1 Introduction
Rapid urbanization and rising living standards have made public health a critical global concern. As a cost-effective and accessible form of physical activity, hiking not only enhances physiological functions
[1] but also, through exposure to nature, positively impacts cognitive capacity, emotional state, and stress level
[2], while exerting overall benefits on physical and mental health
[3][4]. In recent years, hiking has gradually become one of the popular tourism and leisure activities. According to the
China Hiking Tourism Development Report (2019), approximately 130 million people engage in outdoor sports in China, with hiking being the most popular and frequently participated activity among outdoor enthusiasts for four consecutive years
[5]. Research indicates that outdoor hiking has reflected trends such as universal participation, multi-generational involvement, shorter routes, and simplified approaches
[6][7].
Foreign research on hikers began relatively early, with a number of studies indicating that hikers' leisure motivations include accessing nature and exploring broader environmental elements influencing their preferences for natural settings
[8]~[10]. Some studies have found that hikers tend to pay particular attention to natural elements such as trees, scenery, rocks, water, and wildlife
[11], while other research utilizing semantic analysis has identified key factors influencing hikers' preferences for hiking environments, primarily including elevation, topography, trail material, trail condition, and landscape attractiveness
[12]. Additionally, several studies have comprehensively analyzed the factors influencing hiking environments, encompassing ecosystems, flora and fauna, environmental diversity, and cultural perception
[13]. Furthermore, researchers have carried out field emotion assessments of complex scenarios by examining factors such as the sense of enclosure, types of vegetation, geomorphological characteristics, and landscape visibility
[14]. Moreover, other studies have examined the specific characteristics of environmental factors that influence the hiking experience, including hikers' preferences for enclosed vegetation
[15] and vegetation density
[16][17], as well as trail remoteness and path maintenance
[11]. Among these studies, some consider the condition of trail surfaces as a critical component in enhancing park route systems
[18]. They investigate the influence of factors such as trail incision, muddiness, roughness, width, and slope on hiking experience
[19]. Additionally, related attributes, including trail vegetation cover and soil
[20][21], as well as design and maintenance approaches involving trail material, slope, and stride length
[18], have been discussed. However, a comprehensive understanding of the preferences of specific environmental factors that closely influence the walking experience and can be directly applied to trail design and maintenance is lacking.
Current preference research has rarely addressed the diverse perceptions and preferences regarding trail spatial environments among different hikers. Most studies focus on the analysis of landscape resource elements within tourist attractions
[22] or individuals' preferences toward landscape resources
[23]. Only a limited number of studies have investigated the factors influencing the trail system experience
[24] and conducted post-use evaluations
[25]. Furthermore, these studies typically overlook other user groups beyond tourists, thereby neglecting the differences in perception and demand related to trail spaces and associated components and elements. It is noteworthy that, in the absence of research focusing on trail space preferences, existing studies rarely address the underlying factors influencing hiking preferences. Only a limited number of investigations have explored the correlation between hiking motivation and hiker satisfaction
[26]. Other research has predominantly concentrated on the physical activity characteristics of outdoor enthusiasts
[27][28] or has adopted sociological approaches to examining exercise behavior types and motivations
[29]. As a result, there is a marked scarcity of studies on the relationship between outdoor activity motivations and spatial requirements.
Suburban mountain areas, as accessible natural environments, adequately satisfy the needs of short-distance hikers. However, the diverse user groups impose higher demands on the planning and management of trail spaces
[30]. Currently, there is a lack of research addressing the differentiated needs of mountain trail users, leading to inadequate practical guidance for planning and design. Accordingly, this study commences by examining the user groups of mountain trail spaces. By employing perception surveys, this study compares the differences in preferences for trail spaces among various user groups, thereby providing insights for the planning and construction of mountain trails.
2 Methods
2.1 Study Area and Research Framework
The research chose the Xiaoxishan area in Beijing as the study area, which starts from Baiwang Mountain in the east, extending to Moshikou in the south, the Junzhuang–Dajue Temple in the west, and Wenquan Road in the north. It is close to the urban area with beautiful natural scenery and rich cultural landscapes. The two east–west and north–south mountain ranges of Xiaoxishan intersect in an "X" shape, forming a road network mainly based on the firebreak roads on the ridges and the paved municipal roads, together with densely meandered paths in between. Being a moderately challenging hiking site, Xiaoxishan has now become one of Beijing's top destinations for short-distance hiking, and many hiking routes of various lengths and difficulty levels have been developed.
