Influences of Boundary Space Amelioration on Residents' Key Perceptions in Communities
Main Article Content
Abstract
Boundary space amelioration (BSA) aims to eliminate barriers between two sites and activate the grey residual space in-between. School campus in Taiwan is often surrounded by walls, which blocks its connection to communities and often creates security concerns. School campus has become the most popular target for BSA, which tries to turn it into a functional and aesthetic space. This study intends to explore the influences of campus BSA within a community, especially its relationships with neighborhood safety, perceived change and place attachment. The result shows that the improvement of boundary environment has a significant influence on all three perceptions.
Metrics
Article Details
License
Copyright (c) 2019 Heng Zhang, Yu-Hao Ou, Yu-Min Chang
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Abdullah, A., Marzbali, M. H., Ramayah, T., Bahauddin, A., & Tilaki, M. J. M. (2016). Territorial functioning and fear of crime: Testing for mediation in structural equation modeling. Security Journal, 29(3), 461-484. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/sj.2013.40
Anton, C. E., & Lawrence, C. (2016). The relationship between place attachment, the theory of planned behavior and residents’ response to place change. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 47, 145-154. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.05.010
Bonaiuto, M., Carrus, G., Martorella, H., & Bonnes, M. (2002). Local identity processes and environmental attitudes in land use changes: The case of natural protected areas. Journal of economic psychology, 23(5), 631-653. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(02)00121-6
Bordovskaia, N. V., & Baeva, I. A. (2015). The psychological safety of the educational environment and the psychological well-being of Russian secondary school pupils and teachers. Psychology in Russia, 8(1), 86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2015.0108
Clifton, K. J., & Kreamer-Fults, K. (2007). An examination of the environmental attributes associated with pedestrian–vehicular crashes near public schools. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 39(4), 708-715. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2006.11.003
Coeterier, J. F. (1987). De waarneming en waardering van landschappen. Coeterier.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological bulletin, 112(1), 155. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
Daniel, T. C., & Vining, J. (1983). Methodological issues in the assessment of landscape quality Behavior and the natural environment (pp. 39-84): Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-3539-9_3
Denes, A. (1993). Notes on eco-logic: Environmental artwork, visual philosophy and global perspective. Leonardo, 387-395. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1576033
Devine‐Wright, P. (2009). Rethinking NIMBYism: The role of place attachment and place identity in explaining place‐protective action. Journal of community & applied social psychology, 19(6), 426-441. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.1004
Grahn, P., & Stigsdotter, U. K. (2010). The relation between perceived sensory dimensions of urban green space and stress restoration. Landscape and Urban Planning, 94(3-4), 264-275. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2009.10.012
Hair, J. F. (2010). Black, WC, Babin, BJ, & Anderson, RE (2010). Multivariate data analysis, 7.
Herzog, T. R., Herbert, E. J., Kaplan, R., & Crooks, C. (2000). Cultural and developmental comparisons of landscape perceptions and preferences. Environment and Behavior, 32(3), 323-346. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00139160021972559
Hong, J., & Chen, C. (2014). The role of the built environment on perceived safety from crime and walking: examining direct and indirect impacts. Transportation, 41(6), 1171-1185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-014-9535-4
Jessor, R., & Jessor, S. L. (1973). The perceived environment in behavioral science: Some conceptual issues and some illustrative data. American Behavioral Scientist, 16(6), 801-828. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000276427301600602
Kaltenborn, B. P., & Bjerke, T. (2002). Associations between landscape preferences and place attachment: a study in Røros, Southern Norway. Landscape Research, 27(4), 381-396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0142639022000023943
Kaltenborn, B. P., & Williams, D. R. (2002). The meaning of place: Attachments to Femundsmarka National Park, Norway, among tourists and locals. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift, 56(3), 189-198. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00291950260293011
Kasarda, J. D., & Janowitz, M. (1974). Community attachment in mass society. American sociological review, 328-339. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2094293
Korpela, K. M., Ylén, M., Tyrväinen, L., & Silvennoinen, H. (2009). Stability of self-reported favourite places and place attachment over a 10-month period. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(1), 95-100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.05.008
LaScala, E. A., Johnson, F. W., & Gruenewald, P. J. (2001). Neighborhood characteristics of alcohol-related pedestrian injury collisions: a geostatistical analysis. Prevention Science, 2(2), 123-134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011547831475
Lau, S. S. Y., Gou, Z., & Liu, Y. (2014). Healthy campus by open space design: Approaches and guidelines. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 3(4), 452-467. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2014.06.006
Lewicka, M. (2013). Localism and Activity as two dimensions of people–place bonding: The role of cultural capital. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.07.002
Journal of Environmental Psychology, 36, 43-53.
Lin, C.C., & Lockwood, M. (2014). Forms and sources of place attachment: Evidence from two protected areas. Geoforum, 53, 74-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2014.02.008
Lindsay, P. H., & Norman, D. A. (2013). Human information processing: An introduction to psychology: Academic press.
