Temporal and spatial differences in human activities performed in Urban Green Spaces of Vilnius (Lithuania)

Abstract

Urban green spaces (UGS) are relevant to city well-being, as recognized by the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, few studies have studied the temporal use of UGS. This work assessed the seasonal, weekly, and daily use of three urban green spaces (Vingis Park, Bernardino Garden, and Jomantas Park) in Vilnius (Lithuania). The study is based on an on-site observation-based survey, which recorded users’ characteristics, activities, and weather conditions during summer and winter. The results showed that UGS’s seasonal, weekly, and daily use differed according to park and users’ characteristics. Parks with a higher diversity of facilities had a high seasonal difference in the number of observed activities. User numbers were higher in the summer for activities with children, social activities, sports, and water activities than in the winter. Jomantas Park had the lowest variability in user characteristics. Weather variables were linked to changes in users’ activities. Higher precipitation and lower temperature were associated with reducing the number of users and the diversity of registered activities. Most of the stationary activities were observed during summer. The diversity of the observed activities was associated with the available facilities rather than the park size. The distribution of stationary activities was spatially correlated with facility/equipment (benches, playgrounds, sports, and fitness equipment) and proximity to water features. The results of this study are relevant for UGS design, planning, and management.

Keywords

Urban parks / Seasonal differences / Temporal use / Time of day / Spatial distribution of UGS users

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Luís Valença Pinto: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Visualization, Writing – original draft. Carla Sofia Santos Ferreira: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. Paulo Pereira: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – review & editing.

Declaration of competing interests

The authors certify that they have NO affiliations with or involvement in any organisation or entity with any financial interest, or nonfinancial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) through the PhD grant SFRH/BD/149710/2019, which is attributed to the first author, and the institutional scientific employment program-contract CEECINST/00077/2021 attributed to Carla Ferreira.

Supplementary materials

Supplementary material associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.geosus.2024.03.002.

References

[1] Ahas, R, Aasa, A, Mark, Ü, Pae, T, Kull, A., 2007. Seasonal tourism spaces in Estonia: case study with mobile positioning data. Tourism Manage., 28, pp. 898-910. doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2006.05.010.

[2] Anderson, D. H., Nickerson, R, Stein, T. V., Lee, M. E. 2000. Planning to provide community and visitor benefits from public lands. W.G. Gartner, D.W. Lime (Eds.), Trends in Outdoor Recreation, Leisure and Tourism, CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK, pp.197-211.

[3] Andersson, E, Barthel, S, Borgström, S, Colding, J, Elmqvist, T, Folke, C, Gren, Å., 2014. Reconnecting cities to the biosphere: stewardship of green infrastructure and urban ecosystem services. Ambio, 43 (4), pp. 445-453. doi: 10.1007/s13280-014-0506-y.

[4] Anselin, L., 1995. Local indicators of spatial association-LISA. Geogr. Anal., 27, pp. 93-115. doi: 10.1111/j.1538-4632.1995.tb00338.x.

[5] Arnberger, A, Eder, R., 2012. Exploring coping behaviours of Sunday and workday visitors due to dense use conditions in an urban forest. Urban For. Urban Green, 11 (4), pp. 439-449. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2012.08.002.

[6] Bazrafshan, M, Tabrizi, A. M., Bauer, N, Kienast, F., 2021. Place attachment through interaction with urban parks: a cross-cultural study. Urban For. Urban Green., 61, Article 127103. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127103.

[7] Beck, H. E., Zimmermann, N. E., McVicar, T. R., Vergopolan, N, Berg, A, Wood, E. F., 2018. Present and future Köppen-Geiger climate classification maps at 1-km resolution. Sci. Data, 5, Article 180214. doi: 10.1038/sdata.2018.214.

[8] Bedimo-Rung, A. L., Mowen, A. J., Cohen, D. A., 2005. Bedimo-Rung, A.J. Mowen, D.A. Cohen. The significance of parks to physical activity and public health. Am. J. Prev. Med., 28, pp. 159-168. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2004.10.024.

[9] Beeco, J. A., Brown, G., 2013. Integrating space, spatial tools, and spatial analysis into the human dimensions of parks and outdoor recreation. Appl. Geogr., 38, pp. 76-85. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2012.11.013.

