Neighborhood Effects of Blue Space in Historical Environments on the Mental Health of Older Adults: A Case Study of the Ancient City of Suzhou, China
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Blue Space and Mental Health of Older Adults
2.2. Influence Indicators of Blue Space on Mental Health
2.3. The Mechanism of Blue Space’s Impact on the Mental Health of Older Adults
- (1)
- Alleviating the harm to older adults from the living environment: as age increases, older adults group becomes more sensitive to the external living environment [41,42]. Long-term exposure to extreme temperatures may threaten the mental health and well-being of older adults, and sudden temperature changes can significantly aggravate depressive symptoms in older individuals [43]. At the same time, some studies have shown that compared with green spaces, blue spaces have higher specific heat capacities, which are more conducive to mitigating local urban thermal environments and giving full play to the urban cold island effect [44].
- (2)
- Restoration path: according to the Stress Reduction Theory (SRT) [45] and Attention Restoration Theory (ART) [46] of environmental psychology, the natural environment can reduce mental stress and repair attention for older adults, by restoring functions (relieving stress, fatigue, and regulating negative emotions) or reducing environmental noise [47,48].
- (3)
- Constructive path: chronic diseases such as hypertension and diabetes are caused by the decline of body function in older adults and lack of exercise [25]. Residents in areas with high accessibility to neighborhood blue space are more likely to engage in physical activities, such as walking and jogging, which can stimulate the secretion of happy hormones in the human body, thereby affecting physical and mental health [25]; at the same time, blue space provides a spatial carrier for older adults to socialize and participate in collective affairs, which can increase older adults’ sense of community identity and cohesion, thereby affecting the physical and mental health of older adults [15,25,33].
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Research Area and Data Sources
3.2. Research Framework
3.3. Dependent Variables
3.4. Independent Variables
3.5. Mediating Variable
3.6. Control Variables
3.7. Statistical Analysis Methods
3.7.1. Hierarchical Linear Model
3.7.2. Mediating Effect Analysis
4. Results
4.1. Participant Characteristics
4.2. The Impact and Path of Neighborhood Blue Space on the Mental Health of Older Adults
4.3. Stratified Analysis
4.3.1. Differences in the Impact of Blue Spaces in Historical Environments on the Mental Health of Elderly People of Different Ages
4.3.2. Differences in the Impact of Blue Spaces in Historical Environments on the Mental Health of Elderly People with Different Incomes
5. Discussion
5.1. Summary of Findings
5.2. Limitations and Prospects
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Interview Form |
This study aims to investigate the neighborhood effect of blue space on the mental health of older adults in the historical environment. If you agree to participate in this study, you need to participate in a questionnaire survey of about 20 minutes. We guarantee that the information of this survey will only be used for research needs, all materials are confidential, and your information will not be disclosed to any organization or individual. Thank you very much for your cooperation! 1. Your gender is A. Male B. Female 2. Your age is A. 60–70years old B. 71–80 years old C. Above 80 years old 3. Your current marital status A. Unmarried B. Married C. Divorced/Widowed 4. Your education level is A. None/Preschool education B. Primary school C. Middle school (including technical secondary school) D. University (including junior college) E. Postgraduate 5. Your monthly income range A. Below 1370 CNY B. 1370–5600 CNY C. Above 5600 CNY 6. How long have you lived in the neighbourhood? A. Less than 6 months B. 6 months–3 years C. 3–10 years D. More than 10 years 7. You can’t concentrate on doing things A. Always B. Often C. Sometimes D. Rarely E. Never 8. You suffer from insomnia due to anxiety A. Always B. Often C. Sometimes D. Rarely E. Never 9. You don’t feel that you have played a role in things A. Always B. Often C. Sometimes D. Rarely E. Never 10. You feel nervous A. Always B. Often C. Sometimes D. Rarely E. Never 11. You feel unhappy and depressed A. Always B. Often C. Sometimes D. Rarely E. Never 12. You think you are a worthless person A. Always B. Often C. Sometimes D. Rarely E. Never 13. You can’t feel happy in general A. Always B. Often C. Sometimes D. Rarely E. Never 14. The water environment near you is safe A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Indifferent D. Disagree E. Strongly disagree 15. The water quality near you is good (clear and odorless) A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Indifferent D. Disagree E. Strongly disagree 16. The water environment near you has good facilities (e.g. parking lots, sidewalks, toilets, barrier-free facilities, etc.) A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Indifferent D. Disagree E. Strongly disagree 17. Have you felt the influence of stress