Habitat International 134 (2023) 102780

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Habitat International
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/habitatint

Elderly’s intention and use behavior of urban parks: Planned

behavior perspective
Siqiang Wang a, Esther Hiu Kwan Yung a, *, Wadu Mesthrige Jayantha b, Edwin Hon Wan Chan a
a
Department of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China
b
School of Property, Construction and Project Management, RMIT University, Australia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: An urban park is a vital environment that promotes the elderly’s physical, social and psychological health.
Urban park Numerous studies have been conducted to determine the influencing factors that could encourage the elderly’s
Intention usage of urban parks. However, little attention has been paid to elderly’s intention of using urban parks. This
Use behavior
study applies the theory of planned behavior (TPB) to understand the relationship between elderly’s intentions of
Elderly
Theory of planned behavior
using urban park and use behavior. According to the nature of the different activity types elderly people intended
to do in urban parks, three sub-models are built based on the original TPB model, which are social, enjoyment
and physical activity-based models. These models explore the influencing factors that may affect elderly’s use of
urban park under the three different intentions. This study employed focus group meetings and questionnaire
surveys (N = 537) to collect data and applied structural equation modelling to test the proposed social, enjoy­
ment and physical activity-based models. In addition, this study found that elderly’s use behavior of public parks
was significantly affected by their intention of using public parks. The use behavior was also directly associated
with intrapersonal constraints (degree of liking) and structural constraint variables (available leisure time and
physical accessibility). Meanwhile, use behavior is indirectly associated with intrapersonal constraint variables
(elderly’s perception to urban park) and interpersonal constraints (conflict of use with other groups) through the
influence of their intentions of using public parks. Furthermore, physical accessibility may affect elderly’s use
behavior, but it has no effect on elderly’s intention of using urban parks. The findings and proposed models
provide theoretical and practical contributions to better understand elderly’s use behavior of urban park to
encourage healthy ageing in an urban dense city.

1. Introduction
The World Health Organization (WHO) recognized that urban park, a
type of open space, is an important environment that contributes to
active aging and aging in place (WHO, 2007). Previous studies have
demonstrated that urban parks can promote elderly’s physical and social
health, such as increase physical activity level (Coombes et al., 2010),
enhance social connection and sense of community (Kweon et al., 1998)
and improve elderly’s quality of life (Sugiyama et al., 2009). Thus,
elderly people must be encouraged to use urban parks, which can
improve their physical and social health status and their ability of aging
in place.
Previous studies have identified a variety of influencing factors that
could affect people’s use pattern of urban park, such as accessibility
(Arnberger et al., 2017), landscape (Wen et al., 2018), facility (Kac­
zynski, 2010), social environment (Loukaitou-Sideris et al., 2016),
physical health status (Aspinall et al., 2010), attitude (Wang, Brown,
Liu, & Mateo-Babiano, 2015) and personal characteristics (Sugiyama
et al., 2008). However, most of these studies are limited to exploring the
relationship between these factors and people’s usage of urban park.
Only a few studies provide a systematical basis on established theories
and models. Zhang and Tan (2019) emphasized the importance of
exploring the underlying causes affecting urban park use behavior
rather than study urban park use pattern, which could provide con­
ceptual and practical implications to urban park planning.
Theory of planned behavior (TPB), which was originally developed
by Ajzen (1985), has been regarded as one of the widely used and
influential models to explain and to some extent, to predict human

* Corresponding author. ZN725, North Tower, 7/F, Block Z, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, KLN, Hong Kong, China.
E-mail addresses: siqiang-clarence.wang@connect.polyu.hk (S. Wang), esther.yung@polyu.edu.hk (E.H.K. Yung), wadu.jayantha@rmit.edu.au (W.M. Jayantha),
edwin.chan@polyu.edu.hk (E.H.W. Chan).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2023.102780
Received 14 June 2022; Received in revised form 21 February 2023; Accepted 25 February 2023
Available online 1 March 2023
0197-3975/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S. Wang et al.
behavior (Ajzen, 2011). In particular, it has been widely used in urban
studies to explain people’s behavior, such as leisure-time walking (Lin
et al., 2019) or public participation in urban renewal project (Tang et al.,
2022). There are also a number of studies using this theory to identify
the causal relationship between influencing factors and urban park use
behavior (Wang et al., 2015b; Zhang & Tan, 2019), or participatory
behavior in urban park governance (Huang et al., 2021). The previous
studies have proved that this theory is useful to understand and explain
human behavior in urban settings.
Elderly’s motivation to visit urban parks has been identified as an
essential factor that may affect their participation in leisure activities in
urban park (Loukaitou-Sideris et al., 2014). A previous study has also
demonstrated that if elderly people were intrinsically motivated to be
engaged in leisure activity in urban parks, then it may increase their
satisfaction level with using urban parks (Losier et al., 1993). Although
elderly’s demand and intention of using urban park are important in­
dicators of urban park use behavior, few studies have explored the as­
sociation between elderly’s behavioral intention of using urban parks
and their use behavior of urban parks from different intended activity
type perspective in TPB model. Previous studies mainly focus on
whether people are intended to visit urban parks rather than what ac­
tivity type they intend to do in urban parks (Huang et al., 2021; Wan &
Shen, 2015; Wang, Brown, Liu, & Mateo-Babiano, 2015; Zhang & Tan,
2019). Yen et al. (2017) used different activities as behavioral intention,
such as socialize, enjoyable or relax, however, the study treated different
intentions as a whole, rather than compare the different intentions.
Using intended activity type as behavioral intention in TPB model could
not only provide new knowledge from landscape and environmental
psychological area to understand different user groups’ preference and
needs, but also provide strategies to designers and managers of urban
parks during design and manage process of different function zones of
urban parks. Especially, Gibson (2018) pointed out that elderly people
may have different motivations to visit urban parks with young adults,
highlighting the necessity to explore elderly’s specific intention of using
urban parks and how it might affect their use behavior of them.
In addition, the target group pf most of existing studies are general
population (Zhang & Tan, 2019), or some studies paid attention to
young adults (Yen et al., 2017), there is still lack of focus on elderly
group. Elderly people were found to have special needs of urban parks.
Wen et al. (2018) pointed out that urban parks may be more attractive to
elderly people than younger ones. Elderly people may prefer natural
environments in urban parks, which makes them visit urban parks more
frequently than younger ones (Jorgensen & Anthopoulou, 2007). Older
people were found to have a higher need for autonomy in urban parks
compared with individuals below 65 years old (Gibson, 2018), which
may make them more sensitive to safety issue in urban parks. A study in
Hong Kong indicated that the most important issues of urban parks to
elderly people are safety and comfort whilst activity space to younger
people, such as BBQ or fitness area (Lai, 2018). Thus, it is necessary to
investigate the association between different constraints and elderly’s
use behavior of urban parks by using theory of planned behavior.
Some studies using this theory to explain people’s use behavior of
urban parks were conducted in western countries, such as Spain
(López-Mosquera et al., 2014), Australia (Wang, Brown, Liu, &
Mateo-Babiano, 2015) and United States (Miller et al., 2019). Some
studies were conducted in low-density eastern city (Wang, Brown,
Zhong, et al., 2015). The conclusions of these studies may not be directly
applied to explain elderly’s use behavior of urban parks in high-dense
urban environments. Wan and Shen (2015) pointed out that urban
parks in high-density city can feature a unique urban setting, thus, it is
meaningful to provide new insights of elderly’s use behavior of urban
parks in high-dense urban environments.
Similar to cities worldwide, Hong Kong is also experiencing an un­
precedented rate of population aging, with the elderly population (aged
65 years old and above) projected to be 36.6% in 2066 (Census and
Statistics Department, 2017). With the challenges of land scarcity and
2
Habitat International 134 (2023) 102780
development priorities, parks in Hong Kong are typically inadequate and
unsatisfactory in terms of quantity and quality (Hong Kong Planning
Department, 2011; Tang & Wong, 2008). People in Hong Kong have a
strong preference for urban parks due to the city’s high-density urban
form (SHI et al., 2014). Furthermore, elderly people in Hong Kong were
found to heavily rely on visiting public parks to engage in physical ac­
tivity and social contact (Yung et al., 2016) due to the extremely limited
living space. Thus, the findings of the studies conducted in other coun­
tries cannot be directly adopted to explain elderly people’s use behavior
of urban park in high-density city, such as Hong Kong.
Based on the issues and research gaps discussed above, this study
intends to create a model to explore the causal factors that affect eld­
erly’s use behavior of urban park based on the TPB model. Expansions
and revisions will be proposed to make the model suitable in high-
density urban environments in Hong Kong. This study aims to address
the following objectives 1) to explore the underlying factors that affect
elderly’s intention of using urban parks (the activities they intended to
do in urban parks); 2) to identify the relationship between elderly’s
intention of using urban parks and their use behavior; 3) to create an
intention and behavior model based on TPB, which adapts to the specific
context in high-density urban environments.
2. Theoretical framework
Theory of planned behavior (TPB) is an extension of the theory of
reasoned action (TRA), which is a famous theory applied to predict
human behavioral intentions and behavior (Armitage & Conner, 2001;
Cordano et al., 2011). The theory pointed out that intentions and
behavior are affected and determined by subjective norm, attitude and
perceived behavioral control. The TPB model contains several core el­
ements. Subjective norm, which is derived from interpersonal relation­
ship, could affect people’s demand through the lifestyle that people are
familiar with (Crawford et al., 1991). Attitude is defined an individual’s
evaluation of the outcome of a particular behavior (Ajzen, 1991), which
has been seen as an intrapersonal constraint. The TPB model also
introduced the perceived behavioral control factors, which would also
influence people’s intention and behavior (Ajzen, 1988), which were
classified as structural constraints. This factor is regarded as an in­
dividual’s perception of self-efficacy or ability to carry out a particular
behavior. Zhang and Tan (2019) pointed out that structural constraints
are factors that intervene between individuals’ preference and behavior,
such as time and financial resources. Furthermore, intention of using
urban parks, which is the behavioral intention in the original model, is
the key element of this model that represents motivation of people to
perform particular behavior.
In developing the framework for this study utilizing the TPB model,
interpersonal, intrapersonal and structural constraints are the key
components in explaining elderly’s intention of using urban parks and
may indirectly affect the urban park use behaviors. The interpersonal
constraint (subjective norm) is the elderly’s relationship with other user
groups of public parks. The main concern is whether elderly people may
be conflicted with other groups when using public parks. The intraper­
sonal constraints (attitude) are elderly’s perception to the planning and
design of public parks and their degree of liking to visit public parks.
Structural constraints (perceived behavioral control) are elderly’s
perception of self-efficacy to visit public parks, which consists of avail­
able leisure time and physical accessibility to public parks.
The behavioral intention in this study is elderly’s intention of using
urban parks, which reflects the activity types that they intended to do in
urban parks. The modified TPB model for this study includes three sub-
models that look at the three different intentions of using urban parks
based on its nature of activity type, which are social, enjoyment and
physical activities. The three types of intentions are separately included
in the model, whilst keeping other variables consistent. The three sub-
models are named as social activity-based model, enjoyment activity-
based model and physical activity-based model respectively. The use
S. Wang et al.
behaviors of public parks are frequency of visiting public parks and
length of stay in these areas.
According to Ajzen (1988 and 1991), the urban park use behavior is
jointly affected by intention of using urban parks, structural constraints
(physical accessibility and available leisure time) and intrapersonal
constraints (degree of liking to visit public parks). In addition, the
interpersonal constraint (conflict with other user groups) and intraper­
sonal constraints (perception to urban parks) indirectly affect elderly’s
use behavior through affecting different intentions of using urban parks.
Ajzen (1991) asserted that the TPB model is open to modification
that future studies can add or rearrange variables and paths involved in
the model. This study has made some extensions or adjustments of the
TPB model according to the specific condition of high-density urban
environments in Hong Kong. Firstly, this study innovatively used
intention of using urban park (the activity that elderly people intend to
do) as elderly’s behavioral intentions because previous studies mainly
focused on whether people intend to use urban parks under the TPB
model (their demand for public parks). Elderly’s different intentions to
visit public parks (distinct purposes of visiting public parks) may result
in varying use behaviors. Secondly, the original model mainly identifies
a subjective norm as pressure from his or her family, relatives or friends.
This study uses the variable ‘conflict of use with other groups’ as an
interpersonal constraint, which represents pressure from other user
groups in urban parks because the main concern in Hong Kong is
whether elderly people may be obstructed while using urban parks due
to the common problem of small urban park size. Thirdly, several
perception variables mainly identified from previous studies that may
affect elderly’s use pattern of urban park are included as intrapersonal
constraints. Considering the high-density urban form and small house
size, this study specifically included living environment. This study also
includes the design quality of urban park, which has not been explored
in a previous study (Zhang & Tan, 2019). The conceptual framework of
the study is presented in Fig. 1, and each variable is explained in detail in
the following paragraphs.
In terms of interpersonal constraints, elderly people may be affected
by other user groups in urban parks. Consequently, conflict of use could
affect elderly’s use of urban park. Wang, Brown, and Liu (2015) pointed
out that a cultural group variable was a significant factor that is related
Fig. 1. Conceptual intention and behavior model of elderly’s use of urban park based on TPB model.
3
Habitat International 134 (2023) 102780
to people’s visit urban parks in high and low SES suburbs, and people
prefer to use the urban park with similar cultural groups, which can
increase their perceived park accessibility. Inappropriate behavior by
other users could also affect the pleasantness in using urban parks (Turel
et al., 2007).
With regard to intrapersonal constraints, four factors could affect
elderly’s use of urban parks. Firstly, public transport is important to
elderly’s access to urban parks. Dony et al. (2015) indicated that
transportation facilities and its location have a significant effect on the
accessibility to urban park, which could encourage people to use urban
parks that exceed their walking distance. Easy access to public trans­
portation has been found to have an essential effect on the elderly
(McCormack et al., 2010; Van Holle et al., 2015) because it could help
them in easily reaching their preferred places and increase their physical
activity level (Day, 2008).
Secondly, the design quality of urban parks could affect elderly’s use
of them. Wen et al. (2018) suggested that elderly people prefer the
infrastructure and facilities, which consist of trails, intersections,
seating, recreational facilities, business settings and toilets, in the urban
park, and it could increase their recreation activities. Outdoor urban
furniture, such seats, in the urban park could attract people to visit
urban parks (Chen et al., 2016). Barrier-free sidewalks and wayfinding
systems have also been found as necessary elements to elderly’s use of
urban parks (Loukaitou-Sideris et al., 2014; Zhu et al., 2017).
Thirdly, physical and social benefits to elderly users from activities
undertaken within urban parks may influence elderly’s use of urban
parks. Social interaction and enhancing people’s sense of community are
key social benefits influencing the use of public urban parks (Pasao­
gullari & Doratli, 2004). Loukaitou-Sideris et al. (2016) suggested that
urban parks should provide elderly people opportunities for social
interaction, which could enhance active ageing and ageing in place. In
addition, urban parks could increase the possibility to have activities
and promote users’ physical health status (de Vries et al., 2013).
Elderly’s living environment could also affect their willingness to
leave home and visit urban parks. Saelens et al. (2003) indicated that
people who live in a higher density development area spend more time
on participating in walking activities than those living in a low-density
community. People who felt comfortable at home were less likely to go
S. Wang et al. Habitat International 134 (2023) 102780

