Kentsel Yeşil Alanların Yeterlilik Seviyelerinin Ve İnsanların Kentsel Yeşil Alanları Kullanımlarını Etkileyen Faktörlerin Aydın-Efeler Örneğinde İncelenmesi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı kentsel yeşil alanların yeterlilik durumları, insanların bu alanları kullanım nedenleri ve bu alanlarda algıladıkları sorunların kentsel yeşil alanı kullanımı üzerindeki etkilerini incelemektir. Veriler 1 Nisan- 15 Mayıs 2022 tarihinde 400 kişiyle anket ile toplanmıştır. Çalışmada kentsel yeşil alanların yeterlilikleri, insanların bu alanları kullanma nedenleri, bu alanlarda algıladıkları sorunlar, bu alanı kullanma sıklıkları ve süreleri hakkında veri toplanmıştır. Veriler tanımsal istatistik ve çoklu doğrusal regresyon analizi ile analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular kentsel yeşil alanların nitelik ve nicelik olarak yetersiz olduklarını göstermiştir. İnsanlar kentsel yeşil alanları çoğunlukla rekreasyon, sağlık ve sosyalleşme için kullandıkları tespit edilmiştir. Regresyon analizi sonucunda, kullanıcılar arasındaki anlaşmazlık, zeminlerin çok sert olması, engelli kullanımına uygun olmaması ve büyüklüklerinin yeterli olmaması kentsel yeşil alan ziyaret sıklığıyla olumsuz ilişkili olduğu; yeşil alanlarda yeterli gölge alanların olmaması ve yeşil alanların estetik olmaması ile de kentsel yeşil alanda harcanan zaman arasında negatif ilişkili olduğu belirlenmiştir. Bulgular ışığında bir dizi öneri getirilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kentsel yeşil alan
• yeşil alan yeterliliği
• kullanıcı tercihleri
• algılanan sorunlar
• Aydın

Investigating The Adequacy Levels of Urban Green Spaces and Factors Affecting People's Use Of Urban Green Spaces: The Case Study of Aydın-Efeler

Öz

The aim of this study is to examine the adequacy levels of urban green spaces, the reasons why people use these areas, and the effects of the problems they perceive in these areas on the use of urban green areas. Data were collected through a survey with 400 people between April 1 and May 15, 2022. In the study, data were collected on the adequacy of urban green spaces, the reasons why people use these areas, the problems they perceive in these areas, the frequency and duration of using these areas. The data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and multiple linear regression analysis. The findings showed 80% of participants think that urban green areas are insufficient in terms of quality and quantity. It was determined that people mostly use urban green areas for recreation, health, and socialization. As a result of the regression analysis, it was determined that disagreements between users, hard pavement, not being suitable for disabled use, and their insufficient size were negatively associated with the frequency of urban green space visits; and the lack of sufficient shaded areas in green spaces and the lack of aesthetics in green areas were negatively related to the time spent in urban green spaces. Based on the findings, it was suggested to design aesthetic urban green areas with soft ground, suitable for disabled use, sufficient size, and shaded areas.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Urban green space
• green area adequacy
• user preferences
• perceived problems
• Aydın

Kaynakça

1. Açmaz Özden, M., & Başara Uysal, A. (2023). Çanakkale Yeşil Alan Sisteminin Kullanıcı Odaklı Olarak Değerlendirilmesi. International Social Sciences Studies, 9(115), 8435-8448. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.29228/sssj.720
2. Akpınar, A. (2014). Kullanıcıların kentsel yeşil yolları kullanım sebepleri, algıları ve tercihlerinin Aydın-Koşuyolu örneğinde incelenmesi (Assessing the users` perceptions, preferences, and reasons for use of urban greenway in Aydın-Koşuyolu province). Journal of the Faculty of Forestry Istanbul University, 64(2), 41-55. https://doi.org/10.17099/jffiu.31281
3. Akpinar, A. (2016). How is quality of urban green spaces associated with physical activity and health? Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 16, 76–83.
4. Akpınar, A. (2019). Kentsel yeşil alanların kalitesinin insan sağlığı ve fiziksel aktivitesi üzerindeki etkisinin incelenmesi. Artvin Çoruh Üniversitesi Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 20(1), 36-46.
5. Aksoy, Y., & Akpınar, A. (2011). Yeşil alan kullanımı ve yeşil alan gereksinimi üzerine bir araştırma İstanbul ili Fatih ilçesi örneği. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, 10(20), 81-96.
6. Arıkboğa, Ü. (2016). Türkiye’de belediyelerin gelir yapısı: Sorunlar ve çözüm önerileri. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 13(33), 276-297.
7. Bratman, G. N., Daily, G. C., Levy, B. J., & Gross, J. J. (2015). The benefits of nature experience: improved affect and cognition. Landsc. Urban Plan. , 138, 41–50. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.02.005
8. Cankurt, M., Akpınar, A., & Miran, B. (2016). An Exploratory Study on the Perception of Air, Water, Soil, Visual and General Pollution. Ekoloji, 25(98), 52-60. https://doi.org/10.5053/ekoloji.2016.02

