Next Article in Journal
Breaking the Boundary between Permanent Capital Farmland and Arable Land in China: Understanding State and Drivers of Permanent Capital Farmland Non-Grain Production in a Rapid Urbanizing County
Previous Article in Journal
Ecosystem Resilience Trends and Its Influencing Factors in China’s Three-River Headwater Region: A Comprehensive Analysis Using CSD Indicators (1982–2023)
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Semantic Analysis Method of Public Public Built Environment and Its Landscape Based on Big Data Technology: Kimbell Art Museum as Example
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Land
Volume 13
Issue 8
10.3390/land13081225
land-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Evaluating Public Satisfaction and Its Determinants in Chinese Sponge Cities Using Structural Equation Modeling

by
Rui Wang
1,
Youyou Wu
1,
Jiaqi Niu
2,
Na Wang
3 and
Hong Wu
4,*
1
School of Art and Design, Wuhan University of Technology, Wuhan 430070, China
2
The Bartlett School of Architecture, University College London, UCL, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK
3
SWA Group, 712 Main St., Floor 6, Houston, TX 77002, USA
4
Department of Landscape Architecture, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, State College, PA 16802, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Land 2024, 13(8), 1225; https://doi.org/10.3390/land13081225
Submission received: 28 June 2024 / Revised: 1 August 2024 / Accepted: 5 August 2024 / Published: 7 August 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Landscape Design, Evaluation and Management Created by Novel Technologies)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Public satisfaction is an important indicator of the success of environmental policies and management practices. China’s sponge city development (SCD) initiative was launched in 2014 and has received international attention for its technical advancements and environmental achievements. Public satisfaction, however, has not been fully investigated in cities transformed by SCD. This study uses public surveys and structural equation modeling to evaluate people’s satisfaction with SCD in four pilot sponge cities, and how familiarity with SCD, perceived benefits, concerns about adverse effects, and trust in government influence satisfaction levels. The results show that people in the four cities were, on average, slightly satisfied with SCD. Familiarity, perceived benefits, and trust in government were significant determinants of public satisfaction. On the contrary, concerns about the adverse effects of SCD did not significantly influence people’s satisfaction. Moreover, a mismatch was found between government-led evaluation outcomes and satisfaction measured here. This study highlights the importance of social and perceived values in shaping people’s satisfaction with SCD and provides suggestions for management strategies for enhancing public satisfaction, ultimately supporting the long-term effectiveness of urban stormwater management programs.

