Exploring the Relationship between Key Perceptual Elements of Urban Secondary Wilderness and Its Restorative Benefits

Abstract

Urban secondary wilderness (USWs) is a near-natural place in cities and is an important link to reconnect humans with the natural world. Assessing the perceptual elements of USWs not only provides insight into public perceptions and preferences, but also helps to further explore its relevance to experiential values such as environmental restoration benefits. In this study, we selected three USWs cases located in Fuzhou, the capital city of Fujian Province, China, and constructed an evaluation system containing two types of dimensions and seventeen perceptual elements. Based on the public’s evaluation of the importance of and satisfaction with the perceived elements, we extracted the key perceived elements and analyzed their relationship with environmental restoration benefits. The results indicated that all three USWs cases scored over 4.9 on the Perceived Restoration Scale (PRS). Plants, Landscape color, Water, Landform, Climate, Freedom, and Naturalness are the key perceptual elements of the USWs, and the correlation coefficients between the satisfaction with the above seven perceptual elements and the scores of the PRS were all positive. In summary, USWs is an ideal place for residents to carry out restoration activities, and its key perceptual elements play a driving role.

1. Introduction

In recent years, people living in the city have realized that they have fewer opportunities to interact with nature [1,2,3], a phenomenon known as “experiential extinction” [4]. Research has demonstrated that “experiential extinction” not only negatively affects the physical and mental health and social well-being of residents [5,6,7], but also undermines their positive feelings, attitudes, and behaviors towards ecological conservation [8,9,10]. Therefore, in the context of rapid global urban expansion, meeting the needs of urban residents to experience nature and reconnecting people with nature are becoming key issues of the times [11,12].

For this reason, scholars have proposed the concept of urban wilderness (UWs) based on natural wilderness research, emphasizing the feasibility of accessing wild nature in cities [13,14,15]. UWs refers to land dominated by natural processes rather than by humans in or near urban areas, includes three types: urban primary wilderness (UPWs), urban secondary wilderness (USWs), and urban-like wilderness (ULWs) [16,17]. All three types have the potential to increase the connection between human beings and the natural world [18,19], but UPWs emphasizes the natural retention properties of the site, and the scarcity of wilderness resources in cities limits the development of related research [14]; ULWs creation involves species introduction and other ecological modifications, and some scholars are concerned about the risk of damaging fragile urban ecosystems [20,21]; however, taking USWs as the object of research may avoid the abovementioned research shortcomings. USWs refers to the wilderness environment that is re-formed by the natural law after persistent and high-intensity anthropogenic control or influence has ceased [22,23]. Nowadays, the increasing number of abandoned green spaces in cities not only provides sufficient samples for the study of USWs, but also effectively avoids the potential ecological risks of artificial intervention [24,25,26].

In the past, based on case studies of abandoned woodlands, riverbanks, and parks, scholars have found that USWs areas are distinguished from other types of urban environments, and usually contain more natural and wild environmental elements [27,28,29], such as unpruned plants, abundant wildlife, undulating terrain, and a natural boundary. At the same time, according to the framework of restorative environment research constituted by stress reduction theory (SRT) and attention restoration theory (ART), these environmental elements are viewed as key to supporting and contributing to the restorative benefits of USWs [30,31,32,33]. On this basis, a large number of studies have focused on the experiential perception of USWs, confirming on the one hand that USWs, as a near-natural place, has the potential to alleviate daily pressures [34,35], inhibit negative emotions [36,37], and increase life satisfaction [38]; on the other hand, they have found that there are differences in the public’s perceptions of and individual preferences for the objective characteristics of USWs and have emphasized that the evaluation of perceptions is a key perspective for recognizing USWs [39,40].

Perception refers to the human subject’s subjective view of external object things [41]. Drawing on past theoretical models, the perceptual elements of can be divided into physiological and psychological dimensions [42,43]. The physiological dimension refers to the perception of the objective environmental elements of the USWs based on the five senses, including visual elements such as organisms, landscapes, facilities, water, and landform [44,45], auditory elements such as natural and biological sounds [46], olfactory elements such as air freshness [47], and somatosensory elements such as temperature and humidity [48]. And the psychological dimension is the experiential evaluation of the USWs environment, including feelings of fun, comfort, freedom, and naturalness [49,50,51,52]. However, existing studies have mostly assessed only a few perceptual elements from a single evaluation dimension of physiology or psychology, and it is still unclear about the public’s cognition and preference for the perceptual elements of USWs areas, and even less is known about the perceptual elements that play a key role in them. On this basis, it is difficult to further confirm the correlation between experiential benefits such as environmental restoration of USWs and human subjective perceptions.

