Building evidence-based research for park development and design in Canadian cities : cases from the City of Vancouver parks
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Urban parks are among the few urban infrastructures that promote the social, economic and environmental well-being of city residents at the same time. Despite the importance of parks towards the development of cities, there is a major research gap within the Canadian context. The goal of this study is to examine the factors influencing the development and management of urban parks in the City of Vancouver. The research focused on three main themes namely: the evolution of park planning, urban park management models and park user characteristics. Methodologically, the study relied on the mixed methods approach consisting of primary and secondary sources of data. The secondary data used for this study was collected from a variety of documentary sources such as Parks Board records, City of Vancouver documents, old newspapers and archival records. On the other hand, the primary data was collected by interviewing key stakeholders and conducting park user survey in Stanley Park and Queen Elizabeth Park. The historical analysis of parks showed that the development of parks in the City of Vancouver has been approached from a multi-stakeholder perspective since the 19th century. Also, there has been an increase in the number of physical structures and area of hard landscaping on these parks. This is as a result of the continuous increase in the provision of more recreational facilities. Historically, the management of parks in the City of Vancouver has not been approached by one particular model but rather a combination of the elements of the public-for-profit model and the public-non-profit model. However, these models were not strategically laid down to guide the development of parks but rather came along with the incremental development of parks in the City of Vancouver. Similar to the historical approach to park management, the contemporary park management system of the City of Vancouver still relies on the hybrid model. Park management decisions should be informed by the type of park, type of activities and the type of people who use the parks. The bivariate analysis showed that there is the need for park researchers to be cautious in generalizing their findings on the relationship between demographic characteristics and park use. Some of the results ascertained from assessing the relationships between demographic characteristics and park use are generalizable whilst others are context specific. For example, the chi-square analysis indicated that there is no statistically significant relationship between gender and active walking in Stanley Park (P>0.05). However, the relationship between gender and walking in Queen Elizabeth Park was statistically significant (P≤0.05). It is, therefore, important for park administrators and policy makers to formulate context-specific policies and management decisions in relation to the demographic characteristics of park users and active walking. The statistical analysis also indicated that the intensity of Stanley Park use is influenced by demographic characteristics such as marital status, place of origin, race, and age. On the other hand, the intensity of park use in Queen Elizabeth Park is influenced by demographic characteristics such as employment, gender, place of origin and religion. The results of the study showed a strong relationship between the place of origin of park users and the intensity of park use. The research finding showed that park users who live in Vancouver use both Stanley Park and Queen Elizabeth Park at a higher intensity rate than park users coming from outside Canada.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,020 | 0,045 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,006 | 0,014 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,017 | 0,007 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».