outside, implying that they preferred to stay at home rather than behavior of using urban parks. In this study, urban old district refers to
participate in outdoor activities (Beng-Huat, 2002). Furthermore, the the old and decayed area that has completed or is undergoing urban
size of living space may boost home comfort, reducing the likelihood of renewal projects. The urban old districts in Hong Kong face the issues of
individuals visiting urban parks (Tu et al., 2016). inadequate provision and poor quality of public parks. In comparison
Elderly’s attitude is also an important variable that cannot be with the urban old districts, landscape master plans are prepared at the
neglected to explain elderly’s use of urban parks. Wang, Brown, Liu, and early stage of planning of new towns to ensure adequate provision of
Mateo-Babiano (2015) indicated that attitude toward urban parks could public parks (Fung & Siu, 2001). Given the different contexts and urban
significantly affect people’s use of them. The study in Australia (Lin forms, elderly people living in urban old districts and new towns may
et al., 2014) pointed out that higher nature orientation is the primary have varying preferences of public parks. Thus, involving urban districts
variable that encourages people to visit urban parks. A similar finding and new towns could provide a comprehensive understanding of the
was found in Singapore, where attitude was the most important factor underlying mechanism of how different influencing factors affect eld­
that affects the demand and usage of urban parks (Zhang & Tan, 2019). erly’s use behavior of public parks and minimize the variations in park
In this study, the degree of liking to visit urban parks is used to reflect provision and design amongst different districts.
elderly’s attitude toward using them. The selection of study districts is mainly based on the elderly pop­
In terms of structural constraints, available leisure time determines ulation, population density and socio-economic profiles of district
whether elderly people are free to visit urban parks. The people who had council districts or new towns. Wong Tai Sin district was selected as the
little available leisure time were found to have a higher possibility to be representative of an urban old district because it is one of the urban
inactive in physical activity and less engaged in leisure-time physical renewal districts undertaken by the URA and has highest elderly pro­
activity (Reichert et al., 2007). Available leisure time had a significant portion amongst 18 districts of Hong Kong. The Tsing Yi and Tseung
relationship with perceived accessibility of urban park (Wang, Brown, & Kwan O new towns are selected as representatives of new towns because
Liu, 2015). According to a study conducted in Helsinki, persons with they are the earliest and most recent new town development projects
ample leisure time, especially those who are working, would reduce with a high elderly proportion. The spatial layout, planning of streets
their visits to urban parks (Neuvonen et al., 2007). and level of walkability of the two types of districts are also distinctive
Physical accessibility, which refers to elderly’s distance and travel (Table 1).
time to reach an urban park, also affects elderly’s use of urban parks. This research focuses on the outdoor open-air space in urban areas
Giles-Corti et al. (2005) found that public urban parks with good access developed by the public sector and is counted toward the urban park
to and were proximate could increase people’s walking level. Proximity standard of provision. Those urban parks in rural areas, or developed by
and travel time have been found to have positive relationships with private sectors, are out of the research scope. Only those public urban
perceived accessibility (Wang, Brown, & Liu, 2015). Similar findings parks managed by the Leisure and Cultural Services Department are
have also been found in Famagusta, wherein the travel time had a direct selected as study urban parks. The selection of study urban parks mainly
influence on accessibility to urban parks (Pasaogullari & Doratli, 2004). considers the variation of size, facility types, socio-economic status
These findings were found in western countries, which have a less dense (SES) of the neighborhood, residential density of neighborhood and
urban environment. Thus, comparing findings with an extremely
high-density city, such as Hong Kong, would fill the gap in theoretical
constructs. Table 1
Meanwhile, intention of using urban park was also an important Profiles of study districts.
consideration of elderly’s visits to urban parks. Loukaitou-Sideris et al. Characteristics Urban old district New town
(2014) pointed out that motivation was one of the essential factors that
Wong Tai Sin Tsing Yi Tseung Kwan O
influence elderly people’s leisure fulfilment and leisure participation.
Gibson (2018) illustrated that if urban parks could fulfil their autonomy Elderly 17.2% (ranked 1st 15.6% 14.9%
proportion among 18 districts
needs, then it would encourage their revisits. Yung et al. (2019) found
in 2016)
that elderly’s people different intentions of using urban parks had a Median Monthly HK$22,000 HK$26,250 HK$32,000
significant relationship with their use pattern and satisfaction level of Domestic (ranked 2nd
urban parks. Household among 12 new
Income towns)
Population 45,711 (ranked 17,217 23,281
3. Research methods
density 3rd among 18
(Number of districts in 2016)
This study adopts a mixed research methods collection of qualitative persons per
and quantitative methods to explore the influencing factors that affect km2) a
Street Higher street Lower street Lower street
elderly’s intention to visit urban parks and use behavior. The elderly’s
connectivity connectivity connectivity connectivity
intention and park use behavior has been found to be significantly Street scale Narrow street, Wide road, tall Wide road, tall
affected by people’s subjective perception to urban parks (Wang, Brown, medium building buildings buildings
Liu, & Mateo-Babiano, 2015; Zhang & Tan, 2019). Accordingly, an height
in-depth discussion with elderly people is necessary to explore their Walkability Lower walkability Higher walkability Higher
walkability
subjective perceptions and expectations of urban parks, which could
planning one of the urban one of the first three one of the latest
provide supplementary information of findings from a conventional paradigm old districts in participating developed new
quantitative approach. In addition, the mixed research methods have Hong Kong that District Council towns in Hong
been proven to be useful for deeply investigating the complex and has been districts in Hong Kong
undergoing urban Kong that joined the
multilevel relationships (Creswell et al., 2004; Curry et al., 2013), which
renewal carried WHO Global
has especially been validated in previous studies in the urban studies out by the Urban Network of Age-
domain (Vollmer et al., 2015; Sun, Fang, Yung, Chao, & Chan, 2020). Renewal Authority friendly Cities and
Communities
3.1. Sampling of study districts and urban parks Reference: 2016 Population By-census, Census and Statistics Department,
HKSAR.
Urban old districts and new towns are included in this study as study a
for new towns, the Unit of measurement is number of persons per km2 of net
districts to provide a whole picture of elderly people’s preference and land area.