in your work and daily activities in the past month? A. No B. Rarely C. Sometimes D. Often E. Always 18. Have you encountered emotional problems in the past month? A. No B. Rarely C. Sometimes D. Often E. Always 19. Have you been unable to concentrate on anything you do in the past month? A. No B. Rarely C. Sometimes D. Often E. Always 20. Your average daily fitness time (including walking) 21. Have you made new friends when you are in contact with water environment? A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Indifferent D. Disagree E. Strongly disagree 22. Have you participated in public social activities around water environment? A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Indifferent D. Disagree E. Strongly disagree 23. Do you know many people in the community? A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Indifferent D. Disagree E. Strongly disagree 24. Do you get along well with people in the community? A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Indifferent D. Disagree E. Strongly disagree 25. Is your community cohesive? A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Indifferent D. Disagree E. Strongly disagree |
Variable Type | Variable Hierarchy | Variable Name | Descriptions | Mean | S.D. | Min | Max |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Independent variables ) | Community level | NDWI | Continuous variable | 0.041 | 0.033 | 0.002 | 0.108 |
Community level | Water contact | 1961.253 | 1129.805 | 494.376 | 4363.757 | ||
Community level | Accessibility | 234.733 | 89.315 | 64.330 | 376.330 | ||
Individual level | Safety | Measured on a scale from 1‘strongly disagree’ to 5 ‘strongly agree’ | 3.823 | 0.650 | 2.000 | 5.000 | |
Individual level | Hygiene | 3.468 | 0.880 | 2.000 | 4.000 | ||
Individual level | Facilities | 3.278 | 0.983 | 1.000 | 4.000 | ||
Dependent variables ) | Individual level | Mental health | Measured on a scale from 1‘never’ to 5 ‘all the time’ | 2.476 | 0.423 | 1.570 | 4.290 |
Mediating variable ) | Community level | Human comfort | Continuous variable | 90.327 | 3.856 | 83.200 | 95.300 |
Individual level | Stress relief | Measured on a scale from 1‘never’ to 5 ‘always’ | 1.690 | 0.596 | 1.000 | 3.333 | |
Individual level | Physical activities | Continuous variable | 0.583 | 0.600 | 0.000 | 4.000 | |
Individual level | Social interaction | Measured on a scale from 1‘strongly disagree’ to 5 ‘Strongly agree’ | 3.531 | 0.468 | 1.600 | 4.400 | |
Control variables ) | Individual level | Gender | Dummy: 1 = male, 2 = female | 1.514 | 0.500 | 1 | 2 |
Individual level | Age | Dummy: 1 = 60–70 years old, 2 = 71–80 years old, 3 = Above 80 years old | 1.653 | 0.705 | 1 | 3 | |
Individual level | Marital status | Dummy: 1 = Unmarried, 2 = Married, 3 = Divorced/Widowed | 2.113 | 0.560 | 1 | 3 | |
Individual level | Education level | Dummy: 1 = None/Preschool education, 2 = Primary school, 3 = Middle school (including technical secondary school), 4 = University (including junior college), 5 = Postgraduate | 2.615 | 0.905 | 1 | 4 | |
Individual level | Income (CNY/month) | Dummy: 1 = Below 1370 CNY, 2 = 1370–5600 CNY, 3 = Above 5600 CNY | 1.704 | 0.758 | 1 | 3 | |
Individual level | Length of residence | Dummy: 1 = Less than 6 months, 2 = 6 months-3 years, 3 = 3–10 years, 4 = More than 10 years | 2.656 | 1.182 | 1 | 4 |
References
- WHO. Assessment of Aging and Health in China; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Larraz, B.; García-Gómez, E. Depopulation of Toledo’s historical centre in Spain? Challenge for local politics in world heritage cities. Cities 2020, 105, 102841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zanini, S. Tourism pressures and depopulation in Cannaregio: Effects of mass tourism on Venetian cultural heritage. J. Cult. Herit. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2017, 7, 164–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Picascia, S.; Romano, A.; Teobaldi, M. The airification of cities: Making sense of the impact of peer to peer short term letting on urban functions and economy. In Proceedings of the Annual Congress of the Association of European Schools of Planning, Lisbon, Portugal, 11–14 July 2017; pp. 2212–2223. [Google Scholar]
- Esmailpoor, N.; Esmaeilpoor, F.; Rezaeian, F. Explaining the causes of population outflow from the historical fabric of Yazd city. Cities 2023, 137, 104318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Casagrande, M. Heritage, tourism, and demography in the island city of Venice: Depopulation and heritagisation. Urban Island Studies 2016, 2, 121–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, J.; Tian, Y.S.; Xu, L.G.; He, Y.; Zhang, S.; Huang, H.; Yang, J.Q.; Li, J.S.; Ju, D.D.; Zhang, Y. How to reunite the fragmented historic urban areas? City Plan. Rev. 2023, 47, 25–31. [Google Scholar]
