See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318794078

The green open space development model and

associated use behaviors in dense urban
settings: Lessons from Hong Kon....

Article in URBAN DESIGN International · July 2017

DOI: 10.1057/s41289-017-0049-5

CITATIONS READS

0 355

3 authors, including:

Fei Xue Zhonghua Gou

Shenzhen Water Planning and Desig… Griffith University
7 PUBLICATIONS 9 CITATIONS 50 PUBLICATIONS 306 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Health and Space: A Quantitative and Qualitative Research on the Design of

Healing Space in High-Density Urban Built Environment--The Case of Hong Kong
and Singapore View project

Special Issue "Human Factors in Green Building" View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Zhonghua Gou on 24 September 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Original Article
The green open space development model
and associated use behaviors in dense urban settings:
Lessons from Hong Kong and Singapore

Fei Xuea, Zhonghua Goub,* and Stephen Laua

a
School of Design and Environment, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
b
School of Environment, Cities Research Institute, Griffith University, G39_3.40, Parklands Drive,
Southport, QLD 4215, Australia.
E-mails: gouzhonghua@gmail.com; z.gou@griffith.edu.au
*Corresponding author.

Abstract Green open space is addressed as an important urban planning strategy to ameliorate the negative
environmental impacts of high density. The article presents a comparative study of green open space devel-
opment models and associated use behaviors between Hong Kong and Singapore. The two cities represent two
distinct models: ‘‘Concrete Jungle’’ where green open spaces are separated from built-up areas and ‘‘Garden City’’
where green open spaces are integrated in buildings. The research argues that the two distinct urban develop-
ment models are shaping two types of use behaviors. The detached green open space in Hong Kong engendered
active visits with high intentions and sensations; the integrated green open spaces in Singapore, on the other
hand, caused passive visits with low intentions and sensations. This research draws attention to the over-
whelming greenery in urban development that might attenuate the therapeutic function for healing and
restoration. The spatial arrangement of green space distribution should encourage people’s intentions and
aspirations for an active visit with social or physical activities. The planning and design of open space should also
optimize microclimate conditions (such as shading, cross-ventilation and thermal comfort) to facilitate longer
stays.
URBAN DESIGN International (2017). doi:10.1057/s41289-017-0049-5

Keywords: open space; high-density; use behaviors; Hong Kong; Singapore; therapeutic effects

Introduction number of guidelines for planning and designing

More than half of the world’s population lives and
works in cities (UN, 2014). Urban densification
and livability has become an urgent issue in urban
planning and architectural design. Under such
circumstances, green open space is addressed as
an important solution to bringing nature into
densely built-up environments to ameliorate the
negative environmental impacts (Thompson and
Travlou, 2007; Thwaites et al, 2005). The therapeu-
tic role of green open space in man-made built
environments is well evidenced in the literature
(Kaplan, 1993; Lottrup et al, 2013; Thomsen et al,
2011). Government bodies have published a
open space (CABE, 2009; GLA, 2012; HKSARG,
2007, 2015; MSS, 2015; SGG, 2009). However, how
to bring green open space into high-density urban
areas is still an unsolved question.
Hong Kong and Singapore are two well-known
high-density cities with comparable features in
their urban density (Table 1). Although the two
cities are confronted by similar situations and are
developed into compact urban typologies with
high-density high-rise buildings, the distribution
patterns of buildings and open space in the two
cities are significantly different (Figures 1, 2).
The city of Hong Kong is tightly packed. Based
on a unique mountainous landform, 66.6 per cent

ª 2017 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1357-5317 URBAN DESIGN International

www.palgrave.com/journals
 Xue et al

Table 1: General urban index and climatic feature of Hong Kong and Singapore

Hong Konga Singaporeb

Urban index
Land area 1,104 km2 718.3 km2
Urban area 265 km2 (24 per cent) 518 km2 (72 per cent)
Population 7,240,000 5,469,700
Population density 6,690/km2 7,615/km2
Built-up density 25,700/km2 10,500/km2
GDP per capitac 40,169.6 USD 56,286.8 USD
Climatic features
Mean rainfall 2398.5 mm 2338.5 mm
Mean temperature 23.3C 27C
Mean relative humidity 78 per cent 84.1 per cent
Mean bright sunshine duration 1835.6 h 2040.3 h
Mean daily global solar radiation 12.85 (MJ/m2) 16.26 (MJ/m2)
a
The statistics data were calculated until the end of 2014, Hong Kong Government.
b
The statistics data were calculated until the end of 2014, Singapore Department of Statistics.
c
The data reference from the World Bank data statistics 2010–2014.

Figure 1: Urban natural green and open space distribution in Hong Kong. Referenced from the map of Land Utilization in Hong Kong
developed by the Hong Kong Planning Department (version 2013).

of the total territory of Hong Kong are constituted
of non-constructive land, i.e. 738 km2 of wood-
land, shrubland, grassland and wetland, while
only around 23.92 per cent of the land resources
are built-up area for residential, commercial,
industrial, institutional, transportation, etc.
(HKPD, 2014). The compact urban form in Hong
Kong is packed with diverse skyscrapers and
pencil-shape towers, with mixed land use of
residential, commercial, institutional, and indus-
trial (Lau and Zhang, 2015; Xue, 2016). An
incessant stream of people and groceries along

ª 2017 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1357-5317 URBAN DESIGN International

