Who Uses Urban Parks? A Study of User Characteristics and Activity Patterns of Ramna Park, Dhaka
محورهای موضوعی : Urban Design
Niaz Zafri
1
,
Anurima Jahangir
2
,
Ahmed Prithul
3
,
Mashrur Rahman
4
,
Nusrat Sharmin
5
,
Ishrat Islam
6
1 - Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Architecture, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET), Dhaka, Bangladesh
2 - Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET), Dhaka, Bangladesh
3 - Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET), Dhaka, Bangladesh.
4 - Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET), Dhaka, Bangladesh
5 - Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET), Dhaka-1000, Bangladesh.
6 - Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET), Dhaka, Bangladesh
کلید واژه: purpose, catchment area, activity pattern, mobility pattern, Park-user,
چکیده مقاله :
A growing body of research shows positive association between parks and physical activity, but very few studies have investigated the characteristics of users and how the activities vary according to different user groups. The purpose of this study was to investigate the socio-demographic profile of the users, their activities and motivation of visiting the park. Total 400 users of Ramna Park were surveyed in face to face interview in different time periods. The participants were asked to provide information about their socio-economic profile, frequency and purpose of visit, mobility and activity patterns in the park and level of satisfaction about different facilities. At a random selection of the sample, we found larger proportion of male visitors than female visitors with a majority in the age group 40-60 years. The park has a large catchment area which extends beyond the range of walking distance and the frequency of visiting the park was found closely associated with the proximity of the users. Besides, no significant association was found between the proximity and duration of staying in the park. An overwhelming majority of the visitors come to the park for health purpose mainly for walking, jogging and physical exercise. The findings suggest that the purpose of visiting the park significantly varies according to the gender and age group of the respondents. The visitors were also asked about their satisfaction level and problems they usually faced based on their individual perception. Most of them raised their concerns for poor toilet facility and waste management.
Byrne, J., & Wolch, J. (2009). Nature, race, and parks: past research and future directions for geographic research. Progress in Human Geography, 33(6), 743-765.
Brander, L. M., & Koetse, M. J. (2011). The value of urban open space: Meta-analyses of contingent valuation and hedonic pricing results. Journal of environmental management, 92(10), 2763-2773.
Byomkesh, T., Nakagoshi, N., & Dewan, A. M. (2012). Urbanization and green space dynamics in Greater Dhaka, Bangladesh. Landscape and Ecological Engineering, 8(1), 45-58.
Chowdhury, A. (2004). Parks in the urban environment an analytical study regarding urban parks of Dhaka. Unpublished MURP thesis, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka.
Cohen, D. A., McKenzie, T. L., Sehgal, A., Williamson, S., Golinelli, D., & Lurie, N. (2007). Contribution of public parks to physical activity. American journal of public health, 97(3), 509-514.
Dooling, S., Simon, G., & Yocom, K. (2006). Place-based urban ecology: a century of park planning in Seattle. Urban Ecosystems, 9(4), 299-321.
Escobedo, F. J., Kroeger, T., & Wagner, J. E. (2011). Urban forests and pollution mitigation: Analyzing ecosystem services and disservices. Environmental pollution, 159(8-9), 2078-2087.
Gobster, P. H. (2002). Managing urban parks for a racially and ethnically diverse clientele. Leisure Sciences, 24(2), 143-159.
Groenewegen, P. P., Van den Berg, A. E., De Vries, S., & Verheij, R. A. (2006). Vitamin G: effects of green space on health, well-being, and social safety. BMC public health, 6(1), 149.
Grove, J. M., Troy, A. R., O’Neil-Dunne, J. P., Burch, W. R., Cadenasso, M. L., & Pickett, S. T. A. (2006). Characterization of households and their implications for the vegetation of urban ecosystems. Ecosystems, 9(4), 578-597.
Harnik, P., & Welle, B. J. (2009). Measuring the economic value of a city park system. Trust for Public Land.
Hayward, D. G., & Weitzer, W. H. (1984). The public's image of urban parks: Past amenity, present ambivalence, uncertain future. Urban Ecology, 8(3), 243-268.
Islam, M. M., Kawsar, M. A., & Ahmed, R. U. (2002). Open space in Dhaka city: A study on the use of parks in the Dhaka city corporation area. Unpublished BURP thesis, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka.
Jay, M., & Schraml, U. (2009). Understanding the role of urban forests for migrants–uses, perception and integrative potential. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 8(4), 283-294.
Jilcott, S. B., Evenson, K. R., Laraia, B. A., & Ammerman, A. S. (2007). Association Between Physical Activity and Proximity to Physical Activity Resources Among Low-Income, Midlife Women. Preventing chronic disease, 4(1), 1-16.
Kearney, A. R. (2006). Residential development patterns and neighborhood satisfaction: Impacts of density and nearby nature. Environment and Behavior, 38(1), 112-139.
Keniger, L. E., Gaston, K. J., Irvine, K. N., & Fuller, R. A. (2013). What are the benefits of interacting with nature?. International journal of environmental research and public health, 10(3), 913-935.
Lin, B. B., Fuller, R. A., Bush, R., Gaston, K. J., & Shanahan, D. F. (2014). Opportunity or orientation? Who uses urban parks and why. PLoS One, 9(1), e87422.
Lo, A. Y., & Jim, C. Y. (2010). Differential community effects on perception and use of urban greenspaces. Cities, 27(6), 430-442.
Mishu, M. R., Barua, U., & Stoican, I. A. (2014). The changing nature of urban public places in Dhaka City. Urbanism. Arhitectura. Construction, 5(4), 5.
Mowen, A., Orsega-Smith, E., Payne, L., Ainsworth, B., & Godbey, G. (2007). The role of park proximity and social support in shaping park visitation, physical activity, and perceived health among older adults. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 4(2), 167-179.
Nehrin, K., Quamruzzaman, J. M., & Khan, M. S. (2004). Status of Parks and Garden in old Dhaka. Unpublished BURP thesis, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka.
Neema, M. N., Hossain, M. R., Haque, A. M., & Farhan, M. H. M. (2014). Multi-Criteria Evaluation of Quality of Existing Urban Parks in Dhaka City-Towards Achieving Livable City. International Journal of Environment, 3(3), 1-15.
Oguz, D. (2000). User surveys of Ankara’s urban parks. Landscape and urban planning, 52(2-3), 165-171.
Rahman, M., Zaman, K. B., & Hafiz, R. (2016). Translating text into space for mapping the past territory of a city: a study on spatial development of Dhaka during the Mughal period. City, Territory and Architecture, 3(1), 7.
Sacker, A., & Cable, N. (2005). Do adolescent leisure-time physical activities foster health and well-being in adulthood? Evidence from two British birth cohorts. The European Journal of Public Health, 16(3), 331-335.
Siddiqui, M. M. R. (1990). Recreational Facilities in Dhaka City: a study of existing parks and open spaces. Unpublished MURP thesis, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, Dhaka.
Tinsley, H. E., Tinsley, D. J., & Croskeys, C. E. (2002). Park usage, social milieu, and psychosocial benefits of park use reported by older urban park users from four ethnic groups. Leisure Sciences, 24(2), 199-218.
Yanez, E., & Muzzy, W. (2005). Healthy parks, healthy communities: Addressing health disparities and park inequities through public financing of parks, playgrounds, and other physical activity settings. San Francisco, CA: The Trust for Public Land.
