旁观者眼中的“绿色”:比较人造草坪和天然草坪对可持续性和福祉的看法

Michael R. Barnes, E. Watkins
{"title":"旁观者眼中的“绿色”:比较人造草坪和天然草坪对可持续性和福祉的看法","authors":"Michael R. Barnes, E. Watkins","doi":"10.15365/cate.202.150102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Turfgrass lawns are a central component in urban green space and provide a variety of ecosystem services. Traditionally, natural turfgrass lawns can have substantial input requirements (e.g., water, herbicides), which if not managed properly can have harmful ecological effects. A proposed solution that has already been adopted in many cities are artificial turfgrass lawns which do not require some of the traditional inputs of natural lawns. However, understanding perceptions of the sustainability and well-being benefits between these two surfaces are unknown. We surveyed adults in the United States in order to understand perceptions of sustainability and well-being between artificial and natural turfgrass lawns. The survey utilized a pre-post design which presented participants with photos and information about each surface type with questions related to sustainability and well-being before and after the information was presented. Overall, participants perceived natural turfgrass lawns as more sustainable and better for human health and well-being than artificial turfgrass lawns. More work needs to be done to understand the specific reasons behind such perceptions and if perceptions change when in direct contact with the two lawn surfaces.","PeriodicalId":89339,"journal":{"name":"Cities and the environment","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Greenness’ in the Eye of the Beholder: Comparing Perceptions of Sustainability and Well-being Between Artificial and Natural Turfgrass\",\"authors\":\"Michael R. Barnes, E. Watkins\",\"doi\":\"10.15365/cate.202.150102\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Turfgrass lawns are a central component in urban green space and provide a variety of ecosystem services. Traditionally, natural turfgrass lawns can have substantial input requirements (e.g., water, herbicides), which if not managed properly can have harmful ecological effects. A proposed solution that has already been adopted in many cities are artificial turfgrass lawns which do not require some of the traditional inputs of natural lawns. However, understanding perceptions of the sustainability and well-being benefits between these two surfaces are unknown. We surveyed adults in the United States in order to understand perceptions of sustainability and well-being between artificial and natural turfgrass lawns. The survey utilized a pre-post design which presented participants with photos and information about each surface type with questions related to sustainability and well-being before and after the information was presented. Overall, participants perceived natural turfgrass lawns as more sustainable and better for human health and well-being than artificial turfgrass lawns. More work needs to be done to understand the specific reasons behind such perceptions and if perceptions change when in direct contact with the two lawn surfaces.\",\"PeriodicalId\":89339,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cities and the environment\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cities and the environment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15365/cate.202.150102\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cities and the environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15365/cate.202.150102","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

草坪是城市绿地的核心组成部分,提供多种生态系统服务。传统上,天然草坪需要大量的投入(如水、除草剂),如果管理不当,可能会产生有害的生态影响。一个已经被许多城市采用的解决方案是人造草坪,它不需要一些传统的天然草坪的投入。然而,对这两个表面之间的可持续性和福祉效益的理解是未知的。我们调查了美国的成年人,以了解人工草坪和天然草坪之间的可持续性和幸福感。该调查采用了前后设计,向参与者展示了每种表面类型的照片和信息,并在信息呈现前后提出了与可持续性和福祉相关的问题。总体而言,参与者认为天然草坪比人造草坪更具可持续性,对人类健康和福祉更好。需要做更多的工作来了解这种感知背后的具体原因,以及当与两个草坪表面直接接触时,感知是否会发生变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
‘Greenness’ in the Eye of the Beholder: Comparing Perceptions of Sustainability and Well-being Between Artificial and Natural Turfgrass
Turfgrass lawns are a central component in urban green space and provide a variety of ecosystem services. Traditionally, natural turfgrass lawns can have substantial input requirements (e.g., water, herbicides), which if not managed properly can have harmful ecological effects. A proposed solution that has already been adopted in many cities are artificial turfgrass lawns which do not require some of the traditional inputs of natural lawns. However, understanding perceptions of the sustainability and well-being benefits between these two surfaces are unknown. We surveyed adults in the United States in order to understand perceptions of sustainability and well-being between artificial and natural turfgrass lawns. The survey utilized a pre-post design which presented participants with photos and information about each surface type with questions related to sustainability and well-being before and after the information was presented. Overall, participants perceived natural turfgrass lawns as more sustainable and better for human health and well-being than artificial turfgrass lawns. More work needs to be done to understand the specific reasons behind such perceptions and if perceptions change when in direct contact with the two lawn surfaces.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
5 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信