 The green open space development model and associated use behaviors
Figure 2: Urban parks and waterbodies plan in Singapore. Referenced from URA SPACE developed by the Urban Redevelopment
Authority of Singapore (URA).
its comprehensive street network creates superior
street connectivity and encourages urban walka-
bility for a healthier lifestyle in Hong Kong (Guest
et al, 2013). On the other hand, Hong Kong has
managed to conserve 40 per cent of the land mass
for country parks and habitat areas, which create
a comprehensive network of natural trails and
extensive links to the urban domains (HKSARG,
2014; Ng, 2014). Therefore, Hong Kong is an ultra-
dense ‘‘concrete forest’’ integrated with an acutely
overcrowded urban area and surrounded by an
open, natural green landscape and wildlife habi-
tat (Xue and Manuel, 2001). Hong Kong has a
massive area of ‘‘natural’’ and ‘‘urban fringe’’
typologies of landscapes in suburbs, but very
scarce integrated landscapes in the urban built
area (HKSARG, 2015). The planned urban open
space is limited to 3 per cent (25 ha), and the
majority of Hong Kong residents live and work in
urban environments with little green space (Xue
et al, 2001). The provision of open space in Hong
Kong is a critical element in environmental
planning and urban design and stems from a
basic human need for activities that are essential
to the mental and physical well-being of the
individual and the community as a whole (Tian
et al, 2012).
ª 2017 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1357-5317
Singapore created their national motto as ‘‘a City
in a Garden’’ to promote the liveability of the city
and the quality of life. The Garden City project
launched in 1967 performed as a nation-building
purpose regarding economic and social relevance
for disciplining nature and society (Barnard and
Heng, 2014). Unlike the ultra-dense and high-rise
urban morphology developed in Hong Kong,
Singapore sets an exemplary of a liveable city in
the tropical region with the high-rise buildings
embedded in the urban green landscapes. The City
in a Garden as a national policy has established an
exemplar of vertical green living composed of
high-rise buildings surrounded by green and
nature (Beatley, 2012). The government sets a
number of standards and guidelines for high-rise
greenery design and construction in the high-
density of Southeast Asia (BCA, 2012). In addition,
the government has also set up a specialized
management department, the Skyrise Greenery
Section, to implement the publication of policy-
making and design guidelines. Singapore has built
up 40 ha of new skyrise and urban greenery in
different building typologies of new and existing
buildings (MND, 2013). Based on the Representa-
tive Green Features in Singapore Compact Land Use
Policy, the green surface area in Singapore will be
URBAN DESIGN International
 Xue et al
up to 328.7 km2, around 46.3 per cent of Singa-
pore’s Land Area in 2030 (ULI and CLC, 2013),
which indicates that the skyrise greenery has
already been well developed in different kinds of
land typologies in Singapore. The city-state favors
promoting community greening amid a high-
density built environment to balance the dilemma
between high-density built environment and
livability.
This research is intrigued by the two different
high-dense development models: the ‘‘concrete
forest’’ which separates built-up areas and green
open space for dedicated uses, and the ‘‘garden
city’’ which integrates green open space with
buildings in daily life uses. The research question
is: what are the differences in open space use
behaviors associated with the two different devel-
opment models?
Literature Review
Previous studies in urban green space have
demonstrated that there was a strong association
between physical environments and physical
activities (McCormack et al, 2004; Sallis, 2009). In
the early stages, most studies just focused on the
availability and proximity to facilities of excise and
recreation in urban green space (Dishman, 1982;
Sallis et al, 1990). Following studies assessed the
physical environmental characters/features that
may influence physical activity, especially in the
community and street level (Frumkin, 2003; Sallis
et al, 1997). In recent years, there are growing
studies of validating environmental instruments
which integrated the quality of urban design with
physical activity in relation to healthy lifestyle (Bai
et al, 2013; Cohen et al, 2014). The evidence of
healthy places in terms of physical activity pro-
motion was usually related to accessibility and
attractive natural scenery (Kaplan and Kaplan,
2003; Maller et al, 2005); public transportation and
municipal facilities (Pikora et al, 2002), trails and
bikeways (Brownson et al, 2009), etc.
Bedimo-Rung et al (2005) established a typical
conceptual model which correlated the use pat-
tern, the level of physical activity and the envi-
ronment characteristics of urban green open space,
i.e. features, condition, access, safety, and policies.
Pikora et al (2002) developed a conceptual frame-
work to collate potentially relevant indicators of
public green space associated with physical activ-
ities, which grouped the physical environmental
ª 2017 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1357-5317
attributes and physical activity behaviors into
functionality, safety, aesthetics, and destinations.
Thwaites et al (2005) indicated that successful
restorative urban settings included the issues of
appropriate green space density that people could
experience in everyday life, the preferred size
between intimate to enclosed squares, and the
location connecting with the accessible network of
the urban fabric.
Particularly in high dense urban settings, Wan
and Shen (2015) found that spatial features,
natural attributes, accessibility, and the variety of
facilities could significantly predict both the atti-
tudes and the behavior of urban green space
usage, among which accessibility was most impor-
tant indicator of visit frequency. Facing the scarce
landscape in the high-density built area, users
might be affected by the negative perception of
accessible urban green space in daily life (Lau et al,
2014; Shi et al, 2014). Khew et al (2014) found that
the most important factor driving landscape
choices was aesthetic, with a focus on the visual
hues present in a landscape. A study of residents’
perceptions and expectations of rooftop gardens in
Singapore indicated that the majority of respon-
dents were not motivated to a roof garden visit
due to a gap between the occupants’ awareness,
needs, interests and the use of these kinds of green
spaces (Yuen and Wong, 2005).
Previous studies have drawn attention to the
immediate environment and green features of
open spaces in occupants’ use behaviors and
perceptions. Although these studies have inter-
preted the capacity of specific design variables or
features of open space toward users’ behaviors
and experiences, the impact of larger urban con-
texts was less discussed in environmental evalu-
ation and perceptions. Recent research in urban
green open space calls for more contextualized
understanding of use behaviors and their impacts
on urban planning and design (Zhou, 2014). For
example, Karuppannan and Sivam (2013) found
that the utilisation of urban open space at various
levels of neighborhood significantly differs
between cities because of the local context, such
as culture, social values and climate, instead of just
being due to the physical and functional proper-
ties of open space. This research, therefore, aims to
discover the difference of open space use experi-
ence between two different urban contexts and to
explore the influence of the two open space
development models and their related urban
planning, design and management (Figure 3).
URBAN DESIGN International
 The green open space development model and associated use behaviors

Figure 3: Site plans for selected cases (1–7 in Hong Kong and 8–14 in Singapore).