As the Xishan Greenway (Shijingshan Section) Construction Project envisioned, general leisure citizens are the main user group of the Xishan suburban mountain area. However, it attracts more diverse user groups. The management authority of Xiaoxishan has coordinated the integration of various mountain trails, undertaking comprehensive improvements, connectivity enhancements, and pavement renovations to the existing trail network to promote the greenway's leisure and recreational functions. Some sections of the project have already been completed. To better understand user preferences for mountain trail spaces and to apply findings to the construction of other suburban mountain trail systems, this study seeks to answer the following questions: 1) Do users like the current improvements made to the mountain trail spaces? 2) What are the differences in preferences for mountain trail spaces among varied user groups? And 3) what are the underlying reasons for these differences in user preferences?
This study consisted of three parts: the classification of trail space types, the investigation of user preferences, and the analysis of spatial preference patterns. The study area was delineated by referring to relevant literature
[31], and identified trail space information from geographic data. Using a combination of online data sources and on-site field surveys, typical trail space types in Xiaoxishan were extracted and categorized. A questionnaire survey was conducted to collect demographic and behavioral characteristics of mountain trail users, with a focus on analyzing differences in spatial preferences among different user groups and the reasons behind these differences. The study aims to construct preference profiles for different types of users, provide a theoretical basis for the rational design of suburban mountain trail spaces by demonstrating the Xiaoxishan case, and ultimately offer insights into the systematic and standardized development of mountain trail systems.
2.2 Extraction of Trail Space Types
2bulu is one of China's outdoor platforms based on location-based services (LBS), aggregating a substantial amount of data including user tracks and photographs, providing a valuable foundation for understanding the types of landscapes preferred by tourists. From November 23 to 26, 2023, researchers collected geographic information data and associated photographs within the study area from 2bulu using keywords such as "Badachu," "Xiangshan," and the names of other attractions in Xiaoxishan
①. A total of 1,399 geographic trajectories and 3,788 photographs were obtained. Subsequently, these images were filtered based on whether they reflected environmental characteristics of trail spaces, resulting in a final dataset of 1,752 photographs. Based on the analysis of images, field survey results, and domestic and international trail construction standards
[32][33], the research team identified four key spatial elements of mountain trails within the study area:
① The keywords used in the search for all Xiaoxishan attractions included "Badachu," "Xiangshan," "National Botanical Garden," "Heishitou," "Keleyu," "Long'en Temple," "Woniutai," "Tianshan Mausoleum," "Hujialing," "Fushouling," "Fahai Temple," "Shuangquan Temple," "Tanyu," "Dayingwa," "Biesimao," "Wangjinglou," "Dongshancun," "Xiyangtuo," "Dongyangtuo," and "Xiangyu."
1) Trail surface material: dirt, dirt-rock, rock, or paved;
2) Vegetation enclosure: tree or shrub;
3) Trail width: narrow (0 ~ 1.2 m) or wide (over 1.2 m);
4) Slope: gentle (0 ~ 15°), moderate (15° ~ 40°), or steep (over 40°).
The relationship between the proportions of sky and vegetation in the images, along with the height of the viewpoints, served as preliminary criteria for assessing vegetation enclosure and slope. Meanwhile, the particle size of the trail graininess and the area occupied by the trail were used as criteria for determining trail surface material and trail width. In addition, the study performed differential comparisons and adjustments among mountain trails with similar geographical coordinates to reduce the impact of factors such as seasonality and viewpoint on the classification of trail types. Ultimately, 27 trail space types were identified (Fig.1), including 5 types of dirt trails, 9 types of dirt-rock trails, 9 types of rock trails, and 4 types of paved trails. Each trail space type was coded as D for dirt surface, DR for dirt-rock surface, R for rock surface, and P for paved surface; T for tree and S for shrub; N for narrow trail and W for wide trail; G for gentle, M for moderate, and S for steep slope.
This study exacted the graphic materials of the four spatial elements from corresponding photographs as templates. It operated under the assumption that representations of identical element types were consistent and that elements across different hierarchical levels remained distinguishable, and extraneous variables—such as season, weather, and viewpoint—were normalized to mitigate bias. This approach resulted in the creation of scenario-based illustrations, which served as materials for the spatial evaluation questionnaire on mountain trails.
