Recreational use of the urban riverscape: What brings people to the river?

1Åberg, E. U., & Tapsell, S. (2013). Revisiting the River Skerne: The long-term social benefits of river rehabilitation. Landscape and Urban Planning, 113, 94–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.01.009Search in Google Scholar

2Ayala-Azcárraga, C., Diaz, D., & Zambrano, L. (2019). Characteristics of urban parks and their relation to user well-being. Landscape and Urban Planning, 189, 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.04.005Search in Google Scholar

3Baumeister, C. F., Gerstenberg, T., Plieninger, T., & Schraml, U. (2020). Geography of disservices in urban forests: public participation mapping for closing the loop. Ecosystems and People, 18(1), 44–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/26395916.2021.2021289Search in Google Scholar

4Bąkowska-Waldmann, E. (2022). Rivers of Warsaw in the eyes of inhabitants. Sendzimir Foundation. https://sendzimir.org.pl/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Raport-doliny-rzeczne.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

5Bertram, C., & Rehdanz, K. (2015). Preferences for cultural urban ecosystem services: Comparing attitudes, perception, and use. Ecosystem Services, 12, 187–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.12.011Search in Google Scholar

6Bertram, C., Meyerhoff, J., Rehdanz, K., & Wüstemann, H. (2017). Differences in the recreational value of urban parks between weekdays and weekends: A discrete choice analysis. Landscape and Urban Planning, 159, 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.10.006Search in Google Scholar

7Bjerke, T.,Østdahl, T., Thrane, C., & Strumse, E. (2006). Vegetation density of urban parks and perceived appropriateness for recreation. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 5, 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2006.01.006Search in Google Scholar

8Bolund, P., & Hunhammar, S. (1999). Ecosystem services in urban areas. Ecological Economics, 29, 293–301. https://doi.org/10.1017/S174217051300046XSearch in Google Scholar

9Brown, G., & Kyttä, M. (2014). Key issues and research priorities for public participation GIS (PPGIS): A synthesis based on empirical research. Applied Geography, 46, 122–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2013.11.004Search in Google Scholar

10Brown, G., Schebella, M. F., & Weber, D. (2014). Using participatory GIS to measure physical activity and urban park benefits. Landscape and Urban Planning, 121, 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.09.006Search in Google Scholar

11Browning, M. H. E. M., Rigolon, A., McAnirlin, O., & Yoon, H. V. (2022). Where greenspace matters most: A systematic review of urbanicity, greenspace, and physical health. Landscape and Urban Planning, 217, 104233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104233Search in Google Scholar

12Chan, K. M. A., Satterfield, T., & Goldstein, J. (2012). Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values. Ecological Economics, 74, 8–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.11.011Search in Google Scholar

13Chang, P., & Olafsson, A. S. (2022). The scale effects of landscape variables on landscape experiences: a multi-scale spatial analysis of social media data in an urban nature park context. Landscape Ecology, 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-022-01402-2Search in Google Scholar

14Chen, X., de Vries, S., Assmuth, T., Dick, J., Hermans, T., Hertel, O., & Reis, S. (2019). Research challenges for cultural ecosystem services and public health in (peri-)urban environments. Science of the Total Environment, 651, 2118–2129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.09.030Search in Google Scholar

15Cohen, D. A., Lapham, S., Evenson, K. R., Williamson, S., Golinelli, D., Ward, P., & McKenzie, T. L. (2013). Use of neighbourhood parks: Does socio-economic status matter? A four-city study. Public Health, 127, 325–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2013.01.003Search in Google Scholar

16Dade, M. C., Mitchell, M. G. E., Brown, G., & Rhodes, J. R. (2020). The effects of urban greenspace characteristics and socio-demographics vary among cultural ecosystem services. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 49, 126641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126641Search in Google Scholar

17Degórska, B., & Degórski, M. (2017). Green infrastructure as a very important quality factor in urban areas – Warsaw case study. Europa XXI, 32, 51–70. https://doi.org/10.7163/eu21.2017.32.4Search in Google Scholar

