Influencing Mechanism of Ecological Aesthetic Preference on Urban River Ecological Restoration: A Case Study of Kunshan, Jiangsu Province

Abstract

To balance the ecological–aesthetic relationship in urban river ecological restoration, the research analyzed the ecological aesthetics performance of related practice. By defining „ecological aesthetic preference” and establishing a triple framework of ecological aesthetic preference on urban riverfronts, the research summarized three major factors that impact ecological aesthetic preference. With the Urban River Survey method, 24 typical river section samples in Kunshan, Jiangsu Province were selected. Through correlation analysis and optimal scaling regression model, relevant characteristics and influencing mechanisms were analyzed. The results include that: 1) Individuals’ ecological awareness and knowledge level has the most significant impact, followed by ecological factor characteristics of riverfronts and individuals’ social–cultural characteristics; 2) The respondents having higher cognition on ecosystem services show a stronger aesthetic preference for urban riverfronts; and 3) Vegetation characteristics impact ecological aesthetic preference more than material and physical habitat characteristics, and different combinations would lead to various overall benefits of urban riverfronts. Therefore, urban river ecological restoration should better integrate ecological values and aesthetic values by flexibly combining spatial elements, meanwhile fully consider social demands for urban riverfronts, to promote people’s ecological awareness and knowledge level and provide them with better landscape perception of ecosystem services.

Keywords

Urban River / Riverfront / Ecological Aesthetics / Ecological Restoration / Influencing Mechanism / Public Aesthetic Preference / Kunshan City

References

[1] Huang, Q., Zeng, Y., & Jiang, Q. (2015). Progress and prospect of the study on „Making Great Efforts to Promote Ecological Civilization Construction”. China Population Resources and Environment, 25(02), 111-120. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1002-2104.2015.02.015

[2] Ren, J., & Ma, Y. (2020). Research progress and prospects of green development from the perspective of geography. Progress in Geography, 39(7), 1196-1209.

[3] Liu, B. (2018). Urban waterfront era is coming: New growth from urban rivers. City Planning Review, 42(3), 72-79. doi:10.11819/cpr20180311a

[4] Wang, M., Ye, Q., & Wang, J. (2019). The development and paradigm shift of city betterment and ecological restoration of waterfront spaces: Analysis and insights from Suzhou River and Emscher River. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 35(11), 24-29. doi:10.19775/j.cla.2019.11.0024

[5] Gou, F., & Zhou, Y. (2018). The eco-restoration of suburban river landscape—A case study on Dreisam River, Freiburg, Germany. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 34(8), 33-38. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-6664.2018.08.007

[6] Wang, M., Ye, Q., & Held, T. (2017). Riparian zones management with effective eco-services provision under the interaction of stakeholders: A case study of the Emscher River in Germany. Chinese Landscape Architecture, (1), 52-59. doi:10.14085/j.fjyl.2017.01.0052.08

[7] Yu, K., & Gong, Y. (2021). Exploration on ecological restoration model for the improvement of ecosystem services of yellow river floodplains—A case study of Zhengzhou Yellow River Floodplain Park planning and design. Landscape Architecture Frontiers, 9(3), 86-97.

[8] Yuan, X., Xiang, L., Hu, Y., Chen, W., Huang, Y., Xiong, S., Yan, J., & Wang, F. (2021). Ecological design across interface: Ecosystem restoration of Pengxi River/Reservoir in Three Gorges Reservoir Area, Chongqing. Landscape Architecture Frontiers, 9(3), 12-27.

[9] Zhang, M., & Sun, J. (2017). Exoteric dailiness Shanghai Huangpu River wharfs and urban waterfront space. Time Architecture, (4), 44-47.

[10] Wang, J., Peng, H., Zhuo, C., & Calhoun, S. (2016). Radar chart evaluation of overall eco-services provided by sponge community: Empirical study of Stanform Community in Melbourne. Journal of Chinese Urban Forestry, 14(4), 28-33. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-4925.2016.04.006

[11] Li, G. (2019, June 3). Maintaining a good ecological environment - the most universal well-being of the people. People’s Daily.

[12] Chang, C. T., & Huang, S. (2011). Reclaiming the city: Waterfront development in Singapore. Urban Studies, 48(10), 2085-2100.

[13] Wang, M., Piao, S., & Wang, J. (2020). Factors analysis of landscape preference in the ecological perception of urban waterfront spaces: Case studies of Houtan Park and Hongkou Riverside Park in Shanghai. Architecture & Culture, (11), 157-159. doi:10.19875/j.cnki.jzywh.2020.11.052.

[14] Wang, J., Ge, J., & Cheng, S. (2018). Urban river ecological restoration based on improving the overall capacities of water-related ecosystem services. Journal of Human Settlements in West China, 33(6), 54-58. doi:10.13791/j.cnki.hsfwest.20180608

[15] Gobster, P. H., Nassauer, J. I., Daniel, T. C., & Fry, G. (2007). The shared landscape: What does aesthetics have to do with ecology?. JLandscape Ecology, 22(7), 959-972.

[16] Gobster, P. H., Hang, D., & Cheng, X. (2010). Development of ecological aesthetics in the West: A landscape perception and assessment perspective. Academic Research, (4), 2-14. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-7326.2010.04.001

[17] Li, J., & Nassauer, J. I. (2021). Designing aesthetic experiences for the cultural sustainability of ecological health. Landscape Architecture Frontiers, 9(5), 72-79.