4
S. Wang et al. Habitat International 134 (2023) 102780

types of urban park. The median household income (HK$20,200) has Table 2
been used to categorize high and low SES neighborhoods in Hong Kong The interview guides of focus group.
(Boakye-Dankwa et al., 2019). Thus, the study neighborhoods in Wong Main questions Guided questions
Tai Sin are low SES neighborhoods, and Tsing Yi and Tseung Kwan O are
Which type of urban parks you Which urban parks you prefer? The big park
high SES neighborhoods. Fig. 2 illustrates the location of study public visited most frequently? with diverse features, or small parks near
parks in three selected districts. your home?
Will you visit public parks with special
design (such as promenade, or culture park)
3.2. Focus group that in other districts?
What are the activities you would Will you do physical exercise (or Tai Chi) in
Focus groups were conducted in two urban districts in Hong Kong, like to take part in public urban morning?
parks? Will you do physical exercise (or Tai Chi)
Wong Tai Sin and Kwai Tsing districts, which are representative of old
alone, or with friends, or join in a group?
districts and new town area, respectively. The reason for selecting the Will you commonly visit public parks with
two districts is that they have the highest proportion of elderly aged over friends for social interaction?
65 years old amongst old districts and new towns in Hong Kong, which Will you visit public parks to enjoy
are 17.6% and 14.7%, respectively (Census and Statistics Department, landscape when you want to have a rest?
What factors will make urban parks Can you mention some design features that
2013). The focus groups were organized and conducted in community most satisfied for you? impress you in public parks?
centers in two districts. The elderly participants were invited by the Is it convenient for you to visit public parks
community centers who are more familiar with the local residents. The by walking?
elderly people who are living in the districts and actively engaged in Is transport services enough to take you to
public parks?
activities in community centers were approached and invited to
What are the factors that prevent you Have you conflicted with other groups while
participate in the focus group discussion. Most participants are active from visiting urban parks? using the park?
and frequent users of public parks to ensure that they could express their Do you have enough leisure time to visit
preference of public parks. A pilot focus group was conducted to validate public parks? Why?
our questions and refine the question lists and presentation materials. Do you prefer to stay at home or visit public
park, and why?
An experienced researcher acted as a moderator, and two to three stu­
dents would record the elderly’s opinions. The open-ended questions
were employed to guide the focus group discussions and encourage the Tsing between September and November 2018. Superficially, four focus
elderly people to express their experiences of using urban parks. Each groups were conducted in Wong Tai Sin districts and five in Kwai Tsing.
focus group session lasted for approximately 45 min, and the questions Sixty-six participants were investigated, 29 lived in Wong Tai Sin and 37
included in focus group are presented in Table 2. in Kwai Tsing. After a review of the focus group records, one participant
Nine focus groups were conducted in the Wong Tai Sin and Kwai

Fig. 2. The map of selected study districts and public parks.

5
S. Wang et al. Habitat International 134 (2023) 102780

from Kwai Tsing was excluded in the final analysis because he/she Table 4
cannot express valid answers. Table 3 demonstrates the profiles of Measurement of variables in the intention and behavior model of elderly’s use of
participants of the focus group. urban park.
Variables Questions Responses

3.3. Questionnaire survey Intention to visit public urban park What activities you chat with friends/
intended to do in open physical exercises/
pace? (What is your group activity/
The questionnaire survey was used to elicit the subjective attributes
intention to visit urban enjoy landscape/
affecting elderly’s preference of visiting urban parks in general and the park? use facilities
participants’ individual variables. This study adopted the stratified Urban park use frequency How many times you 0/1–2 times/3–5
random sampling technique because it could help in achieving an behavior will visit urban park times/6–7 times/
per week? >7 times
overall representation of elderly population in urban old districts and
Length of stay How long do you stay <15min/
new towns (Rahman & Hossain, 2020). This mechanism is a widely used in the urban park? 15–30min/
technique in questionnaire survey in urban studies domain (Abd’Razack 30–60min/
et al., 2017; Shan, 2020). The subjects of the questionnaire survey were >60min
elderly people aged 60 years old and above who were using the selected Interpersonal Conflict of use No conflict with other Strongly disagree/
constraints with other groups in the urban Disagree/Neutral/
public urban parks and were willing and competent to participate. The
groups park will affect my Agree/Strongly
pilot study was conducted before the questionnaire survey to test the visits to urban park agree
questionnaires. The data were excluded from the further analysis. The Intrapersonal Public Public transport Strongly disagree/
final questionnaire contains questions relevant to the variables in the constraints transport stations are in close Disagree/Neutral/
intention and behavior model of elderly’s use of urban park (Table 4). proximity to public Agree/Strongly
urban parks. agree
The questionnaire survey was conducted from February 27, 2019 to There is public
May 6, 2019 in 30 selected urban parks in three districts. Two to three transportation to reach
trained researchers were responsible for conducting an interview with public urban parks.
the participants. A total number of 537 valid questionnaires were The cost of public
transportation to
collected, amongst which 271 public urban park users are in urban old
public urban parks is
districts, and 266 public urban parks users are in new towns. According reasonable.
to Barlett et al. (2001), an appropriate sample size for a categorical data There are different
model is 264. Thus, the sample size of the whole public urban park user ways to reach public
samples and samples in urban old district and new town meets the basic urban parks, such as
walking, public
statistical requirement. transport, driving.
Design quality A public urban park Strongly disagree/
with diverse, novel, Disagree/Neutral/
3.4. Data analysis
and comfortable urban Agree/Strongly
furniture, such as agree
Focus groups are one of the main research methods involved in this tables, chairs, and
study, which includes qualitative analysis. NVivo 11 pro software was stools.
A public urban park
used to manage and organize the focus group data and help analyze and
with clear signals to
find pattern of results. This software is a useful tool for qualitative help find different
analysis (Welsh, 2002). The elderly people’s opinions were transcribed facilities.
and coded into the variables included in the model. The coded infor­ A public urban park
mation was used to validate the quantitative results. The elderly’s with barrier free
design.
opinions from the focus group were recorded and transcribed. Then, the
A public urban park
transcript was imported into NVivo software for coding. Each partici­ with different types of
pant’s transcript was imported as a case. The codes were preset as the facilities, such as
possible influencing factors of elderly’s use behavior of public parks seating, kiosks,
gazebos, sports
from literature. Two experienced researchers were conducting coding
equipment, courts, etc.
work independently. Elderly’s opinions related to their use behavior of Benefit of Opportunity to do Strongly disagree/
public parks will be categorized into different codes. The potential new visiting urban physical exercise in Disagree/Neutral/
codes of influencing factors found in transcripts will be discussed and park urban park. Agree/Strongly
agreed upon by two researchers before formally included in analysis. Opportunity to chat agree
with friends in a public
The two researchers’ coding work will be discussed and revised to
urban park.
ensure uniformity. The coded opinions will be compared with the A public urban park
with group activities.
Living I live in a small house. Strongly disagree/
Table 3
environment I feel uncomfortable at Disagree/Neutral/
Profile of elderly that attended focus group meetings.
home (so I prefer going Agree/Strongly
Wong Tai Sin (N = 29) Kwai Tsing (N = 37) out). agree
I live in a high-density
Age
neighborhood.
60–70 4 (13.8%) 17 (45.9%)
Degree of Do you like to visit Strongly dislike/
71–80 14 (48.3%) 15 (40.5%)
liking to visit urban park? Dislike/Fair/Like/
81–90 11 (37.9%) 5 (13.5%)
urban park Strongly like
Gender
Structural Available I have available leisure Strongly disagree/
Male 9 (31.0%) 10 (27.0%)
constraints leisure time time to visit urban park Disagree/Neutral/
Female 20 (69.0%) 27 (73.0%)
Agree/Strongly
Frequency to visit public park per week
agree
0–2 days 3 (10.3%) 4 (10.8%)
Physical How long does it take <10min/10–20
3–5 days 11 (37.9%) 7 (18.9%)
accessibility from home to urban min/>20 min
6–7 days 15 (51.7%) 26 (70.3%)
park?