Therefore, the study aimed to scientifically and comprehensively evaluate the perceptual elements of USWs and to explore the association between key perceptual elements and experiential benefits such as environmental restoration. Based on the cases of USWs in Fuzhou City, Fujian Province, China, the study tried to construct an evaluation system for USWs perception based on the results of related studies and field research. Then, we extracted the perceptual elements that have a key impact on the experience of USWs. Finally, we measured the restorative benefits of USWs and explored the relationship between the key perceptual elements described above and environmental restorative benefits. Specifically, the study explored three questions:

• What are the key perceptual elements of USWs?;
• What are the restorative benefits of USWs?;
• Do the key perceived elements of USWs influence its restorative benefits?

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

As shown in Figure 1, the experimental design of this study was divided into three parts.

The three parts are as follows:

• Constructing a perceptual evaluation system for USWs and extracting key perceptual elements of USWs;
• Measuring the environmental restorative benefits of USWs;
• Analyzing the correlation between key perceptual elements of USWs and environmental restorative benefits.

The first part of the experiment includes six main steps. First, we summarized the perceived dimensions and evaluation elements of USWs, based on the results of related studies and field research. Second, we designed a questionnaire to evaluate the importance of and satisfaction with the perceived elements. The survey helps us to learn about residents’ preferences for perceived elements and how they behave in reality, as urban green spaces can be seen as a service provided to residents [53]. Then, we counted the explicit importance and actual performance of USWs perception elements based on the importance and satisfaction evaluation results, respectively. Third, we conducted bivariate analysis of the importance of perceived elements and satisfaction, and extracted correlation coefficients to reflect the implied importance of these elements. Distinguishing from the subjects’ direct evaluation of the importance of the elements, the implicit importance can reflect the implicit influence of individual perceptual element on the overall benefits. Fourth, we use the IPA-Kano model to analyze the quality attributes of the perceptual elements. The Importance–Performance Analysis (IPA) model evaluates the attributes of elements based on the importance–satisfaction matrix [54], and the Kano model categorizes element attributes based on user needs [55]. The IPA-Kano model builds on the similarities and differences between the IPA model and the Kano model to construct the quality measurement grid that can jointly assess importance and performance [56]. Origin is statistical and graphical software applied to statistics and the visualization of data, and we used it to map the IPA-Kano quality measurement grid of the perception elements of USWs. As shown in Figure 2, the horizontal axis used the importance data and the vertical axis used the implicit importance data, and the mean of the explicit and implicit importance of all the perceptual elements was used as the center coordinate, and each element was integrated into the coordinate system separately. Based on the IPA-Kano model, the important elements in Quadrant I have high explicit and implicit importance, the charismatic elements in Quadrant II have low explicit and high implicit importance, Quadrant III has unimportant elements with low explicit and implicit importance, and Quadrant IV has basic elements consisting of high explicit and low implicit importance. Fifth, we analyzed the impact of user needs on satisfaction and prioritize perceptual elements based on the Kano theory. Specifically, we focus on the important, charismatic, and basic perceptual elements and prioritize them according to their actual performance, filtering key perceptual elements ranked in the top one-third. The criteria for the key hierarchy of the perceptual elements are shown in

Table 1. Criteria for key hierarchy.

Key Hierarchy	Quality Attributes	Actual Performance Ranking
High	Important	1–6
	Charming
	Basic
Medium	Important	7–11
	Charming
	Basic
Low	Important	12–17
	Charming
	Basic

.

The second part of the experiment included two main steps. First, the Perceived Restoration Scale (PRS) was used to obtain subjects’ perceptual evaluations of the restorative benefits of USWs. Second, SPSS software was used to calculate subjects’ restorative benefits of the three cases.

In the third part of the experiment, Pearson correlation between satisfaction and the restorative benefits of USWs’ key perceived elements was analyzed using SPSS software, and the correlation between USWs’ key perceived elements and their restorative benefits was analyzed using the same method.

2.2. Indicator System

As shown in

Table 2. Evaluation indicators for USWs perception elements.