1. Introduction

Public satisfaction with environmental conditions is closely related to people’s quality of life, making it a critical aspect for governments to monitor and improve in order to enhance environmental policymaking and resident well-being [1,2]. Effective environmental management also requires the cooperation of individuals and communities in supporting the operation and maintenance of infrastructure to achieve sustainable outcomes [3]. Conversely, dissatisfaction with environmental quality and related policies can lead to diminished public trust in government and increased participation in environmental activism, such as protests and campaigns [4]. Therefore, evaluating public satisfaction with environmental governance is essential to addressing potential conflicts between the local communities and authorities on environmental issues [5].
Due to climate change and urbanization, flooding and stormwater pollution are significant concerns for cities worldwide. Various water management initiatives have been implemented in Western countries to address these issues, such as low-impact development (LID) in the USA, Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SuDSs) in the United Kingdom, and Blue-Green Cities in Australia [5]. These initiatives aim to manage urban flooding, enhance urban water ecosystems, and promote social well-being.
In China, urban flooding has severely threatened public safety and quality of life. For example, in 2023, flooding affected 2.59 million people across 20 provinces, resulting in direct economic losses of 3.25 billion RMB, with more than 7300 houses collapsed or damaged [6]. Urban central areas are particularly vulnerable to flooding and stormwater pollution due to outdated infrastructure and inadequate maintenance, exacerbating the decline in residents’ quality of life [7]. Many old urban neighborhoods still use combined sewer systems that channel rainwater and wastewater into centralized treatment plants. In severe wet weather conditions, these systems often result in the overflow of untreated wastewater into nearby water bodies, raising serious concerns over water quality [8].
By contrast, a more novel approach to stormwater management involves using decentralized green stormwater infrastructure (GSI), such as rain gardens, bioswales, green roofs, and grass filters, to intercept, infiltrate, retain, and purify stormwater runoff at its source before it enters the underground drainage system [9]. GSI components are typically small-scale and require minimal space, making them ideal for neighborhood renovations, street renewals, and the development of urban parks and green spaces [10]. Due to their natural elements—such as soil, plants, and stones—GSI facilities can often add a natural look to the urban environment if properly designed [11]. Additionally, as part of urban green spaces, GSI can provide other benefits, such as improving air quality, regulating microclimates, and providing recreational and educational opportunities for residents [12]. However, there are also concerns about possible disservices of GSI developments, such as when GSI investments spur the process of gentrification, leading to displacement and structural change within communities [13].
With the pros and cons of GSI, China’s central government launched the sponge city development (SCD) initiative in 2014 and designated 30 pilot cities in 2015 and 2016 to test the capability of GSI, among other approaches [5]. According to the technical guide for SCD [14], additional approaches include upgrading outdated underground pipe systems, renewing watershed management plans, and developing flood warning systems at city or regional levels [15]. SCD is intended to offer a comprehensive upgrade to urban water systems through various interventions at multiple scales to more effectively address urban water challenges [16]. In 2019, the Chinese central government conducted a comprehensive performance evaluation of pilot sponge cities, rating 6 (i.e., Pingxiang, Chizhou, Suining, Nanning, Zhenjiang, and Baicheng) out of 16 pilot cities as excellent [17]. However, the specific assessment criteria and procedures were unavailable to the public. Consequently, it is unclear whether public satisfaction was a criterion considered in the assessment and to what extent residents are satisfied with SCD initiatives.
There is a general lack of empirical studies revealing public satisfaction with SCD in the pilot cities. Therefore, comparing measured public satisfaction levels with the performance ratings given by the central government can offer valuable insights into the social implications of SCD and identify areas for improvement from the public’s perspective. Some studies explored public satisfaction within a certain project type. For example, Gu et al. [18] specifically focused on residents’ satisfaction with SCD in old urban neighborhood renewal projects. They found that dissatisfaction was primarily related to maintenance and the participation approach during the renewal, which echoed another study indicating that nearly half of the residents were unaware of sponge city transformations in their communities [19]. Several other studies identified some sources of dissatisfaction without systematically investigating overall satisfaction from the public’s perspective. For example, Wang et al. [20] interviewed SCD experts and revealed residents’ complaints about design plans in neighborhood transformations in Zhenjiang. Dai et al. [21] reported residents’ dissatisfaction with construction waste being dumped in neighborhoods without prior notice in Wuhan. Hawken et al. [22] surveyed satisfaction with SCD based on expert perspectives, finding that long-term care and monitoring, as well as the quality of construction and initial maintenance, often received low satisfaction ratings.
Regarding the determinants of public satisfaction, most studies have focused on how environmental factors affect people’s behavior and life satisfaction. For instance, numerous studies have examined the effects of air quality, water pollution, and flood hazards on people’s life satisfaction (e.g., subjective well-being) [23,24,25]. Other studies have identified physical and social attributes, such as the variety of amenities, cleanliness, and maintenance, as predictors of satisfaction with urban environments [26,27]. In the context of stormwater management, perceived factors have been frequently examined for their associations with people’s stormwater-related behaviors rather than their satisfaction with stormwater policies. For example, Pradhananga and Davenport [28] found that a sense of attachment to the community’s physical and social environment, as well as environmental concerns, impacts civic engagement in stormwater management. Wang et al. [29] studied the effects of a composite variable of perceived value (e.g., perceived effects on drinking water conditions, ecological and living environment, and housing prices) on people’s willingness to pay for SCD. Their results indicated that perceived value could predict stormwater behaviors. However, it remains unclear whether these perceived values directly affect satisfaction with SCD.
Additionally, public trust can play a significant role in assessing satisfaction with environmental governance. Venkataramanan et al. [30] conducted a systematic review and found that a lack of trust in governments, along with knowledge and familiarity with flood-related issues, influences people’s flood-related behaviors. In China, the public has generally exhibited high trust in the government in recent decades due to economic prosperity and effective public communication [31,32]. However, recent national and local press [33] indicate that urban flooding has resurfaced in cities that underwent SCD since 2015. These recurring events could decrease trust in the government’s commitment to urban water management. Therefore, it is critical to monitor the status of public trust and its impact on satisfaction with SCD.
Moreover, research has shown that residents’ satisfaction with SCD in old neighborhood renewal projects was affected by demographic factors, including age, education, and income [18]. Homeownership is another critical variable in China that symbolizes the Chinese dream and affects people’s subjective well-being or life satisfaction [34]. Previous research has revealed that homeowners tend to be more satisfied with their housing and living environment conditions than renters due to better access to education, a stronger sense of belonging, and greater involvement in social activities [35]. However, little is known about whether homeownership leads to differing levels of satisfaction with SCD.
Overall, existing research highlights a gap in the comprehensive evaluation of public satisfaction with SCD and a lack of investigation into how social and perceived factors influence this satisfaction. Additionally, there is limited understanding of the disparity between public satisfaction levels and the central government’s official assessments, creating challenges for future SCD policy and construction enhancements. To address these empirical research gaps, this study focused on four pilot sponge cities as case study areas to examine both the current status and determinants of public satisfaction with SCD. Specifically, this study investigated the effects of four factors: trust in the government, perceived benefits of SCD, concerns about adverse effects of SCD, and familiarity with SCD. It also explored differences in satisfaction levels between homeowners and renters, as well as among residents of the four cities. Insights from this research can inform better sponge city policies and implementation practices that align with public satisfaction, thereby enhancing social acceptance and garnering public support for SCD as a vital approach to urban stormwater management.
The study aimed to answer the following research questions:
(1)
What is the status of overall public satisfaction, perceived benefits provided by SCD, concerns about adverse effects of SCD, familiarity with SCD, and trust in the government?
(2)
How do satisfaction levels with SCD vary between homeowners and renters and across different cities?
(3)
How do perceived benefits of SCD, trust in government, concerns about adverse effects of SCD, and familiarity with SCD affect public satisfaction with SCD?

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

This study focused on four pilot sponge cities: Jiaxing, Zhenjiang, Pingxiang, and Chizhou (Figure 1). All four cities are located in the subtropical monsoon climate zone in southeastern China, with annual precipitation over 1000 mm. These cities also have abundant water resources and complex water ecosystems formed by rivers, lakes, and wetlands. However, rapid urbanization and outdated infrastructure have led to common ecological problems such as pluvial flooding and non-point source pollution in recent decades. The four cities vary in overall economic conditions and sponge city construction investments by local governments. For instance, Zhenjiang’s annual per capita GDP and government SCD investment (USD 1.34 billion) far exceeded the other three cities (USD 570–790 million) over the three-year pilot period. In addition, the SCD pilot implementation areas differ in size; Zhenjiang and Pingxiang have larger areas (29–32.98 square kilometers) than Jiaxing and Chizhou (18–18.5 square kilometers).