ª 2017 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1357-5317 URBAN DESIGN International

 Xue et al

Table 2: Questionnaire structure

Domain Category Questions Measurement

Behavior Visit pattern Visit frequency Single-choice from once a year or fewer to more than once a week
and Visit duration Single-choice from a few minutes to more than two hours
Sensation Visit schedule Multiple-choice from early morning to midnight
Personal Spatial preference Multiple-choice the list: forest; canopy; flower beds; flower trails; lawn;
preference waterfront; and others
Elements preference Multiple-choice from the list: plants; water; sculpture; pergola; bench;
chair; and others
Main concern of visit Multiple-choice from the list: time/schedule availability; weather
condition; site facilities/programs; site management and
accessibility
Activity preference Multiple-choice from the list: have a tea break, lunch or supper; hang
out with friends or colleagues; doo physical exercise; just passing by;
and other activities
Healing Beneficial of visual From strongly disagree to strongly agree
sensation connection (VC)
Beneficial of landscape From strongly disagree to strongly agree
aesthetics (LA)
Beneficial of auditory From strongly disagree to strongly agree
perception (AP)
Beneficial of olfactory From strongly disagree to strongly agree
perception (OP)
Beneficial of haptic From strongly disagree to strongly agree
perception (HP)
Beneficial of gustatory From strongly disagree to strongly agree
perception (GP)
Beneficial of thermal comfort From strongly disagree to strongly agree
(TC)
Healing efficacy of green From strongly disagree to strongly agree
space at the workplace
(HE)

Methodology visual connection with nature (Leather et al, 1998),

Structure of measurement
A self-administrated questionnaire is employed to
test the divergence of green space visit phe-
nomenon in Hong Kong and Singapore. Fifteen
user-oriented variables were grouped into three
categories: visit pattern, personal preference, and
healing sensation (Table 2). First, visit pattern
investigated the indicators of visit frequency and
duration of stay, as well as the expectant schedule
of the green space visit (Ries et al, 2009; Sugiyama
and Thompson, 2007). Second, personal preference
queried the diverse choices of green spaces,
landscape elements, the main concern of green
space visits, and activity preference (Bedimo-Rung
et al, 2005). These items described the physical
characteristics of green space in urban settings and
identified the users’ preferences and requirements
of the green space attributes (McCormack et al,
2004). Third, the healing sensation explored the
evaluation of sensorial experience of the green
space performance, which contains the factors of
landscape aesthetics stimulation (Tveit et al, 2006),
auditory stimulation (Hunter et al, 2010), olfactory
stimulation (Malnar and Vodvarka, 2004), haptic
stimulation (Gibson, 1966),and gustatory stimula-
tion (Brewer et al, 2013), as well as the thermal
comfort perception (Givoni, 1998).
Data collection
Different from other open space research which
collected data from residential communities and
neighborhoods, this research collected data from
office buildings. Office workers in urban down-
town areas are one of the most stressed groups.
The high-paced modern society brings immense
pressure and stress to people working and living
in cities (WHO, 2015). People are experiencing
various kinds of work-life conflict, burnout, and
turnover (Chan et al, 2000), leading to mental and
physical illness (Michie, 2002). We should take the
green open space as an advantage to optimize the
therapeutic function of the natural environment

ª 2017 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1357-5317 URBAN DESIGN International

 The green open space development model and associated use behaviors

Table 3: Selected cases in Hong Kong and Singapore

Region Attribute Number Main features of adjacent green space

Hong Commercial 1 Skyrise garden with trees, fountain, and artworks

Kong setting 2 Public plaza with trees, fountain, and artworks
3 Urban central parks with comprehensive programme; harbourfront plaza with trees and
benches
4 Public playground with basketball court, fitness facilities and children’ s playground
Institutional 5 Water garden with trees and lily pond; public plaza with bench and corridor
setting 6 Podium garden with greenery and bench; green courtyard with water pool
7 Podium garden with trees and benches
Singapore Commercial 8 Skyrise deck with seats; green atrium with green wall
setting 9 Street park with trees and pathway; street square with fitness facilities
10 Skyrise garden with urban farming; green courtyard with rainforest
11 Podium garden with trees, benches, and children’s playground; green courtyard with green
wall and trees
Institutional 12 Green boulevard with trees and hillside; green courtyard with theme garden
setting 13 Skyrise garden with urban farming; green courtyard with green wall
14 Roof garden with lawn and benches; green courtyard with large tree canopy and
playground

Figure 4: Typical open space surrounded by the office buildings in Hong Kong, (a) site photo, (b) sky view.

and to maximize the healing perception between
human and nature. Fourteen office buildings were
investigated in the cross-sectional questionnaire
survey (Table 3): seven in Hong Kong and seven
in Singapore. The buildings were anonymous in
this article due to research ethics and consent
agreement signed for publication. The target cases
are located in the high-rise high-density urban
context adjacent to a green space or an open area.
The investigated open space in Hong Kong is
mainly street parks or ground plazas, which are
detached from the building structures; while the
open spaces surveyed in Singapore are integrated
with the building structures, such as sky gardens,
roof terraces and green atria (Figures 4, 5). The
selected green open spaces represent three main
spatial configurations and site features in the
subtropical and tropical Asian context: (1) street
park and/or plaza (the urban park or street plaza
adjacent to the target buildings at the ground
level, connected by pedestrian sidewalks); (2)
skyrise gardens integrated with buildings (roof
gardens integrated with building complexes with-
out noticeable shading canopies); and (3) court-
yards enclosed by buildings (courtyards enclosed
by building complexes and semi-open porches or
colonnades attached to the external walls).
A total of 413 office workers completed the
survey. The criteria for selecting participants were
limited to those occupants who work daily for
eight hours or above and have been in the same
workplace for more than six months. The demo-
graphic profiles of the participants are summa-
rized in Table 4. It has been verified that the
gender, self-reported health status, and the work-
place attribute are similar between the two cities.
In particular, the number of males (47.7 per cent)
and females (52.3 per cent) are approximately

ª 2017 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1357-5317 URBAN DESIGN International

 Xue et al

Figure 5: Typical open space integrated in office buildings in Singapore, (a) site photo, (b) sky view.

