Impact of Boundary Removal Project on Residents’ Perceptions: Cases in Taiwan
Keywords:Environmental amelioration, Neighborhood safety, Perceived change, Place attachment
Boundary removal project (BRP) aims to eliminate barriers between two sites and activate the grey residual space in-between. School campus in Taiwan is often surrounded by walls, which blocks its connection to communities and often creates security concerns. School campus has become the most popular target for BRP, which tries to turn it into a functional and aesthetic space. This study intends to explore the impact of campus BRP within a community, especially its relationships with neighborhood safety, perceived change and place attachment. The result shows that the improvement of boundary environment has a significant impact on all three perceptions.
Keywords: Environmental amelioration; Neighborhood safety; Perceived change; Place attachment
eISSN: 2398-4287 © 2018. The Authors. Published for AMER ABRA cE-Bs by e-International Publishing House, Ltd., UK. This is an open access article under the CC BYNC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer–review under responsibility of AMER (Association of Malaysian Environment-Behaviour Researchers), ABRA (Association of Behavioural Researchers on Asians) and cE-Bs (Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.
Anton, C. E., & Lawrence, C. (2016). The relationship between place attachment, the theory of planned behaviour and residents’ response to place change. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 47, 145-154.
Bonaiuto, M., Carrus, G., Martorella, H., & Bonnes, M. (2002). Local identity processes and environmental attitudes in land use changes: The case of natural protected areas. Journal of economic psychology, 23(5), 631-653.
Clifton, K. J., & Kreamer-Fults, K. (2007). An examination of the environmental attributes associated with pedestrian–vehicular crashes near public schools. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 39(4), 708-715.
Coeterier, J. F. (1987). De waarneming en waardering van landschappen. Coeterier.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological bulletin, 112(1), 155.
Daniel, T. C., & Vining, J. (1983). Methodological issues in the assessment of landscape quality Behavior and the natural environment (pp. 39-84): Springer.
Denes, A. (1993). Notes on eco-logic: Environmental artwork, visual philosophy and global perspective. Leonardo, 387-395.
Hair, J. F. (2010). Black, WC, Babin, BJ, & Anderson, RE (2010). Multivariate data analysis, 7.
Herzog, T. R., Herbert, E. J., Kaplan, R., & Crooks, C. (2000). Cultural and developmental comparisons of landscape perceptions and preferences. Environment and Behavior, 32(3), 323-346.
Hong, J., & Chen, C. (2014). The role of the built environment on perceived safety from crime and walking: examining direct and indirect impacts. Transportation, 41(6), 1171-1185.
Kaltenborn, B. P., & Bjerke, T. (2002). Associations between landscape preferences and place attachment: a study in Røros, Southern Norway. Landscape Research, 27(4), 381-396.
Kaltenborn, B. P., & Williams, D. R. (2002). The meaning of place: Attachments to Femundsmarka National Park, Norway, among tourists and locals. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift, 56(3), 189-198.
Korpela, K. M., Ylén, M., Tyrväinen, L., & Silvennoinen, H. (2009). Stability of self-reported favourite places and place attachment over a 10-month period. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(1), 95-100.
LaScala, E. A., Johnson, F. W., & Gruenewald, P. J. (2001). Neighborhood characteristics of alcohol-related pedestrian injury collisions: a geostatistical analysis. Prevention Science, 2(2), 123-134.
Lau, S. S. Y., Gou, Z., & Liu, Y. (2014). Healthy campus by open space design: Approaches and guidelines. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 3(4), 452-467.
Low, S. M., & Altman, I. (1992). Place attachment Place attachment (pp. 1-12): Springer.
Lynch, K., & Hack, G. (1984). Site planning: MIT press.
Matilainen, A., Pohja-Mykrä, M., Lähdesmäki, M., & Kurki, S. (2017). “I feel it is mine!”–Psychological ownership in relation to natural resources. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 51, 31-45.
Mehta, V. (2014). Evaluating public space. Journal of Urban Design, 19(1), 53-88.
Moore, R. L., & Graefe, A. R. (1994). Attachments to recreation settings: The case of rail‐trail users. Leisure sciences, 16(1), 17-31.
Muslim, Z. (2016). Design Transformation based on Nature and Identity Formation in the Design of Landscape Elements. Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal, 1(1), 189-196.
Ode, Å., Fry, G., Tveit, M. S., Messager, P., & Miller, D. (2009). Indicators of perceived naturalness as drivers of landscape preference. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(1), 375-383.
Omar, D., Omar, K. A., Othman, S., & Yusoff, Z. M. (2016). Walkability design for urban public housing park. Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal, 1(3), 311-317.
Purcell, A. T., & Lamb, R. J. (1998). Preference and naturalness: An ecological approach. Landscape and Urban Planning, 42(1), 57-66.
Rapoport, A. (2016). Human aspects of urban form: towards a man—environment approach to urban form and design: Elsevier.
Riley, R. B. (1992). Attachment to the ordinary landscape Place attachment (pp. 13-35): Springer.
Ruihai, Z., & Dinghai, Y. (2017). Analysis and reform strategies of campus landscape of Hainan University. Journal of Landscape Research, 9(2), 23.
Saeidi, S., Mohammadzadeh, M., Salmanmahiny, A., & Mirkarimi, S. H. (2017). Performance evaluation of multiple methods for landscape aesthetic suitability mapping: A comparative study between Multi-Criteria Evaluation, Logistic Regression and Multi-Layer Perceptron neural network. Land Use Policy, 67, 1-12.
Saelens, B. E., Sallis, J. F., Black, J. B., & Chen, D. (2003). Neighborhood-based differences in physical activity: an environment scale evaluation. American journal of public health, 93(9), 1552-1558.
Strumse, E. (1996). Demographic differences in the visual preferences for agrarian landscapes in western Norway. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16(1), 17-31.
Sullivan, W. C., Kuo, F. E., & Depooter, S. F. (2004). The fruit of urban nature: Vital neighborhood spaces. Environment and Behavior, 36(5), 678-700.
Toruńczyk‐Ruiz, S., & Lewicka, M. (2016). Perceived social diversity and neighbourhood attachment: The role of intergroup ties and affective appraisals of the environment. Evidence from Poland. European Journal of Social Psychology, 46(7), 818-832.
Van Treese II, J. W., Koeser, A. K., Fitzpatrick, G. E., Olexa, M. T., & Allen, E. J. (2017). A review of the impact of roadway vegetation on drivers’ health and well-being and the risks associated with single-vehicle crashes. Arboricultural Journal, 39(3), 179-193.
von Wirth, T., Grêt-Regamey, A., Moser, C., & Stauffacher, M. (2016). Exploring the influence of perceived urban change on residents' place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 46, 67-82.
Williams, D. R., & Roggenbuck, J. W. (1989). Measuring place attachment: Some preliminary results. Paper presented at the Abstracts: 1989 leisure research symposium.
Wolf, K. L. (2003). Freeway roadside management: the urban forest beyond the white line. Journal of Arboriculture, 29(3), 127-136.
Wood, L., Shannon, T., Bulsara, M., Pikora, T., McCormack, G., & Giles-Corti, B. (2008). The anatomy of the safe and social suburb: an exploratory study of the built environment, social capital and residents’ perceptions of safety. Health & place, 14(1), 15-31.
Yu, K. (1995). Cultural variations in landscape preference: comparisons among Chinese sub-groups and Western design experts. Landscape and Urban Planning, 32(2), 107-126.
Zhang, H., & Lin, S.-H. (2011). Affective appraisal of residents and visual elements in the neighborhood: A case study in an established suburban community. Landscape and Urban Planning, 101(1), 11-21.
How to Cite
eISSN: 2398-4287 © Year. The Authors. Published for AMER ABRA cE-Bs by e-International Publishing House, Ltd., UK. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer–review under responsibility of AMER (Association of Malaysian Environment-Behaviour Researchers), ABRA (Association of Behavioural Researchers on Asians) and cE-Bs (Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia.