Whom Do Urban Agriculture Parks Provide Landscape Services to and How? A Case Study of Beijing, China

Miaomiao Xie, Manyu Li, Zhaoyang Li, Meng Xu, Yan Chen, Ran Wo and Tong De
Additional contact information
Miaomiao Xie: School of Land Science and Technology, China University of Geosciences (Beijing), Haidian District, Beijing 100083, China
Manyu Li: School of Land Science and Technology, China University of Geosciences (Beijing), Haidian District, Beijing 100083, China
Zhaoyang Li: School of Land Science and Technology, China University of Geosciences (Beijing), Haidian District, Beijing 100083, China
Meng Xu: School of Land Science and Technology, China University of Geosciences (Beijing), Haidian District, Beijing 100083, China
Yan Chen: School of Land Science and Technology, China University of Geosciences (Beijing), Haidian District, Beijing 100083, China
Ran Wo: School of Land Science and Technology, China University of Geosciences (Beijing), Haidian District, Beijing 100083, China
Tong De: Laboratory for Urban Future, School of Urban Planning and Design, Peking University Shenzhen Graduate School, Shenzhen 518055, China

Sustainability, 2020, vol. 12, issue 12, 1-21

Abstract: An urban agriculture park (UAP) is a mixture of various kinds of urban agriculture and has a group of administrators to plan and manage its landscapes. Thus, the relationships between users and the ability of the UAPs to provide services are crucial. This study investigated the user profiles of three kinds of UAPs in Beijing, China. Investigation of 345 interviewees suggested that most of the users have an upper-middle level income and are well educated. Social connections vary across different types of UAPs. An assessment matrix of landscape services was introduced for a pioneer of UAP, Little Donkey Farm, based on questionnaires, a field survey, and indicators of landscape patterns. Pearson correlations between service demands and users’ characters showed age, companions, and education level were significantly correlated to the needs of scenery and education services. The landscape with the highest supply value was the vegetable plots planted by members. The scenery service was not adequately supplied, and 31.5% of the areas did not meet the demand. Based on the budgets of supply and demand, six types of landscape should be optimized. This study provides an approach to understand the path of landscape service provision in UAP and supports basic knowledge on how to better involve urban agriculture in sustainable development.

Keywords: urban agriculture; landscape service; questionnaires; ecosystem services; assessment matrix (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/12/4967/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/12/4967/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:12:p:4967-:d:373083

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().