Table 4: Demographic profiles of participants (n = 413)

Demographic information Overall all (n= 413) Hong Kong group (n = 203) Singapore group (n = 210)

Gender
Male 197 47.7 per cent 104 51.2 per cent 93 44.3 per cent
Female 216 52.3 per cent 99 48.8 per cent 117 55.7 per cent
Age
25 and below 86 20.8 per cent 48 23.6 per cent 38 18.1 per cent
26–40 240 58.1 per cent 134 66.0 per cent 106 50.5 per cent
41–60 80 19.4 per cent 19 9.4 per cent 61 29.0 per cent
61 and above 7 1.7 per cent 2 1.0 per cent 5 2.4 per cent
Education level
Secondary school 23 5.6 per cent 1 0.5 per cent 22 10.5 per cent
College/academy 130 31.5 per cent 36 17.7 per cent 94 44.8 per cent
Postgraduate 260 63.0 per cent 166 81.8 per cent 94 44.8 per cent
Self-reported health status
Healthy 329 79.7 per cent 161 79.3 per cent 168 80.0 per cent
Neutral 76 18.4 per cent 37 18.2 per cent 39 18.6 per cent
Unhealthy 8 1.9 per cent 5 2.5 per cent 3 1.4 per cent
Workplace attribute
Commercial setting 211 51.1 per cent 101 49.8 per cent 110 52.4 per cent
Institutional setting 202 48.9 per cent 102 50.2 per cent 100 47.6 per cent
Natural view from the work desk
Yes 195 47.2 per cent 85 41.9 per cent 110 52.4 per cent
No 218 52.8 per cent 118 58.1 per cent 100 47.6 per cent

equal, 79.7 per cent of self-reported health status
are healthy, and the workplace attributes between
commercial settings (51.1 per cent) and institu-
tional settings (48.9 per cent) are also comparable.
Analysis
Comparison of visit pattern
The visit frequency, duration and schedule
between Hong Kong and Singapore are presented
in Table 5. Kruskal–Wallis and t tests have been
conducted to examine the differences between the
two groups (Table 6). Respondents from the two
cities reported the diverse frequency of green
space visits. More participants in Singapore visited
more than once a week. However, the divergence
of visit frequency is not significantly remarkable.
Additionally, the stay duration in outdoor green
spaces from the Hong Kong group is significantly
longer than those from the Singapore group, with
59.1 per cent of Hong Kong participants staying
more than one hour each time while 51.40 per cent
of Singapore participants stayed for only a few
minutes. Furthermore, participants from Singa-
pore reported a higher chance of visiting an
outdoor green space in the early morning while
more from Hong Kong tended to visit during the
afternoon in work breaks.

ª 2017 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1357-5317 URBAN DESIGN International

 The green open space development model and associated use behaviors

Table 5: The visit pattern

Visit pattern Hong Kong (per cent) Singapore (per cent) Total (per cent)

Visit frequency
More than once a week 35.50 44.80 40.20
Once a week 33.00 20.50 26.60
Once a month 19.70 10.50 15.00
Several times a year 9.40 9.50 9.40
Once a year or fewer 2.50 14.80 8.70
Stay duration
More than two hours 21.20 6.20 13.60
One to two hours 37.90 7.10 22.30
Half to one hour 21.20 14.80 17.90
Half hour 8.40 20.50 14.50
A few minutes 11.30 51.40 31.70
Visit schedule
Early morning 9.85 23.81 16.95
Morning to mid-afternoon 31.53 29.52 30.51
Afternoon 63.05 43.81 53.27
Evening to midnight 29.06 33.81 31.48

Table 6: Comparison of visit pattern

Indicator Group Mean SD t test

Signif. (2-tailed) Mean diff.

a
Visit frequency Hong Kong 3.90 1.069 0.141 0.187
Singapore 3.71 1.479
Stay durationb Hong Kong 3.49 1.236 0.000*** 1.531
Singapore 1.96 1.229
Nonparametric analysis Kruskal–Wallis test

Asymp. signif. Chi square

c
Visit schedule Early morning Hong Kong 0.10 0.299 0.000*** 14.250
Singapore 0.24 0.427
Morning to noon Hong Kong 0.32 0.466 0.659 0.195
Singapore 0.30 0.457
Afternoon Hong Kong 0.63 0.484 0.000*** 15.320
Singapore 0.44 0.497
Evening to midnight Hong Kong 0.29 0.455 0.300 1.075
Singapore 0.34 0.474
*Significant at the .05 level (2-tailed).
**Significant at the .01 level (2-tailed).
***Significant at the .001 level (2-tailed).
a
1 = Once a year or fewer, 2 = several times a year, 3 = once a month, 4 = once a week, 5 = several times a week.
b
1 = Only a few minutes, 2 = around half-hour, 3 = half to one hour, 4 = one to two hours, 5 = more than two hours.
c
0 = no, 1 = yes.

Comparison of personal preference
The personal preferences of place, element, visit
concern, and outdoor activities in the green space of
the workplace between the Hong Kong group and
the Singapore group are presented in Figure 6. The
Kruskal–Wallis Test was conducted to examine the
differences between the nonparametric indicators
(Table 7). The results indicate that there are signif-
icant divergences in the items of place preference,
visit concern, and activity preference. However, the
preference of landscape elements in Hong Kong
and Singapore are analogous: natural plants were
most loved while man-made sculptures or pergolas
were least preferred. The spaces of forest/tree
canopy and lawn were more preferred by the
Hong Kong respondents, while the Singapore
participants were fonder of the waterfront. Also,
Hong Kong respondents were concerned about the
availability of time and weather conditions more

ª 2017 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1357-5317 URBAN DESIGN International

 Xue et al
Figure 6: Personal preferences, (a) places, (b) concerns, (c) elements, (d) activities.
than those from Singapore. Both groups considered
that site facilities were least important. Significantly
more respondents in Hong Kong preferred to
conduct social activities and physical exercise in
outdoor green spaces, while many more respon-
dents from Singapore just passed by.
Comparison of healing sensation
The sensorial experience towards outdoor green
space is presented in Table 8. The results indicate
that there are significant divergences in the items of
visual connection with nature, landscape aesthetics
sensation, and auditory sensation, as well as ther-
mal sensation, between the evaluations from the
Hong Kong group and Singapore group. Specifi-
cally, the Hong Kong respondents expressed higher
evaluations on visual connections with nature,
landscape aesthetics, and auditory stimulation from
the natural environment than those from Singapore.
However, participants from Singapore considered
thermal comfort in outdoor spaces is more signifi-
cant for human health than the respondents from
the Hong Kong group. Both groups showed lower
evaluations of personal sensation of smell, touch,
and taste from the green space environment.
ª 2017 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1357-5317
Furthermore, compared with the Singapore respon-
dents, respondents from Hong Kong revealed
significantly higher scores on the healing efficacy
of the adjacent green spaces in the workplace.
In sum, the divergence of visit behavior and
sensorial experience reflected the spatial pattern
and climatic influence in different regions. First,
office workers in Singapore reported a higher
frequency of green space visits, but more than half
of selected office workers in Singapore selected to
just pass by the green space or stay for a few
minutes. Office workers from Hong Kong reported
a lower frequency of green space visits but longer
stay durations and higher preferences for tea or
lunch breaks, social engagement, and physical
exercise. Second, Hong Kong office workers were
more satisfied with the healing sensation of the
outdoor green space, and more preferred natural
spaces than those from Singapore.
Discussion
Visit pattern
This research investigated the visit pattern of
green open spaces in workplace environments in
URBAN DESIGN International
 The green open space development model and associated use behaviors