2.3 Questionnaire Survey and Analysis
The questionnaire consists of three main sections: user profiling, evaluation of trail pavement, and investigation of preferences for trail spatial elements. First, user profiles were created by collecting respondents' self-reported demographic information, behavioral characteristics, and preferences and reasons for specific trail spatial elements. Second, respondents were asked to evaluate two sections of mountain trails within the study area before renovation (primarily natural trails) and after renovation (primarily paved trails) by using a scale from 1 to 3 (1 means non-preferred, 2 means neutral, and 3 means preferred). Third, respondents were asked to score a set of representative trail scenario images (with the same scale above), so as to understand their preferences for different trail spaces. Referring to a synthesis of domestic and international literature on hiking motivation, the reasons of preferences were summarized into four dimensions: fun, safety, comfort, and challenge
[26][34].
This study focused on all-age mountain trail users who participate in hiking activities. They were divided into two groups, hikers and non-hikers, according to their self-identification. The questionnaires were distributed to diverse groups such as hikers, mountaineers, fitness people, and the general public in Beijing, from October to December 2023, through WeChat, Weibo, and offline distribution. A total of 339 questionnaires were returned, and by screening uncompleted and regularly answered questionnaires, 310 valid questionnaires remained. The gender, age, and other characteristics of the respondents basically confirmed those of the Seventh Beijing Census, which covers a wide range of occupations, with a male to female ratio of 91:64. It is noteworthy that among the respondents, individuals over the age of 60 accounted for 2%, lower than Beijing's average (19.6%) reported in the census. This discrepancy may be related to the all-age participation in hiking activities, which still presents physical difficulties for elder people.
This study employed the two-step-cluster analysis of SPSS and descriptive statistics for user group segmentation and characterization. Subsequently, the Mann–Whitney U test was utilized to analyze preference differences between groups, while the Wilcoxon Match-Pairs Signed Ranks Test was applied to compare preference differences within the groups regarding varied types of trail spaces.
3 Study Results
3.1 User Profiles
In this study, respondents' feature variables were identified through a two-step-cluster analysis. Data of self-identified user group (non-hikiers or hikers), years of hiking, frequency, distance, and elevation gain were utilized to conduct a cluster analysis of hiking behavior characteristics (the size ratio of the clusters was 1.33), and eventually three user groups were identified. Furthermore, the survey results revealed that respondents with more extensive hiking experience and higher activity frequency exhibited a preference for trails with greater elevation gain and longer distances. Based on the cluster analysis results and observed differences in hiking behavior, the three groups were categorized as non-hikers, short-distance hikers, and long-distance hikers (Tab.1). Interestingly, approximately half of the short-distance hikers self-reported themselves as non-hikers, highlighting a significant divergence between subjective self-identification and the objective classification determined by their behavior patterns.
The three groups also differed in terms of gender, age, and occupation. The age distribution among non-hikers was relatively balanced across the ranges of 19 ~ 27, 28 ~ 40, and 41 ~ 60. Notably, as hiking distances increased, there was a distinct trend toward younger individuals among long-distance hikers. Among male respondents, long-distance hikers were more prevalent, whereas among female respondents, short-distance hikers were more common. The occupational composition revealed notable differences among representative groups, including students, corporate employees, and government staff. As the level of hiking participation increased, the proportion of corporate employees also increased. Conversely, government staff were predominantly found among non-hikers and short-distance hikers, while students constituted a significant portion of both the non-hiker and long-distance hiker groups (Tab.2).
3.2 Pre- and Post-Construction Evaluation of the Trail Renovation
The study found that different user groups had conflicting preferences for the two trail sections before and after renovation: positive evaluations from non-hikers consistently improved, while those from long-distance hikers consistently declined. For the same scenario, the preference levels of the three groups for the previous trails rose sequentially, and fell sequentially for the renovated trails; moreover, the ratings of non-hikers and long-distance hikers differed significantly (p < 0.05) (Fig.2). This indicated that the renovated trail spaces were more preferred by non-hikers, but non-preferred by hikers.
3.3 Differences in Preferences for Trail Spatial Elements
Within each user group, there were notable differences in the importance given to various spatial elements. Non-hikers prioritized slope significantly outweighing other three elements. Short-distance hikers prioritized both slope and vegetative enclosure. In contrast, long-distance hikers placed their greatest emphasis on trail surface material. In terms of trail material, long-distance hikers valued significantly more than non-hikers and short-distance hikers, and the latter two showed an equal importance. For slope, non-hikers valued the most, and both non-hikers and short-distance hikers valued it significantly more than long-distance hikers (Fig.3). There were no significant differences in importance for trail width and vegetation enclosure between the three groups.