2.2. Data Collection

The sampling locations included residential areas and adjacent parks and plazas renovated or newly developed under SCD from 2014 to 2018. These sites feature various GSI elements, such as stormwater planters, rain gardens, sunken green spaces, and stormwater ponds (Figure 2), which significantly changed the visual characteristics of the landscape. A convenient sampling method was employed for this study. From October to December 2019, eight trained surveyors conducted intercept surveys using tablets to collect data via the Qualtrics platform. Surveyors randomly selected individuals at the sampling locations and asked if they had heard of SCD and their age. Those at least 18 years old who had heard of SCD were then introduced to the study’s purpose and procedures. Verbal consent was obtained from the participants, who were informed that their participation was voluntary and that their personal information would remain confidential. Before starting the survey, participants received an introduction page detailing the study’s purpose and the principal investigator’s contact information. They were also informed that they could skip questions or withdraw from the survey at any time. The face-to-face nature of the survey allowed surveyors to provide additional information and address any questions participants might have. The surveyors also read the questions aloud for senior participants who had difficulty reading the texts on the tablets. At the end of the survey, participants received a small gift (a shopping bag) as a token of appreciation. All the survey materials were reviewed by the Institutional Review Board at the Pennsylvania State University (STUDY00013257).
The questionnaire asked questions of six aspects: overall satisfaction with SCD, familiarity with SCD, perceived benefits of SCD, concerns about potential adverse effects of SCD, trust in governments’ dedication to SCD, and demographic information. First, overall satisfaction with SCD was measured by asking, “How would you rate your level of satisfaction with the overall SCD in your city on a 5-point scale (1 = Completely dissatisfied; 5 = Completely satisfied)?” An “opt-out” option was provided for participants who preferred not to express an opinion on this topic. Second, familiarity with SCD was measured by asking, “How would you rate your familiarity with the concept of SCD on a 5-point scale (1 = Very unfamiliar; 5 = Very familiar)?” Next, the perceived benefits of SCD, concerns about adverse effects of SCD, and trust in the government were regarded as composite concepts and measured by multiple observed items, respectively. For the perceived benefits of SCD, participants were asked, “To what degree have you perceived the following benefits provided by SCD (1 = Not perceived at all, 5 = Well perceived)?” Seven specific benefits were assessed, including flood mitigation, public safety, water quality improvement, ecological benefits, recreational opportunities, aesthetics value, and job creation. Similarly, concerns about SCD’s adverse effects were measured through five observed items identified from the literature. These concerns included “SCD costs too much”, “Disturbance to daily life”, “Poor performance and outcomes of SCD construction”, “Occupies too much public space”, and “Unappealing landscape aesthetics”. Trust in governments’ dedication to SCD was measured by asking the participants, “How much do you believe the government can effectively manage the following five aspects of SCD (1 = Do not believe at all, 5 = Strongly believe)?” The aspects included collaboration across government sectors, professionalism of SCD employees, sound governmental decision making, commitment to long-term maintenance, and valuing of public participation [36]. Finally, demographic characteristics such as age, gender, homeownership status, and city of residence were recorded to provide context for the survey responses.

2.3. Data Analysis

Data analysis was performed in SPSS Amos (version 27). First, descriptive statistics of all the measures were reported. Differences in people’s perceived benefits, concerns about SCD’s adverse effects, and trust in government by their homeownership status were analyzed using independent sample t-tests. Subsequently, a One-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test was performed to detect statistically significant differences in public satisfaction levels among the four selected cities.
Next, the structural equation modeling (SEM) method was employed [37] to assess the causal effects of the four chosen factors—perceived benefits of SCD, concerns about adverse effects of SCD, familiarity with SCD, and trust in the government—on public satisfaction. SEM is a statistical technique that allows researchers to analyze complex relationships between observed variables and underlying latent constructs [38]. By integrating principles from both factor analysis and regression analysis, SEM facilitates the identification of latent constructs from multiple observed variables and enables the simultaneous prediction of their effects on a dependent variable [39]. Given that individuals can perceive multiple benefits or concerns related to SCD and assess their trust in governments based on multiple aspects, a single observed variable for each construct is insufficient to capture the full range of these perceptions. Therefore, latent variables were developed to encompass the multiple dimensions of the studied constructs, and SEM was chosen for its capability to test the effects of multiple latent variables on a dependent variable.
Before building the SEM, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to ensure the validity of the measurements for the three constructs of perceived benefits, concerns, and trust [40]. The SEM was then used to test the effects of these constructs on overall satisfaction, accounting for additional factors such as familiarity with SCD and demographic characteristics.
More specifically, Cronbach’s alpha (α > 0.6) was used to assess measurement validity in the CFA. To evaluate the goodness of fit for both the CFA model and the structural model, six fit indices were applied with their respective acceptable thresholds: composite reliability (CR > 0.6), Chi-square/degree of freedom (1 < CMIN/DF < 3), comparative fit index (CFI > 0.90), Tucker–Lewis index (TLI > 0.90), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA < 0.08), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR < 0.08) [41]. Factor loadings for each observed variable were assessed in magnitude using these cutoffs: statistically significant loadings greater than 0.30 were considered sufficient, and those greater than 0.60 were considered high [42]. Lastly, the analysis focused on the full sample without testing differences by city, considering the broader spectrum of the sample population. Preliminary results showed that demographic status did not significantly affect overall satisfaction, so these variables were removed from the formal analysis.

3. Results

3.1. Descriptive Statistics

Out of 607 participants who filled out the questionnaires, 528 answered most of the survey questions. Fourteen participants opted out of the question of overall satisfaction with SCD and were listwise excluded from the analysis. Therefore, the final dataset included 514 responses (Pingxiang = 92, Chizhou = 156, Zhenjiang = 155, and Jiaxing = 111). Less than half of the participants were male (40.9%), and the average age was 38.
Participants reported a slight-to-moderate level of overall satisfaction with SCD in their cities (Mean = 3.60) (Table 1). Their familiarity with SCD was neutral (Mean = 2.95). The average level of perceived SCD benefits was moderate to high (Aggregate mean = 4.29), with means of individual benefits ranging from 4.17 to 4.39 (Table 2). The average concern level was moderate (Aggregate mean = 3.96), with means of individual concerns ranging from 3.63 to 4.29. Lastly, the average trust level was moderate to high (Aggregate mean = 4.10), with means of individual trust items ranging from 4.01 to 4.30.
Regarding satisfaction levels across cities, the one-way ANOVA showed statistically significant differences between two sponge city groups [F(3, 510) = 12.149, p < 0.001] (Table 3). Tukey post hoc tests revealed no statistically significant difference in satisfaction between Pingxiang and Chizhou (p = 0.664) or between Zhenjiang and Jiaxing (p = 0.393). However, the satisfaction levels in Pingxiang and Chizhou were both statistically significantly higher than in Zhenjiang and Jiaxing (Table 3).
Homeowners and renters were indifferent in multiple aspects, including overall satisfaction with SCD, familiarity with SCD, trust in government, and concerns about SCD’s adverse effects (Table 4). However, homeowners’ perceived benefits of SCD were statistically significantly lower than those reported by renters (p = 0.039).

