Perception of Residents about Urban Vegetation: A Comparative Study of Planned Versus Semi-Planned Cities of Islamabad and Rawalpindi, Pakistan

S. A. Bokhari, Z. Saqib, Amjad Ali, M. Z. U. Haq
{"title":"Perception of Residents about Urban Vegetation: A Comparative Study of Planned Versus Semi-Planned Cities of Islamabad and Rawalpindi, Pakistan","authors":"S. A. Bokhari, Z. Saqib, Amjad Ali, M. Z. U. Haq","doi":"10.4172/2157-7625.1000251","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present study compared opinions of south Asian planned (Islamabad) versus semi-planned (Rawalpindi) urban residents, regarding urban vegetation (ecological capital) and its usefulness. These urban areas known as twin cities lie in close vicinity but their contrasting contextual setting makes them a suitable case study. The locals were asked questions related to the importance of urban vegetation, changes in it over a period of time and resultant impacts (positive/negative). A majority (90%) of respondents opined that urban vegetation is beneficial while another big proportion (69.20%) believed vegetation cover changed over time and recent changes in urban vegetation were viewed negatively (55.80%). Statistical analysis revealed that respondents form both cities significantly differ in their point of view regarding ecological capital: usefulness of vegetation (p<0.02); urban vegetation cover changes (p<0.02) and its impacts (p<0.01). The study concluded that planning/contextual settings influence human perception about natural capital in urban settings. While, the people were equivocal in perceiving the vegetation change; the negative impacts were more felt by the people living in semi-planned area than the people living in the planned areas.","PeriodicalId":15637,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Ecosystem & Ecography","volume":"6 1","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Ecosystem & Ecography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2157-7625.1000251","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

Abstract

The present study compared opinions of south Asian planned (Islamabad) versus semi-planned (Rawalpindi) urban residents, regarding urban vegetation (ecological capital) and its usefulness. These urban areas known as twin cities lie in close vicinity but their contrasting contextual setting makes them a suitable case study. The locals were asked questions related to the importance of urban vegetation, changes in it over a period of time and resultant impacts (positive/negative). A majority (90%) of respondents opined that urban vegetation is beneficial while another big proportion (69.20%) believed vegetation cover changed over time and recent changes in urban vegetation were viewed negatively (55.80%). Statistical analysis revealed that respondents form both cities significantly differ in their point of view regarding ecological capital: usefulness of vegetation (p<0.02); urban vegetation cover changes (p<0.02) and its impacts (p<0.01). The study concluded that planning/contextual settings influence human perception about natural capital in urban settings. While, the people were equivocal in perceiving the vegetation change; the negative impacts were more felt by the people living in semi-planned area than the people living in the planned areas.
居民对城市植被的感知:巴基斯坦伊斯兰堡和拉瓦尔品第规划与半规划城市的比较研究
本研究比较了南亚已规划(伊斯兰堡)和半规划(拉瓦尔品第)城市居民对城市植被(生态资本)及其用途的看法。这些被称为“双城”的城市区域毗邻而居,但它们截然不同的背景环境使它们成为一个合适的案例研究。当地人被问及城市植被的重要性、一段时间内城市植被的变化以及由此产生的影响(积极/消极)。大部分受访者(90%)认为城市植被是有益的,而另一大部分受访者(69.20%)认为植被覆盖随着时间的推移而变化,对最近城市植被的变化持负面看法(55.80%)。统计分析表明,两市受访者对生态资本的看法存在显著差异:植被有用性(p<0.02);城市植被覆盖变化(p<0.02)及其影响(p<0.01)。该研究得出结论,规划/环境设置影响人们对城市环境中自然资本的看法。然而,人们对植被变化的认识是模棱两可的;居住在半规划区内的居民比居住在规划区内的居民更能感受到这种负面影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信