Overall, in terms of specific preferences for trail material, vegetation enclosure, trail width, and slope of trail spaces, the three user groups all preferred wide trails and tall tree enclosing spaces. Further analysis of the preference differences in slope and trail surface material has implications for understanding hiking difficulty choices and element preferences among different user groups. Non-hikers and short-distance hikers exhibited a preference for gentle slopes, while long-distance hikers prefered moderate slopes. The preferred slopes of the three groups increased sequentially, and significant differences existed between each pair of groups (p < 0.05). In terms of preferences for trail surface material, non-hikers favored materials in the following order: paved, dirt, dirt-rock, and rock. Short-distance hikers prefered dirt first, followed by paved, dirt-rock, and rock. Long-distance hikers prioritized dirt, followed by dirt-rock, rock, and paved. Across the three groups, the preference for paved trails decreased, while the preference for natural trails (dirt, dirt-rock, and rock) increased. Notably, long-distance hikers exhibited a significantly lower preference for paved trails compared with the other two groups (p < 0.05), and their preference for dirt and dirt-rock trails was significantly higher than that of non-hikers (p < 0.05).
Among the 27 trail space types, non-hikers preferred paved trail spaces and a few of gentle natural trail spaces. Short-distance hikers predominantly favored dirt trail spaces, while long-distance hikers preferring various dirt, dirt-rock, and rock trail spaces (Fig.4).
In addition to long-distance hikers having significantly lower preferences for all paved types than the other two groups, the three groups also differed significantly on a small number of dirt and rock trail spaces. Non-hikers showed a significantly higher preference for D-T-W-G trail compared with short-distance hikers, while their preference for D-S-N-G trail was significantly lower than that of short-distance hikers. Furthermore, long-distance hikers exhibited a significantly higher preference for DR-T-N-M trail compared with the other two groups, and they also had a significantly higher preference for DR-T-N-G trail than short-distance hikers.
Specifically, among the 27 trail space types, non-hikers relatively preferred D-T-W-G, DR-S-N-G, R-T-W-G, P-T-W-M, and D-T-N-G, with a significant disfavor for natural trails with steeper slopes, such as DR-T-N-M, R-S-N-S, DR-T-N-S, and D-S-N-M. The preference of short-distance hikers was not significant, with a relative preference for D-T-N-G and a significant dislike for P-S-N-M or P-S-N-G. Meanwhile, long-distance hikers had a relatively greater preference for D-T-W-G, DR-T-N-G, D-T-W-M, D-T-N-G, DR-T-W-G, and DR-S-N-G, and a significant dislike for all paved trails.
The types of trail space commonly preferred by the three groups were D-T-W-G, D-T-N-G, D-T-W-M, DR-S-W-G, DR-S-N-G, DR-T-W-G, DR-T-N-G, R-T-W-G, R-T-N-M, and DR-S-N-S.
3.4 Reasons for Preference Disparity
The primary reason for the preference differences among the three groups lied in their varying demands for safety and challenge (Fig.5). Non-hikers and short-distance hikers had a significantly stronger demand for safety compared with long-distance hikers, whereas long-distance hikers exhibited a significantly higher demand for challenge than the other two groups. In addition, all groups highly focused on fun and comfort, showing a graded distribution among non-hikers, short-distance hikers, and long-distance hikers, no statistically significant differences between the groups though. Relatively speaking, hikers had a higher requirement for the fun and comfort of trail spaces.
In addition, there were similarities and differences between the reasons for preference and the spatial elements of trails concerned by different groups. Although all three groups focused on fun and comfort, non-hikers and short-distance hikers were more concerned with the fun by slope and vegetation enclosure, and long-distance hikers were more concerned with the fun by vegetation enclosure and trail surface material; non-hikers were concerned with the comfort by slope and vegetation enclosure, and short-distance hikers and long-distance hikers were more concerned with the comfort by slope and trail surface material. Although there were significant differences among the three groups in safety and challenge, they all prioritized the experience differences brought about by slope.
4 Discussion
4.1 Conflicting Preference for Trail Spaces
This study showed that there was a correlation between participation level in hiking and the preference for naturalized trail spaces: the higher the participation level in hiking, the stronger the preference for naturalized trail spaces. The conclusions of this study align with existing research findings that differential preferences of tourists and hikers exist regarding the acceptability of natural environments
[9]. Hikers prefer open, natural environment with low artificial interference, and are more attracted by spaces with natural variations in space, topography, and enclosure conditions
[35], and are more concerned with the naturality of trail spaces
[11].
