph6092332
Hartig, T. (1993). Nature experience in a transactional perspective. Landscape and Urban Planning, 25, 17-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(93)90120-3
Hussain, N. (2014). Use and experience in two recreational forests in Selangor state, Malaysia: The impact of age, gender and ethnicity. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. The University of Sheffield.
Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. New York, Cambridge University Press.
Manual Perhutanan. (2003). Jilid i 2005. Jabatan Perhutanan Semenanjung Malaysia. Ampang Press Sdn. Bhd.
O’Brien, E. (2006). Social housing and green space: A case study in Inner London. Forestry, 79, 535-551. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpl029
Ulrich, R.S. (1981). Natural versus urban scenes: Some psychophysiological effects. Environment and Behavior, 13, 523-556. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916581135001
Scopelliti, M. & Vittoria Giuliani, M. (2004). Choosing restorative environments across the lifespan: A matter of place experience. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 693-712. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.11.002
Ulrich, R.S. (1993). Biophilia, biophobia, and natural landscapes. In S.R. Kellert & E.O. Wilson (Eds.), The Biophilia hypothesis (73-137). USA: Island Press.
Ulrich, R.S. (2008). Biophilic theory and research for healthcare design. In S.R. Kellert, J.H. Heerwagen & M.L. Mador (Eds.), Biophilic design: The theory, science, and practice of bringing buildings to life (pp. 87-106). New Jersey: John Wiley.
Ward Thompson, C., Aspinall, P. & Roe, J. (2014). Acces to green space in disadvantaged urban communities: Evidence of salutogenic effects based on biomarker and self-report measures of wellbeing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 153, 10-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.10.036
Wilson, E.O. (1993). The Biophilia Hypothesis. In S. R. Kellert & E. O. Wilson (Eds.), Biophilic and the conservation ethic (pp. 31-69). Washington: Island Press.