6
S. Wang et al. Habitat International 134 (2023) 102780

quantitative results to determine if any evidence exists to support the Table 5

quantitative findings. Profile of the respondents and the use pattern of urban park.
The quantitative data were analyzed by using structural equation Users (N = Wong Tai Sin Tsing Yi (N Tseung Kwan O
modelling (SEM), which is a suitable method to evaluate the fitness and 537) (N = 271) = 134) (N = 132)
explanatory power of a model (Ullman & Bentler, 2012). SEM is Age
commonly used to understand the structural theory based on phenom­ <60 35(6.5%) 14(5.2%) 6(4.5%) 15(11.4%)
ena (Byrne, 2013) and can identify causal relationships between mul­ 60–64 111 61(22.5%) 25(18.7%) 25(18.9%)
tiple variables (Bentler, 1988). Byrne (2013) pointed out that one of the (20.7%)
65–74 186 93(34.3%) 48(35.8%) 45(34.1%)
advantages of the SEM method is that the causal processes of the (34.6%)
structural equations can be visually modelled in a path diagram. This 75–84 149 75(27.7%) 41(30.6%) 33(25.0%)
study used IBM AMOS 24 to perform the SEM method to test the pro­ (27.7%)
posed intention and behavior model of elderly’s use of urban parks, and ≥85 56(10.4%) 28(10.3%) 14(10.4%) 14(10.6%)
Gender
the proposed model is presented in Fig. 1. The analysis of results is
Female 297 139(51.3%) 84(62.7%) 74(56.1%)
divided into three sub-models based on the nature of intention of using (55.3%)
urban park, which are social activity-based model (intentions are chat Male 240 132(48.7%) 50(37.3%) 58(43.9%)
with friends and group activity), enjoyment activity-based model (in­ (44.7%)
tentions are enjoy landscape and use facilities) and physical Education level
None 110 53(19.6%) 28(20.9%) 29(22.0%)
activity-based model (intention is physical exercises). (20.5%)
Primary 227 115(42.4%) 61(45.5%) 51(38.6%)
4. Results (42.3%)
Secondary 152 77(28.4%) 38(28.4%) 37(28.0%)
(28.3%)
4.1. Characteristics of respondents
Post- 48(8.9%) 26(9.6%) 7(5.2%) 15(11.4%)
secondary
Table 5 demonstrates the respondents’ profiles and use pattern of Intention (Intention) to visit public urban park (multiple choice)
urban parks. In this study, a total number of 537 questionnaires were Chat with 194 81 (29.9%) 51(38.1%) 62(47.0%)
collected. More than half of the elderly respondents aged between 65 friends (36.1%)
Physical 405 210 (77.5%) 98(73.1%) 97(73.5%)
years old to 84 years old. Gender distribution was quite even, with exercises (75.4%)
slightly more than half of the respondents are female. More than half of Group 57 (10.6%) 21 (7.7%) 16(11.9%) 20(15.2%)
the elderly respondents visit urban parks more than six times per week. activity
In terms of length of using urban parks, 52.0% of respondents would stay Landscape 81 (15.1%) 48 (17.7%) 7(5.2%) 26(19.7%)
Facilities 94 (17.5%) 37 (13.7%) 24(17.9%) 33(25.0%)
in urban parks for more than 1 h. In addition, nearly 80% of elderly
Frequency to visit urban park per week
respondents indicated that they are likely to visit urban parks, and the 0 9(1.7%) 7(2.6%) 2(1.5%) 0(0.0%)
intention (intention) to visit urban parks is mainly for physical exercises 1-2 times 75(14.0%) 40(14.8%) 9(6.7%) 26(19.7%)
or chatting with friends, which account for 75.4% and 36.1% 3-5 times 144 71(26.2%) 16(11.9%) 57(43.2%)
respectively. (26.8%)
6-7 times 272 141(52.0%) 95(70.9%) 36(27.3%)
(50.7%)
4.2. Development of intention and behavior model >7 times 37(6.9%) 12(4.4%) 12(9.0%) 13(9.8%)
Length of stay
Four latent variables are present in the proposed intention to visit <15min 14 (2.6%) 9 (3.3%) 5(3.7%) 0(0.0%)
15–30min 56 (10.4%) 23 (8.5%) 13(9.7%) 20(15.2%)
urban parks and behavior model. Table 6 illustrates the reliability and
30–60min 188 88 (32.5%) 41(30.6%) 59(44.7%)
construct validity of the latent variables. The Cronbach’s alpha values of (35.0%)
all four variables were all above 0.70, except ‘benefit of using urban >60min 279 151 (55.7%) 75(56.0%) 53(40.2%)
park’, which is also close to 0.70. The composite reliability values of the (52.0%)
four latent variables are also higher than the cutoff criterion of 0.70. The Degree of liking to visit urban park
Strongly 3 (0.6%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 3(2.3%)
average variance extracted values of the latent variables are above 0.50, dislike
except the value of variable ‘design quality’ (0.496). The construct of Dislike 2 (0.4%) 0 (0.0%) 0 (0.0%) 2(1.5%)
items of the four latent variables is reliable and suitable to be included in Fair 66 (12.3%) 42 (15.5%) 7(5.2%) 17(12.9%)
the model. The goodness-of-fit of the models are also presented in Like 424 220 (81.2%) 118(88.1%) 86(65.2%)
(79.0%)
Table 7, indicating that the three models fit well with the empirical data.
Strongly like 42 (7.8%) 9 (3.3%) 9(6.7%) 24(18.2%)

4.3. Social activity-based model

Table 8 presents the SEM results of the social activity-based model, in
which the intentions of visiting urban park are chatting with friends and
participating in a group activity. The diagram of significant relation­
ships in social activity-based model is illustrated in Fig. 3. The variable
‘conflict of use with other groups’ has a significant negative influence on
the intention of chatting with friends (standardized estimate = − 0.186,
p < 0.001) and participating in a group activity (standardized estimate
= − 0.15, p < 0.001). Elderly people who believe that the conflict of use
issue is not important are more likely to visit urban parks for chatting
with friends or participating in a group activity. In addition, variables
‘public transport’ and ‘benefit of using urban park’ have significant
positive effects on the intention of chatting with friends and partici­
pating in a group activity, whilst variable ‘design quality’ has a signif­
icant negative effect on two types of intentions. This notion means that
elderly people who that believe public transport issue or benefit of using
urban parks are important more likely to visit urban parks to participate
in social activities.
In terms of the effect on urban park use behavior, available leisure
time (standardized estimate = 0.131, p < 0.01) and degree of liking to
visit urban parks (standardized estimate = 0.124, p < 0.01) have sig­
nificant positive effects on elderly’s frequency of visiting urban parks,
indicating that elderly people who have ample leisure time or are likely
to visit urban parks would more frequently visit urban parks. Physical
accessibility variable (standardized estimate = − 0.084, p < 0.05) has a
significant negative effect on frequency, demonstrating that elderly
people who need to spend a longer time on travelling to urban parks may
less frequently visit urban park. Available leisure time (standardized
estimate = 0.088, p < 0.05), physical accessibility (standardized

7
S. Wang et al. Habitat International 134 (2023) 102780

Table 6
Cronbach’s alpha, composite reliability (CR), and average variance extracted
(AVE) for latent constructs.
Latent constructs items
Public transport B5 Proximity to public
transport
B4 Availability of
public transport
B6 Cost of public
transport
B14 Means to public
urban park
Design Quality C10 Urban furniture
C9 Wayfinding system
C13 Barrier free design
C8 Facilities/amenities
Benefit of using C19 Physical Activity
urban park C18 Social interaction
C17 Social cohesion
Living environment A2 Size of living space
A3 Comfort at home
A1 Residential density
has a significant negative effect on elderly’s length of using urban parks.
Elderly people who visit urban parks to enjoy landscape may less
frequently visit urban park and who visit urban park to use facilities may
Cronbach’s CR AVE stay for a shorter period of time.
Alpha Besides the two types of intentions, the variables ‘available leisure
0.911 0.921 0.748 time’ (standardized estimate = 0.149, p < 0.001) and ‘degree of liking to
visit urban park’ (standardized estimate = 0.131, p < 0.01) have also
been found to have a positive effect on elderly’s frequency of visiting
urban parks. Elderly people who have ample leisure time or like to visit
urban parks may more frequently visit urban parks. This study also
indicated that the variables ‘available leisure time’ (standardized esti­
mate = 0.1, p < 0.05), ‘physical accessibility’ (standardized estimate =
0.729 0.795 0.496 0.097, p < 0.05) and ‘degree of liking to visit urban park’ (standardized
estimate = 0.181, p < 0.001). Elderly people who have ample leisure
time, spend longer time on travelling to urban parks and like visiting
0.679 0.796 0.567 urban parks are more likely to use urban parks for a longer period of
time.
0.734 0.825 0.614
4.5. Physical exercise-based model

Table 10 presents the SEM results of the physical exercise model, in

estimate = 0.097, p < 0.05) and degree of liking to visit urban parks
(standardized estimate = 0.176, p < 0.001) are also found to have sig­
nificant positive effects on elderly’s length of using urban park. Elderly
people who have ample leisure time spend longer time on travelling to
urban parks and like visiting them could are more likely to use urban
parks for a longer period of time.
4.4. Enjoyment activity-based model
Table 9 presents the SEM results of the enjoyment activity-based
model, in which the intentions of visiting urban park are enjoy land­
scape or use facilities of urban parks. The diagram of the significant
relationships in enjoyment activity-based model is illustrated in Fig. 4
the variable ‘conflict of use with other groups’ has a significant positive
effect on intention of using facilities (standardized estimate = 0.103, p
< 0.05). Elderly people who believe that no conflict with other groups
when using urban parks is important intent to visit urban parks to use
facilities. The variable ‘living environment’ is also found to have a sig­
nificant positive effect on the intention of enjoy landscape (standardized
estimate = 0.207, p < 0.001) and use facilities (standardized estimate =
0.281, p < 0.001). Elderly people living in a poor living environment,
such as high-density neighborhood or small houses, and who are not
comfortable at home are more likely to visit urban parks to enjoy
landscape or use different types of facilities. Meanwhile, the variable
‘design quality’ has a significant negative effect on the intention of enjoy
landscape (standardized estimate = − 0.2, p < 0.05).
This study also found that the two types of intention have an effect on
elderly’s use behavior of urban parks. The intention of enjoy landscape
(standardized estimate = − 0.174, p < 0.001) has a significant negative
effect on elderly’s frequency to visit urban parks. Meanwhile, the
intention of using facilities (standardized estimate = − 0.102, p < 0.05)
which the intention of visiting urban parks is doing physical exercises.
The diagram of the significant relationships in physical activity-based
model is illustrated in Fig. 5. Similar to the results of the social
activity-based model, the variable ‘conflict of use with other groups’ has
a significant negative effect on the intention of physical exercise (stan­
dardized estimate = − 0.141, p < 0.001). In addition, the variable
‘benefit of using urban park’ has a significant positive effect on the
intention of physical exercise (standardized estimate = 0.216, p < 0.01),
which means that elderly people who are aware of the benefits of using
urban parks may intend to visit urban parks to do physical exercise.
In terms of the effect on urban park use behavior, the intention of
physical exercise has a significant positive effect on elderly’s frequency
(Standardized Estimate = 0.139, p < 0.001) and stay length (stan­
dardized estimate = 0.215, p < 0.001) of using urban parks. The elderly
people whose intention of using urban parks is physical exercise may
intend to visit more frequently and stay in the urban park for a longer
period of time.
The factors ‘available leisure time’ (standardized estimate = 0.123,
p < 0.01) and ‘degree of liking to visit urban park’ (standardized esti­
mate = 0.119, p < 0.01) have a significant positive effect on elderly’s
frequency of visiting urban parks. Meanwhile, the variable ‘physical
accessibility’ (standardized estimate = − 0.089, p < 0.05) has a signif­
icant negative effect. This finding demonstrated that elderly people who
have ample available leisure time, like to visit urban parks and do not
need to spend a substantial amount of time on travelling to urban parks
may visit more frequently urban parks. Furthermore, variables ‘physical
accessibility’ (Standardized Estimate = 0.088, p < 0.05) and ‘degree of
liking to visit urban park’ (standardized estimate = 0.169, p < 0.001)
have a significant positive effect on elderly’s length of using urban
parks, indicating that elderly people who need to spend longer time on
travelling to and like visiting urban parks may intend to use urban parks
for a longer period of time.