- Motoc, I.; Timmermans, E.J.; Deeg, D.; Penninx, B.W.J.H.; Huisman, M. Associations of neighbourhood sociodemographic characteristics with depressive and anxiety symptoms in older age: Results from a 5-wave study over 15 years. Health Place 2019, 59, 102172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gale, C.R.; Dennison, E.M.; Cooper, C.; Sayer, A.A. Neighbourhood environment and positive mental health in older people: The Hertfordshire Cohort Study. Health Place 2011, 17, 867–874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burkart, K.; Meier, F.; Schneider, A.; Breitner, S.; Canario, P.; Alcoforado, M.J.; Scherer, D.; Endlicher, W. Modification of heat-related mortality in an elderly urban population by vegetation (urban green) and proximity to water (urban blue): Evidence from Lisbon, Portugal. Environ. Health Persp. 2016, 124, 927–934. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- White, M.P.; Pahl, S.; Ashbullby, K.; Herbert, S.; Depledge, M.H. Feelings of restoration from recent nature visits. J. Environ. Psychol. 2013, 35, 40–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elliott, L.R.; White, M.P.; Taylor, A.H.; Herbert, S. Energy expenditure on recreational visits to different natural environments. Soc. Sci. Med. 2015, 139, 53–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Vries, S.; Ten Have, M.; Van Dorsselaer, S.; Van Wezep, M.; Hermans, T.; De Graaf, R. Local availability of green and blue space and prevalence of common mental disorders in the Netherlands. BJPsych. Open 2016, 2, 366–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- White, M.P.; Wheeler, B.W.; Herbert, S.; Alcock, L.; Depledge, M.H. Coastal proximity and physical activity: Is the coast an under-appreciated public health resource? Prev. Med. 2014, 69, 135–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- de Bell, S.; Graham, H.; Jarvis, S.; White, P. The importance of nature in mediating social and psychological benefits associated with visits to freshwater blue space. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2017, 167, 118–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nutsford, D.; Pearson, A.L.; Kingham, S.; Reitsma, F. Residential exposure to visible blue space (but not green space) associated with lower psychological distress in a capital city. Health Place 2016, 39, 70–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sonnett, J. Water: The epic struggle for wealth, power, and civilization. Nat. Cult. 2016, 11, 206–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martinez, M.L.; Intralawan, A.; Vazquez, G.; Perez-Maqueo, O.; Sutton, P.; Landgrave, R. The coasts of our world: Ecological, economic and social importance. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 63, 254–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mcdougall, C.W.; Hanley, N.; Quilliam, R.S.; Bartie, P.J.; Robertson, T.; Griffiths, M.; Oliver, D.M. Neighbourhood blue space and mental health: A nationwide ecological study of antidepressant medication prescribed to older adults. Landscape Urban Plan. 2021, 214, 104132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coleman, T.; Kearns, R. The role of bluespaces in experiencing place, aging and wellbeing: Insights from Waiheke Island, New Zealand. Health Place 2015, 35, 206–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Twohig-Bennett, C.; Jones, A. The health benefits of the great outdoors: A systematic review and meta- analysis of greenspace exposure and health outcomes. Environ. Res. 2018, 166, 628–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van den Bosch, M.; Sang, A.O. Urban natural environments as nature-based solutions for improved public health—A systematic review of reviews. Environ. Res. 2017, 158, 373–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Den Berg, M.; Wendel-Vos, W.; Van Poppel, M.; Kemper, H.; Van Mechelen, W.; Maas, J. Health benefits of green spaces in the living environment: A systematic review of epidemiological studies. Urban For. Urban Gree. 2015, 14, 806–816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Markevych, I.; Schoierer, J.; Hartig, T.; Chudnovsky, A.; Hystad, P.; Dzhambov, A.M.; de Vries, S.; Triguero-Mas, M.; Brauer, M.; Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J.; et al. Exploring pathways linking greenspace to health: Theoretical and methodological guidance. Environ. Res. 2017, 158, 301–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- He, T.J.; He, Q.X.; Tan, S.H. Research on Planning Paths for Urban Blue Spaces to Promote Elderly Health. South Archit. 2022, 5, 54–63. [Google Scholar]
- Garrett, J.K.; White, M.P.; Huang, J.; Ng, S.; Hui, Z.; Leung, C.; Tse, L.A.; Fung, F.; Elliott, L.R.; Depledge, M.H.; et al. Urban blue space and health and wellbeing in Hong Kong: Results from a survey of older adults. Health Place 2019, 55, 100–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dempsey, S.; Devine, M.T.; Gillespie, T.; Lyons, S.; Nolan, A. Coastal blue space and depression in older adults. Health Place 2018, 54, 110–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Vert, C.; Gascon, M.; Ranzani, O.; Márquez, S.; Triguero-Mas, M.; Carrasco-Turigas, G.; Arjona, L.; Koch, S.; Llopis, M.; Donaire-Gonzalez, D.; et al. Physical and mental health effects of repeated short walks in a blue space environment: A randomised crossover study. Environ. Res. 2020, 188, 109812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elliott, L.R.; White, M.P.; Grellier, J.; Garrett, J.K.; Cirach, M.; Wheeler, B.W.; Bratman, G.N.; van den Bosch, M.A.; Ojala, A.; Roiko, A.; et al. Research Note: Residential distance and recreational visits to coastal and inland blue spaces in eighteen countries. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2020, 198, 103800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Labib, S.M.; Lindley, S.; Huck, J.J. Spatial dimensions of the influence of urban green-blue spaces on human health: A systematic review. Environ. Res. 2020, 180, 108869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gascon, M.; Zijlema, W.; Vert, C.; White, M.P.; Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J. Outdoor blue spaces, human health and well-being: A systematic review of quantitative studies. Int. J. Hyg. Envir. Health 2017, 220, 1207–1221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leng, H.; Yan, T.J.; Yuan, Q. Research progress on mental health effect of blue-green space and its enlightenments. Urban Plan. Int. 2022, 37, 34–43. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, Y.J.; Yuan, Y.; Zhou, Y.Q.; Liu, Y. The neighborhood effect of exposure to green and blue space on the elderly’s health: A case study of Guangzhou, China. Sci. Geogr. Sin. 2020, 40, 1679–1687. [Google Scholar]
- Ekkel, E.D.; De Vries, S. Nearby green space and human health: Evaluating accessibility metrics. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2017, 157, 214–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaix, B.; Meline, J.; Duncan, S.; Merrien, C.; Karusisi, N.; Perchoux, C.; Lewin, A.; Labadi, K.; Kestens, Y. GPS tracking in neighborhood and health studies: A step forward for environmental exposure assessment, a step backward for causal inference? Health Place 2013, 21, 46–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, Y.; Cheng, B.; Dong, L.; Zheng, T.; Wu, R. The moderating effect of social participation on the relationship between urban green space and the mental health of older adults: A case study in China. Land 2024, 13, 317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yan, T.; Leng, H.; Yuan, Q. The role of “nostalgia” in environmental restorative effects from the perspective of healthy aging: Taking Changchun parks as an example. Land 2023, 12, 1817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mcdougall, C.W.; Quilliam, R.S.; Hanley, N.; Oliver, D.M. Freshwater blue space and population health: An emerging research agenda. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 737, 140196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pasanen, T.P.; White, M.P.; Wheeler, B.W.; Garrett, J.K.; Elliott, L.R. Neighbourhood blue space, health and wellbeing: The mediating role of different types of physical activity. Environ. Int. 2019, 131, 105016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hartig, T.; Mitchell, R.; de Vries, S.; Frumkin, H. Nature and health. Annu. Rev. Public Health 2014, 35, 207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gascon, M.; Sanchez-Benavides, G.; Dadvand, P.; Martinez, D.; Gramunt, N.; Gotsens, X.; Cirach, M.; Vert, C.; Molinuevo, J.L.; Crous-Bou, M.; et al. Long-term exposure to residential green and blue spaces and anxiety and depression in adults: A cross-sectional study. Environ. Res. 2018, 162, 231–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, B.; Chang, C.Y.; Sullivan, W.C. A dose of nature: Tree cover, stress reduction, and gender differences. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2014, 132, 26–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.R.; Sun, R.C.; Chen, X.; Qin, X.Z. Does extreme temperature exposure take a toll on mental health? Evidence from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study. Environ. Dev. Econ. 2023, 28, 486–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, Z.W.; Yang, G.Y.; Zuo, S.D.; Jorgensen, G.; Koga, M.; Vejre, H. Critical review on the cooling effect of urban blue-green space: A threshold-size perspective. Urban For. Urban Gree. 2020, 49, 126630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaplan, S. The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. J. Environ. Psychol. 1995, 15, 169–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ulrich, R.S.; Simons, R.F.; Losito, B.D.; Fiorito, E.; Miles, M.A.; Zelson, M. Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. J. Environ. Psychol. 1991, 11, 201–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Volker, S.; Kistemann, T. The Impact of Blue Space on Human Health and Well-being—Salutogenetic Health Effects of Inland Surface Waters: A Review. Int. J. Hyg. Envir. Health 2011, 214, 449–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lachowycz, K.; Jones, A.P. Towards a better understanding of the relationship between greenspace and health: Development of a theoretical framework. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2013, 118, 62–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Wu, W.; Boelens, L. City profile: Suzhou, China—The interaction of water and city. Cities 2021, 112, 103119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Statistics, S.M.B. The Seventh National Census Bulletin of Suzhou City. Available online: http://tjj.suzhou.gov.cn/sztjj/tjgb/202105/63f291317a62483ba1b6872b64b45b98.shtml (accessed on 31 May 2021).