9. Cohen, D. A., Marsh, T., Williamson, S., Han, B., Derose, K. P., Golinelli, D., & McKenzie, T. L. (2014). The potential for pocket parks to increase physical activity. American journal of health promotion, 28(3_suppl), S19-S26.
10. Dadvand, P., Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J., & Esnaola, M. (2015). Green spaces and cognitive development in primary schoolchildren. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. , 112, 7937–7942. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1503402112
11. Danford, R. S., Strohbach, M., Warren, P. S., & Ryan, R. L. (2018). Active greening or rewilding the city: how does the intention behind small pockets of urban green affect use? Urban For. Urban Green., 29, 377–383. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.11.014
12. de Vries, S., van Dillen, S. M., Groenewegen, P. P., & Spreeuwenberg, P. (2013). Streetscape greenery and health: Stress, social cohesion and physical activity as mediators. Social Science & Medicine, 94, 26-33.
13. 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. Environmental science & policy, 109, 36-44.
14. Gobster, P. H. (1995). Perception and use of a metropolitan greenway system for recreation. Landscape and Urban Planning, 33, 401–413.
15. Haaland, C., & van den Bosch, C. (2015). Challenges and strategies for urban green-space planning in cities undergoing densification: A review. Urban For. Urban Green., 14, 760–771. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2015.07.009
16. Hartig, T., & Kahn, P. H. (2016). Living in cities, naturally. Science , 352, 938–940. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf3759
17. Hipp, J. A., Gulwadi, G. B., Alves, S., & Sequeira, S. (2016). The relationship between perceived greenness and perceived restorativeness of university campuses and student reported quality of life. Environ. Behav. , 48, 1292–1308. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916515598200
18. IBM Corp. (Released 2017). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 25.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
19. Ilgar, R., & Şeran, Y. (2019). İstanbul ili, Bahçelievler ilçesinde park ve yeşil alan kullanımı. Türk Coğrafya Dergisi, 73, 7-16.
20. James, P., Tzoulas, K., Adams, M. D., Barber, A., Box, J., Breuste, J., . . . Handley, J. (2009). Towards an integrated understanding of green space in the European built environment. Urban For. Urban Green., 8(2), 65-75. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2009.02.001
21. Kothencz, G., Kolcsár, R., Cabrera-Barona, P., & Szilassi, P. (2017). Urban green space perception and its contribution to well-being. International journal of environmental research and public health, 14(7), 766.
22. Lee, A. C., Jordan, H. C., & Horsley, J. (2015). Value of urban green spaces in promoting healthy living and wellbeing: prospects for planning . Risk management and healthcare policy, 131-137.
23. Mitchell, R., & Popham, F. (2008). Effect of exposure to natural environment on health inequalities: an observational population study. Lancet, 372, 1655–60.
24. Nechyba, T. J., & Walsh, R. P. (2004). Urban sprawl. J. Econ. Perspect., 18(4), 177–200.
25. Nguyen, P. Y., Astell-Burt, T., Rahimi-Ardabili, H., & Feng, X. (2021). Green space quality and health: A systematic review. International journal of environmental research and public health, 18(21), 11028.
26. Ostoić, S. K., van den Bosch, C. C., Vuletić, D., Stevanov, M., Živojinović, I., Mutabdžija-Bećirović, S., . . . Nevenić, R. (2017). Citizens’ perception of and satisfaction with urban forests nd green space: results from selected Southeast European cities. Urban For. Urban Green., 23, 93–103. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.02.005
27. Peschardt, K. K., & Stigsdotter, U. (2013). Associations between park characteristics and perceived restorativeness of small public urban green spaces. Landscape and Urban Planning, 112, 26– 39.
28. Peschardt, K. K., Schipperijn, J., & Stigsdotter, U. K. (2012). Use of small public urban green spaces(SPUGS). Urban For. Urban Green., 11, 235–244. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2012.04.002
29. Selanon, P., & Chuangchai, W. (2023). The Importance of Urban Green Spaces in Enhancing Holistic Health and Sustainable Well-Being for People with Disabilities: A Narrative Review. Buildings, 13(8), 2100.
30. Selanon, P., & Chuangchai, W. (2024). Improving Accessibility to Urban Greenspaces for People with Disabilities: A Modified Universal Design Approach. Journal of Planning Literature, 39(1), 79-83.
31. Smith, S. (2013, April 10). Determining sample size: How to ensure you get the correct sample size. Retrieved from Qualtrics: http://www.qualtrics.com/blog/determining-sample-size/
32. Teixeira, C. F. (2021). Green space configuration and its impact on human behavior and URBAN environments. Urban Climate, 35, 100746.
33. Ulrich, R. S. (2006). Evidence-based health care architecture. Lancet, 368, S38–S39. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69921-2
34. Vural, H. (2020). Bingöl halkının yeşil alan kullanımı ve kent parkları yeterliliklerinin değerlendirilmesi. Bartın Orman Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(1), 79-90.
35. Wang, R., Zhao, J., Meitner, M. J., Hu, Y., & Xu, X. (2019). Characteristics of urban green spaces in relation to aesthetic preference and stress recovery. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 41, 6-13.
36. Zhang, J. W., Piff, P. K., Iyer, R., Koleva, S., & Keltner, D. (2014). An occasion for unselfing: Beautiful nature leads to prosociality. Environ. Psychol., 37, 61–72. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.11.008
37. Zhang, R., Huang, L., & Wang, H. (2023). Accessibility Improvement and Renewal of Urban Park Green Space for the Elderly and the Disabled. Forests, 14, 1801. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/f14091801