Table 7
Values of model fit indexes for three hypothesized intention and behavior model of elderly’s use of urban park.
Social activity-based model Enjoyment activity-based model Physical activity-based model Acceptable Values

Chi-square 635.196 613.464 587.275

df 185 185 174
X2/df 3.433 3.316 3.375 <5.0 (Wheaton, 1987)
GFI 0.901 0.904 0.904 ≥0.90 (Hair et al., 2006)
AGFI 0.864 0.869 0.873 ≥0.80 (Marsh et al., 1988)
CFI 0.873 0.879 0.882 ≥0.80 (Doll et al., 1994)
RMR 0.056 0.055 0.058 <0.05 (McDonald & Ho, 2002)
SRMR 0.0905 0.0882 0.0913 ≤.10 (Kline, 2015)
RMSEA 0.067 0.066 0.067 <0.08 (Hair et al., 2006)

8
S. Wang et al. Habitat International 134 (2023) 102780

Table 8 Table 8 (continued )

Effects of variables on intention of using urban park and behavior (social Effects Variables Standardized S.E. C.R. P
activity-based model). Estimate
Effects Variables Standardized S.E. C.R. P <— Degree of
Estimate liking to visit
Effect on Intention − 0.186 0.026 − 4.552 *** urban park
intention of (Chat with Intention − 0.012 0.02 − 0.3 0.764
using urban friends) <— (participate
park (Chat Conflict of use group activity)
with friend) with other <— Available
groups leisure time
Intention 0.267 0.041 5.106 *** Intention 0.017 0.021 0.407 0.684
(Chat with (participate
friends) <— group activity)
Public <— Physical
transport accessibility
Intention − 0.172 0.127 − 2.142 0.032* Effect on Frequency < 0.131 0.057 3.106 0.002**
(Chat with urban park — Available
friends) <— use leisure time
Design Quality behavior Length < — 0.088 0.05 2.093 0.036*
Intention 0.264 0.06 3.573 *** Available
(Chat with leisure time
friends) <— Frequency < − 0.084 0.06 − 1.981 0.048*
Benefit of — Physical
using urban accessibility
park Length < — 0.097 0.052 2.316 0.021*
Intention − 0.076 0.047 − 1.331 0.183 Physical
(Chat with accessibility
friends) <— Frequency < 0.124 0.072 2.943 0.003**
Living — Degree of
environment liking to visit
Intention − 0.011 0.039 − 0.278 0.781 urban park
(Chat with Length < — 0.176 0.063 4.186 ***
friends) <— Degree of
Degree of liking to visit
liking to visit urban park
urban park Frequency < 0.064 0.077 1.497 0.134
Intention − 0.047 0.031 − 1.155 0.248 — Intention
(Chat with (Chat with
friends) <— friends)
Available Length < — 0.042 0.067 0.989 0.323
leisure time Intention
Intention − 0.018 0.032 − 0.437 0.662 (Chat with
(Chat with friends)
friends) <— Frequency < 0.056 0.12 1.321 0.186
Physical — Intention
accessibility (participate
Effect on Intention − 0.15 0.017 − 3.63 *** group activity)
intention of (participate Length < — 0.075 0.105 1.784 0.074
using urban group activity) Intention
park <— Conflict of (participate
(participate use with other group activity)
group groups
Note: *Relationship is significant at the 0.05 level.
activity) Intention 0.162 0.026 3.081 0.002**
**Relationship is significant at the 0.01 level.
(participate
group activity) ***Relationship is significant at the 0.001 level.
<— Public
transport 5. Discussion
Intention − 0.281 0.089 − 3.229 0.001**
(participate
group activity) 5.1. Influencing factors that affect elderly’s intention of using urban parks
<— Design
Quality In terms of interpersonal constraints, previous studies mainly
Intention 0.389 0.041 4.924 *** focused on the peer encouragement or pressure from users’ relatives and
(participate
group activity)
friends (Zhang & Tan, 2019). This study innovatively examined the
<— Benefit of relationship between elderly users and other users in the urban parks
using urban and pointed out that the variable ‘Conflict of use with other groups’ will
park affect elderly’s decision to visit urban parks to use facilities. Elderly
Intention − 0.005 0.031 − 0.088 0.93
people who aim to visit urban parks to use facilities may have more
(participate
group activity) concerns about use conflict with others. This phenomenon may because
<— Living of the small size of urban parks in Hong Kong and insufficient facilities
environment within them, which are frequent issues in a high-density city with
Intention 0.044 0.025 1.063 0.288 limited land resources. In particular, providing a sufficient number of
(participate
group activity)
facilities commensurate with the elderly population is difficult. Elderly
people may have to wait for a long time to use facilities, or their usage
may be easily disturbed by other user groups. In the focus group

9
S. Wang et al.
Fig. 3. Standardized regression weights in social activity-based model.
Note: *Relationship is significant at the 0.05 level
**Relationship is significant at the 0.01 level
***Relationship is significant at the 0.001 level.
interview, the elderly people complained: ‘It’s too hard to wait for using
facilities. There are too many people, but too few facilities to play with.’ and
‘The number of facilities is not enough, because many people go outside at the
same time. It’s hard to satisfy so many people at the same time.’ This finding
is in line with another study in Hong Kong (Wong et al., 2009), which
found that crowdedness was one of the problems that residents faced
when using urban parks, and that more facilities were needed. However,
the study in Turkey pointed out that using public parks with other age
groups is essential to elderly people in maintaining their social network
and participating in social interaction activities (Turel et al., 2007).
Four different factors of elderly’s perception to urban park, which
are viewed as intrapersonal constraints, have been found to affect eld­
erly’s intention to visit urban park in various ways. Public transport has
only been found significant in social activity-based model, showing that
elderly people who visit urban parks mainly for social interaction or
group activities recognized the importance of public transport. This
condition may be attributed to social activities that may not always
occur in the urban parks close to elderly’s home compared with other
intentions. These people may need to visit urban parks that exceed their
walking distance, necessitating the use of public transport services to get
there. This notion has been proven by the elderly participants during the
focus group meeting. They indicated: ‘I went to urban parks in Sai Kung to
participate in activities organized by elderly center. It is too difficult to visit
these urban parks far away by myself. Thus, the public transportation is very
important.’ Public transport could help elderly people visit urban parks
that exceed their walking distance and encourage their usage of them
(Dony et al., 2015). The study in Shanghai, which is also a high-density
city, also reported similar results that public transport is a key issue to
improve the accessibility to public parks (Fan et al., 2017).
The elderly’s awareness of the benefits of using urban parks may
significantly encourage them to visit urban parks to chat with friends or
participate in group or physical activities. Elder people are highly
motivated to fulfil their autonomy needs by visiting urban parks with
specific elements (Gibson, 2018). These people may intend to visit urban
parks to engage in physical or social activities if they have such kinds of
10
Habitat International 134 (2023) 102780
demands and understand that visiting urban parks could provide them
opportunities to participate in these activities. For instance, elderly
people mentioned that ‘I aim to chat with other people and get some in­
formation from them in the park.‘, indicating that elderly people visit
urban parks because he/she was aware of the benefits of using them.
Living environment is another important factor that is significantly
associated with elderly’s intention to enjoy landscape or using facilities
in urban parks. It shows that elderly people whose living environment is
poor, such as high residential density or small house size, may be more
willing to visit urban park to enjoy landscape or use facilities. In
Singapore, which is also a high-density area, elderly people who felt not
comfort at home may have higher possibility to go outside and visit
urban park (Beng-Huat, 2002). In addition, elderly people who lived in
small size of living space usually have low socio-economic level, thus,
public facilities provided by public sectors in urban park is quite
important to these elderly people (Wang et al., 2022). The poor living
environment may result in their visits to urban park to use facilities or
enjoy landscape as free entertainment activities.
5.2. Influencing factors that affect elderly’s use behavior of urban park
Available leisure time is an important variable that affects the eld­
erly’s preference in visiting public urban parks, and it influences
whether elderly people have spare leisure time to frequently visit public
urban parks, or can spend a long time on using them. Elderly people who
do not have enough available leisure time may not be able to frequently
visit urban parks (Neuvonen et al., 2007). This factor is significant in
Hong Kong may be because elderly people still have to be engaged in
different types of work. The number of older persons in the labor force
has already been doubled from 2006 to 2016, and the labor force
participation rate of the elderly people has increased from 7.0% in 2006
to 11.2% in 2016 (Census and Statistics Department, 2018). The
importance of available leisure time was also mentioned by elderly
people in the focus group interviews: ‘I don’t have much free time. I often
do housework at home. I spend a lot of time in the day, and I rarely go to
S. Wang et al. Habitat International 134 (2023) 102780

Table 9 Table 9 (continued )