Table 7: Comparison of personal preferences

Indicator Group Mean SD Kruskal–Wallis test

Asymp. signif. Chi square

a
Spatial preference
Forest or canopy Hong Kong 0.77 0.420 0.000*** 21.567
Singapore 0.56 0.498
Flower beds or garden Hong Kong 0.46 0.500 0.513 0.427
Singapore 0.50 0.501
Lawn Hong Kong 0.49 0.501 0.010** 6.671
Singapore 0.36 0.482
Waterfront Hong Kong 0.36 0.481 0.005** 7.735
Singapore 0.50 0.501
Spatial preferencea
Plants Hong Kong 0.84 0.370 0.911 0.013
Singapore 0.83 0.374
Water Hong Kong 0.62 0.486 0.667 0.185
Singapore 0.60 0.491
Sculpture or pergola Hong Kong 0.12 0.329 0.061 3.519
Singapore 0.19 0.394
Bench or chair Hong Kong 0.46 0.500 0.256 1.292
Singapore 0.52 0.501
Main concerna
Time Hong Kong 0.54 0.500 0.028* 4.844
Singapore 0.43 0.496
Weather Hong Kong 0.73 0.446 0.029* 4.763
Singapore 0.63 0.484
Facilities Hong Kong 0.18 0.387 0.052 3.780
Singapore 0.11 0.319
Accessibility Hong Kong 0.36 0.481 0.164 1.939
Singapore 0.30 0.457
Activity preferencea
Tea or lunch break Hong Kong 0.29 0.453 0.597 0.279
Singapore 0.31 0.463
Sociality Hong Kong 0.67 0.471 0.000*** 39.112
Singapore 0.36 0.482
Physical exercise Hong Kong 0.30 0.460 0.000*** 26.012
Singapore 0.10 0.301
Pass by Hong Kong 0.34 0.476 0.000*** 27.888
Singapore 0.60 0.490

*Significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

* Significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
***Significant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed).
a
1 = yes; 0 = no.

Hong Kong and Singapore. The comparison of
visit frequency echoed the findings from previous
studies in neighborhood environments. For exam-
ple, Bai et al (2013) conducted a survey of
perceived park quality and physical activity and
health in Kansas, which identified that 45 per cent
of participants spent around 2.5 h per week on
park-based physical activities and the greater
perceptions of parks were positively associated
with higher levels of overall physical activities.
Cohen et al (2014) found in Los Angeles that the
attractive and safe pocket parks may involve 70
per cent of the respondents for daily physical
activity compared with those in the playground.
Another study in Baltimore also verified that
perceptions of greater park availability were asso-
ciated with a 2.97 times greater odds of using
parks (Ries et al, 2009). On the other hand, there is
no evidence supportive of the correlation between
green open space distributions and the pattern of
stay durations in this research. Specifically,
although the public green space in Singapore is
well accessible and elicits frequent visits, it does
not necessarily engender long stays in these
spaces. In contrast, Hong Kong participants stay
significantly longer than those from Singapore.
Besides spatial distribution and accessibility, there
are more issues about attracting users to stay

ª 2017 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1357-5317 URBAN DESIGN International

 Xue et al

Table 8: Comparison of sensorial experience

Sensorial experiencea Group Mean SD t tests

Signif. (2-tailed) Mean diff.

Visual connection Hong Kong 4.54 0.538 0.009** 0.142

Singapore 4.40 0.563
Landscape aesthetics Hong Kong 4.48 0.557 0.019* 0.130
Singapore 4.35 0.570
Auditory sensation Hong Kong 4.38 0.652 0.008** 0.175
Singapore 4.20 0.685
Olfactory sensation Hong Kong 4.02 0.817 0.810 -0.018
Singapore 4.04 0.721
Haptic sensation Hong Kong 4.05 0.772 0.078 0.135
Singapore 3.92 0.781
Gustatory sensation Hong Kong 4.06 0.765 0.321 0.074
Singapore 3.99 0.738
Thermal sensation Hong Kong 3.99 0.774 0.000*** -0.281
Singapore 4.27 0.695
Healing efficacy Hong Kong 4.33 0.633 0.004** 0.182
Singapore 4.15 0.658

*Significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

**Significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
***Significant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed).
a
1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree.

longer, such as programs and facilities, mainte-
nance and safety, as well as microclimate
conditions.
Personal preference
Previous studies have separately investigated
users’ behaviors and experiences in urban open
space in Hong Kong and Singapore and empha-
sized the capacity of the immediate environment
and green features. In Hong Kong, the result from
this research is generally consistent with the study
of Wan and Shen (2015) that accessibility is a key
concern and significant factor influencing the
frequency of green space visits. The research
argued that the intentional and sensational use
behaviors found among participants from Hong
Kong was due to the scarcity of green open spaces
in dense urban areas, which echoed the findings
from Jim and Chan (2016) and Lo and Jim (2012)
which addressed the strong expectation of Hong
Kong people for greenery and nature. In Singa-
pore, the result in this study demonstrated that the
weather conditions in the tropical region were
very important for green space visits, which
helped to explain the study by Yuen and Wong
(2005) which showed that the uncomfortable ther-
mal comfort of microclimate conditions in rooftop
gardens could be an encumbrance for users
visiting. The comparison of the urban context of
the environmental evaluations and perceptions in
Hong Kong and Singapore was less discussed in
previous studies; this study filled in this research
gap. In particular, the research indicates that the
office occupants from Hong Kong revealed signif-
icantly higher preferences and evaluations of
outdoor green space than those from Singapore.
The results suggested that the healing perfor-
mance and therapeutic function of green space in
the ‘‘Garden City’’ of Singapore were not neces-
sarily higher than those in the ‘‘Concrete Jungle’’ of
Hong Kong.
Healing sensation
This research transformed the implication of
‘‘healing space’’ from the original healing or
restorative gardens towards a wider public realm,
which expanded the focus from specific hospital or
healthcare settings towards a generalized every-
day built environment. Specifically, this research
addressed the point that the healing sensation is
supported by a multi-sensory stimulation that
enables the improvement of general psychological
well-being. Among the seven healing sensations
investigated in this research, those directly per-
ceived from the eyes and ears are more appreci-
ated in both Hong Kong and Singapore, such as