Dimension	S/N	Index	Description	References
Physiological perception	A1	Plants	Visual perception of vegetation height, density, and richness	[57,58]
	A2	Animals	Visual perception of animal numbers, diversity	[57,59]
	A3	Landscape color	Visual perception of landscape color vibrancy and diversity	[60]
	A4	Landscape seasonal phase	Visual perception of landscape seasonal legibility	[61]
	A5	Water	Quality of the water environment, dynamic visual perception	[42]
	A6	Boundary	Visual perception of environmental boundary integrity, sense of shelter	[62]
	A7	Landform	Perception of terrain relief, diversity	[62]
	A8	Climate	Perception of solar radiation, temperature and humidity, and wind speed	[63]
	A9	Sound	Auditory perception of biological sounds, such as birdsong, and natural sounds, such as the wind	[64,65]
	A10	Air	Olfactory perception of air freshness	[66,67]
	A11	Facilities	Perceived completeness and cleanliness of manual services such as roads, streetlights, seats, toilets, etc.	[68,69]
	A12	Cell phone signal	Access to cell phone signal	[70,71]
psychological perception	B1	Comfort	Feeling of gentleness and harmony	[50]
	B2	Freedom	Feeling undisturbed within, freedom of movement, and relaxation of the mind	[72,73]
	B3	Stimulation	Experience a unique, stimulating, heart-pumping atmosphere	[62,74]
	B4	Fun	Enjoyable atmosphere and interest in the activity	[75,76]
	B5	Naturalness	Feeling close to nature and ecological integration	[59,77]

, based on the literature, the study categorized USWs perception into two types of dimensions, physiological and psychological, with a total of seventeen elements. Among them, the physiological perception element included twelve indicators, Plants (A1), Animals (A2), Landscape color (A3), Landscape seasonal phase (A4), Water (A5), Boundary (A6), Landform (A7), Climate (A8), Sound (A9), Air (A10), Service facilities (A11), and Cell phone signal (A12), which were used to obtain the subjects’ perception evaluations through the means of vision, hearing, and smell. The psychological perception element includes five indicators, Comfort (B1), Freedom (B2), Stimulation (B3), Fun (B4), and Naturalness (B5), which were selected as representative indicators for the evaluation of USWs perception.

2.3. Questionnaire Design

The study was conducted to obtain data by administering a paper questionnaire in the field, which consisted of three parts. The first part of the questionnaire recorded the socio-demographic characteristics of the subjects, such as gender and age.

The second part of the questionnaire consisted of subjects’ importance and satisfaction ratings of seventeen USWs perception elements. The importance questionnaire asked subjects to rate the USWs perception elements according to their subjective cognitive preferences, with questions such as “Do you think plant elements in the current environment are important?” The question was recorded on a 9-point Likert scale, with “1” indicating very unimportant, “5” indicating fairly unimportant, and “9” indicating very important. The satisfaction questionnaire asked subjects to rate USWs perception elements based on objective performance. For example, the questions included “Are you satisfied with the plant elements in your current environment?”, and the answers were also recorded on a 9-point Likert scale, with “1” indicating very dissatisfied, “5” indicating fairly dissatisfied, and “9” indicating very satisfied. The arithmetic mean scores of the variables were used as importance and satisfaction scores, reflecting the apparent importance and actual performance of the perceived elements of the USWs [78]. The importance questionnaire scale had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.901, a KMO value of 0.910, and a significant Barlett’s test of sphericity (p < 0.001). And the satisfaction questionnaire scale had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.911, a KMO value of 0.902, and a significant Barlett’s test of sphericity (p < 0.001). The results showed that the scales have high reliability and validity.

The third part of the questionnaire was used to measure the restorative benefits of USWs. As shown in

Table 3. Chinese version of the PRS.

Dimension	S/N	Description
Being away	Q1	Here I feel far away from what is expected of me.
	Q2	It’s a place where I’m away from a lot of the pressures of real life.
	Q3	It’s a lot different from the environment I’m exposed to in my normal life.
	Q4	When I’m here, I don’t have to think about my responsibilities.
	Q5	Here, I can put aside my daily chores for a while.
Fascination and Compatibility	Q6	This environment is new to me.
	Q7	There is a certain monumental significance here.
	Q8	Here I can see, hear, feel and think about many things.
	Q9	When I stay here, I often make unexpected discoveries.
	Q10	There are attractive qualities here.
	Q11	My attention is drawn to many interesting things.
	Q12	I can do what I like here.
	Q13	I feel at one with this place.
	Q14	I want to stay here longer.
	Q15	I feel like I belong here.
	Q16	I can notice many things in this environment without trying hard.
	Q17	It brings back memories or imaginations.
Complexity	Q18	I find this environment boring.
	Q19	I find this environment monotonous.
	Q20	The landscape contains too many things.
	Q21	I feel like this place is a mess.
	Q22	I feel bored here.