Effects of variables on intention of using urban park and behavior (enjoyment Effects Variables Standardized S.E. C.R. P
activity-based model). Estimate
Effects Variables Standardized S.E. C.R. P Intention − 0.061 0.026 − 1.455 0.146
Estimate (using facility)
Effect on Intention 0.055 0.02 1.299 0.194 <— Physical
intention (enjoy accessibility
of using landscape) <— Effect on Frequency < — 0.149 0.056 3.566 ***
urban park Conflict of use urban park Available
(enjoy with other use leisure time
landscape) groups behavior Length < — 0.1 0.05 2.381 0.017*
Intention 0.079 0.03 1.509 0.131 Available
(enjoy leisure time
landscape) <— Frequency < — − 0.071 0.059 − 1.712 0.087
Public Physical
transport accessibility
Intention − 0.2 0.099 − 2.416 0.016* Length < — 0.097 0.052 2.321 0.02*
(enjoy Physical
landscape) <— accessibility
Design Quality Frequency < — 0.131 0.071 3.157 0.002**
Intention 0.05 0.044 0.677 0.498 Degree of liking
(enjoy to visit urban
landscape) <— park
Benefit of using Length < — 0.181 0.063 4.322 ***
urban park Degree of liking
Intention 0.207 0.036 3.433 *** to visit urban
(enjoy park
landscape) <— Frequency < — − 0.174 0.102 − 4.151 ***
Living Intention
environment (enjoy
Intention 0.041 0.029 0.961 0.336 landscape)
(enjoy Length < — − 0.042 0.091 − 0.999 0.318
landscape) <— Intention
Degree of liking (enjoy
to visit urban landscape)
park Frequency < — − 0.038 0.096 − 0.906 0.365
Intention 0.06 0.023 1.416 0.157 Intention
(enjoy (using facility)
landscape) <— Length < — − 0.102 0.086 − 2.436 0.015*
Available Intention
leisure time (using facility)
Intention 0.048 0.024 1.139 0.255
Note: *Relationship is significant at the 0.05 level.
(enjoy
**Relationship is significant at the 0.01 level.
landscape) <—
Physical ***Relationship is significant at the 0.001 level.
accessibility
Effect on Intention 0.103 0.021 2.454 0.014* public urban park.’ The common reasons raised in the focus group in­
intention (using facility)
terviews are employment or volunteer work, housework and taking care
of using <— Conflict of
urban park use with other of grandchildren. Thus, these activities keep elderly people busy and
(using groups make visits public urban park less frequent. However, a study in
facility) Intention − 0.093 0.032 − 1.778 0.075 Singapore reported that available leisure time is unimportant to resi­
(using facility) dents in Singapore (Zhang & Tan, 2019). The elderly people in Hong
<— Public
transport
Kong may face serious life stress, which decreases their opportunity to
Intention − 0.074 0.1 − 0.933 0.351 visit public parks.
(using facility) Physical accessibility is also essential to elderly’s use behavior of
<— Design urban parks in this study. Distance to urban park will significantly affect
Quality
elderly’s use of urban park, and the elderly people usually prefer short
Intention 0.059 0.047 0.806 0.42
(using facility) access time (Arnberger et al., 2017). Elderly people usually visit public
<— Benefit of urban parks near their home as discussed in the focus group interviews:
using urban ‘I like to visit the Kowloon Walled City Park, because I live near the park.’ In
park comparison with proximity to home, travel time is more concerned
Intention 0.281 0.039 4.583 ***
(using facility)
about an individual’s condition because each elderly’s travel mode or
<—Living walking speed is different. Travel time had a close relationship with
environment elderly’s accessibility to urban park (Pasaogullari & Doratli, 2004). In
Intention 0.012 0.031 0.294 0.769 this study, elderly people indicate that 92.7% of them travel to public
(using facility)
urban parks within 20 min, and 46.0% of them are within 10 min.
<— Degree of
liking to visit Moreover, 20 min may be an acceptable travel time for elderly people to
urban park decide which public urban park to visit. However, this study also found
Intention 0.009 0.024 0.218 0.827 no significant relationship between physical accessibility and elderly’s
(using facility) intentions of using urban parks. Although elderly people prefer to visit
<— Available
leisure time
urban parks within a short access time, it will not determine their pur­
pose of visiting urban parks. The intention of urban parks is related to
elderly’s self-choice or psychological needs. Ball et al. (2008) pointed

11
S. Wang et al.
Fig. 4. Standardized regression weights in enjoyment activity-based model.
Note: *Relationship is significant at the 0.05 level
**Relationship is significant at the 0.01 level
***Relationship is significant at the 0.001 level.
out that physical accessibility may not be effective to reflect the infor­
mation that are important for recreational activity, such as visiting
urban parks, in an appropriate manner. Elderly’s intention of using
urban parks may rely on their perception to urban parks, as found in this
study, rather than the physical distance to urban parks. Zhang and Tan
(2019) demonstrated that perceived accessibility has a stronger
explanatory and predictive power than physical accessibility regarding
the use behavior of urban parks.
Whether elderly people like to visit urban parks has also been found
to affect their use behavior of urban parks. Elderly people who like to
visit urban parks prefer to more frequently visit them and stay for a
longer time. Degree of liking to visit urban park is a type of elderly’s
attitude toward use of urban parks. Wu et al. (2021) indicated that lei­
sure attitude has a significant positive relationship with leisure moti­
vation. If elderly people have a higher degree of liking to visit urban
park, then it will increase their motivation to use urban parks. The
finding of this study is in line with a previous study (Wang, Brown, Liu,
& Mateo-Babiano, 2015) that people’s attitude toward urban park could
have an essential effect on their decision to visit urban parks in the
future.
5.3. Effects of intention of using urban park on elderly’s use behavior
Elderly’s intention to visit urban park (intention of using urban park)
was found to significantly affect elderly’s use behavior. Elderly people
who visit urban park for different intentions would have various use
patterns. This study indicated that no significant relationship exists
between elderly’s intention to participate in social activity and their use
behavior of urban park. This situation may be because social activities,
such as social interaction and group activities, are irregular. Elderly
people participate in these activities in a random basis, which means
that they may not have a regular plan to be engaged in social activities in
urban parks. This phenomenon was also found in the focus group: ‘On
occasion, I gather with my friends in Tsing Yi Park. We make food and bring it
to the gatherings.’ Thus, elderly people who visit urban parks for social
12
Habitat International 134 (2023) 102780
activity intention do not have a significant use pattern in terms of fre­
quency or length of stay of using urban parks.
Meanwhile, elderly people who intend to do physical activity will
more frequently visit urban parks and stay for a longer period of time.
This study demonstrated that physical exercise is the top reason for
elderly people’s visit to urban park in Hong Kong (75.4% of re­
spondents), which is also found by Wong (2009). Previous studies
pointed out that people may intend to do physical exercise everyday to
stay healthy in urban parks (Gill & Simeoni, 1995; Strath et al., 2007).
This situation is also common for elderly people in Hong Kong because
doing physical activity in urban parks is part of their daily activity. It is
supported by elderly’s opinion during focus group that ‘I go to the Kwai
Chung Park to do exercises every morning.’ Elderly people believe that
doing physical exercise could frequently bring benefits to their physical
health, so they have higher demands to use urban park more frequently
and stay for a longer period of time to stay healthy.
This study also found that elderly people who visit urban parks for
enjoyment intention may have a lower demand of using them. Elderly
people who visit urban parks to enjoy landscape may intend to less
frequently visit, and those who visit to use facility may intend to stay for
a shorter period of time. This situation may be attributed to landscape of
urban park that remains unchanged for a period of time; thus, it may not
be highly attractive to elderly people. Enjoying landscape is not a daily
activity in urban parks for elderly people in Hong Kong. In addition,
elderly people who visit urban parks to use facility have a clear target,
such as toilet or light refreshment kiosks, and they may not stay for a
long period of time. People will leave the urban park after using facil­
ities, which makes them stay for a shorter period of time than elderly
people who visit urban parks for other intentions.
In addition, this study found that three variables, namely, degree of
liking to visit urban park, available leisure time and physical accessi­
bility, do not have significant effects on elderly’s intention of using
urban parks. These variables only have a significant direct effect on
elderly’s use behavior of urban parks. This result is different from the
findings of conflict of use with other groups and four perception
S. Wang et al. Habitat International 134 (2023) 102780

Table 10 variables because they have an indirect effect on elderly’s use behavior
Effects of variables on intention of using urban park and behavior (physical of urban park through affecting elderly’s intention of using them.
activity-based model).
Effects Variables Standardized S.E. C.R. P 6. Conclusion
Estimate

Effect on Intention − 0.141 0.024 − 3.35 *** This study proposed an intention and behavior model of elderly’s use
intention (physical of urban parks based on TPB. The model intends to explore the influ­
of using exercise) <— encing factors that affect elderly’s intention of using urban parks and the
urban Conflict of use
relationship between intention of using urban parks and use behavior in
park with other
(physical groups the context of a high-density city. The study findings provide significant
exercise) Intention 0.062 0.037 1.174 0.24 contribution to theoretical and practical frameworks to understand
(physical elderly’s usage of urban park, which are applicable to cities with a
exercise) <—
similar dense urban environment.
Public transport
Intention − 0.145 0.118 − 1.774 0.076
From the theoretical perspective, the main contribution of this study
(physical is to extend the original TPB model to provide new knowledge of eld­
exercise) <— erly’s intentions of using urban parks and explain elderly’s use behavior
Design Quality of urban parks in high-density urban environments. Firstly, the original
Intention 0.216 0.055 2.867 0.004**
TPB model uses demands as the behavioral intention and explores how it
(physical
exercise) <— affects people’s behavior. This study innovatively used intention of
Benefit of using using urban parks (activity types) as the behavioral intention to inves­
urban park tigate elderly’s usage of them. It provides new insights of the associa­
Intention − 0.067 0.043 − 1.134 0.257
tions between planning and design of public parks and elderly’s use
(physical
exercise) <—
behavior through the linkage of intention of using urban parks from
Living environmental psychological perspective. Different planning and design
environment attributes of public parks may attract elderly users with different in­
Intention 0.036 0.036 0.865 0.387 tentions, and it may result in their different use behavior. Elderly’s
(physical
intention of using urban parks has been divided into three categories
exercise) <—
Degree of liking (social, enjoyment and physical activities). The SEM technique was
to visit urban employed to analyze the three models, namely, social, enjoyment and
park physical activity-based models. The results provided new insights on
Intention 0.054 0.028 1.272 0.203 how intention of using urban parks will affect elderly people’s use
(physical
exercise) <—
behavior of urban parks. Secondly, previous studies mainly applied TPB
Available to explain general individual’s use behavior of urban parks, there is lack
leisure time of focus on the elderly group which have special needs and use behavior
Intention 0.058 0.03 1.376 0.169 of public park, especially in dense urban environments. This study ad­
(physical
dresses this research gap and adds to the knowledge of this domain by
exercise) <—
Physical introducing some specific variables in the model, such as conflict of use
accessibility with other group, benefit of visiting open space, living environment and
Effect on Frequency < — 0.123 0.057 2.939 0.003** available leisure time. In addition, this study also made some im­
urban Available provements of TPB model. It involved the elderly’s subjective evaluation
park use leisure time
behavior Length < — 0.078 0.049 1.893 0.058
of quality of urban parks as a construct variable, except the traditional
Available variables included in the TPB model. This initiative can help in
leisure time improving the model (Zhang & Tan, 2019).
Frequency < — − 0.089 0.059 − 2.125 0.034* In addition, the study found that elderly’s intention of using urban
Physical
parks affects their use behavior, which expands the relevant knowledge.
accessibility
Length < — 0.088 0.051 2.138 0.032* The intention of doing physical activity will encourage elderly people to
Physical more frequently visit urban parks and stay for a longer period of time.
accessibility Elderly people who visit urban parks for enjoyment may less frequently
Frequency < — 0.119 0.072 2.846 0.004** visit or spend less time using them. In addition, elderly people who visit
Degree of liking
to visit urban
public parks for social activities do not have a specific usage pattern. The
park findings show that the effects of intention of using urban parks on use
Length < — 0.169 0.062 4.105 *** behavior vary according to the nature of the activity that elderly people
Degree of liking intend to do.
to visit urban
This study demonstrated that, under the three different intentions,
park
Frequency < — 0.139 0.085 3.296 *** various constraint factors of the TPB model affect the intention of using
Intention urban parks and/or use behavior. Intrapersonal constraints (degree of
(physical liking to visit an urban park) and structural constraints (available leisure
exercise) time and physical accessibility) were directly associated with elderly’s
Length < — 0.215 0.074 5.218 ***
Intention
use behavior, but have no significant effect on elderly’s intention of
(physical using urban parks. This study also found that interpersonal constraints
exercise) (conflict of use with other groups) and intrapersonal constraint variable
Note: *Relationship is significant at the 0.05 level.
(perception to urban parks) may result in elderly’s different intentions of
**Relationship is significant at the 0.01 level. using urban park and indirectly affect elderly’s use behavior of them.
***Relationship is significant at the 0.001 level. Overall, elderly’s use behavior was jointly influenced by their intention
of using them, degree of liking to visit urban parks and available leisure
time and physical accessibility, whilst indirectly related to conflict of use