[18] Cheng, X. (2013). On the four points of ecological aesthetics. Tianjin Social Sciences, 5(05), 120-125. doi:10.16240/j.cnki.1002-3976.2013.05.011

[19] Yu, Y., & Zeng, Z. (2015). Ecological aesthetics—A new perspective of urban planning aesthetics and design. New Normal: Inheritance and Change—Proceedings of 2015 Annual Meeting of Urban Planning Society of China (07 Urban Ecological Planning). Guiyang, China: Urban Planning Society of China.

[20] Cheng, X. (2013). Ecological Aesthetics and Ecological Assessment and Planning. Henan People’s Publishing House.

[21] Hu, W., Yang, F., Shi, Y., & Bao, Z. (2020). Research Progress on Landscape Aesthetic Evaluation of Urban Park Green Space. 2020 Annual Meeting Proceedings of Chinese Society of Landscape Architecture (Part 1) (pp. 51-59). Beijing, China: Chinese Society of Landscape Architecture.

[22] Ma, Y., Yuan, Q., & Leng, H. (2017). Review and enlightenment of landscape aesthetics service evaluation from the perspective of ecosystem service. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 33(6), 99-103.

[23] Cheng, X. (2016). Ecological aesthetics: The legal connection of ecology and aesthetics—An answer to Mr. Berlint. Exploration and Free Views, (12), 52-57. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-2229.2016.12.015

[24] Junker, B., & Buchecker, M. (2008). Aesthetic preferences versus ecological objectives in river restorations. Landscape & Urban Planning, 85(3-4), 141-154.

[25] Zhao, J., Jia, P., Wang, R., & Cai, Y. (2013). Correlations between aesthetic preferences of river and landscape characters. Journal of Environmental Engineering & Landscape Management, 21(2), 123-132.

[26] Nassauer, J. I. (2004). Monitoring the success of metropolitan wetland restorations: Cultural sustainability and ecological function. Wetlands, 24(4), 756-765.

[27] Herzog, T. R. (1985). A cognitive analysis of preference for waterscapes. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 5(3), 225-241.

[28] Yamashita, S. (2002). Perception and evaluation of water in landscape: Use of Photo-Projective Method to compare child and adult residents’ perceptions of a Japanese river environment. Landscape & Urban Planning, 62(1), 3-17.

[29] Hu, L., Li, W., Cao, M., Che, Y., & Yang, K. (2014). Study of urban waterfront landscape and public preference: A case study of Suzhou Creek in Shanghai. Environmental Science & Technology, 37(S1), 412-418. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1003-6504.2014.6N.089

[30] Li, D., & Yao, C. (2005). Research on the aesthetic quality of urban water landscape with the support of systematic landscape aesthetics. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Urban Planning Society (pp. 1102-1105). China Water & Power Press.

[31] van den Berg, A. E., & Koole, S. L. (2006). New wilderness in the Netherlands: An investigation of visual preferences for nature development landscapes. Landscape & Urban Planning, 78(4), 362-372.

[32] de Groot, M., & de Groot, W. T. (2009). „Room for river” measures and public visions in the Netherlands: A survey on river perceptions among riverside residents. Water Resources Research, 45(7), 45-55.

[33] Kunshan City Water Conservancy Bureau, & Suzhou Water Conservancy Design and Research Institute. (2015). River blue line protection plan in Kunshan City.

[34] Gurnell, A., Shuker, L., & Wharton, G. (2014). URS classifications and indices: 2014.

[35] Zeng, P., Wang, Y., Liu, Y., Wang, H., Chen, Shi., & Che, Y. (2020). A river stretch scale assessment of urban river habitat in the Taihu Lake Basin. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 31(2), 581-589. doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.202002.006

[36] Wang, Q., & Yuan, X., Liu, H., & Zhang, Y. (2011). Rapid assessment model for mountain stream habitat and its application. Shuili Xuebao, 42(8), 928-933. doi:10.13243/j.cnki.slxb.2011.08.014

[37] Yang, Q., & Dobbie, M. F. (2019). Importance-satisfaction analysis of cultural ecosystem services of multifunctional landscapes designed for stormwater management. Landscape Architecture Frontiers, 7(1), 52-67.

[38] Liu, Y., Zhang, Y., & Jia, Q. (2017). Study on the methods of ecosystem services valuation. Environmental Protection, 45(6), 64-68. doi:10.14026/j.cnki.0253-9705.2017.06.015

[39] Ouyang, Z., Zhao, T., Wang, X., & Miao, H. (2004). Ecosystem services analyses and evaluation of China terrestrial surface water system. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 24(10), 2091-2099. doi:10.3321/j.issn:1000-0933.2004.10.001

[40] Zhai, X., & Lange, E. (2020). Using social media to explore perceptions of ecosystem services by Nature-Based Solution Projects. Landscape Architecture Frontiers, 8(3), 58-77.

[41] Cheng, X., & Li, L. (2020). A study on the relationship between aesthetic values and ecological values. Social Science Front, (10), 165-173, 282.

[42] Daniel, T. C., & Boster, R. S. (1976). Measuring landscape aesthetics: The scenic beauty estimation method. USDA Forest Service Research Paper RM-167.

[43] Miller, P. A. (2013). Visual preference research: An approach to understanding landscape perception. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 29(5), 22-26.

[44] National Bureau of Statistics. (2021). Residents’ income and consumption expenditure in 2020. National Bureau of Statistics.

[45] Wang, M., & Hou, X. (2018). The value conflicts and tradeoffs in the ecological revival of urban waterfront landscape: Practical experience and enlightenment of the Isar River, Germany. Urbanism and Architecture, (33), 26-30. doi:10.19892/j.cnki.csjz.2018.33.006

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2022 Higher Education Press