, this study utilized the Chinese version of the PRS developed by Ye et al. (2010) [79]. It is widely used in Chinese contexts and has been shown to have high reliability and validity [42,80,81]. Subjects were assessed using a 7-point Likert scale to evaluate the restorative benefits of three USWs cases. The questionnaire consisted of three dimensions and twenty-two questions, of which the first seventeen questions were positively scored, with “1” indicating strongly disagree, “4” indicating fair, and “7” indicating strongly agree, and the last five questions were scored in reverse, with “1” indicating strongly agree, “4” indicating fairly agree, and “7” indicating strongly disagree. The arithmetical mean of the scores for each question was used to reflect the overall environmental restoration benefits.

The three sections of the questionnaire were analyzed for reliability and validity using SPSS 27 statistical software; the Cronbach values were basically above 0.9, proving that the questionnaire had good reliability. The significance value was 0 and the validity was good.

2.4. Study Area

As shown in Figure 3, the study area is Fuzhou, the capital city of Fujian Province in China. The city has one of the top five green coverage rates in China, and the large number of parks within this city limits not only attracts a large number of foreign tourists, but is also closely related to the well-being of local residents. However, in the context of decreasing local revenues, high maintenance costs have elevated the difficulty of managing parks, and some of the city’s man-made green spaces have even entered an unmanaged state and are being transformed into natural wastelands [82,83].

In this study, Aofeng Park (Aofeng), Qishan Forest Park (Qishan), and Lujitan Forest Park (Lujitan) were selected as our study cases (Figure 4). Located in Taijiang District, Aofeng was once famous for the more than 700 crocodiles on display in the park, which has since been deserted for more than fifteen years due to poor management. Qishan, located in Minhou County, was once a 4A-class scenic spot in China, but subsequent poor performance led to the management’s inability to afford the maintenance costs, and the park has been left unmanaged for the past five years. Located in Changle District, Lujitan features beautiful features such as lakes, waterfalls, and strange rocks, but a management incident that occurred more than ten years ago created a bad social impact and led to the park’s abandonment. We assessed the feasibility of Aofeng, Qishan, and Lujitan as USWs study cases. First, the abandoned parks meet the definition of USWs, as urban green spaces that were once under artificial management and are now dominated by natural succession, and are capable of becoming USWs. Second, the three parks differ significantly in terms of length of abandonment, size, landscape type, and other characteristics. Lastly, the parks have sufficient traffic flow, and the main users include not only the residents of the neighborhood, but also external visitors such as hikers, fishermen, and wildlife enthusiasts. Combining these three factors, we believed that public surveys could be conducted in Aofeng, Qishan, and Lujitan.

2.5. Subjects

Data were collected over a seven-month period from 10 August 2023 to 7 March 2024, and the researchers were divided into three groups that visited each case site four times per month, on weekly rest days (Saturday, Sunday), with each visit lasting five hours (9:00–11:00, 13:00–16:00). The exact procedure of the investigation is as follows:

• Researchers selected the main entrance to the USWs, randomly chose groups of visitors and used the “random number method” to invite visitors to participate in the survey;
• Subjects were informed of the purpose and content of the survey, and could discontinue the ongoing survey at any time if they felt any discomfort;
• Subjects were asked to visit the park for more than 15 min to ensure they had a basic understanding of their environment;
• Respondents were then asked to fill out a questionnaire consisting of importance and satisfaction ratings of the perceived elements and the PRS, at the end of which each respondent was able to receive a small gift (valued at less than five dollars).

A total of 850 questionnaires were distributed in the study, and 797 valid questionnaires were returned after excluding invalid questionnaires, including 275 questionnaires from Aofeng, 280 questionnaires from Qishan, and 242 questionnaires from Lujitan, and the validity rate of questionnaire return was 93.7%. Information regarding the subjects is shown in Figure 5; the respondents mainly consisted of subjects under 35 years old (62%), of whom 54% were male and 46% were female.