18Durán Vian, F., Pons Izquierdo, J. J., & Serrano Martínez, M. (2021). River-city recreational interaction: A classification of urban riverfront parks and walks. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 59, 127042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127042Search in Google Scholar

19Elbakidze, M., Dawson, L., Milberg, P., Mikusiński, G., Hedblom, M., Kruhlov, I., … & Grodzynskyi, M. (2022). Multiple Factors Shape the Interaction of People with Urban Greenspace: Sweden as a Case Study. SSRN Electronic Journal, 74. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4032626 Search in Google Scholar

20European Environment Agency (2022). Percentage of total green infrastructure, urban green space, and urban tree cover in the area of EEA-38 capital cities (excluding Liechtenstein). https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/daviz/percentage-of-total-green-infrastructure/#tab-chart_1 [accessed 09.02.2023]Search in Google Scholar

21Esri (2020). ArcGIS Desktop Version 10.8. Environmental Systems. Research Institute, Redlands, CA.Search in Google Scholar

22Fischer, L. K., Honold, J., Botzat, A., Brinkmeyer, D., Cvejic, R., Delshammar, T., ... & Kowarik, I. (2018). Recreational ecosystem services in European cities: Sociocultural and geographical contexts matter for park use. Ecosystem Services, 31, 455–467 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.01.015Search in Google Scholar

23Grzyb, T., & Kulczyk, S. (2023). How do ephemeral factors shape recreation along the urban river? A social media perspective. Landscape and Urban Planning, 230, 104638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2022.104638Search in Google Scholar

24Hamstead, Z. A., Fisher, D., Ilieva, R. T., Wood, S. A., McPhearson, T., & Kremer, P. (2018). Geolocated social media as a rapid indicator of park visitation and equitable park access. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 72, 38–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2018.01.007Search in Google Scholar

25Hegetschweiler, K. T., de Vries, S., Arnberger, A., Bell, S., Brennan, M., Siter, N., … & Hunziker, M. (2017). Linking demand and supply factors in identifying cultural ecosystem services of urban green infrastructures: A review of European studies. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 21, 48–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2016.11.002Search in Google Scholar

26Hegetschweiler, K. T., Wartmann, F. M., Dubernet, I., & Fischer, C. (2022). Urban forest usage and perception of ecosystem services – A comparison between teenagers and adults. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 74, 127624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2022.127624Search in Google Scholar

27Hossu, C. A., Iojă, I. C., Onose, D. A., Niþă, M. R., Popa, A. M., Talabă, O., & Inostroza, L. (2019). Ecosystem services appreciation of urban lakes in Romania. Synergies and trade-offs between multiple users. Ecosystem Services, 37, 100937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100937Search in Google Scholar

28Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

29Kičić, M., Haase, D., Marin, A. M., Vuletić, D., & Krajter Ostoić, S. (2022). Perceptions of cultural ecosystem services of tree-based green infrastructure: A focus group participatory mapping in Zagreb, Croatia. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 78, 127767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2022.127767Search in Google Scholar

30Kraemer, R., & Kabisch, N. (2021). Parks in context: Advancing citywide spatial quality assessments of urban green spaces using fine-scaled indicators. Ecology and Society, 26(2). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12485-260245Search in Google Scholar

31Krellenberg, K., Artmann, M., Stanley, C., & Hecht, R. (2021). What to do in, and what to expect from, urban green spaces – Indicator-based approach to assess cultural ecosystem services. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 59, 126986. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.126986Search in Google Scholar

32Mantzios, K., Ioannou, L. G., Panagiotaki, Z., Ziaka, S., Périard, J. D., Racinais, S., … & Flouris, A. D. (2022). Effects of Weather Parameters on Endurance Running Performance: Discipline-specific Analysis of 1258 Races. Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 54(1), 153–161. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000002769Search in Google Scholar

33McCormack, G. R., Rock, M., Toohey, A. M., & Hignell, D. (2010). Characteristics of urban parks associated with park use and physical activity: A review of qualitative research. Health and Place, 16(4), 712–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2010.03.003Search in Google Scholar