ª 2017 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1357-5317 URBAN DESIGN International

 The green open space development model and associated use behaviors
visual connection with nature, landscape aesthet-
ics, and auditory sensations. This supports the
findings of those quasi-homothetic studies show-
ing that views of nature influenced individuals’
psychological well-being (Schweitzer et al, 2004).
Natural views in workplace environments should
become fundamental criteria for design practice in
the high-density urban context, because they may
make significant contributions to eye stress allevi-
ation, especially for computer-based workers who
suffer from eye strain or dry eye due to extended
periods of time spent looking at their computers.
Auditory stimulation is a valued equipollent from
the survey feedbacks, which echoes findings from
Alvarsson et al (2010) that physiological recovery
of sympathetic activation is 37 per cent faster
during exposure to pleasant nature sounds than to
less pleasant noise of similar levels after psycho-
logical stress.
Urban morphology and climatology
In sum, the divergence of green space use behav-
iors could be accounted for by the divergence of
urban morphology and climatic characteristics of
the two cities. Hong Kong is an ultra-dense
‘‘concrete forest’’ that integrates an acutely over-
crowded urban area with the surrounding open
and natural green landscape and wildlife habitat.
Singapore, on the other hand, is ‘‘a city in a
garden’’, set to be an exemplary of a livable city in
the tropical region with the high-rise buildings
embedded in the urban natural landscape. Based
on the environmental differences between the two
cities, statistically, Hong Kong participants
revealed a significantly higher evaluation of heal-
ing efficacy in the outdoor green space in daily life
than the sample participants in Singapore. They
also cherished the experience of visual connections
with nature, landscape aesthetics and auditory
sensations from the natural environment more
highly than those participants from Singapore.
The divergence of climatic characteristics in
Hong Kong and Singapore probably explains the
difference in green open space evaluations
between the two cities. The personal sentiment
and the thermal comfort evaluation reveal the
main circumstances of the climatic-oriented influ-
ence. In general, Singapore participants are more
concerned about thermal comfort in outdoor
spaces than those in Hong Kong. The daytime
temperature in the tropical region is relatively
ª 2017 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1357-5317
high (above 30C) and the range of monthly mean
temperature is less than 2C in long-term climate
measurements (MSS, 2015). However, the annual
temperature in the sub-tropical region fluctuates in
the four seasons and the range of monthly mean
temperature is up to 12.5C (Lam et al, 2004).
These climatic characteristics in both cities could
significantly restrict the user behaviors and per-
ceptions of the outdoor environment. Based on the
data analysis, Singapore participants reported
greater visit preference in the early morning while
Hong Kong participants prefer to visit in the
afternoon. The duration of stay of participants
from Hong Kong is significantly longer than those
from Singapore. Due to the divergence of daily
temperature, participants from Hong Kong
reported higher preference in hanging out with
friends/colleagues and conducting physical exer-
cise than the Singapore groups. Many more
respondents from Singapore preferred to stay
outside for only a few minutes or were just
passing by. Therefore, the preference for outdoor
activities is also relevant to climatic and microcli-
mate conditions.
Conclusion
Research summary
Most previous research investigated open space
and associated users’ activities in neighborhood
environments, while this research addresses this
topic in urban workplace settings where green
space could generate therapeutic effects for
stressed office workers. More importantly, this
research fills in the gap of understanding open
space uses in urban contexts and pushing the
research of open space uses beyond immediate
environmental factors. Specifically, this research
compares Hong Kong and Singapore. Hong Kong
is a typical model of a ‘‘Concrete Jungle’’ where
ultra-density high-rise buildings and acute over-
crowding human activities occupy the limited
built-up area. The street parks or ground plazas in
Hong Kong are often centralized and detached
from the office buildings, which require active
visits with purposes and intentions. Singapore, on
the other hand, has established an exemplary of ‘‘a
City in a Garden’’ which has integrated nature
with buildings in daily life. Most green open
spaces in Singapore are designed to be integrated
with building structures in daily commute
URBAN DESIGN International
 Xue et al
routines. Based on this research, office workers
from the ‘‘Concrete Jungle’’ cherish and are thirsty
for public open spaces; their sensation about green
open space is much stronger than those from the
‘‘Garden City’’, Singapore. Therefore, the outdoor
green spaces perform as compensation for the
office workers from the inferior urban environ-
ment in Hong Kong.
Design implications
The research has two important implications for
planning and designing open spaces in high-
density cities in the hot humid Asian context:
spatial enclosure and microclimates.
First, the design pattern of spatial enclosure
significantly enhances the probability of visual
connection with nature or being in nature. A
combination of building blocks connected through
a series of courtyards, backyards, theme gardens,
etc., is recommended to maximize the association
and interrelation between the outdoor green space
and indoor work environment. However, appro-
priate separation and isolation could be used to
create more private, tranquil open space in dense
urban areas.
Second, exposure to direct solar radiation will
intensively affect the personal perception of out-
door green spaces in tropical and subtropical
Asian context. Due to spatial and technical limi-
tations, it is difficult to implement big trees with
large canopies in the high-rise buildings. Further-
more, grassland or parterre above the ground level
does not provide sufficient shade from the intense
solar radiation. Thus, sufficient shading facilities
are an essential strategy to create comfortable mi-
croclimates for social uses.
Policy implications
Many countries and cities are setting green space
per capita or overall green space coverage as a
sustainable planning and design strategy. For
example, Australia launched 202020Vision as a
national campaign to increase urban green space
in Australia by 20 per cent by 2020 (Miller and
Peacock, 2015). Numerous green walls, green
roofs, green podiums and green courtyards are
being planned and implemented. This research
draws the attention to the overwhelming greenery
in urban development that might attenuate the
therapeutic function for healing and restoration.
ª 2017 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1357-5317
The spatial arrangement of green space distribu-
tion should encourage people’s intentions and
aspirations for an active green space visit with
purposes and social or physical activities, instead
of a passive visit without intentions and aspira-
tions. The planning and design of open spaces
should also optimize microclimate conditions
(such as shading, cross-ventilation and thermal
comfort) to facilitate longer stays or visits for their
therapeutic effects. The lesson from Hong Kong
and Singapore calls for a balanced model to
selectively bring green open spaces into dense
built environments for optimal benefits for users.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the School of
Design and Environment in NUS for granting the
Academic Visitor Fellowship and providing the
opportunity to collect raw data in Singapore.
Thanks are also due to Griffith University Inter-
national Travel Fellowship and New Researcher
Grants. The authors also gratefully acknowledge
the Research and Conference Grants from the
University of Hong Kong that made the case
studies and field trips possible. Special thanks to
HKU Estates Office, NUS Office of Estate Devel-
opment and other anonymous institutions who
facilitated the research investigation in Hong Kong
and Singapore. The authors also like to thank the
anonymous reviewers who provided helpful
advice to revise this article.
Authors contribution All authors equally con-
tribute to this paper.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest There is no conflict of
interest.
References
Alvarsson, J.J., Wiens, S. and Nilsson, M.E. (2010) Stress
recovery during exposure to nature sound and environmen-
tal noise. International Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health 7: 1036–1046.
Bai, H., Wilhelm Stanis, S.A., Kaczynski, A.T. and Besenyi,
G.M. (2013) Perceptions of neighborhood park quality:
Associations with physical activity and body mass index.
Annals of Behavioral Medicine 45: 39–48.
URBAN DESIGN International
 The green open space development model and associated use behaviors
Barnard, T.P. and Heng, C. (2014) A City in a Garden. In: T.P.
Barnard (ed.), Nature Contained: Environmental Histories of
Singapore. Singapore: NUS, pp. 281–306.
BCA. (2012) BCA Green Mark Certification Standard for New
Buildings. Singapore: Building and Construction Authority.
Beatley, T. (2012) Singapore: How to grow a high-rise city in a
garden. Site Lines 8: 14–17.
Bedimo-Rung, A.L., Mowen, A.J. and Cohen, D.A. (2005) The
significance of parks to physical activity and public health: A
conceptual model. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 28:
159–168.
Brewer, J.M., Shavit, A.Y., Shepard, T.G., Veldhuizen, M.G.,
Parikh, R. and Marks, L.E. (2013) Identification of gustatory–
olfactory flavor mixtures: Effects of linguistic labeling.
Chemical Senses 38: 305–313.
Brownson, R.C., Hoehner, C.M., Day, K., Forsyth, A. and Sallis,
J.F. (2009) Measuring the built environment for physical
activity: State of the science. American Journal of Preventive
Medicine 36: S99–S123.
CABE. (2009) Open space strategies: Best Practice Guidance.
London: Commission for Architecture and the Built
Environment.
Cohen, D.A., Marsh, T., Williamson, S., Han, B., Derose, K.P.,
Golinelli, D. and McKenzie, T.L. (2014) The potential for
pocket parks to increase physical activity. American Journal of
Health Promotion 28: S19–S26.
Chan, K.B., Lai, G., Ko, Y.C. and Boey, K.W. (2000) Work stress
among six professional groups: the Singapore experience.
Social Science & Medicine 50: 1415–1432.
Dishman, R.K. (1982) Compliance/adherence in health-related
exercise. Health Psychology 1: 237–267.
Frumkin, H. (2003) Healthy places: Exploring the evidence.
American Journal of Public Health 93: 1451–1456.
Gibson, J.J. (1966) The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems.
Connecticut: Houghton Mifflin.
Givoni, B. (1998) Climate Considerations in Building and Urban
Design New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
GLA. (2012) Green Infrastructure and Open Environments: The All
London Green Grid. London: Greater London Authority.
Guest, C., Ricciardi, W., Kawachi, I. and Lang, I. (2013) Oxford
Handbook of Public Health Practice. New York: Oxford
University Press.
HKPD. (2014) Land Utilization in Hong Kong 2014. Hong Kong:
Hong Kong Planning Department.
HKSARG. (2007) Hong Kong 2030: Planning Vision and
Strategy–Strategic Environmental Assessment Executive
Summary. In Hong Kong 2030: Planning Vision and Strategy.
Hong Kong: Planning Department, pp. 31.
HKSARG. (2014) Fact Sheet—Country Parks and Conservation.
Hong Kong: HKSARG.
HKSARG. (2015) Recreation, Open Space and Greening. Hong
Kong: HKSARG.
Hunter, M.D., Eickhoff, S.B., Pheasant, R.J., Douglas, M.J.,
Watts, G.R., Farrow, T.F.D., Hyland, D., Kang, J., Wilkinson,
I.D., Horoshenkov, K.V. and Woodruff, P.W.R. (2010) The
state of tranquility: Subjective perception is shaped by
contextual modulation of auditory connectivity. NeuroImage
53: 611–618.
Jim, C.Y. and Chan, M.W.H. (2016) Urban greenspace delivery
in Hong Kong: Spatial-institutional limitations and solutions.
Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 18: 65–85.
Kaplan, R. (1993) The role of nature in the context of the
workplace. Landscape and Urban Planning 26: 193–201.
ª 2017 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1357-5317
Kaplan, S. and Kaplan, R. (2003) Health, supportive environ-
ments, and the Reasonable Person Model. American Journal of
Public Health 93: 1484–1489.
Karuppannan, S. and Sivam, A. (2013) Comparative analysis of
utilisation of open space at neighborhood level in three
Asian cities: Singapore, Delhi and Kuala Lumpur. Urban
Design International 18: 145–164.
Khew, J.Y.T., Yokohari, M. and Tanaka, T. (2014) Public
perceptions of nature and landscape preference in Singa-
pore. Human Ecology 42: 979–988.
Lam, K.S., Hung, W.T. and Fung, W.Y. (2004) Provision of
Service for Characterizing the Climate Change Impact in Hong
Kong. Hong Kong: Department of Civil & Structural Engi-
neering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
Lau, S.S.Y., Gou, Z. and Liu, Y. (2014) Healthy campus by open
space design: Approaches and guidelines. Frontiers of Archi-
tectural Research 3:452-467.
Lau, S.S.Y. and Zhang, Q. (2015) Genesis of a vertical city in
Hong Kong. International Journal of High-Rise Buildings 4:
117–125.
Leather, P., Pyrgas, M., Beale, D. and Lawrence, C. (1998)
Windows in the workplace: Sunlight, view, and occupa-
tional stress. Environment and Behavior 30: 739–762.
Lo, A.Y.H. and Jim, C.Y. (2012) Citizen attitude and expectation
towards greenspace provision in compact urban milieu. Land
Use Policy 29: 577–586.
Lottrup, L., Grahn, P. and Stigsdotter, U.K. (2013) Workplace
greenery and perceived level of stress: Benefits of access to a
green outdoor environment at the workplace. Landscape and
Urban Planning 110: 5–11.
Maller, C., Townsend, M., Pryor, A., Brown, P. and Leger, L.S.
(2005) Healthy Nature healthy people: ‘‘contact with nature’’
as an upstream health promotion intervention for popula-
tions. Health Promotion International 21: 45–54.
Malnar, J.M. and Vodvarka, F. (2004) Sensory Design. Min-
neapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
McCormack, G., Giles-Corti, B., Lange, A., Smith, T., Martin, K.
and Pikora, T.J. (2004) An update of recent evidence of the
relationship between objective and self-report measures of
the physical environment and physical activity behaviours.
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport 7: 81–92.
Michie, S. (2002) Causes and management of stress at work.
Occupational and Environmental Medicine 59: 67–72.
Miller, J. and Peacock, B. (2015) The 202020 Vision Plan for
Australia. http://202020vision.com.au/media/41955/2020
20visionplan.pdf, accessed 1 November 2016.
MND. (2013) Land Use Plan to Support Singapore’s Future
Population. Singapore: Ministry of National Development.
MSS. (2015) Singapore’s Second National Climate Change Study
Climate Projections to 2100. Singapore: Centre for Climate
Research Singapore.
NG, J. (2014) Compact Sustainability and Liveability in Hong
Kong. In: World Sustainable Building 2014 Conference (pp.
11–24). Barcelona WSB14 Committee.
Pikora, T.J., Bull, F.C.L., Jamrozik, K., Knuiman, M., Giles-
Corti, B. and Donovan, R.J. (2002) Developing a reliable
audit instrument to measure the physical environment for
physical activity. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 23:
187–194.
Ries, A.V., Voorhees, C.C., Roche, K.M., Gittelsohn, J., Yan, A.F.
and Astone, N.M. (2009) A quantitative examination of park
characteristics related to park use and physical activity
among urban youth. Journal of Adolescent Health 45: S64–S70.
URBAN DESIGN International
 Xue et al
Sallis, J.F. (2009) Measuring physical activity environments: A
brief history. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 36: S86–
S92.
Sallis, J.F., Hovell, M.F., Hofstetter, C.R., Elder, J.P., Hackley, M.,
Caspersen, C. J. and Powell K.E. (1990) Distance between
homes and exercise facilities related to frequency of exercise
among San Diego Residents. Public Health Reports 105:179–185.
Sallis, J.F., Johnson, M.F., Calfas, K.J., Caparosa, S. and Nichols,
J.F. (1997) Assessing perceived physical environmental
variables that may influence physical activity. Research
Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 68: 345–351.
Schweitzer, M., Gilpin, L. and Frampton, S. (2004) Healing
spaces: Elements of environmental design that make an
impact on health. Journal of Alternative & Complementary
Medicine 10: S71–S83.
SGG. (2009) A Lively and Liveable Singapore: Strategies for
Sustainable Growth. Singapore: Ministry of the Environment
and Water Resources and Ministry of National
Development.
Shi, S., Gou, Z. and Chen, L.H.C. (2014) How does enclosure
influence environmental preferences? A cognitive study on
urban public open spaces in Hong Kong. Sustainable Cities
and Society 13: 148–156.
Sugiyama, T. and Thompson, C.W. (2007) Measuring the
quality of the outdoor environment relevant to older
people’s lives. In C.W. Thompson and P. Travlou (eds.),
Open Space: People Space. London, New York: Taylor and
Francis, pp. 153–162.
Thompson, C.W. and Travlou, P. (2007) Open Space: People
Space. London; New York: Taylor and Francis.
Thomsen, J.D., Sønderstrup-Andersen, H.K.H. and Ller, R.M.
(2011) People–plant relationships in an office workplace:
Perceived benefits for the workplace and employees HortS-
cience 46: 744–752.
Thwaites, K., Helleur, E. and Simkins, I.M. (2005) Restorative
urban open space: Exploring the spatial configuration of
ª 2017 Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 1357-5317
View publication stats
human emotional fulfilment in urban open space. Landscape
Research 30: 525–547.
Tian, Y., Jim, C.Y. and Tao, Y. (2012) Challenges and strategies
for greening the compact city of Hong Kong. Journal of Urban
Planning & Development 138: 101–109.
Tveit, M., Ode, Å. and Fry, G. (2006) Key concepts in a
framework for analysing visual landscape character. Land-
scape Research 31: 229–255.
ULI and CLC. (2013) 10 Principles for Liveable High-Density
Cities: Lessons from Singapore. Singapore: Centre for Liveable
Cities and Urban Land Institute..
UN. (2014) World Urbanization Prospects: The 2014 Revision. New
York: United Nations..
Wan, C. and Shen, G.Q. (2015) Salient attributes of urban green
spaces in high density cities: The case of Hong Kong. Habitat
International 49: 92–99.
WHO (2015) Workplace health promotion. In WHO (ed.)
Occupational Health. Geneva: WHO.
Xue, C.Q. (2016) Hong Kong Architecture 1945–2015: From
Colonial to Global. Singapore: Springer.
Xue, C. Q.L., Manuel, K.K. and Chung, R.H.Y. (2001) Public
space in the old derelict city area—a case study of Mong
Kok, Hong Kong. Urban Design International 6:15–31.
Xue, C.Q.L. and Manuel, K.K.K. (2001) The quest for better
public space: a critical review of urban Hong Kong. In: P.
Miao (ed.), Public places of Asia Pacific countries: current issues
and strategies. Dordrecht: Kluwer., pp. 171–190.
Yuen, B. and Wong, N.H. (2005) Resident perceptions and
expectations of rooftop gardens in Singapore. Landscape and
Urban Planning 73: 263–276.
Zhou, P. (2014) A socio-economic-cultural exploration on open
space form and everyday activities in Danwei: A case study
of Jingmian compound, Beijing. Urban Design International
19: 22–37.
URBAN DESIGN International