3.2. Structural Equation Modeling

The CFA examined the validity of the measurements of perceived benefits of SCD, concerns about the adverse effects of SCD, and trust in government. As shown in Figure 3, the factor loadings ranged from the lowest of 0.54 for CN1 (SCD costs too much) to the highest of 0.94 for TS4 (governmental commitment to long-term maintenance). All factor loadings exceeded 0.3, so no observed variables were removed from the CFA model. Following the correlation of two pairs of error terms based on the modification indices in Amos, all the goodness of fit indices met the cutoff requirements: X2 = 331.918, p < 0.001; CMIN/DF = 2.912, CFI = 0.969, TLI = 0.963, RMSEA = 0.061, SRMR = 0.0532), indicating a good model fit for the CFA model. Therefore, the three major latent constructs were validated through CFA and were subsequently integrated into the SEM in the next step.
Similarly, all goodness of fit indices of the full SEM model (Figure 4) met the required thresholds, indicating a good model fit (X2 = 399.916, p < 0.001; CMIN/DF = 2.758, CFI = 0.965, TLI = 0.959, RMSEA = 0.059, SRMR = 0.0550). The model showed significant effects of perceived benefits, trust, and familiarity with SCD on overall satisfaction with SCD. More specifically, perceived benefits (weight = 0.425, p < 0.001) and trust (weight = 0.244, p < 0.001) exerted significant, positive, weak-to-moderate [42] effects on overall satisfaction. Familiarity (weight = 0.091, p = 0.011) exerted a significant but very weak effect on satisfaction. Concern, however, did not significantly affect overall satisfaction (weight = −0.018, p = 0.658).