34McPhearson, T., Hamstead, Z. A., & Kremer, P. (2014). Urban ecosystem services for resilience planning and management in New York City. Ambio, 43(4), 502–515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-014-0509-8Search in Google Scholar

35Miaux, S., & Garneau, J. (2016). The sports park and urban promenade in the ‘quais de Bordeaux’: An example of sports and recreation in urban planning. Loisir et Société / Society and Leisure, 39(1), 12–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/07053436.2016.1151223Search in Google Scholar

36National Geoportal (2023). Orthophotomap in standard resolution. https://mapy.geoportal.gov.pl/wss/service/PZGIK/ORTO/WMS/StandardResolutionSearch in Google Scholar

37Ode Sang, Å., Knez, I., Gunnarsson, B., & Hedblom, M. (2016). The effects of naturalness, gender, and age on how urban green space is perceived and used. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 18, 268–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2016.06.008Search in Google Scholar

38Palliwoda, J., & Priess, J. A. (2021). What do people value in urban green? Linking characteristics of urban green spaces to users’ perceptions of nature benefits, disturbances, and disservices. Ecology and Society, 26(1). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12204-260128Search in Google Scholar

39Pinto, L., Ferreira, C. S. S., & Pereira, P. (2021). Environmental and socioeconomic factors influencing the use of urban green spaces in Coimbra (Portugal). Science of the Total Environment, 792, 148293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148293Search in Google Scholar

40Pitt, H. (2019). What prevents people accessing urban bluespaces? A qualitative study. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 39, 89–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2019.02.013Search in Google Scholar

41Priess, J., Pinto, L. V., Misiune, I., & Palliwoda, J. (2021). Ecosystem Service Use and the Motivations for Use in Central Parks in Three European Cities. Land, 10(2), 154. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10020154Search in Google Scholar

42Rall, E., Bieling, C., Zytynska, S., & Haase, D. (2017). Exploring city-wide patterns of cultural ecosystem service perceptions and use. Ecological Indicators, 77, 80–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.02.001Search in Google Scholar

43Rall, E., Hansen, R., & Pauleit, S. (2019). The added value of public participation GIS (PPGIS) for urban green infrastructure planning. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 40, 264–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2018.06.016Search in Google Scholar

44Riechers, M., Strack, M., Barkmann, J., & Tscharntke, T. (2019). Cultural ecosystem services provided by urban green change along an urban-periurban gradient. Sustainability, 11(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030645Search in Google Scholar

45Rushing, J. R., Needham, M. D., Antonio, A. D., & Covelli, E. (2019). Barriers to attachment? Relationships among constraints, attachment, and visitation to urban parks. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 27, 100228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2019.100228Search in Google Scholar

46Scott Shafer, C., Scott, D., Baker, J., & Winemiller, K. (2013). Recreation and amenity values of Urban Stream corridors: Implications for green infrastructure. Journal of Urban Design, 18(4), 478–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2013.800450Search in Google Scholar

47Sikorska, D., Sikorski, P., Archiciński, P., Chormański, J., & Hopkins, R. J. (2019). You can’t see the woods for the trees: Invasive Acer negundo L. in urban riparian forests harms biodiversity and limits recreation activity. Sustainability, 11(20). https://doi.org/10.3390/su11205838 Search in Google Scholar

48Smith, N., Georgiou, M., King, A. C., Tieges, Z., & Chastin, S. (2022). Factors influencing usage of urban blue spaces: A systems-based approach to identify leverage points. Health and Place, 73, 102735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2021.102735Search in Google Scholar

49Stepniewska, M., & Sobczak, U. (2017). Assessing the synergies and tradeoffs between ecosystem services provided by urban floodplains: The case of the Warta River Valley in Poznań, Poland. Land Use Policy, 69, 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.09.026Search in Google Scholar

50United Nations (2015). Sustainable development goals: 17 goals to transform our world. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/Search in Google Scholar

