打印

作者

Ina Säumel;Jan Hogrefe;Luca Battisti;Thomas Wachtel;Federica Larcher

来源

URBAN FORESTRY & URBAN GREENING,Vol.58,Issue1,Article 126949

语言

英文

关键字

Belonging;Environmental justice;Health relevant ecosystem services;Place attachment;Public health;Urban planning

作者单位

Integrative Research Institute Transformation of Human-Environment-Systems (IRITHESys), Research Group Multifunctional Landscapes, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099, Berlin, Germany;Trautmann Landschaftsarchitekten, Großbeerenstraße 55, 10965, Berlin, Germany;Department of Agricultural Forest and Food Sciences, University of Turin, Largo Paolo Braccini 2. 10095, Grugliasco, TO, Italy;Integrative Research Institute Transformation of Human-Environment-Systems (IRITHESys), Research Group Multifunctional Landscapes, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Unter den Linden 6, 10099, Berlin, Germany;Trautmann Landschaftsarchitekten, Großbeerenstraße 55, 10965, Berlin, Germany;Department of Agricultural Forest and Food Sciences, University of Turin, Largo Paolo Braccini 2. 10095, Grugliasco, TO, Italy

摘要

Though the often semi-public green spaces of the residential environment, usually created during the building of the houses, are of a pivotal importance for less-mobile people, after-work recreation and healthy development of children, there has been relatively little research on them. Using face-to-face questionnaires, we explored residents’ use and perceptions of local greenery in eight disadvantaged neighborhoods of Berlin that are exposed to high loads of environmental stressors and belonging to four relevant building types of Central European cities. We find that the greenery of housing complexes of modernism is highly appreciated by local residents; that residents visit parks not more often than once a week but benefit daily from residential greenery; that passive use (enjoying the sun, fresh air) dominates active (meeting neighbors, exercising); that residents visit parks once per week but benefit daily from residential greenery; that the baseline for judgement differs among respondents with different perspectives on the city (e.g. car drivers vs. users of public transport; active vs. passive users); and that residents are highly attached to place but not to their neighbors. Co-creative involvement of residents in the design and management of the residential greenery in order to encourage social contacts and neighbor’s physical activity on the doorstep can bring about change, making residential greenery the social tissue of ‘disadvantaged’ neighborhoods.