- Yuan, Y.; Chen, Y.; Liu, Y.; Ding, K. The neighborhood effect of residential greenery on residents’ self-rated health: A case study of Guangzhou, China. Acta Geogr. Sin. 2021, 76, 1965–1975. [Google Scholar]
- White, M.P.; Elliott, L.R.; Gascon, M.; Roberts, B.; Fleming, L.E. Blue space, health and well-being: A narrative overview and synthesis of potential benefits. Environ. Res. 2020, 191, 110169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stewart-Brown, S.; Tennant, A.; Tennant, R.; Platt, S.; Parkinson, J.; Weich, S. Internal construct validity of the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): A Rasch analysis using data from the Scottish Health Education Population Survey. Health Qual. Life Out. 2009, 7, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Steptoe, A.; Feldman, P.J. Neighborhood problems as sources of chronic stress: Development of a measure of neighborhood problems, and associations with socioeconomic status and health. Ann. Behav. Med. 2001, 23, 177–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guite, H.F.; Clark, C.; Ackrill, G. The impact of the physical and urban environment on mental well-being. Public Health 2006, 120, 1117–1126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fat, L.N.; Scholes, S.; Boniface, S.; Mindell, J.; Stewart-Brown, S. Evaluating and establishing national norms for mental wellbeing using the short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (SWEMWBS): Findings from the Health Survey for England. Qual. Life Res. 2017, 26, 1129–1144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, M.; Yu, B.; Yao, K.M. Current status of research on human comfort and its development and application prospects. Meteorol. Sci. Technol. 2002, 1, 11–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, H.J.; Jiang, M.H.; Zou, Y.L. The influence of water environment microclimate on human comfort in Jiangnan classical gardens: Taking Suzhou Master of the Nets Garden as an example. Chin. Horiticulture Abstr. 2016, 32, 142–144. [Google Scholar]
- Xu, J.C.; Zhu, X.Y.; Li, G.M. Influence of waterfront area surrounding small-scale landscape water bodies in cities on human comfort. China Water Waste Water 2007, 23, 101–104. [Google Scholar]
- Yuan, F.; Xiao, J.; Lu, Y. Summer load characteristic analysis based on body comfort index. Jiangsu Electr. Eng. 2005, 24, 11–13. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, Y.; Yuan, Y.; Zhou, Y. Exploring the Association between Neighborhood Blue Space and Self-Rated Health among Elderly Adults: Evidence from Guangzhou, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 16342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fu, J.B.; Li, X.; Zhou, J.; Zhou, W. Application of cluster analysis and water quality identification index on Suzhou urban rivers. Environ. Eng. 2016, 34, 103–107. [Google Scholar]
- Ji, X.H.; Zhang, J.W. Upgrading the characteristics of streets and revealing the connotation of water city: The integration of traditional streets and local culture in Suzhou Ancient City. City Plan. Rev. 2014, 38, 46–49. [Google Scholar]
- Feng, J.; Lin, W.S. Residential satisfaction level and influencing factors of declining old town residents in Suzhou. Prog. Geogr. 2017, 36, 159–170. [Google Scholar]
- Yan, G.T.; Zhu, X.B. Research on the protection and planning of context of historical blocks: Analysis of the cultural heritage of Pingjiang Historical Block of Suzhou. Chin. Landsc. Archit. 2014, 30, 82–84. [Google Scholar]
- Finlay, J.; Franke, T.; Mckay, H.; Sims-Gould, J. Therapeutic landscapes and wellbeing in later life: Impacts of blue and green spaces for older adults. Health Place 2015, 34, 97–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Level | Human Comfort Index | Human Body Sensation | Level | Human Comfort Index | Human Body Sensation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Level 1 | <0 | Extremely cold and uncomfortable | Level 7 | 71~75 | Warm, comfortable for most people |