4. Discussion

Since 2014, the implementation of GSI and upgrades of the underground system under SCD policies have significantly transformed urban landscapes and altered social perceptions of stormwater management. The overall goal of this study was to elucidate public satisfaction with SCD and investigate its determinants. Overall, the results indicate positive feedback from the four surveyed pilot cities, including an average slight-to-moderate level of satisfaction, significant benefit perception, and high trust in government. In the subsequent discussion, we will first discuss the status of overall satisfaction and then explore the three major determinants of public satisfaction. The implications of these findings are summarized in the Conclusions section.
First, the slight-to-moderate average level of overall satisfaction (Aggregate mean = 3.60) indicates room for improving public satisfaction, especially in Zhenjiang (Mean = 3.31) and Jiaxing (Mean = 3.49) with the two lowest ratings. This satisfaction assessment from the public’s perspective partially aligns with the central government’s official evaluations, which rated Pingxiang, Chizhou, and Zhenjiang as excellent sponge cities, except for Jiaxing. Although the official evaluations of two of the three cities’ overall performance align with public perceptions, the nuanced mismatch indicates that official metrics may not fully capture the public’s experience or concerns, calling for more accessible and transparent criteria in official SCD evaluations. In the case of Zhenjiang, which has been frequently recognized in newsletters and reports for significant progress in enhancing its urban water environment, the potential overemphasis on environmental performance may have led to a neglect of social benefit provision, contributing to lower public satisfaction.
Second, the study results indicated that people perceived multiple benefits from SCD (Aggregate mean = 4.29, SD = 0.796), especially improvements in landscape aesthetics (Mean = 4.39, SD = 0.862) and water pollution reduction (Mean = 4.37, SD = 0.868). Indeed, China’s SCD efforts have extended beyond the implementation of GSI, as each pilot city has formulated its own sponge programs to enhance benefit provision. For instance, Chizhou leveraged SCD funds to initiate river cleanup projects, renovate river banks, and add amenities to waterfront parks. In Pingxiang and Zhenjiang, urban parks have been upgraded with additional recreational facilities (e.g., jogging trails and seating benches) and educational opportunities (e.g., SCD exhibition halls) for urban residents (Figure 5). These enhancements suggest that the public can benefit from SCD in many other ways beyond the hydrological improvements in their living environment. These additional benefits are crucial for enhancing the public’s quality of life and well-being.
Subsequently, the SEM analysis revealed that people who perceived greater benefits (weight = 0.425, p < 0.001) were more satisfied with SCD. This indicates that enhancing people’s perceived values of SCD is essential for increasing public satisfaction with sponge programs. This finding also aligns with previous research indicating that perceived values can positively influence people’s willingness to pay for SCD [29]. Governments should provide the public with desired ecosystem benefits beyond the originally intended environmental benefits, such as recreation, aesthetics, and health [43]. Local governments tend to focus on maximizing the hydrological performance of sponge projects by converting extensive outdoor spaces into GSI. For example, some neighborhood sponge renovation projects in Zhenjiang replaced the original garden plants and trees with sunken areas featuring wild-looking plants [20]. This caused dissatisfaction among senior residents accustomed to the previous garden spaces. To avoid such issues, it is important to understand residents’ preferences for the function and aesthetics of the community space before implementing GSI plans.
Third, the significant predictive effect of trust in governments (weight = 0.244, p < 0.001) demonstrated the importance of fostering trust between governments and the public. Previous research has shown that building social capital, such as through word-of-mouth within local communities, can enhance trust between governments and local stakeholders [4]. Increased trust not only boosts public satisfaction but also encourages public engagement and participation in stormwater management programs. Specifically, the results showed that two trust items, “TS3—Governments make sound decisions” and “TS5—Governments value public participation”, received lower scores than the other trust items. This suggests a need for more transparent decision-making processes and platforms to improve communication and strengthen government-community relationships. Contrary to previous studies highlighting maintenance concerns [18], this study found relatively high trust in the government’s commitment to long-term maintenance (Mean = 4.08, SD = 0.999). While our results reflect an overall positive relationship between local communities and SCD authorities when the survey was administrated, there is a risk of diminished trust if the outcomes of SCD fail to align with public expectations in the long run.
Fourth, our study found that people were not very familiar with SCD. Yet, the effect of familiarity on overall satisfaction was positive and significant, albeit at a low level (weight = 0.091, p < 0.05). The neutral-level familiarity echoed a previous study that revealed a lack of notice and low awareness of sponge renovation in their neighborhoods [19]. The positive impact of familiarity on satisfaction is also supported by a recent study that surveyed residents in Xi’an City, finding that residents of sponge communities were more satisfied with SCD than those of traditional communities [44]. Despite the weak effect, there remains potential to improve satisfaction by enhancing knowledge sharing through increased civic engagement and educational opportunities. These approaches were believed to boost perceived benefits and familiarity [45]. Since the sponge city concept and related GSI facilities remain relatively new, these results underscore the importance of raising awareness and educating the public about SCD and GSI.
Next, the lack of significant impact of concerns on satisfaction (weight = −0.018, p = 0.658) may be partially due to the mitigating effect of high trust in governments. Specifically, people tend to believe governments can effectively address the adverse effects of SCD, which reduces their attention to these issues in daily life. This high trust in governments aligns with previous studies on how trust influences flood risk perceptions and the positive effect of public participation in non-government organizations on the environment [46,47].
Additionally, the results indicated no significant differences between homeowners and renters regarding their overall satisfaction, trust in governments, concerns, or familiarity with SCD. This lack of differences contrasts with previous research suggesting that homeowners generally report higher satisfaction with their housing and living environment conditions than renters [35]. On the contrary, renters reported higher perceived benefits of SCD than homeowners (p = 0.039). Due to the transient nature of renting, renters might be more focused on and appreciative of improvements that enhance their quality of life in the short term, such as better stormwater management or enhanced green spaces. Homeowners, on the other hand, might be more focused on longer-term benefits or structural changes that impact property value and overall neighborhood quality, which may not align as closely with the specific benefits provided by SCD. Future research could further investigate the underlying reasons why homeownership affects benefit perceptions in SCD. Understanding these differences could help tailor SCD initiatives to better meet the diverse needs and expectations of various residential groups.
The significance of this study lies in its explicit exploration of public satisfaction with SCD and its determinants, addressing a notable gap in the literature. It bridges the gap between public perceptions and environmental policy, providing actionable insights that can enhance the design and implementation of sustainable urban solutions. By revealing how social perceptions and perceived benefits influence public satisfaction, the study deepens our understanding of the factors essential for effective stormwater management systems. The research is particularly relevant for countries with top–down governance systems, where integrating public perceptions into the development process has often been overlooked. Furthermore, by identifying differences between public and governmental perceptions, this study sets the groundwork for future research to refine SCD practices and better align environmental initiatives with community needs.
Finally, several limitations of this study should be acknowledged. First, SCD encompasses a range of construction approaches and management strategies across the pilot cities, which could lead to varying levels of public satisfaction depending on the specific aspects of SCD measured. This study only measured general satisfaction with SCD policies and construction as a whole. Future studies can be improved by evaluating multiple facets of SCD. For example, during the survey, some residents specifically expressed satisfaction with the national government’s commitment to solving stormwater problems through SCD. However, they also voiced concerns about local governments’ adherence to national policies and requirements. This suggests a possible difference in satisfaction with local vs. national authorities, which was not specifically measured in our study and presents a gap for future research. Second, the relatively small sample size in each surveyed city may limit the generalizability of the results to a broader population. Additionally, different cities’ diverse local cultures may influence resident’s needs and understanding of the living environment, leading to subjective satisfaction levels. Future studies can explore satisfaction across different cultural backgrounds and social contexts. Moreover, the survey was conducted in central areas of the cities, where many SCD projects were integrated with ongoing urban renewal efforts [7]. This integration could have created implementation challenges and conflicts between various regeneration policies, potentially skewing the perceived satisfaction with SCD. Future research can compare satisfaction levels in different city areas (e.g., central vs. suburban areas) to provide a more comprehensive understanding of public satisfaction with SCD.

5. Conclusions

Public satisfaction is an important indicator for evaluating the overall success of urban environmental policies and their implementation. Considering the impact of SCD on urban stormwater management and overall human well-being, it is crucial to address the current insufficient understanding of public satisfaction within the context of SCD. The lack of this information challenges local governments in refining existing GSI implementation strategies, potentially hampering the long-term management of urban water ecosystems. This study utilized public surveys and structural equation modeling to explore public satisfaction levels and their determinants. The findings reveal that individuals who perceive greater SCD benefits, hold higher trust in governments, and are more familiar with SCD are generally more satisfied. Additionally, renters perceived greater benefits from SCD than homeowners. Moreover, this study identified a minor discrepancy between the national government’s performance evaluations of pilot sponge cities and public satisfaction levels.
Several important practical implications can be drawn from this study to improve people’s overall satisfaction with SCD in southeast China and beyond. First, urban stormwater policymakers and program managers should recognize the significant role that local communities’ social and perceived values play in shaping satisfaction with stormwater management programs. Investing in social and human capital is as crucial for improving technical and environmental effectiveness. Programs designed to build trust between governments and communities, such as civic engagement initiatives, training projects, and design workshops, can enhance familiarity with SCD and increase satisfaction. Second, since perceived benefits from SCD are positively associated with satisfaction, enhancing ecosystem benefit provision plans to deliver more of the desired benefits to local communities is essential. Aligning these benefits with community preferences can significantly improve the quality of life and overall satisfaction. Third, both local and national governments should enhance the SCD performance evaluation criteria by incorporating more social and cultural indicators. This will help ensure public satisfaction is considered in sponge city construction, addressing the existing mismatch between public and government perspectives and promoting the long-term social sustainability of SCD. Finally, given the subjective nature of public satisfaction based on the quality of SCD projects and local government services, developing local stormwater stewardship programs to periodically track and respond to residents’ satisfaction can enhance government performance and the social and environmental impacts of SCD.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.W. and H.W.; methodology, R.W. and H.W.; software, R.W. and Y.W.; validation, R.W. and H.W.; formal analysis, R.W.; resources, H.W.; writing—original draft preparation, R.W.; writing—review and editing, H.W., N.W. and J.N.; visualization, R.W. and Y.W.; supervision, H.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [No. 2024IVA066].