3. Results

3.1. Description of the Underlying Data

The results of the significance evaluation reflect the apparent significance of the perceived elements in the USWs cases (Appendix A). As shown in Figure 6, the perceptual elements that ranked high in the importance scores in all three cases included Landscape color (A3), Landscape seasonal phase (A4), Water (A5), Cell phone signal (A12), and Freedom (B2), indicating that the public recognized that these five perceptual elements were of high importance. In contrast, both Animals (A2) and Stimulation (B3) ranked at the bottom of the importance scores, suggesting that the public perceived these two perceptual elements as less important. Meanwhile, the perceptual elements that received attention in the different parks showed some similarity. Climate was regarded as the most important perceptual element by the subjects of Aofeng (7.473) and Lujitan (7.694), and Water was seen as the most important perceptual element of Qishan (7.050). It is also worth mentioning that none of the subjects cared about Stimulation, which ranked at the bottom of the scores for Aofeng (4.895), Qishan (5.425), and Lujitan (5.116).

The results of the satisfaction evaluation reflect the actual performance of the perceived elements in the USWs cases (Appendix B). As shown in Figure 7, the perceptual elements with the highest satisfaction scores in all three cases include Plants (A1), Landform (A7), and Climate (A8), indicating that the public recognized the actual performance of these three perceptual elements as good. In contrast, both Comfort (B1) and Stimulation (B3) were at the bottom of the list, suggesting that the public recognized these two perceptual elements as less important. Meanwhile, the actual performance of the perceptual elements also varies greatly from park to park. Climate (7.076) and Water (3.495) were the best- and worst-performing perceptual elements in Aofeng, while in Qishan the best- and worst-performing categories were Landform (6.953) and Comfort (4.689), and in Lujitan they were Water (7.198) and Comfort (4.231).

3.2. Extraction of Key Perceptual Elements

We found strong correlations in the evaluation data for some of the perceptual elements (r > 0.7), which means that there is multicollinearity in the data. Therefore, bivariate correlation analyses were chosen for the study to extract implied importance [84]. According to the data in

Table 4. Implicit importance of the perceptual elements of three cases.

Factor	Aofeng		Qishan		Lujitan
	Score	Ranking	Score	Ranking	Score	Ranking
A1	0.249 **	11	0.270 **	9	0.343 **	6
A2	0.336 **	1	0.291 **	5	0.335 **	8
A3	0.291 **	7	0.227 **	15	0.372 **	1
A4	0.228 **	13	0.229 **	14	0.356 **	5
A5	0.264 **	10	0.255 **	11	0.334 **	9
A6	0.181 **	17	0.285 **	7	0.276 **	17
A7	0.241 **	12	0.231 **	13	0.370 **	2
A8	0.198 **	16	0.282 **	8	0.370 **	3
A9	0.331 **	3	0.237 **	12	0.325 **	10
A10	0.226 **	14	0.328 **	3	0.281 **	16
A11	0.332 **	2	0.256 **	10	0.315 **	12
A12	0.294 **	6	0.351 **	2	0.287 **	15
B1	0.224 **	15	0.301 **	4	0.325 **	11
B2	0.283 **	8	0.203 **	16	0.359 **	4
B3	0.308 **	4	0.287 **	6	0.311 **	13
B4	0.297 **	5	0.370 **	1	0.339 **	7
B5	0.273 **	9	0.162 **	17	0.308 **	14

Note: ** indicates highly significant correlation at p < 0.01, the same below.

, we extracted the importance of the perceived elements and satisfaction for correlation analysis; all the perceptual elements show implicit importance. In Aofeng, Animals (0.336 **) was the perceptual element with the highest implicit importance, followed by Sound (0.332 **) and Facilities (0.331 **), while Boundary (0.181 **) has the lowest implicit importance. In Qishan, the perceptual elements with the highest implicit importance were Fun (0.370 **), Cell phone signal (0.351 **), and Air (0.328 **), respectively, while Naturalness (0.162 **) had the lowest implicit importance. In Lujitan, Landscape color (0.372 **) was the perceptual element with the highest implicit importance, followed by Landform (0.370 **) and Climate (0.370 **), while Boundary (0.276**) had the lowest implicit importance.