Level 2 | 0~25 | Very cold and uncomfortable | Level 8 | 76~79 | Hot, uncomfortable for a few people |
Level 3 | 26~38 | Cold, uncomfortable for most people | Level 9 | 80~85 | Hot, uncomfortable for most people |
Level 4 | 39~50 | A few people are uncomfortable | Level 10 | 86~88 | Very hot and uncomfortable |
Level 5 | 51~58 | Comfortable for most people | Level 11 | ≥89 | Extremely hot and uncomfortable |
Level 6 | 59~70 | Comfortable |
Personal Characteristics | Index Value | Frequency | Ration% |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 356 | 48.6% |
Female | 377 | 51.4% | |
Age | 60–70 years old | 353 | 48.2 |
71–80 years old | 281 | 38.3 | |
Above 80 years old | 99 | 13.5 | |
Marital status | Unmarried | 78 | 10.6% |
Married | 494 | 67.4% | |
Divorced/Widowed | 161 | 22.0% | |
Education level | None/Preschool education | 186 | 25.4% |
Primary school and above | 547 | 74.6% | |
Income (CNY/month) | Below 1370 | 351 | 47.9% |
1370–5600 | 248 | 33.8% | |
Above 5600 | 134 | 18.3% | |
Length of residence | Less than 6 months | 168 | 22.9% |
6 months–3 years | 177 | 24.1% | |
3–10 years | 127 | 17.4% | |
More than 10 years | 261 | 35.6% |
Index | Model 1 Dependent Variable: Mental Health (Path A) Direct Effect | Model 2a (Path B’) | Model 2b (Path C’) | Model 2c (Path D’) | Model 2d (Path E’) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mediating Effect | |||||
Human Comfort | Stress Relief | Physical Activities | Social Interaction | ||
Independent variables | |||||
NDWI | 0.133 | 1.725 | 1.208 | 1. 556 | 0.403 |
(1.044) | (1.382) | (1.719) | (1.884) | (1.107) | |
Water contact | 4.658 ** | 3.230 * | 3.915 *** | 3. 285 ** | 3.107 ** |
(1.897) | (1.478) | (1.794) | (1. 254) | (3.601) | |
Accessibility | −1.284 | −1.205 | (−1.585) * | −1.698 | −2.924 |
(1.674) | (1.299) | (1.559) | (1.352) | (1.527) | |
Safety | 0.302 | 0.179 | 0.4417 | 0. 831 * | 0.614 |
(0.306) | (0.145) | (0.933) | (0. 643) | (0.933) | |
Hygiene | 0.632 *** | 0.492 *** | 0. 877 * | 0.813 *** | 0.503 *** |
(0.742) | (0.111) | (0. 502) | (0.523) | (0.277) | |
Facilities | 1.049 *** | 0.674 *** | 0. 853 *** | 0.868 *** | 0.614 *** |
(1.655) | (0.113) | (0. 517) | (0.523) | (0.933) | |
Mediating variable | |||||
Human comfort | 0.972 | ||||
(0.571) | |||||
Stress relief | −0. 340 *** | ||||
(0.331) | |||||
Physical activities | 0.865 *** | ||||
(0.477) | |||||
Social interaction | 0.211 *** | ||||
(0.051) | |||||
Individual characteristics | |||||
Gender | 0.827 ** | 0.488 ** | 0.726 | 0.738 ** | 0.844 ** |
(0.947) | (0.189) | (0.532) | (0.555) | (0.518) | |
Age | 0.692 *** | 0.427 *** | 0.834 ** | 0.709 *** | 0.520 *** |
(0.329) | (0.134) | (0.797) | (0.816) | (0.803) | |
Marital status | 0.341 *** | 0.562 *** | 0.662 *** | 0.925 *** | 0.740 *** |
(0.781) | (0.181) | (0.425) | (0.446) | (0.424) | |
Education | −0.437 ** | −0.239 ** | −0.770 ** | −0.724 ** | −0.416 * |
(0.730) | (0.112) | (0.518) | (0.527) | (0.500) | |
Income | −0.308 * | −0.242 ** | −0.420 ** | −0.382 ** | −0.214 * |
(0.826) | (0.117) | (0.592) | (0.607) | (0.158) | |
Length of residence | −0.799 *** | −0.525 ** | −0.807 *** | −0.617 ** | −0.727 *** |
(0.606) | (0.223) | (0.304) | (0.306) | 0.301 | |
ICC | 0.337 | 0.334 | 0.309 | 0.326 | 0.288 |
Variance between groups | 0.489 | 0.492 | 0.435 | 0.472 | 0.391 |
Variance within group | 0.961 | 0.979 | 0.974 | 0.978 | 0.969 |
AIC | 3918.156 | 1527.086 | 1588.817 | 1602.372 | 1578.603 |
Index | Model 1a Dependent Variable: Human Comfort (Path B) | Model 1b Dependent Variable: Stress Relief (Path C) | Model 1c Dependent Variable: Physical Activities (Path D) | Model 1d Dependent Variable: Social Interaction (Path E) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Coefficient | S.E. | Coefficient | S.E. | Coefficient | S.E. | Coefficient | S.E. | |