[10] Bertram, C, Meyerhoff, J, Rehdanz, K, Wüstemann, H., 2017. Differences in the recreational value of urban parks between weekdays and weekends: a discrete choice analysis. Landsc. Urban Plan., 159, pp. 5-14. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.10.006.

[11] Bjerke, T, Thrane, C, Strumse, E., 2006. Vegetation density of urban parks and perceived appropriateness for recreation. Urban For. Urban Green., 5, pp. 35-44. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2006.01.006.

[12] Bozkurt, M, Woolley, H., 2020. Let’s splash: children’s active and passive water play in constructed and natural water features in urban green spaces in Sheffield. Urban For. Urban Green., 52, Article 126696. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126696.

[13] Campbell, L. K., Svendsen, E. S., Sonti, N. F., Johnson, M. L., 2016. A social assessment of urban parkland: analyzing park use and meaning to inform management and resilience planning. Environ. Sci. Policy, 62, pp. 34-44. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2016.01.014.

[14] Canosa, E, Sáez, E, Sanabria, C, Zavala, I., 2014. Metodología para el estudio de los parques urbanos: la Comunidad de Madrid. GeoFocus 3, 160-185.

[15] Chen, S, Sleipness, O, Xu, Y, Park, K, Christensen, K., 2020. A systematic review of alternative protocols for evaluating non-spatial dimensions of urban parks. Urban For. Urban Green., 53, Article 126718. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126718.

[16] Choi, D, Park, K, Rigolon, A., 2020. From XS to XL urban nature: examining access to different types of green space using a “just sustainabilities” framework. Sustainability 12(17), 6998.

[17] Cohen, D. A., Setodji, C, Evenson, K. R., Ward, P, Lapham, S, Hillier, A, McKenzie, T. L., 2011. How much observation is enough? Refining the administration of SOPARC. J. Phys. Act. Health, 8, pp. 1117-1123. doi: 10.1123/jpah.8.8.1117.

[18] Douglas, O., Lennon, M., Scott, M., 2017. Green space benefits for health and well-being: a life-course approach for urban planning, design and management. Cities 66, 53–62. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2017.03.011.

[19] Enssle, F, Kabisch, N., 2020. Urban green spaces for the social interaction, health and well-being of older people— An integrated view of urban ecosystem services and socio-environmental justice. Environ. Sci. Policy, 109, pp. 36-44. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2020.04.008.

[20] Fagerholm, N, Eilola, S, Arki, V., 2021. Urban For. Urban Green., 64, Article 127257. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127257.

[21] Fontán-Vela, M, Rivera-Navarro, J, Gullón, P, Díez, J, Anguelovski, I, Franco, M., 2021. Active use and perceptions of parks as urban assets for physical activity: a mixed-methods study. Health Place, 71, Article 102660. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2021.102660.

[22] Galvonaite, A, Valiukas, D, Kilpys, J., 2013. Lietuvos Klimato Atlasas = Climate atlas of Lithuania. LHML, Vilnius, Lithuania

[23] Gauvin, L, Richard, L, Kestens, Y, Shatenstein, B, Daniel, M, Moore, S, Mercille, G, Payette, H., 2012. Living in a well-serviced urban area is associated with maintenance of frequent walking among seniors in the VoisiNuAge study. J. Gerontol. Ser. B-Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci., 67 B (1), pp. 76-88. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbr134.

[24] Giles-Corti, B, Broomhall, M. H., Knuiman, M, Collins, C, Douglas, K, Ng, K, Lange, A, Donovan, R. J., 2005. Increasing walking: how important is distance to, attractiveness, and size of public open space?. Am. J. Prev. Med., 28, pp. 169-176. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2004.10.018.

[25] Gross, J., Ligges, U., 2015. nortest: tests for Normality. R package version 1.0-4.

[26] Guan, C, Song, J, Keith, M, Zhang, B, Akiyama, Y, Da, L, Shibasaki, R, Sato, T., 2021. Seasonal variations of park visitor volume and park service area in Tokyo: a mixed-method approach combining big data and field observations. Urban For. Urban Green., 58, Article 126973. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126973.

[27] Haase, D., Frantzeskaki, N., Elmqvist, T., 2014. Ecosystem services in urban landscapes: practical applications and governance implications. Ambio 43, 407–412. doi: 10.1007/s13280-014-0503-1.