As shown in Figure 8, the quadrant in which the element is located delineates the quality of the perceptual elements. Regarding the important elements in Quadrant I, there are seven items in Aofeng (Landscape color, Sound, Facilities, Cell phone signal, Freedom, Fun, Naturalness), two items in Qishan (Air, Cell phone signal), and five items in Lujitan (Landscape color, Landscape seasonal phase, Water, Climate, Freedom). Regarding the charming elements in Quadrant II, there are two items in Aofeng (Animals, Stimulation), seven items in Qishan (Plants, Animals, Boundary, Climate, Comfort, Stimulation, Fun), and four items in Lujitan (Plants, Animals, Landform, Fun). Regarding the unimportant elements in Quadrant III, there are four items in both Aofeng (Plants, Boundary, Landform, Air) and Lujitan (Boundary, Air, Facilities, Stimulation), and Qishan has two items (Sound, Facilities). Regarding the basic elements in Quadrant IV, there were four items in Aofeng (Landscape seasonal phase, Water, Climate, Comfort) and Lujitan (Sound, Cell phone signal, Comfort, Naturalness), and Qishan has six items (Landscape color, Landscape seasonal phase, Water, Landform, Freedom, Naturalness). Similarities and differences coexisted in the quality measurements of the perceptual elements in the three USWs cases.

We combined the qualities of the perceptual elements and their actual performance to delineate the key hierarchy (

Table 5. Key hierarchy of perceptual elements in three cases.

Key Hierarchy	Aofeng	Qishan	Lujitan
High	A8 A12 B2 B5	A1 A3 A5 A7 A8 B5	A1 A3 A5 A7 A8 B2
Medium	A3 A4 B4	A4 A6 A10 B2 B4	A2 A4 A9 B5
Low	A2 A5 A9 A11 B1 B3	A2 A12 B1 B3	A12 B1 B4

). In the highest key hierarchy, the number of perceptual elements in Aofeng is the lowest, only four (Climate, Cell phone signal, Freedom, Naturalness); while the number in both Qishan (Plants, Landscape color, Water, Landform, Climate, Naturalness) and Lujitan (Plants, Landscape color, Water, Landform, Climate, Freedom) was six. Using repetition in at least two case categories as the extraction criterion, the study screened seven key perceptual elements based on USWs cases in Fuzhou, namely, Plants (A1), Landscape color (A3), Water (A5), Landform (A7), Climate (A8), Freedom (B2), and Naturalness (B5).

3.3. Association of USWs Restorative Benefits with Key Perceptual Elements

The study used the PRS to assess the restorative benefits of the environment (Appendix C). Aofeng (4.972), Qishan (5.166), and Lujitan (4.979) all scored around five, suggesting good restorative benefits of USWs. In addition, Aofeng (5.440) had the highest scores in the being away dimension, suggesting that it is more differentiated from participants’ everyday environment compared to Qishan (5.209) and Lujitan (5.170). In the dimension of fascination and compatibility, the performance of Qishan (5.234) was superior to both Aofeng (5.013) and Lujitan (4.905), indicating that it is more popular. In the complexity dimension, Qishan (4.957) was close to Lujitan (4.965) and higher than Aofeng (4.404), indicating that compared to the other two, the environment of Aofeng may be a bit cluttered.

The study used Pearson correlation analysis to explore the relationship between the key perceptual elements of USWs and its restorative benefits. According to the data in

Table 6. Pearson’s correlation analysis of satisfaction and restorative benefits.

Factor	Aofeng	Qishan	Lujitan
A1		0.481 **	0.479 **
A3		0.342 **	0.464 **
A5		0.415 **	0.517 **
A7		0.430 **	0.569 **
A8	0.325 **	0.392 **	0.567 **
B2	0.477 **		0.494 **
B5	0.522 **	0.363 **

Note: ** indicates highly significant correlation at p < 0.01.

, all the key perceptual elements were significantly correlated with environmental restoration benefits (p < 0.01). Specifically, Climate (r = 0.325 **), Freedom (r = 0.477 **), and Naturalness (r = 0.522 **) in Aofeng showed moderate correlation. In Qishan, Plants (r = 0.481**), Landscape color (r = 0.342 **), Water (r = 0.415 **), Landform (r = 0.430 **), Climate (r = 0.392 **), and Naturalness (r = 0.363 **) showed moderate correlation. In Lujitan, Plants (r = 0.479 **), Landscape color (r = 0.464 **), Water (r = 0.517 **), Landform (r = 0.569 **), Climate (r = 0.567 **), and Freedom (r = 0.494 **) showed moderate correlations. It is noteworthy that all the correlation coefficients are positive (r > 0), so we conclude that the above seven key perceptual elements of USWs are positively driving its environmental restoration benefits.