NDWI | 0.396 *** | 0.867 | 1.677 | 1.407 | 0.764 ** | 0.474 | 0.289 | 2.351 |
Water contact | 0.138 *** | 0.895 | −2.832 * | 1.964 | −0.461 | 0.423 | −0.979 | 2.401 |
Accessibility | −0.508 *** | 0.853 | 0.651 | 1.919 | −0.980 | 0.618 | 2.560 | 2.844 |
Safety | −0.318 | 0.971 | 0.964 *** | 0.306 | 0.768 ** | 0.334 | 0.294 ** | 0.338 |
Hygiene | 0.445 | 0.974 | −0.483 * | 0.397 | −0.685 *** | 0.324 | 0.094 | 0.083 |
Facilities | −0.374 | 0.632 | −0.570 *** | 0.242 | 0.719 | 0.591 | 0.074 ** | 0.085 |
Gender | 0.573 | 0.914 | −0.355 | 0.404 | −0.402 | 0.253 | −0.111 | 0.183 |
Age | −0.526 | 0.678 | −0.852 *** | 0.865 | 0.608* | 0.374 | 0.027 | 0.307 |
Marital status | 0.895 | 0.974 | −0.837 *** | 0.866 | 0.601 | 0.439 | 0.623 | 0.218 |
Education | 0.913 | 0.931 | −0.440 | 0.406 | 0.742 | 0.260 | −0.270 ** | 0.307 |
Income | 0.840 | 0.674 | 0.447 | 0.542 | −0.640 | 0.237 | 0.067 | 0.931 |
Length of residence | −0.414 | 0.964 | −0.204 | 0.842 | 0.980 | 0.524 | 0.495 * | 0.688 |
Index | Model 3 (Path A) Dependent Variable: Mental Health Direct Effect | Model 3a (Path B’) | Model 3b (Path C’) | Model 3c (Path D’) | Model 3d (Path E’) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mediating Effect | |||||
Human Comfort | Stress Relief | Physical Activities | Social Interaction | ||
Independent variables | |||||
NDWI | 0.163 | 0.952 | 0.431 | 0.177 | 0.052 |
Water contact | 6.652 *** | 5.976 ** | 6.758 *** | 6.821 *** | 0.643 *** |
Accessibility | 3.185 * | −2.478 | 0.3583 | −3.613 * | −3.507 * |
Safety | 0.245 | 0.109 | 0.142 | 0.278 | 0.194 |
Hygiene | 0.328 ** | 0.336 ** | 0.428 ** | 0.286 * | 0.533 ** |
Facilities | 0.982 *** | 0.609 *** | 0.497 *** | 0.592 *** | 0.903 *** |
Mediating Variable | |||||
Human comfort | 0.682 | ||||
Stress relief | 0.580 ** | ||||
Physical activities | −0.645 *** | ||||
Social interaction | 0.042 | ||||
ICC | 0.440 | 0.376 | 0.433 | 0.467 | 0.335 |
Variance between groups | 0.397 | 0.574 | 0.539 | 0.657 | 0.47 |
Variance within Group | 0.505 | 0.954 | 0.707 | 0.751 | 0.933 |
AIC | 1586.682 | 1587.982 | 1590.154 | 1578.166 | 1585.870 |
Index | Model 3 (Path A) Dependent Variable: Mental Health Direct Effect | Model 3a (Path B’) | Model 3b (Path C’) | Model 3c (Path D’) | Model 3d (Path E’) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mediating Effect | |||||
Human Comfort | Stress Relief | Physical Activities | Social Interaction | ||
Independent variables | |||||
NDWI | 1.133 | 2.247 | 0.198 | 1.852 | 1.084 |
Water contact | 2.658 | 2.239 | 3.352 * | 1.671 | 1.572 |
Accessibility | 0.284 | −0.187 | −1.688 | 0.167 | −0.120 |
Safety | 0.130 | 0.133 | 0.021 | 0.171 | −0.922 |
Hygiene | 0.632 *** | 0.554 *** | 0.593 *** | 0.401 ** | 0.227 *** |
Facilities | 0.104 *** | 0.743 *** | 0.668 *** | 0.736 *** | 0.273 *** |
Mediating Variable | |||||
Human comfort | −0.031 | ||||
Stress relief | 0.247 *** | ||||
Physical activities | −1.240 *** | ||||
Social interaction | −0.266 *** | ||||
ICC | 0.362 | 0.543 | 0.398 | 0.396 | 0.332 |
Variance between groups | 0.489 | 0.833 | 0.504 | 0.413 | 0.477 |
Variance within Group | 0.861 | 0.700 | 0.763 | 0.631 | 0.959 |
AIC | 1948.156 | 1921.509 | 1868.339 | 1898.327 | 1913.783 |
Index | Model 4 (Path A) Dependent Variable: Mental Health Direct Effect | Model 4a (Path B’) | Model 4b (Path C’) | Model 4c (Path D’) | Model 4d (Path E’) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mediating Effect | |||||
Human Comfort | Stress Relief | Physical Activities | Social Interaction | ||
Independent variables | |||||
NDWI | 0.784 | 1.214 | 1.260 | 1.439 | 1.739 |
Water contact | 4.649 *** | 3.813 ** | 5.051 *** | 6.306 *** | 3.772 * |
Accessibility | −2.590 | −1.531 | −2.139 * | −2.348 | −2.207 |
Safety | 0.570 | 0.713 | 0.737 | 0.716 | 0.638 |
Hygiene | 0.619 *** | 0.7615 *** | 0.621 *** | 0.563 *** | 0.601 *** |