13
S. Wang et al.
Fig. 5. Standardized regression weights in physical activity-based model.
Note: *Relationship is significant at the 0.05 level
**Relationship is significant at the 0.01 level
***Relationship is significant at the 0.001 level.
with other groups and elderly’s perception to urban park. This work
explains how different interpersonal, intrapersonal and structure con­
straints directly or indirectly affect elderly’s use behavior of public
parks.
The study findings provide a practical contribution to the policy of
planning and management of urban parks. First, the study identified the
associations between elderly’s intention of using urban parks and their
use behavior. To encourage the usage, urban parks should provide suf­
ficient physical fitness equipment and quality space for physical exer­
cises because physical activity could increase elderly’s frequency and
length of stay. In addition, as elderly people who visit urban park for
enjoy landscape and facilities may have less frequency or length of stay,
urban parks may consider renew their landscape design and facilities
regularly to attract more visits. Second, the study also investigated the
relationship between different constraints and elderly’s intention of
using urban parks. Different strategies could be applied during planning,
design and management of different function zones of urban parks.
Considering the effect of conflict of use variable, the management action
plan should be used to avoid conflict of use and control unacceptable
crowding in different areas of the urban parks during different times of
the day and week, especially in fitness area and group activity area.
Public transport would also affect elderly’s use behavior of urban parks;
thus, sufficient public transport services should be provided near urban
parks. Elderly’s awareness of benefits of using open space may
encourage their visits to urban parks for chat with friends, group activity
and physical activity purposes. Thus, it is important for government to
promote education of the benefits of using urban parks to elderly group.
Furthermore, the government should improve the living conditions of
the elderly to ensure that they have ample leisure time to visit urban
parks. Physical accessibility has a direct effect on elderly’s use behavior
of public parks, but no significant effect on different intentions of using
urban parks. This idea may imply that distribution of urban parks should
consider physical accessibility to housing estate because shorter travel
times from home to urban parks may encourage elderly people to more
frequently visit urban parks.
14
Habitat International 134 (2023) 102780
One of the limitations of this study is that the data are only collected
through focus groups and questionnaires, which represent the elderly’s
subjective evaluation of urban parks. Accordingly, this study does not
include an objective evaluation of the design quality and built envi­
ronment of urban parks in the model, such as onsite measurement of
quality of urban parks and the surrounding environment. Future studies
may include these objective variables in the model to improve the per­
formance of TPB in understanding elderly’s use behavior of urban parks.
Author statement
Siqiang Wang: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation,
Methodology, Formal analysis, Visualization, Roles/Writing – original
draft.
Esther Hiu Kwan YUNG: Conceptualization, Investigation, Method­
ology, Formal analysis, Writing – review & editing, Project
administration.
Wadu Mesthrige Jayantha: Conceptualization, Formal analysis,
Writing – review & comment.
Edwin Hon Wan Chan: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Writing –
review & comment.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgments
This research project (Project Number: 2017.A6.102.18B) is funded
by the Public Policy Research Funding Scheme from the Policy Inno­
vation and Co-ordination Office of The Government of the Hong Kong
Special Administrative Region. The authors would like to thank the re­
viewers for their valuable comments.
S. Wang et al. Habitat International 134 (2023) 102780