[28] Hadwen, W. L., Arthington, A. H., Boon, P. I., Taylor, B, Fellows, C. S., 2011. Do climatic or institutional factors drive seasonal patterns of tourism visitation to protected areas across diverse climate zones in eastern Australia?. Tourism Geogr., 13, pp. 187-208. doi: 10.1080/14616688.2011.569568.

[29] Handley, J, Pauleit, S, Slinn, P, Barber, A, Baker, M, Jones, C, Lindley, S., 2003. Accessible Natural Green Space Standards in Towns and Cities: A Review and Toolkit for Their Implementation (Research Report No. 526), Research Reports. English Nature, Peterborough, UK

[30] Herzog, T. R., Kutzli, G. E., 2002. Herzog, G.E. Kutzli. Preference and perceived danger in field/forest settings. Environ. Behav., 34, pp. 819-835. doi: 10.1177/001391602237250.

[31] Horn, J. L., 1965. A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, pp. 179-185. doi: 10.1007/bf02289447.

[32] Huang, J. H., Floyd, M. F., Tateosian, L. G., Aaron Hipp, J., 2022. Exploring public values through Twitter data associated with urban parks pre- and post- COVID-19. Landsc. Urban Plan., 227, Article 104517. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2022.104517.

[33] Iraegui, E, Augusto, G, Cabral, P., 2020. 9 (5), p. 308. doi: 10.3390/ijgi9050308.

[34] Jansson, M., 2010. Attractive playgrounds: some factors affecting user interest and visiting patterns. Landsc. Res., 35 (1), pp. 63-81. doi: 10.1080/01426390903414950.

[35] Jansson, M, Persson, B., 2010. Playground planning and management: an evaluation of standard-influenced provision through user needs. Urban For. Urban Green., 9(1), 33-42.

[36] Jones, B, Scott, D., 2006. Climate change, seasonality and visitation to Canada's National Parks. J. Park Recreat. Adm., 24, 42-62.

[37] Kaczynski, A. T., Potwarka, L. R., Saelens, B. E., 2008. Association of park size, distance, and features with physical activity in neighborhood parks. Am. J. Public Health, 98 (8), pp. 1451-1456. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2007.129064.

[38] Kassambara, A., 2020. ggpubr: “ggplot2 ” Based Publication Ready Plots. R package version 0.4.0.

[39] Kim, J, Thapa, B, Jang, S, Yang, E., 2018. Seasonal spatial activity patterns of visitors with a mobile exercise application at Seoraksan National Park. South Korea. Sustainability, 10 (7), p. 2263. doi: 10.3390/su10072263.

[40] Klemm, W, van Hove, B, Lenzholzer, S, Kramer, H., 2016. Towards guidelines for designing parks of the future. Urban For. Urban Green., 21, pp. 134-145. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2016.11.004.

[41] Lo, A. Y. H., Jim, C. Y., 2012. Lo, C.Y. Jim. Citizen attitude and expectation towards greenspace provision in compact urban milieu. Land Use Policy, 29, pp. 577-586. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.09.011.

[42] Ma, X, Tian, Y, Du, M, Hong, B, Lin, B., 2021. How to design comfortable open spaces for the elderly? Implications of their thermal perceptions in an urban park. Sci. Total Environ., 768, Article 144985. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.144985.

[43] Maco, B, Bardos, P, Coulon, F, Erickson-Mulanax, E, Hansen, L. J., Harclerode, M, Hou, D, Mielbrecht, E, Wainwright, H. M., Yasutaka, T, Wick, W. D., 2018. Resilient remediation: addressing extreme weather and climate change, creating community value. Remediation, 29 (1), pp. 7-18. doi: 10.1002/rem.21585.

[44] Mangiafico, S., 2020. rcompanion: functions to Support Extension Education Program Evaluation. R package version 2.3.25.

[45] McKenzie, T. L., van der Mars, H., 2015. Top 10 research questions related to assessing physical activity and its contexts using systematic observation. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport, 86 (1), pp. 13-29. doi: 10.1080/02701367.2015.991264.