4. Discussion

4.1. Key Perceptual Elements of USWs

In this study, three abandoned parks in Fuzhou were selected as the research cases to construct a perception evaluation system of USWs. Based on the results of the public perception evaluation, we selected seven key perceptual elements: Plants, Landscape color, Water, Landform, Climate, Freedom and Naturalness, combining the quality attributes of the elements and their real performance, and refined our perception of USWs as a special type of urban environment with both artificial green space and natural wilderness. This result completes our perception of USWs, which is a special type of urban environment that combines the characteristics of artificial green space and natural wilderness [85].

On the one hand, artificial green space perceptual elements such as Plants, Landscape color, Water and Climate are usually of high importance and preferred by the public. Palliwoda et al. (2021) investigated more than thirty urban parks and brownfields, and they emphasized that Plants are a key factor influencing the social, cultural, and ecological benefits of the environment [69], while plants are also positively correlated with perceptions of the ecological diversity of the environment and the complexity of the landscape, and are a valid predictor of how well the environment is experienced [86,87,88,89]. Ma et al. (2021) developed a landscape visual quality (LVQ) evaluation model, and they emphasized the importance of Landscape color as a perceptual dimension, which not only affects the aesthetic characteristics and overall presentation of urban green space landscapes [90], but also attracts the visual attention of the experiencers [91,92], as a “wow factor” that is appreciated by the public [93]. A study by Wang et al. (2021) concluded that Water is closely related to aesthetic and is an important factor in encouraging recreational activities for experiencers [94], as the public prefers the visual and auditory stimulation that come with the perception of Water [65]. Javadi et al. (2021) focused on the sustainable development of urban green spaces and generalized the relationship between Climate and social well-being [95], emphasizing that the willingness, duration, and benefits of outdoor activities of the experiencers were influenced by Climate factors such as air quality, temperature and humidity, and wind speed [96].

On the other hand, natural wilderness perception elements such as Landform, Freedom, and Naturalness also showed high criticality, and we believe that this result may indicate the desire of experiencers such as city dwellers to live in a natural environment. Nakarmi et al. (2023) surveyed public perceptions of a proposed geopark and found that wilderness features significantly influenced the visual quality of the environment, with the public showing a clear preference for undulating landforms such as rocks and cliffs [97]. Smith (2015) explored the significance of wilderness for youth [98], where Freedom has the value of enhancing the value of the recreational experience, boosting personal spirituality, and promoting the outdoors [99]. Ried et al. (2020) emphasized the recreational experience value of natural wilderness by studying nature reserves, where experiencers were able to recognize the beauty of wilderness during encounters with natural organisms, as well as their own desire to return to nature [100]. In summary, analyzing the results of the study, the diverse and natural landscapes in USWs areas reflect the aesthetic tendency of city dwellers to favor naturalization [101], and people are able to realize their own goals, get rid of the burden of responsibility, and act unrestrainedly in USWs experience [73], and this kind of transcendent experience will attract more and more city dwellers to try to get out of the city and explore the future of a nature-connected lifestyle [102].

4.2. Relationship Between Key Perceptual Elements of USWs and Its Restorative Benefits

While past studies have found that USWs have experiential value such as relieving daily stress for urban residents, our findings further suggest that USWs is the ideal place for residents to engage in restorative experiences. We also found significant positive correlations between key perceptions of USWs and its restorative properties, with perceptions of Plants, Landscape color, Water, Landform, Climate, Freedom, and Naturalness contributing to experiencers’ access to the restorative benefits of USWs. This finding is not surprising as it is consistent with past research findings.