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article; further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank all the interviewees for their participation. The authors also would like to express their gratitude to the editor and anonymous reviewers for their insightful and constructive comments.

Conflicts of Interest

Author Na Wang was employed by the company SWA Group. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

  1. Alkan, Y. User-focused alternative design model for Sarıçay channel and landscaping in terms of sports and health components: Çanakkale, Turkey. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2020, 23, 7212–7229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Barclay, N.; Klotz, L. Role of community participation for green stormwater infrastructure development. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 251, 109620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Bouckaert, G.; van de Walle, S. Comparing Measures of Citizen Trust and User Satisfaction as Indicators of ‘Good Governance’: Difficulties in Linking Trust and Satisfaction Indicators. Int. Rev. Adm. Sci. 2003, 69, 329–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Brown, H.L.; Bos, D.G.; Walsh, C.J.; Fletcher, T.D.; RossRakesh, S. More than money: How multiple factors influence householder participation in at-source stormwater management. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2016, 59, 79–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Chan, F.; Griffiths, J.; Higgitt, D.; Xu, S.; Zhu, F.; Tang, Y.-T.; Xu, Y.; Thorne, C. “Sponge City” in China—A breakthrough of planning and flood risk management in the urban context. Land Use Policy 2018, 76, 772–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Ministry of Emergency Management of The People’s Republic of China. Ministry of Emergency Management Released the National Natural Disaster Situation in May 2023. Available online: http://mp.weixin.qq.com/s?__biz=MjM5OTI3MjI1MQ==&mid=2651360134&idx=1&sn=c5d2a3fe3ea2bc01d89219062d96a57e&chksm=bcc221d28bb5a8c476583601d7178243cd232ca97a50ba0a86a99893835ee3f309a55459441f#rd (accessed on 5 July 2024).
  7. Wang, R.; Wu, H.; Chiles, R.; Yang, Y. Sustainability outcomes and policy implications: Evaluating China’s “old urban neighborhood renewal” experiment. PLoS ONE 2024, 19, e0301380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. China National Radio. As the Rainy Season Approaches, Urban Waterlogging Reappears in Many Places. Can “Sponge Cities” Solve the Chronic Problem of Waterlogging? Available online: http://china.cnr.cn/gdgg/20220705/t20220705_525897763.shtml (accessed on 5 July 2022).
  9. US EPA. What Is Green Infrastructure? [Overviews and Factsheets]. Available online: https://www.epa.gov/green-infrastructure/what-green-infrastructure (accessed on 30 September 2015).
  10. Darnthamrongkul, W.; Mozingo, L.A. Toward sustainable stormwater management: Understanding public appreciation and recognition of urban Low Impact Development (LID) in the San Francisco Bay Area. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 300, 113716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Echols, S.; Pennypacker, E. From Stormwater Management to Artful Rainwater Design. Landsc. J. 2008, 27, 268–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wang, R.; Brent, D.; Wu, H. Willingness to pay for ecosystem benefits of green stormwater infrastructure in Chinese sponge cities. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 371, 133462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Ali, L.; Haase, A.; Heiland, S. Gentrification through Green Regeneration? Analyzing the Interaction between Inner-City Green Space Development and Neighborhood Change in the Context of Regrowth: The Case of Lene-Voigt-Park in Leipzig, Eastern Germany. Land 2020, 9, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. MHURD Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development. Sponge City Technical Guideline-Low Impact Development. Available online: http://www.mohurd.gov.cn/wjfb/201411/ t20141102_219465.html (accessed on 1 November 2014).
  15. GOSC National Guidance on the Implementation of Sponge City Development. Available online: http://www.gov.cn/gongbao/content/2015/content_2953941.htm (accessed on 11 October 2015).
  16. Ren, N.; Wang, Q.; Wang, Q.; Huang, H.; Wang, X. Upgrading to urban water system 3.0 through sponge city construction. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. 2017, 11, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. People’s Government of Suining Municipal. New Grant of 0.12 Billion Issued to Suijing by the Central Government for Developing Sponge City Projects. Available online: https://www.suining.gov.cn/xinwen/show/f27f83bd66b6453fa98d3b2db1c8e664.html (accessed on 5 August 2019).
  18. Gu, T.; Li, D.; Zhu, S.; Wang, Y. Does sponge-style old community renewal lead to a satisfying life for residents? An investigation in Zhenjiang, China. Habitat Int. 2019, 90, 102004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Gong, Y.; Fu, H.; Zhang, S.; Li, J.; Zhang, A.; Chen, Y.; Yin, D.; Liu, H. Research on Public Participation in Sponge City Construction. China Water Wastewater 2018, 34, 124963. [Google Scholar]