[46] McKinnon, R. A., Reedy, J, Handy, S. L., Rodgers, A. B., 2009. Measuring the food and physical activity environments. Am. J. Prev. Med., 36, pp. S81-S85. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2009.01.003.

[47] Mu, B, Liu, C, Mu, T, Xu, X, Tian, G, Zhang, Y, Kim, G., 2021. Spatiotemporal fluctuations in urban park spatial vitality determined by on-site observation and behavior mapping: a case study of three parks in Zhengzhou City, China. Urban For. Urban Green., 64, Article 127246. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127246.

[48] Palliwoda, J, Banzhaf, E, Priess, J. A., 2020. How do the green components of urban green infrastructure influence the use of ecosystem services? Examples from Leipzig, Germany. Landsc. Ecol., 35 (5), pp. 1127-1142. doi: 10.1007/s10980-020-01004-w.

[49] Panno, A, Carrus, G, Lafortezza, R, Mariani, L, Sanesi, G., 2017. Nature-based solutions to promote human resilience and wellbeing in cities during increasingly hot summers. Environ. Res., 159, pp. 249-256. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2017.08.016.

[50] Pinto, L., Ferreira, C.S.S., Pereira, P., 2021a. Environmental and socioeconomic factors influencing the use of urban green spaces in Coimbra (Portugal). Sci. Total Environ. 792, 148293. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148293.

[51] Pinto, L.V., Ferreira, C.S.S., Pereira, P., 2021b. Time of day and workdays vs. weekend differences in the use of cultural ecosystem services in urban parks (Coimbra, Portugal). In: da Costa Sanches Galvão, J.R., Duque de Brito, P.S., dos Santos Neves, F., da Silva Craveiro, F.G., de Amorim Almeida, H., Correia Vasco, J.O., Neves, L.M.P, de Jesus Gomes, R., de Jesus Martins Mourato, S., Ribeiro, V.S.S. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Water Energy Food and Sustainability (ICoWEFS 2021). Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 568–575. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-75315-3_61.

[52] Pinto, L.V., Inácio, M., Ferreira, C.S.S., Ferreira, A.D., Pereira, P., 2022a. Ecosystem services and well-being dimensions related to urban green spaces – a systematic review. Sustain. Cities Soc. 85, 104072. doi: 10.1016/j.scs.2022.104072.

[53] Pinto, L.V., Ferreira, C.S.S., Inácio, M., Pereira, P., 2022b. Urban green spaces accessibility in two European cities: Vilnius (Lithuania) and Coimbra (Portugal). Geogr. Sustain. 3 (1), 74–84. doi: 10.1016/j.geosus.2022.03.001.

[54] Priess, J, Pinto, L. V., Misiune, I, Palliwoda, J., 2021. Ecosystem service use and the motivations for use in central parks in three European cities. Land, 10 (2), p. 154. doi: 10.3390/land10020154.

[55] Refshauge, A. D., Stigsdotter, U. K., Cosco, N. G., 2012. Adults’ motivation for bringing their children to park playgrounds. Urban For. Urban Green., 11, pp. 396-405. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2012.06.002.

[56] Revelle, W., 2020. PSYCH: Procedures for personality and psychological research. Software. Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA

[57] Rigolon, A., 2016. A complex landscape of inequity in access to urban parks: a literature review. Landsc. Urban Plan., 153, pp. 160-169. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.05.017.

[58] Rivera, E, Timperio, A, Loh, V. H. Y., Deforche, B, Veitch, J., 2021. Critical factors influencing adolescents’ active and social park use: a qualitative study using walk-along interviews. Urban For. Urban Green., 58, Article 126948. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126948.

[59] Rossy, Q., 2019. Visualist: a spatial analysis plugin for crime analysts. Ecole des sciences criminelles, Lausanne

[60] Rout, A, Galpern, P., 2022. Benches, fountains and trees: using mixed-methods with questionnaire and smartphone data to design urban green spaces. Urban For. Urban Green., 67, Article 127335. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127335.

[61] Sapranaviciute-Zabazlajeva, L, Luksiene, D, Virviciute, D, Kranciukaite-Butylkiniene, D, Bobak, M, Tamosiunas, A., 2018. Changes in psychological well-being among older Lithuanian city dwellers: results from a cohort study. Int. J. Clin. Health Psychol., 18 (3), pp. 218-226. doi: 10.1016/j.ijchp.2018.05.002.