Low, S. M., & Altman, I. (1992). Place attachment Place attachment (pp. 1-12): Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-8753-4_1
Lynch, K., & Hack, G. (1984). Site planning: MIT press.
Matilainen, A., Pohja-Mykrä, M., Lähdesmäki, M., & Kurki, S. (2017). “I feel it is mine!”–Psychological ownership in relation to natural resources. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 51, 31-45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.03.002
Mehta, V. (2014). Evaluating public space. Journal of Urban Design, 19(1), 53-88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2013.854698
Moore, R. L., & Graefe, A. R. (1994). Attachments to recreation settings: The case of rail‐trail users. Leisure sciences, 16(1), 17-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01490409409513214
Muslim, Z. (2016). Design Transformation based on Nature and Identity Formation in the Design of Landscape Elements. Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal, 1(1), 189-196. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21834/e-bpj.v1i1.215
Ode, Å., Fry, G., Tveit, M. S., Messager, P., & Miller, D. (2009). Indicators of perceived naturalness as drivers of landscape preference. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(1), 375-383. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.10.013
Omar, D., Omar, K. A., Othman, S., & Yusoff, Z. M. (2016). Walkability design for urban public housing park. Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal, 1(3), 311-317. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21834/e-bpj.v1i3.375
Pikora, T., Giles-Corti, B., Bull, F., Jamrozik, K., & Donovan, R. (2003). Developing a framework for assessment of the environmental determinants of walking and cycling. Social science & medicine, 56(8), 1693-1703. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00163-6
Purcell, A. T., & Lamb, R. J. (1998). Preference and naturalness: An ecological approach. Landscape and Urban Planning, 42(1), 57-66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(98)00073-5
Rapoport, A. (2016). Human aspects of urban form: towards a man—environment approach to urban form and design: Elsevier.
Riley, R. B. (1992). Attachment to the ordinary landscape Place attachment (pp. 13-35): Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-8753-4_2
Ruihai, Z., & Dinghai, Y. (2017). Analysis and reform strategies of campus landscape of Hainan University. Journal of Landscape Research, 9(2), 23.
Saeidi, S., Mohammadzadeh, M., Salmanmahiny, A., & Mirkarimi, S. H. (2017). Performance evaluation of multiple methods for landscape aesthetic suitability mapping: A comparative study between Multi-Criteria Evaluation, Logistic Regression and Multi-Layer Perceptron neural network. Land Use Policy, 67, 1-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.05.014
Saelens, B. E., Sallis, J. F., Black, J. B., & Chen, D. (2003). Neighborhood-based differences in physical activity: an environment scale evaluation. American journal of public health, 93(9), 1552-1558. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.93.9.1552
Scannell, L., & Gifford, R. (2017). The experienced psychological benefits of place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 51, 256-269. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.04.001
Sell, J. L., & Zube, E. H. (1986). Perception of and response to environmental change. Journal of architectural and planning research, 33-54.
Strumse, E. (1996). Demographic differences in the visual preferences for agrarian landscapes in western Norway. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16(1), 17-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1996.0002
Sullivan, W. C., Kuo, F. E., & Depooter, S. F. (2004). The fruit of urban nature: Vital neighborhood spaces. Environment and Behavior, 36(5), 678-700. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X04264945
Toruńczyk‐Ruiz, S., & Lewicka, M. (2016). Perceived social diversity and neighbourhood attachment: The role of intergroup ties and affective appraisals of the environment. Evidence from Poland. European Journal of Social Psychology, 46(7), 818-832. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2209
Tuan, Y.-F. (1975). Place: an experiential perspective. Geographical review, 151-165. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/213970
Van Treese II, J. W., Koeser, A. K., Fitzpatrick, G. E., Olexa, M. T., & Allen, E. J. (2017). A review of the impact of roadway vegetation on drivers’ health and well-being and the risks associated with single-vehicle crashes. Arboricultural Journal, 39(3), 179-193. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03071375.2017.1374591
von Wirth, T., Grêt-Regamey, A., Moser, C., & Stauffacher, M. (2016). Exploring the influence of perceived urban change on residents' place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 46, 67-82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.03.001
Williams, D. R., & Roggenbuck, J. W. (1989). Measuring place attachment: Some preliminary results. Paper presented at the Abstracts: 1989 leisure research symposium.
Wolf, K. L. (2003). Freeway roadside management: the urban forest beyond the white line. Journal of Arboriculture 29(3), 127-136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.2003.016
Wood, L., Shannon, T., Bulsara, M., Pikora, T., McCormack, G., & Giles-Corti, B. (2008). The anatomy of the safe and social suburb: an exploratory study of the built environment, social capital and residents’ perceptions of safety. Health & place, 14(1), 15-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2007.04.004
Yu, K. (1995). Cultural variations in landscape preference: comparisons among Chinese sub-groups and Western design experts. Landscape and Urban Planning, 32(2), 107-126. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-2046(94)00188-9
Zhang, H., & Lin, S.-H. (2011). Affective appraisal of residents and visual elements in the neighborhood: A case study in an established suburban community. Landscape and Urban Planning, 101(1), 11-21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.12.010