Facilities | 0.749 *** | 0.753 *** | 0.711 *** | 0.998 *** | 0.630 *** |
Mediating variable | |||||
Human comfort | 0.860 | ||||
Stress relief | 0.898 *** | ||||
Physical activities | −0.816 *** | ||||
Social interaction | −1.230 *** | ||||
ICC | 0.352 | 0.422 | 0.343 | 0.344 | 0.330 |
Variance between groups | 0.523 | 0.716 | 0.500 | 0.503 | 0.471 |
Variance within group | 0.963 | 0.98 | 0.959 | 0.960 | 0.955 |
AIC | 1730.014 | 1704.047 | 1698.739 | 1691.772 | 1693.428 |
Index | Model 4 (Path A) Dependent Variable: Mental Health Direct Effect | Model 4a (Path B’) | Model 4b (Path C’) | Model 4c (Path D’) | Model 4d (Path E’) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mediating Effect | |||||
Human Comfort | Stress Relief | Physical Activities | Social Interaction | ||
Independent variables | |||||
NDWI | −1.059 | −1.659 | −1.161 | −1.424 | −2.411 |
Water contact | 3.108 | 1.872 | 3.871 | 2.882 | 4.138 |
Accessibility | −0.420 | −2.291 | −1.466 | −0.549 | −0.739 |
Safety | 0.219 | 0.204 | 0.449 | 0.240 | 0.164 |
Hygiene | 0.572 ** | 0.614 ** | 0.413 ** | 0.406 ** | 0.434 ** |
Facilities | 0.910 *** | 0.803 *** | 0.512 *** | 0.811 *** | 0.744 *** |
Mediating variable | |||||
Human comfort | 0.737 | ||||
Stress relief | 0.418 ** | ||||
Physical activities | −0.828 *** | ||||
Social interaction | −0.159 *** | ||||
ICC | 0.288 | 0.467 | 0.333 | 0.350 | 0.314 |
Variance between groups | 0.380 | 0.780 | 0.478 | 0.509 | 0.435 |
Variance within group | 0.940 | 0.890 | 0.959 | 0.947 | 0.952 |
AIC | 1864.051 | 1836.927 | 1798.101 | 1821.192 | 1831.939 |
Type of Spatial Element | Schematic Drawing | Current Situation | Water Contact description | |
---|---|---|---|---|
River alley | River without alley | There are no public alleys on either side of the river. The direct contact with the blue space is limited to residents living on either side. This model has a weak water contact level. | ||
One river and one alley | There is public alley is on only one side of the river, so this mode has a good level of water contact. | |||
One river and two alleys | There are public alleys on both sides of the river, so this model has a better level of water contact. | |||
River bridge | Extended type | Various types of bridges can increase pedestrian mobility in neighborhoods and thus increase the water contact level of waterways. | ||
Lap type | ||||
Vertical type | ||||
River port | Vertical type | The vertical dock space faces the water on one side. To a certain extent it increases the opportunities for residents to touch the water and improves the water contact level. | ||
Turning type | The turning pier space faces water on both sides. It increases the opportunities for residents to touch the water and has a better level of water contact. | |||
Parallel overlap type | The parallel overlapping pier space faces water on three sides. It increases the opportunities for residents to touch the water and has a much better level of water contact. |
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. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Yang, Z.; Yang, J.; Chen, S. Neighborhood Effects of Blue Space in Historical Environments on the Mental Health of Older Adults: A Case Study of the Ancient City of Suzhou, China. Land 2024, 13, 1328. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13081328
Yang Z, Yang J, Chen S. Neighborhood Effects of Blue Space in Historical Environments on the Mental Health of Older Adults: A Case Study of the Ancient City of Suzhou, China. Land. 2024; 13(8):1328. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13081328
Chicago/Turabian StyleYang, Zihan, Jianqiang Yang, and Shenglan Chen. 2024. "Neighborhood Effects of Blue Space in Historical Environments on the Mental Health of Older Adults: A Case Study of the Ancient City of Suzhou, China" Land 13, no. 8: 1328. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13081328