Regarding the differences in perceptions of specific trail spaces among groups, previous research found that some groups prefer asphalt or gravel trails, while others being indifferent to the type of trail surface material. In addition, some individuals perceive mud and rock trails as obstacles to navigation
[10]. This study indicates that non-hikers showed a greater preference for paved trail spaces, whereas hikers favored naturalized trail spaces, with a clear conflict between the preferences of these two user groups. A study taken in Swedish discussed the changes and differences in the characteristics and preferences of hikers over time: wider age ranges, increased demand for natural trails and challenge will be the future trends
[6].
This study also found some similarities between different use groups. For example, all groups had high requirements for comfort and fun, and some dirt trails were favored by all groups. A study abroad found that both hikers and general tourists exhibit a preference for natural environmental features to some extent
[36]. Hikers tend to favor undeveloped areas and natural trails, while tourists prefer paved trails that have undergone some degree of human modification. However, it has been found that naturalized spaces can serve as attractive landscapes that are acceptable to both general tourists and hikers
[9]. In terms of mountain trail construction in China, it is important to respect the preferences of various user groups while fully considering the higher demand for safety of non-hikers and short-distance hikers. On the premise of ensuring the safety of natural trails, efforts should be made to transform the trails into a form that is more easily accepted by general tourists, so as to achieve the promotion of naturalized trails.
4.2 Planning and Design Recommendations for Mountain Trail Spaces
Mountain trail space is a crucial component of the mountain ecosystem. In order to meet the goals of good experience, all-age friendliness, and beautiful landscapes, trail routing should prioritize the ones with good forest resources. For the planning and design of mountain trail spaces, it is essential to understand the needs and preferences of different user groups, and trail design should skillfully incorporate the behavioral characteristics of these groups by type, grade, form, and segmentation, to meet the diversified, differentiated, and personalized needs (Fig.6).
1) Paved trails can be used mainly in the hiking range of general tourists (within 5 km), focusing on safety and comfort needs, and appropriately designing naturalized trail spaces preferred by non-hikers (e.g., D-T-W-G, D-T-N-G) while making the gradient of the trails as gentle as possible (no more than 15°). Additionally, anti-slip and smooth measures should be used, and tall trees can be planted along the trails to create shaded spaces.
2) For the hiking range beyond 5 km, efforts should be made to preserve the natural conditions of trails. The focus should be on maintaining dirt or dirt-rock trails and adjusting rock trails, while retaining the trails with slopes of 15° or more to enhance the interest and challenge of trail spaces. However, given that the domestic hiking groups are predominantly short-distance hikers, emphasis should be placed on enhancing the comfort of naturalized trails through measures like using stepping stones, adjusting the roughness of the trails, and designing steps according to ergonomics.
3) In areas serving for both general tourists and hikers, naturalized trails (e.g., D-T-W-G, D-T-N-G, DR-S-W-G, DR-S-N-G) preferred by various groups can be designed to balance the safety, comfort, and fun as much as possible.
4) To ensure the safety of all users, trail conditions and safety risks should be notified along naturalized routes, allowing hikers to make informed decisions. Naturalized fences are set up on difficult sections, while stabilizing the trail surface structure.
5) In order to promote "naturalization" in future suburban mountain trail planning and design, it is necessary to enhance public preference for naturalized trail spaces. Thus, in terms of fun, different forms and contents of nature education programs can be combined to increase the public's participation in hiking activities, then promoting the general preference for naturalized trail spaces.
5 Conclusions
Driven by the goals of healthy city construction, hiking has become one of the effective ways to promote public health. Trail spaces, as important sites for hiking activities, can be developed into an adaptive construction by exploring the preferences of different user groups to meet their diversified needs. This study takes Xiaoxishan in Beijing as a case to reveal the conflicting preferences among different user groups of suburban mountain trail spaces, and to explore the differences in preferences and the underlying reasons among various groups. The research develops specific user profiles of suburban mountain trail spaces and focuses on key trail spatial elements closely related to hiking experience—trail surface material, vegetation enclosure, trail width, and slope. It also examines the reasons for preference differences, including fun, safety, comfort, and challenge. The findings offer universal and practical implications for the planning and design of suburban mountain trail spaces. The study not only provides corresponding strategies for trail construction in suburban mountain areas, exemplified by Xiaoxishan, but also contributes to enriching the content of National Fitness Strategy, advancing the formulation of trail system policies and improving related planning and design practices. At the same time, it can provide a reference for the sustainable development of mountain spaces compatible with both natural conservation and activity needs.
PDF
(7282KB)