Physiological perceptual elements such as Plants, Landscape color, Water, Landform, and Climate can serve as positive predictors of environmental resilience [43,103,104,105]. According to Nghiem et al. (2021), increasing the biodiversity, landscape complexity, and perceived visual aesthetic quality of the environment helps experiencers to reap restorative benefits [65,106,107]. The rich landscape elements in USWs areas attract the attention of the experiencers, help people to escape from their daily lives, and satisfy them by enabling them to have a good rest [86,88]. Hoyle et al. (2017) emphasized that diverse and vibrant landscapes have greater perceptual appeal, and that aesthetically pleasing environments stimulate positive emotions and mobilize their supervisory energies to engage in perceptually restorative behaviors [93,108]. Rich vegetation communities and rare species in USWs areas are more preferred, encouraging people to increase the frequency of their visits to wilderness areas, which can help them reap restorative benefits [92]. A study by McAllister et al. (2017) concluded that environments with water features are more restorative than those without them [109]. The quality of Water in USWs areas, such as clear water quality, naturally sloping banks, and high levels of interactivity and safety, enhances the restorative benefits that people receive [110,111,112]. Rickard et al. (2021) found that exposure to the natural world is an effective way for people to escape from their daily stresses [113]. USWs provide spaces for diverse scenic experiences, such as flat man-made terrains and naturalized rolling landscapes, that can meet the restoration needs of different groups [114]. Sousa et al. (2024) emphasized that climate is an important determinant of public environmental perceptions [115], with factors such as light, temperature and humidity, and wind speed showing a significant relationship with environmental restoration potential [108]. USWs is effective in purifying the air and regulating the climate in a “refreshing”, “comfortable” and “gentle” environment that can help experiencers obtain restorative benefits [58,116].

Similarly, there is an influence of psychological factors on environmental resilience [43,117]. Conradson et al. (2016) reviewed research on the psychological elements of environments and defined Freedom as the psychological perception of autonomy, emancipation, and transcendence [117]. The environmental features of USWs that differentiate them from everyday life have a special experiential potential to act as a refuge for the mind and help residents to self-realize, get rid of stress, regulate their moods, and increase their self-confidence [118,119]. In their study, Fisher et al. (2021) emphasized that more natural sites are more conducive to people’s rejuvenation [59], whereas it is difficult for people to perceive ecological sensations in artificially maintained urban green spaces [120]. The natural successional character of USWs shapes the diversity of biomes and diverse landscape spaces, creates a link between ecological processes and people’s perceptions, can facilitate the ecological perceptual experience, and can effectively enhance the restoration benefits of the environment [40,121].

5. Conclusions

In this study, we constructed a perception evaluation system of USWs, screened seventeen evaluation elements based on two types of perception dimensions, physiological and psychological. Meanwhile, we analyzed the quality of the perceptual elements based on the IPA-Kano model and extracted the key perceptual elements of USWs by combining their actual performance. In addition, we adopted the PRS to evaluate the restorative benefits of USWs. By investigating the case of USWs in Fuzhou, we identified Plants, Landscape color, Water, Landform, Climate, Freedom, and Naturalness as the key perceptual elements, and found that they contribute to the restoration benefits of the environment.

5.1. Theoretical and Practical Implications

The study focused on the urban and natural attributes of USWs, based on previous perceptual evaluation dimensions, integrating a larger number of evaluation indicators, and also focusing on perceptual elements such as Boundary, Cell phone signal, and Stimulation. In terms of methodology, the study focused on the influence of public perception and preference differences on the evaluation of the perceptual elements. According to the IPA-Kano model, bivariate correlation analyses were used to extract the correlation coefficients to express the implicit importance of the elements, and then key perceptual elements were extracted by combining this with the elements’ actual performance, which is an experimental procedure that demonstrates higher reliability and efficiency. In addition, the study found that USWs has good restorative efficacy and this is associated with its key perceptual elements. Our findings suggested that physiological perceptual elements such as Plants, Landscape color, Water, Landform, and Climate, as well as psychological perceptual elements such as Freedom and Naturalness, are conducive to improving the restoration benefits of USWs. These findings can improve public awareness of USWs, which is not only conducive to the conservation and sustainable development of it, but also provides valuable evidence for the future harmonious development of humans and nature.

5.2. Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research

Several limitations of this study should be addressed. First, although perceptual evaluation facilitates the assessment of people’s subjective perceptions and preferences for the environment in which they live, there is variability in landscape preferences among different groups of people, and the influencing elements include upbringing, cultural practices, and values [122]. Secondly, the IPA-Kano model used in this study has some flaws, and due to the multicollinearity of the study data, a bivariate correlation model was used instead of the commonly used partial correlation and regression analysis models to calculate the implicit importance of the elements [84]. Subsequent studies should consider using different analytical models and coefficient calculation methods to reduce the error according to the actual situation. In addition, the research object is limited to abandoned parks in the city, which makes it difficult to guide subsequent research on other types of USWs. Further expanding the scope of the study to include more diverse natural spaces in future research will not only enhance public awareness of USWs and protect precious natural experience resources, but also encourage people to pursue alternative modes of living and explore the realization of sustainable and prosperous living.