References Hong Kong Planning Department. (2011). Planning statistics. Hong Kong: Planning
Department, Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Retrieved
March 2022, from http://www.pland.gov.hk/pland/en/info serv/statistic/landu.
Abd’Razack, N. T., Medayese, S. O., Shaibu, S. I., & Adeleye, B. M. (2017). Habits and
html.
benefits of recycling solid waste among households in Kaduna, North West Nigeria.
Huang, Y., Aguilar, F., Yang, J., Qin, Y., & Wen, Y. (2021). Predicting citizens’
Sustainable Cities and Society, 28, 297–306.
participatory behavior in urban green space governance: Application of the extended
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Action
theory of planned behavior. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 61, Article 127110.
control (pp. 11–39). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
Kaczynski, A. T. (2010). Neighborhood walkability perceptions: Associations with
Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality, and behavior (Mapping social psychology). Milton
amount of neighborhood-based physical activity by intensity and purpose. Journal of
Keynes: Open University Press.
Physical Activity and Health, 7(1), 3–10.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human
Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford
Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
publications.
Ajzen, I. (2011). The theory of planned behaviour: Reactions and reflections. Psychology
Kweon, B. S., Sullivan, W. C., & Wiley, A. R. (1998). Green common spaces and the social
and Health, 26(9), 1113–1127.
integration of inner-city older adults. Environment and Behavior, 30(6), 832–858.
Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned behaviour: A
Lin, W., Chen, Q., Jiang, M., Zhang, X., Liu, Z., Tao, J., … Zeng, Q. (2019). The effect of
meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(4), 471–499.
green space behaviour and per capita area in small urban green spaces on
Arnberger, A., Allex, B., Eder, R., Ebenberger, M., Wanka, A., Kolland, F., … Hutter, H. P.
psychophysiological responses. Landscape and Urban Planning, 192, Article 103637.
(2017). Elderly resident’s uses of and preferences for urban green spaces during heat
Lin, B. B., Fuller, R. A., Bush, R., Gaston, K. J., & Shanahan, D. F. (2014). Opportunity or
periods. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 21, 102–115.
orientation? Who uses urban parks and why. PLoS One, 9(1), Article e87422.
Aspinall, P. A., Thompson, C. W., Alves, S., Sugiyama, T., Brice, R., & Vickers, A. (2010).
López-Mosquera, N., García, T., & Barrena, R. (2014). An extension of the Theory of
Preference and relative importance for environmental attributes of neighbourhood
Planned Behavior to predict willingness to pay for the conservation of an urban park.
open space in older people. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 37(6),
Journal of Environmental Management, 135, 91–99.
1022–1039.
Losier, G. F., Bourque, P. E., & Vallerand, R. J. (1993). A motivational model of leisure
Ball, K., Jeffery, R. W., Crawford, D. A., Roberts, R. J., Salmon, J., & Timperio, A. F.
participation in the elderly. Journal of Psychology, 127(2), 153–170.
(2008). Mismatch between perceived and objective measures of physical activity
Loukaitou-Sideris, A., Levy-Storms, L., & Brozen, M. (2014). Placemaking for an aging
environments. Preventive Medicine, 47(3), 294–298.
population: Guidelines for senior-friendly parks. UCLA complete streets initiative, luskin
Barlett, J. E., Kotrlik, J. W., & Higgins, C. C. (2001). Organizational research:
school of public affairs. Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies.
Determining appropriate sample size in survey research. Information Technology,
Loukaitou-Sideris, A., Levy-Storms, L., Chen, L., & Brozen, M. (2016). Parks for an aging
Learning, and Performance Journal, 19(1), 43–50.
population: Needs and preferences of low-income seniors in Los Angeles. Journal of
Beng-Huat, C. (2002). Singaporeans ingesting McDonald’s. In Consumption in asia (pp.
the American Planning Association, 82(3), 236–251.
199–217). Routledge.
Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., & McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in
Bentler, P. M. (1988). Causal modeling via structural equation systems. In Handbook of
confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3),
multivariate experimental psychology (pp. 317–335). Boston, MA: Springer.
391.
Boakye-Dankwa, E., Nathan, A., Barnett, A., Busija, L., Lee, R. S., Pachana, N., …
McCormack, G. R., Rock, M., Toohey, A. M., & Hignell, D. (2010). Characteristics of
Cerin, E. (2019). Walking behaviour and patterns of perceived access to
urban parks associated with park use and physical activity: A review of qualitative
neighbourhood destinations in older adults from a low-density (Brisbane, Australia)
research. Health & Place, 16(4), 712–726.
and an ultra-dense city (Hong Kong, China). Cities, 84, 23–33.
McDonald, R. P., & Ho, M. H. R. (2002). Principles and practice in reporting structural
Byrne, B. M. (2013). Structural equation modeling with Mplus: Basic concepts, applications,
equation analyses. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 64.
and programming. routledge.
Miller, Z. D., Freimund, W., Metcalf, E. C., Nickerson, N., & Powell, R. B. (2019). Merging
Census and Statistics Department. (2013). 2011 population census – thematic report: Older
elaboration and the theory of planned behavior to understand bear spray behavior of
persons. Retrieved March 2022, from https://www.census2011.gov.hk/pdf/older-pe
day hikers in Yellowstone National Park. Environmental Management, 63, 366–378.
rsons.pdf.
Neuvonen, M., Sievänen, T., Tönnes, S., & Koskela, T. (2007). Access to green areas and
Census and Statistics Department. (2017). Hong Kong population projections 2017-2066.
the frequency of visits–A case study in Helsinki. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 6
Retrieved March 2022, from https://www.statistics.gov.hk/pub/B1120015
(4), 235–247.
072017XXXXB0100.pdf.
Pasaogullari, N., & Doratli, N. (2004). Measuring accessibility and utilization of public
Census and Statistics Department. (2018). 2016 population by-census – thematic report:
spaces in Famagusta. Cities, 21(3), 225–232.
Older persons. Retrieved March 2022, from https://www.bycensus2016.gov.hk/
Rahman, A., & Hossain, R. (2020). The uncomfortable truth about land disputes in
data/16BC_Older_persons_report.pdf.
Bangladesh: Insights from a household survey. Land Use Policy, 95, Article 104557.
Chen, Y., Liu, T., Xie, X., & Marušić, B. G. (2016). What attracts people to visit
Reichert, F. F., Barros, A. J., Domingues, M. R., & Hallal, P. C. (2007). The role of
community open spaces? A case study of the Overseas Chinese town community in
perceived personal barriers to engagement in leisure-time physical activity. American
Shenzhen, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,
Journal of Public Health, 97(3), 515–519.
13(7), 644.
Saelens, B. E., Sallis, J. F., Black, J. B., & Chen, D. (2003). Neighborhood-based
Coombes, E., Jones, A. P., & Hillsdon, M. (2010). The relationship of physical activity
differences in physical activity: An environment scale evaluation. American Journal
and overweight to objectively measured green space accessibility and use. Social
of Public Health, 93(9), 1552–1558.
Science & Medicine, 70(6), 816–822.
Shan, X. Z. (2020). Association between the time patterns of urban green space
Cordano, M., Welcomer, S., Scherer, R. F., Pradenas, L., & Parada, V. (2011). A cross-
visitations and visitor characteristics in a high-density, subtropical city. Cities, 97,
cultural assessment of three theories of pro-environmental behavior: A comparison
Article 102562.
between business students of Chile and the United States. Environment and Behavior,
Shi, S., Gou, Z., & Chen, L. (2014). How does enclosure influence environmental
43(5), 634–657.
preferences? A cognitive study on urban public open spaces in Hong Kong.
Crawford, D. W., Jackson, E. L., & Godbey, G. (1991). A hierarchical model of leisure
Sustainable Cities and Society, 13, 148–156.
constraints. Leisure Sciences, 13(4), 309–320.
Strath, S., Isaacs, R., & Greenwald, M. J. (2007). Operationalizing environmental
Creswell, J. W., Fetters, M. D., & Ivankova, N. V. (2004). Designing a mixed methods
indicators for physical activity in older adults. Journal of Aging and Physical Activity,
study in primary care. The Annals of Family Medicine, 2(1), 7–12.
15(4), 412–424.
Curry, L. A., Krumholz, H. M., O’Cathain, A., Clark, V. L. P., Cherlin, E., & Bradley, E. H.
Sugiyama, T., & Thompson, C. W. (2008). Associations between characteristics of
(2013). Mixed methods in biomedical and health services research. Circulation:
neighbourhood open space and older people’s walking. Urban Forestry and Urban
Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, 6(1), 119–123.
Greening, 7(1), 41–51.
Day, R. (2008). Local environments and older people’s health: Dimensions from a
Sugiyama, T., Thompson, C. W., & Alves, S. (2009). Associations between neighborhood
comparative qualitative study in Scotland. Health & Place, 14(2), 299–312.
open space attributes and quality of life for older people in Britain. Environment and
De Vries, S., Van Dillen, S. M., Groenewegen, P. P., & Spreeuwenberg, P. (2013).
Behavior, 41(1), 3–21.
Streetscape greenery and health: Stress, social cohesion and physical activity as
Sun, Y., Fang, Y., Yung, E. H., Chao, T. Y. S., & Chan, E. H. (2020). Investigating the links
mediators. Social Science & Medicine, 94, 26–33.
between environment and older people’s place attachment in densely populated
Doll, W. J., Xia, W., & Torkzadeh, G. (1994). A confirmatory factor analysis of the end-
urban areas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 203, Article 103897.
user computing satisfaction instrument. MIS Quarterly, 453–461.
Tang, D., Gong, X., & Liu, M. (2022). Residents’ behavioral intention to participate in
Dony, C. C., Delmelle, E. M., & Delmelle, E. C. (2015). Re-Conceptualizing accessibility to
neighborhood micro-renewal based on an extended theory of planned behavior: A
parks in multi-modal cities: A variable-width floating catchment area (VFCA)
case study in Shanghai, China. Habitat International, 129, Article 102672.
method. Landscape and Urban Planning, 143, 90–99.
Tang, B. S., & Wong, S. W. (2008). A longitudinal study of open space zoning and
Gibson, S. C. (2018). Let’s go to the park.” an investigation of older adults in Australia
development in Hong Kong. Landscape and Urban Planning, 87(4), 258–268.
and their motivations for park visitation. Landscape and Urban Planning, 180,
Tu, G., Abildtrup, J., & Garcia, S. (2016). Preferences for urban green spaces and peri-
234–246.
urban forests: An analysis of stated residential choices. Landscape and Urban
Giles-Corti, B., Broomhall, M. H., Knuiman, M., Collins, C., Douglas, K., Ng, K., …
Planning, 148, 120–131.
Donovan, R. J. (2005). Increasing walking: how important is distance to,
Turel, H. S., Yigit, E. M., & Altug, I. (2007). Evaluation of elderly people’s requirements
attractiveness, and size of public open space? American journal of preventive medicine,
in public open spaces: A case study in bornova district (Izmir, Turkey). Building and
28(2), 169–176.
Environment, 42(5), 2035–2045.
Gill, B., & Simeoni, E. (1995). Residents’ perceptions of an environmental enhancement
Ullman, J. B., & Bentler, P. M. (2012). Structural equation modeling. Handbook of
project in Australia. Health Promotion International, 10(4), 253–259.
Psychology (2nd ed., p. 2).
Hair, J, Black, W, Babin, B, Anderson, R, & Tatham, R (2006). Multivariate data analysis
(6th edn.). New Jersey: Pearson Educational International—Prentice Hall.

15
S. Wang et al.
Van Holle, V., De Bourdeaudhuij, I., Deforche, B., Van Cauwenberg, J., & Van Dyck, D.
(2015). Assessment of physical activity in older Belgian adults: Validity and
reliability of an adapted interview version of the long International physical activity
questionnaire (IPAQ-L). BMC Public Health, 15(1), 1–14.
Vollmer, D., Prescott, M. F., Padawangi, R., Girot, C., & Grêt-Regamey, A. (2015).
Understanding the value of urban riparian corridors: Considerations in planning for
cultural services along an Indonesian river. Landscape and Urban Planning, 138,
144–154.
Wang, D., Brown, G., & Liu, Y. (2015). The physical and non-physical factors that
influence perceived access to urban parks. Landscape and Urban Planning, 133,
53–66.
Wang, D., Brown, G., Liu, Y., & Mateo-Babiano, I. (2015). A comparison of perceived and
geographic access to predict urban park use. Cities, 42, 85–96.
Wang, D., Brown, G., Zhong, G., Liu, Y., & Mateo-Babiano, I. (2015). Factors influencing
perceived access to urban parks: A comparative study of brisbane (Australia) and
Zhongshan (China). Habitat International, 50, 335–346.
Wang, S., Yung, E. H. K., Yu, Y., & Tsou, J. Y. (2022). Right to the city and community
facility planning for elderly: The case of urban renewal district in Hong Kong. Land
Use Policy, 114, Article 105978.
Wan, C., & Shen, G. Q. (2015). Encouraging the use of urban green space: The mediating
role of attitude, perceived usefulness and perceived behavioural control. Habitat
International, 50, 130–139.
Welsh, E. (2002). Dealing with data: Using NVivo in the qualitative data analysis process.
In , Vol. 3. Forum qualitative sozialforschung/forum: Qualitative social research. No. 2.
16
Habitat International 134 (2023) 102780
Wen, C., Albert, C., & Von Haaren, C. (2018). The elderly in green spaces: Exploring
requirements and preferences concerning nature-based recreation. Sustainable Cities
and Society, 38, 582–593.
Wheaton, B. (1987). Assessment of fit in overidentified models with latent variables.
Sociological Methods & Research, 16(1), 118–154.
WHO. (2007). Global age-friendly cities: A guide. Retrieved March 2022, from http
://www.who.int/ageing/publications/Global_age_friendly_cities_Guide_English.pdf.
Wong, K. K. (2009). Urban park visiting habits and leisure activities of residents in Hong
Kong, China. Managing Leisure, 14(2), 125–140.
Wu, Y., Sun, J., Fan, F., Wang, X., & Peng, Y. (2021). The study on the influence of
motivation, attitude and Obstacles of Middle school students’ participation in leisure
activities on their leisure satisfaction in Southwest China. Frontiers in Psychology,
5622.
Yen, Y., Wang, Z., Shi, Y., Xu, F., Soeung, B., Sohail, M. T., … Juma, S. A. (2017). The
predictors of the behavioral intention to the use of urban green spaces: The
perspectives of young residents in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Habitat International, 64,
98–108.
Yung, E. H. K., Wang, S., & Chau, C. K. (2019). Thermal perceptions of the elderly, use
patterns and satisfaction with open space. Landscape and Urban Planning, 185, 44–60.
Zhang, J., & Tan, P. Y. (2019). Demand for parks and perceived accessibility as key
determinants of urban park use behavior. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 44,
Article 126420.
Zhu, B. W., Zhang, J. R., Tzeng, G. H., Huang, S. L., & Xiong, L. (2017). Public open space
development for elderly people by using the DANP-V model to establish continuous
improvement strategies towards a sustainable and healthy aging society.
Sustainability, 9(3), 420.