  20. Wang, R.; Wu, H.; Chiles, R. Ecosystem Benefits Provision of Green Stormwater Infrastructure in Chinese Sponge Cities. Environ. Manag. 2022, 69, 558–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Dai, L.; van Rijswick HF, M.W.; Driessen PP, J.; Keessen, A.M. Governance of the Sponge City Programme in China with Wuhan as a case study. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 2018, 34, 578–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hawken, S.; Sepasgozar SM, E.; Prodanovic, V.; Jing, J.; Bakelmun, A.; Avazpour, B.; Che, S.; Zhang, K. What makes a successful Sponge City project? Expert perceptions of critical factors in integrated urban water management in the Asia-Pacific. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 75, 103317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Welsch, H. Environment and happiness: Valuation of air pollution using life satisfaction data. Ecol. Econ. 2006, 58, 801–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Wu, W.; Chen, W.Y.; Yun, Y.; Wang, F.; Gong, Z. Urban greenness, mixed land-use, and life satisfaction: Evidence from residential locations and workplace settings in Beijing. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2022, 224, 104428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zhang, B.; Song, Y.; Liu, D.; Zeng, Z.; Guo, S.; Yang, Q.; Wen, Y.; Wang, W.; Shen, X. Descriptive and Network Post-Occupancy Evaluation of the Urban Public Space through Social Media: A Case Study of Bryant Park, NY. Land 2023, 12, 1403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mell, I. Examining the Role of Green Infrastructure as an Advocate for Regeneration. Front. Sustain. Cities 2022, 4, 731975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Liu, R.; Xiao, J. Factors Affecting Users’ Satisfaction with Urban Parks through Online Comments Data: Evidence from Shenzhen, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Pradhananga, A.K.; Davenport, M.A. Community attachment, beliefs and residents’ civic engagement in stormwater management. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2017, 168, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Wang, Y.; Liu, X.; Huang, M.; Zuo, J.; Rameezdeen, R. Received vs. given: Willingness to pay for sponge city program from a perceived value perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 256, 120479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Venkataramanan, V.; Lopez, D.; McCuskey, D.J.; Kiefus, D.; McDonald, R.I.; Miller, W.M.; Packman, A.I.; Young, S.L. Knowledge, attitudes, intentions, and behavior related to green infrastructure for flood management: A systematic literature review. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 720, 137606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Yang, Y.; Tang, M.; Zhou, W.; Huhe, N. The Effect of Media Use on Institutional Trust in China. Probl. Post-Communism 2014, 61, 45–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Zhong, Y. Do Chinese People Trust Their Local Government, and Why?: An Empirical Study of Political Trust in Urban China. Probl. Post-Communism 2014, 61, 31–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. People.cn. Does Zhengzhou’s Waterlogging Reveal a Failure of the Sponge City? See What Experts Say—Qiangguo News—People’s Daily Online. Available online: http://www.people.com.cn/n1/2021/0723/c32306-32168268.html (accessed on 23 July 2021).
  34. Wu, W.; Stephens, M.; Du, M.; Wang, B. Homeownership, family composition and subjective well-being. Cities 2019, 84, 46–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Huang, Z.; Du, X.; Yu, X. Home ownership and residential satisfaction: Evidence from Hangzhou, China. Habitat Int. 2015, 49, 74–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Tsang, S.; Burnett, M.; Hills, P.; Welford, R. Trust, public participation and environmental governance in Hong Kong. Environ. Policy Gov. 2009, 19, 99–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Chin, W.W. The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling. Mod. Methods Bus. Res. 1998, 295, 295–336. [Google Scholar]
  38. Hair, J. Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective, 7th ed.; Pearson Education: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2010; ISBN 9780135153093. [Google Scholar]
  39. Kline, P. An Easy Guide to Factor Analysis, 1st ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  40. Ferraro, D.M.; Miller, Z.D.; Ferguson, L.A.; Taff, B.D.; Barber, J.R.; Newman, P.; Francis, C.D. The phantom chorus: Birdsong boosts human well-being in protected areas. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2020, 287, 20201811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Wu, H.; Miller, Z.D.; Wang, R.; Zipp, K.Y.; Newman, P.; Shr, Y.-H.; Dems, C.L.; Taylor, A.; Kaye, M.W.; Smithwick EA, H. Public and manager perceptions about prescribed fire in the Mid-Atlantic, United States. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 322, 116100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Hu, L.; Bentler, P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. A Multidiscip. J. 1999, 6, 1–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Yang, M.; Chen, D.; Shi, L.; He, J.; Liu, L.; Shang, X. How do construct a sponge city that can improve residents’ satisfaction? Evidence from a suburb of Huizhou City, China. Ecol. Indic. 2022, 142, 109238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Luo, P.; Zheng, Y.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, S.; Yu, W.; Zhu, X.; Huo, A.; Wang, Z.; He, B.; Nover, D. Comparative Assessment of Sponge City Constructing in Public Awareness, Xi’an, China. Sustainability 2022, 14, 11653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Pierce, G.; Gmoser-Daskalakis, K.; Rippy, M.A.; Holden, P.A.; Grant, S.B.; Feldman, D.L.; Ambrose, R.F. Environmental Attitudes and Knowledge: Do They Matter for Support and Investment in Local Stormwater Infrastructure? Soc. Nat. Resour. 2021, 34, 885–905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Luechinger, S.; Raschky, P.A. Valuing flood disasters using the life satisfaction approach. J. Public Econ. 2009, 93, 620–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Wang, Z.; Wang, H.; Huang, J.; Kang, J.; Han, D. Analysis of the Public Flood Risk Perception in a Flood-Prone City: The Case of Jingdezhen City in China. Water 2018, 10, 1577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Land 13 01225 g001