[62] Sarkar, C, Webster, C, Pryor, M, Tang, D, Melbourne, S, Zhang, X, Jianzheng, L., 2015. Exploring associations between urban green, street design and walking: results from the Greater London boroughs. Landsc. Urban Plan., 143, pp. 112-125. doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.06.013.

[63] Semeraro, T, Scarano, A, Buccolieri, R, Santino, A, Aarrevaara, E., 2021. Planning of urban green spaces: an ecological perspective on human benefits. Land, 10 (2), p. 105. doi: 10.3390/land10020105.

[64] Shan, X. Z., 2020. Association between the time patterns of urban green space visitations and visitor characteristics in a high-density, subtropical city. Cities, 97, Article 102562. doi: 10.1016/j.cities.2019.102562.

[65] SEC, R., 2021. Statistinės suvestinės: gyventojų skaičius pagal savivaldybes 2021 m. sausio 1 d. Vilnius, Lithuania.

[66] Signorell, A., mult. al., 2020. DescTools: tools for descriptive statistics. R package version 0.99.38.

[67] Sotomayor, S, Barbieri, C, Wilhelm Stanis, S, Aguilar, F. X., Smith, J. W., 2014. Motivations for recreating on farmlands, private forests, and state or national parks. Environ. Manage., 54 (1), pp. 138-150. doi: 10.1007/s00267-014-0280-4.

[68] Tan, Z, KK-Lau, L, Roberts, A. C, Chao, ST-.Y, Ng, E., 2019. Designing urban green spaces for older adults in Asian cities. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 16 (22), p. 4423. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16224423.

[69] Tan, Z., Lau, K.K.-L., Roberts, A.C., Chao, S.T.-Y., Ng, E., 2019. Designing urban green spaces for older adults in Asian cities. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 16 (22), 4423. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16224423.

[70] UN-habitat, 2022. World Cities Report 2022: Envisaging the Future of Cities. United Nations Human Settlements Programme, UN-Habitat, Nairobi, Kenya.

[71] United Nations, 2015. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. United Nations.

[72] Valença Pinto, L, Ferreira, C. S., Ferreira, A, Kalantari, Z, Pereira, P., 2021. Green and blue infrastructure (GBI) in urban areas. R. Brears (Ed.), The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Urban and Regional Futures, Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 1-13. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-51812-7_174-1.

[73] Valença Pinto, L., Inácio, M., Pereira, P., 2023. Observation-based data-gathering method to support the assessment of the use of cultural ecosystem services in urban green spaces. MethodsX 11, 102326. doi: 10.1016/j.mex.2023.102326.

[74] Veitch, J, Bagley, S, Ball, K, Salmon, J., 2006. Where do children usually play? A qualitative study of parents’ perceptions of influences on children's active free-play. Health Place, 12, pp. 383-393. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2005.02.009.

[75] Wang, Y, Ni, Z, Peng, Y, Xia, B., 2018. Local variation of outdoor thermal comfort in different urban green spaces in Guangzhou, a subtropical city in South China. Urban For. Urban Green., 32, pp. 99-112. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2018.04.005.

[76] Weber, D, Anderson, D., 2010. Contact with nature: recreation experience preferences in Australian parks. Ann. Leis. Res., 13, pp. 46-69. doi: 10.1080/11745398.2010.9686837.

[77] Whiting, J. W., Larson, L. R., Green, G. T., Kralowec, C., 2017. Outdoor recreation motivation and site preferences across diverse racial/ethnic groups: a case study of Georgia state parks. J. Outdoor Recreat. Tour., 18, pp. 10-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jort.2017.02.001.

[78] Wickham, H., 2016. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer-Verlag, New York

[79] World Health Organization, 2017. Urban Green Spaces - A Brief for Action. Copenhagen, Denmark.

[80] Yilmaz, B, Aşur, F., 2020. Urban landscape design criteria in winter cities. J. Environ. Nat. Stud., 2, 14.

[81] Zhai, Y, Baran, P. K., Wu, C., 2018. Spatial distributions and use patterns of user groups in urban forest parks: an examination utilizing GPS tracker. Urban For. Urban Green., 35, pp. 32-44. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2018.07.014.