51Valenzuela, P. L., Mateo-March, M., Zabala, M., Muriel, X., Lucia, A., Barranco-Gil, D., & Pallarés, J. G. (2022). Ambient Temperature and Field-Based Cycling Performance: Insights From Male and Female Professional Cyclists. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 17(7), 1025–1029. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2021-0508Search in Google Scholar

52Van Berkel, D. B., Tabrizian, P., Dorning, M. A., Smart, L., Newcomb, D., Mehaffey, M., … & Meentemeyer, R. K. (2018). Quantifying the visual-sensory landscape qualities that contribute to cultural ecosystem services using social media and LiDAR. Ecosystem Services, 31, 326–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.022Search in Google Scholar

53Veerkamp, C. J., Schipper, A. M., Hedlund, K., Lazarova, T., Nordin, A., & Hanson, H. I. (2021). A review of studies assessing ecosystem services provided by urban green and blue infrastructure. Ecosystem Services, 52, 101367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101367Search in Google Scholar

54Vert, C., Carrasco-Turigas, G., Zijlema, W., Espinosa, A., Cano-Riu, L., Elliott, L., … & Gascon, M. (2019). Impact of a riverside accessibility intervention on use, physical activity, and wellbeing: A mixed methods pre-post evaluation. Landscape and Urban Planning, 190, 103611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2019.103611Search in Google Scholar

55Vierikko, K., & Yli-Pelkonen, V. (2019). Seasonality in recreation supply and demand in an urban lake ecosystem in Finland. Urban Ecosystems, 22(4), 769–783. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-019-00849-7Search in Google Scholar

56Völker, S., & Kistemann, T. (2013). “I’m always entirely happy when I’m here!” Urban blue enhancing human health and well-being in Cologne and Düsseldorf, Germany. Social Science and Medicine, 78, 113–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.09.047Search in Google Scholar

57Wang, Y., Niemelä, J., & Kotze, D. J. (2022). The delivery of Cultural Ecosystem Services in urban forests of different landscape features and land use contexts. People and Nature, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10394Search in Google Scholar

58Warsaw City Hall (2019). Attitudes of Warsaw residents towards the Vistula River. A report from the survey. https://dzielnicawisla.um.warszawa.pl/files/Wisla_2018_raport_z_badania.pdf [accessed 03.08.2020]Search in Google Scholar

59Warsaw City Hall (2020). The Vistula in Warsaw in the eyes of its users. https://dzielnicawisla.um.warszawa.pl/files/wisla_badanie_0623.pdf [accessed 21.06.2019]Search in Google Scholar

60Williams, A. T., Davies, P., Ergin, A., & Balas, C. (2000). Environmental risk assessment; a case study of the Colhuw Beach revetment on the Glamorgan Heritage Coast, Wales. Journal of Coastal Conservation, 6, 125–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02913809Search in Google Scholar

61Wolff, M., Mascarenhas, A., Haase, A., Haase, D., Andersson, E., Borgström, S. T., … & Biernacka, M. (2022). Conceptualizing multidimensional barriers: a framework for assessing constraints in realizing recreational benefits of urban green spaces. Ecology and Society, 27(2). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-13180-270217Search in Google Scholar

62Zhang, S., & Zhou, W. (2018). Recreational visits to urban parks and factors affecting park visits: Evidence from geotagged social media data. Landscape and Urban Planning, 180(18), 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.08.004Search in Google Scholar

63Zingraff-Hamed, A., Noack, M., Greulich, S., Schwarzwalder, K., Wantzen, K. M., & Pauleit, S. (2018). Model-Based Evaluation of Urban River Restoration: Conflicts between Sensitive Fish Species and Recreational Users. Sustainability, 10(1747). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061747Search in Google Scholar

64Zwierzchowska, I., Hof, A., Iojă, I. C., Mueller, C., Poniży, L., Breuste, J., & Mizgajski, A. (2018). Multi-scale assessment of cultural ecosystem services of parks in Central European cities. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 30, 84–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.12.017Search in Google Scholar