Figure 1. Geographic locations and background of studied pilot cities.
Figure 1. Geographic locations and background of studied pilot cities.
Land 13 01225 g001
Land 13 01225 g002
Figure 2. GSI facilities in surveyed cities (source: first author).
Figure 2. GSI facilities in surveyed cities (source: first author).
Land 13 01225 g002
Land 13 01225 g003
Figure 3. CFA of the three latent variables of perceived benefits, concerns, and trust (X2 = 331.918, p < 0.001; CMIN/DF = 2.912, CFI = 0.969, TLI = 0.963, RMSEA = 0.061, SRMR = 0.0532).
Figure 3. CFA of the three latent variables of perceived benefits, concerns, and trust (X2 = 331.918, p < 0.001; CMIN/DF = 2.912, CFI = 0.969, TLI = 0.963, RMSEA = 0.061, SRMR = 0.0532).
Land 13 01225 g003
Land 13 01225 g004
Figure 4. Structural equation model for the relationship of perceived benefits, concerns, trust, familiarity, and overall satisfaction with SCD (X2 = 399.916, p < 0.001; CMIN/DF = 2.758, CFI = 0.965, TLI = 0.959, RMSEA = 0.059, SRMR = 0.0550). Significance codes: * p ≤ 0.05, *** p ≤ 0.001.
Figure 4. Structural equation model for the relationship of perceived benefits, concerns, trust, familiarity, and overall satisfaction with SCD (X2 = 399.916, p < 0.001; CMIN/DF = 2.758, CFI = 0.965, TLI = 0.959, RMSEA = 0.059, SRMR = 0.0550). Significance codes: * p ≤ 0.05, *** p ≤ 0.001.
Land 13 01225 g004
Land 13 01225 g005
Figure 5. Infrastructures and benefits provided by sponge renovation projects (source: first author).
Figure 5. Infrastructures and benefits provided by sponge renovation projects (source: first author).
Land 13 01225 g005
Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the mean values of studied variables.
Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the mean values of studied variables.
VariablesMinMaxMeanSDNAlpha
Overall satisfaction with SCD 1153.600.931514
Perceived benefits of SCD 2154.290.7965140.95
Concerns about adverse effects of SCD 3153.960.7075140.82
Familiarity with SCD 4152.95 1.068514
Trust in governments’ dedication to SCD 5154.100.8845140.94
Homeownership (Homeowner = 1)010.800.398514
Gender (Male = 1)121.590.492514
Age 38.2915.608500
1 Measured on five-point scale where 1 = Completely unsatisfied; 5 = Completely satisfied. 2 Mean value was aggregated from seven benefit items. 3 Mean value was aggregated from five concern items. 4 Measured on five-point scale where 1 = Completely unfamiliar; 5 = Completely familiar. 5 Mean value was aggregated from five trust items.
Table 2. Descriptive statistics of perceived benefits of SCD, concerns, and trust.
Table 2. Descriptive statistics of perceived benefits of SCD, concerns, and trust.
CodeObserved VariableMinMaxMean (SD)N
Perceived BenefitsPB1Mitigate urban flooding154.31 (0.902)514
PB2Improve public safety154.28 (0.904)513
PB3Mitigate stormwater pollution154.37 (0.868)513
PB4Increase recreational opportunities154.17 (0.943)513
PB5Enhance ecological values154.34 (0.885)514
PB6Promote green industry and create job opportunities154.19 (0.925)514
PB7Improve landscape aesthetics154.39 (0.862)514
ConcernsCN1SCD costs too much153.63 (1.011)514
CN2SCD disturbs my daily life (e.g., waste and noise)154.06 (0.921)514
CN3SCD does not effectively solve stormwater problems154.29 (0.808)514
CN4SCD occupies too much public space153.79 (0.973)514
CN5SCD negatively affects landscape aesthetic154.04 (0.923)514
TrustTS1Government sectors collaborate well154.30 (0.888)514
TS2SCD practitioners are professional154.07 (0.987)514
TS3Governments make sound decisions154.01 (0.987)514
TS4Governments commit to long-term maintenance154.08 (0.999)514
TS5Governments value public participation154.02 (1.058)514
Table 3. Comparison of public satisfaction across cities.
Table 3. Comparison of public satisfaction across cities.
CityCityMean DifferenceStd. Errorp-Value
Pingxiang (Mean = 3.92)Chizhou (Mean = 3.79)0.140.1190.664
Zhenjiang (Mean = 3.31)0.610.1190.000 ***
Jiaxing (Mean = 3.49)0.440.1270.004 **
ChizhouZhenjiang0.480.1020.000 ***
Jiaxing0.300.1120.036 *
ZhenjiangJiaxing−0.180.1120.393
Note: Significance codes—* p ≤ 0.05, ** p ≤ 0.01, *** p ≤ 0.001.
Table 4. Comparing mean ratings for all variables between homeowners and renters.
Table 4. Comparing mean ratings for all variables between homeowners and renters.
VariablesHomeowner Mean (SD)Renter Mean (SD)p-Value
Overall satisfaction with SCD3.60 (0.954)3.60 (0.838)0.201
Familiarity with SCD3.03 (1.070)2.62 (1.010)0.862
Trust in governments’ dedication to SCD4.09 (0.905)4.14 (0.796)0.208
Perceived benefits of SCD4.26 (0.829)4.42 (0.627)0.039 *
Concerns about the adverse effects of SCD3.95 (0.710)3.99 (0.701)0.653
Note: Significance codes—* p ≤ 0.05; All p-values were interpreted using Levene’s test for equality of variance.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wang, R.; Wu, Y.; Niu, J.; Wang, N.; Wu, H. Evaluating Public Satisfaction and Its Determinants in Chinese Sponge Cities Using Structural Equation Modeling. Land 2024, 13, 1225. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13081225

AMA Style

Wang R, Wu Y, Niu J, Wang N, Wu H. Evaluating Public Satisfaction and Its Determinants in Chinese Sponge Cities Using Structural Equation Modeling. Land. 2024; 13(8):1225. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13081225

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wang, Rui, Youyou Wu, Jiaqi Niu, Na Wang, and Hong Wu. 2024. "Evaluating Public Satisfaction and Its Determinants in Chinese Sponge Cities Using Structural Equation Modeling" Land 13, no. 8: 1225. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13081225

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop