Research on the Optimal Design of Community Public Space from the Perspective of Social Capital

Abstract

In the process of rapid urbanization and accelerated transformation of urban community public space structures, the optimization of community space structure and the quality of the living environment has attracted the attention of academic circles. Existing research has shown that the well-being of community residents is positively correlated with community social capital. The starting point of this study was howaimed to increase residents’ social capital and enhance their sense of life happiness through a good community space environment design. This paper focuses on the analysis of the spatial perception level of community residents and the correlation between environmental space design elements and social capital and explores the environmental factors that affect the accumulation of social capital of community residents to put forward suggestions for the optimal design of community public spaces. A field survey of 30 communities in Shanghai City was conducted based on relevant theories and practical cases both at home and abroad. The six dimensions of “social cohesion”, “sense of community belonging”, “social participation”, “social network”, “social interaction”, and “neighborhood relationship” are used to assign social capital, and the six dimensions are respectively regressed with residents’ environmental perception of the community and the objective environment of the community. The correlation between the social capital of community residents and the three elements of public space (space, facilities, and social elements) was obtained. According to the public space optimization design strategy of the three elements, public space design principles for improving community social capital are proposed, including the principles of diversification, humanization, suitability, and inclusiveness, and the corresponding suggestions are proposed from three aspects: point space, line space, and surface space.

1. Introduction

Community public spaces are important places for residents to participate in urban daily activities and to relax, socialize, entertain, relax, and enjoy good times [1]. High-quality public spaces contribute to health, the economy, social cohesion, well-being, and biodiversity [2]. With the rapid urbanization and industrialization in China, social and economic development and the great improvement in the living conditions of residents have brought new demands on the function and quality of public space [3]. Social capital is an important concept of sociological research. It refers to a collection of actual or potential resources obtained through the possession of an “institutionalized relationship network” [4]. Social capital mainly comes from the horizontal connection between people, including social networks, trust, and related norms [5]. It is an individual’s ability to obtain scarce resources on social networks [6]. Community space has an important impact on the growth of community social capital [7]. A community is essentially a community of residents’ social life, and “the construction of community needs the joint participation of multiple subjects, and this benign interaction can only be realized by relying on the platform of public space” [8]. An important special attribute of the “community” is its “life”. Community spaces are spaces for residents’ daily life activities. Because of the characteristics of “openness” and “no threshold”, community public space has become an important space for residents’ leisure and entertainment, exercise, chat and communication, and cultural activities [9]. It is also the best place for residents to carry out mass public activities, as well as an important platform for residents to establish social networks. The residents’ activities in such public spaces are characterized by daily, frequent, and interest-free activities. Social capital is an important resource that promotes the overall development of communities and the individual development of residents [10]. From the perspective of the community as a whole, good neighborhood relations and the resulting strong sense of belonging are the bases of community governance [11]. The accumulation of community social capital helps community managers organize and mobilize residents to participate in community affairs, restrict residents’ behavior, maintain community public interests, and promote community development [12]. Social capital and public space interact with each other. Currently, the design of community public spaces is relatively closed, resulting in a reduction in the frequency of communication, contact, and interaction between residents in the community [13]. Simultaneously, the degree of social participation was greatly reduced. It is difficult to contact new objects, and there is a certain distance from the outside world. People’s trust and sense of security cannot be improved, the establishment of interpersonal networks lacks relative space carriers, and the neighborhood relationship is not as close as it used to be, which is not conducive to improving the happiness of life [14]. At the same time, research shows that residents in the community can participate in daily recreational activities and physical activities, which has a significant impact on per capita well-being [15]. A sense of happiness in life is closely related to social capital. From the perspective of social livelihood or economic development, enhancing a sense of happiness requires sufficient attention from all walks of life. Therefore, for the design of community public spaces, attention should be paid to design efficiency to improve the sense of happiness and gain of community residents from the perspective of improving social capital and to help improve the happiness of residents from the design level.

At present, research on social capital mainly focuses on its connotation and measurement, whereas research on the relationship between architectural space and social capital is scarce. This study aims to quantify community social capital, analyze the residents’ spatial environmental perception level and the correlation between spatial environmental factors and social capital, explore the environmental factors that affect the accumulation of social capital, and propose space optimization design suggestions from the perspective of architectural design, which can provide new sociological theoretical support for the development of public space architectural design.

As a form of capital, social capital should first have proliferative properties; however, it also exists in social organizations and networks. Therefore, it exhibits the following properties: 1. The subject’s social capital is an embedded result. Only when individuals enter a certain network, they can have social capital, which differs from physical and human capital. This does not depend on the existence of the individuals. 2. Social capital continues to increase with its use, and once it is not used, it immediately dries up. 3. Social capital has non-transferability “because it is an embedded result” and does not depend on the subject. 4. The destruction of social capital is easy to achieve. In other words, the formation of social capital is relatively difficult, but it is also fragile and easily destroyed. The consequences of this destruction are serious. 5. Social capital refers to the nature of the public good. The fundamental difference between social capital and other forms of capital is that many forms of social capital have the characteristics of public goods. Social capital also has external effects on its use.

The construction method of Christopher Alexander’s “Pattern Language” is a preliminary exploration in the field of architecture to solve complex problems in the human settlement environment system [16]. Christopher Alexander criticized the top-down design method of modern designers, advocating the process of a large number of local construction behaviors gathering and evolving on their own. He believes that the environment generated by “Pattern Language” is a complex system of overall and local harmony [17]. Christopher Alexander’s “Pattern Language” provides a solution for informal settlements, as they have many public spaces that bring prosperity to public life. Another public space scholar, Jan Gehl, advocates for conducting practical surveys of public spaces, with all indicators designed to be measured through human senses [18], and some scholars can extend Jan Gehl’s method from investigating small urban areas to analyzing the entire city [19].

In recent years, when the COVID-19 pandemic emerged, the planning weaknesses of most urban planning models were exposed. Some aspects advocated by the concept of “15 min city” have gained attention during the pandemic. The concept of “15 min city” is in line with the promotion of proximity dimensions, emphasizing walking and social interaction within the city. Alexander and Jan Gehl supported this viewpoint through their paper on human-scale urban design [20], and some scholars have predicted that cities will benefit from the widespread acceptance and implementation of the concept of “15 min city” [21].

The research achievements of these scholars are not only the thinking research methods in the field of human settlement environment construction but also an effective way of understanding and analyzing the universal laws of things’ development. Based on the research results of the above scholars, this article introduces the sociological theory of “social capital” into community planning research and establishes an evaluation system for community public space based on its key factors, thus proposing a design strategy for updating existing community public spaces in cities based on the accumulation of social capital. The innovation lies in the following two aspects:

(1) Innovation in perspective: Exploring the spatial design of urban communities from the perspective of urban communities by combining social capital theory.

The study explores the spatial design of urban communities under the theory of social capital, which is different from traditional urban spatial construction models. It explores the applicability of social capital theory to the public space of communities, providing new ideas and perspectives for systematically analyzing and solving community spatial development problems.

(2) Method innovation: Explore methods and strategies for improving the quality of community public spaces in the context of the new era.

The research focuses on the many problems that arise in the development process of community public space construction, taking specific spatial design as the starting point, and constructs a scenario-based design method framework composed of the spatial environment, node public space, and finally local space. It is a research framework composed of multiple levels and perspectives. Covering three dimensions: macro-environmental construction, meso-spatial quality improvement, and micro-spatial local element design, corresponding design strategies are proposed to provide effective methods and strategies for the construction and development of community public spaces and spatial design.

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. The second section is a literature review. The third section describes the definitions and concepts. The fourth section describes the research methods and data sources. The fifth section provides a detailed analysis of the results. The sixth section summarizes the relevant suggestions proposed in this study. The seventh section is the conclusion and outlook.

2. Measurement of Community Social Capital and Environmental Perception

2.1. Research on Social Capital

2.1.1. Research on the Role of Social Capital

Daskalopoulou (2023) analyzed the mediating role of social capital in creating social value in social entrepreneurship [22]. Giacovelli (2022) studied the social aspects of social capital used to influence energy transformation [23]. Sun (2021) analyzed the spatial environment perception level of elderly people in nursing homes and the correlation between environmental space design elements and social capital [24]. Zhang (2017) believes that community public spaces have important constraints and impacts on community social capital [25]. Xiong Yihan (2020) believes that an important reason for the lack of social capital in urban community residents is that the spatial arrangement of the community cannot create personalized social interaction opportunities for residents, leading to the disappearance of neighborhood relationships [26].

Summarizing the above literature, it is found that research on the Community Governance model based on social capital theory, urban Community Governance based on social capital theory, and community construction in old urban areas based on social capital theory are recent research directions.

2.1.2. Research on the Patterns of Social Capital Formation

In the report by Wang, D. (2023), four different Community Governance models were summarized using social capital theory [27]. Li Yanfei (2022) discussed the optimization strategy of urban Community Governance from the perspective of social capital and studied the positive impact of social capital on residents’ interaction, public participation, and other behaviors [28]. Wenjie (2021) believes that exploring community construction in old urban areas from the perspective of social capital is worthy of research and promotion [29].

Summarizing the above literature, it is found that social capital has a mediating role, can affect energy transformation, and can affect the spatial environment perception level of elderly people, public space has constraints on community social capital, and an important reason for the lack of social capital among urban community residents is the lack of social interaction opportunities.

2.1.3. Research on the Measurement of Social Capital

Bi Xiangyang suggested that the construction of community social capital should be placed within the framework of a multilevel latent variable model and modeled using multilevel confirmatory factor analysis [30]. Fang Yaqin incorporated five dimensions and thirty indicators into a community social capital measurement table through factor analysis [31]. Eriksson used principal component analysis to measure the level of social capital at the community level and studied how social capital is related to social population and socioeconomic factors [32].

Summarizing the above literature, we found that multilevel confirmatory factor analysis, factor analysis, and principal component analysis methods have been applied to the study of social capital.

2.2. Research on Public Space

2.2.1. Research on Specific Issues

Mariano (2023) proposed paths and projects conducive to achieving sustainable and inclusive public spaces to establish new relationships between cities and the natural environment [33]. Yan Decheng (2017) revealed that public space is an indispensable carrier of the dynamic dissemination of corporate social networks and the appreciation and utilization of social capital [34]. Zhou (2022) believes that a completely rural public space is conducive to promoting the comprehensive revitalization of rural areas [35]. Fang Yaming believes that examining the construction and development of urban community public space in China from a humanistic perspective is essential. Incorporating the optimized allocation of urban community public space into the strategic layout of building a better life and promoting the modernization of national governance is an important embodiment of the people-centered development concept and an inevitable choice for the high-quality development of urban communities [36]. Wang Yanan used the SPSS mathematical analysis to explore the impact of the urban community public space environment on residents’ emotions [37]. Liu Xueying used the Delphi method to build an evaluation system for the resilience of urban community public spaces from the perspective of epidemic prevention [38]. Xing Nianchen turned to the theory of environmental behavior research as a guide, combined with geographic information systems (GIS) to evaluate the public space potential of mixed residential communities and considered the two main elements of time and space that are most closely related to people’s use of space to use GIS for traffic reachability analysis. Using GIS to simulate and calculate the potential regional distribution of public space, a potential evaluation system for public spaces in mixed residential communities was constructed [39].

Summarizing the above literature, it has been found that research on inclusive public spaces, bar spaces, rural public spaces, urban community public spaces with a people-centered development concept, urban community public spaces from the perspective of epidemic prevention, and mixed residential communities has received attention from scholars.

2.2.2. Research Targeting Specific Regions and Specific Facilities

Li Yanqun (2021) drew inspiration from the theory of spatial production and studied whether impoverished villages in southwestern Yunnan could achieve high-quality revitalization and sustainable development in response to the phenomenon of spatial reconstruction [40]. Kamalipour (2023) analyzed how the public space of countries in the Southern Hemisphere of Earth was formed, revealing the spatial structure and incremental changes [41]. Cheng (2021) believes that the form and function of rural public spaces play an important role in promoting rural development [42]. Hwang (2023) argued that shared spaces, such as university-affiliated welfare facilities, have not been well utilized [43]. Ma Yilin (2021) analyzed the problems and reasons for the renovation of public spaces in old residential areas [44]. Yuzhen (2019) believes that the traditional endogenous interactions and cultural sustainability of communities are gradually declining and breaking down. To meet the need to create a social governance pattern of co-construction, co-governance, and sharing in the new era, the maintenance mechanism of modern urban community communities can be reconstructed from the perspective of internal propaganda [45].

Summarizing the above literature, it has been found that research targeting specific regions, such as impoverished villages in southwestern Yunnan that can cope with spatial reconstruction, public spaces in countries in the southern hemisphere of Earth, and rural public spaces, has received attention. There are issues with the poor utilization of shared spaces, the transformation of public spaces, and the gradual decline in traditional endogenous interactions in communities.

2.2.3. Research on Spatial Environment Perception

Wang et al. found that spatial perception had a significant positive impact on leisure satisfaction, and leisure satisfaction had a significant mediating effect on the relationship between spatial perception and leisure loyalty [46]. Qiao et al. found that the higher the perceived natural feature score of neighborhood green spaces, the higher the subjective well-being level of residents is [47]. Peng Yongzhi began with an analysis of the recreational characteristics and spatial perception needs of the elderly population, exploring the spatial supportive environmental characteristics and elements of recreational activities for the elderly in community parks, and analyzing their impact mechanism on recreational activities for the elderly [48]. Zhou Jun believes that spatial perception is the prerequisite and foundation for reproducing spatial cognitive behaviors such as environmental images in memory. A high-quality spatial environment encourages users to have a good psychological experience and affects their health and emotional and social behavior [49]. Song Jingwen used VR and eye trackers to study the side interface morphology and perception of famous pedestrian commercial streets in China, providing a reference for the research method of virtual and real interactions for urban spatial perception [50]. Xu Yiwen believed that the spatial perception of community public service facilities can be multidimensional, which is an organic fusion of the psychological perception of the material environment and behavioral preference perception [51].

Summarizing the above literature, it was found that spatial perception has a mediating effect on residents’ subjective well-being, entertainment, and good psychological experience for the elderly.

2.2.4. Research on the Quality of Life of Residents

Xiao Qiao believed that the various drawbacks caused by rapid urbanization have triggered and exacerbated the mental health problems of urban residents. Neighborhood green spaces are closely related to people and play an important role in public health. Research on health-oriented green spaces is a task in the field of landscape architecture; it is also an organic integration of landscape architecture and other related and public health fields. In this context, the impact of neighborhood green spaces on the subjective well-being of urban residents urgently requires systematic and in-depth research [47]. Xu Guangqing believes that street space, as a public space that accommodates residents for outdoor activities, is often overlooked in the planning and design proposed in the early stages of urban development. This suppresses other behaviors in residents’ daily lives to varying degrees, leading to a lack of vitality and a lack of human touch, as well as reducing residents’ sense of happiness. Therefore, a deep understanding of the impact of environmental factors on residents’ daily life behavior is of great significance for guiding the renovation, optimization, and transformation of residential streets [52]. Miaomiao believes that street space is an important component of urban public spaces. Compared to the macro-level, the micro-level-built environment has a more direct impact on people’s physical and mental health. Therefore, research on the healing of urban living street spaces on a close human scale is important [53].

Summarizing the above literature, it was found that public spaces are closely related to residents’ mental health, happiness, and physical and mental healing.

A summary of the existing research findings reveals that domestic and foreign scholars’ research on social capital mainly focuses on the relationship between social capital and community development, the role of social capital, and strategies for cultivating social capital. Among these, studying the relationship between social capital and communities, as well as methods for cultivating social capital, is of great value for studying the relationship between social capital and the architectural spatial environment. Many studies have focused on social capital and community research, with a few scholars studying the relationship between social capital and the public space environment. Therefore, in the field of architecture, relevant research requires further exploration.

The proposal of this research hypothesis mainly stems from the model established based on existing theoretical and empirical research on social capital and public space optimization. By analyzing the mutual relationship between the two, we summarize the possible hypotheses. This study was based on a literature review and analysis. The focus of this study was to examine the spatial perception level of community residents and the interaction and impact mechanism between environmental space design elements and social capital. The hypotheses of this study were proposed to determine the direction of subsequent empirical research. Therefore, this study assumes that community social capital has a positive impact on the optimization of community public spaces.

3. Measurement of Community Social Capital and Environmental Perception

3.1. Definition and Measurement Method of Community Social Capital

Social capital is a concept that originates from “economic capital” but transcends “economic capital”. The academic community has not reached a consensus on its definition, which is closely related to specific historical backgrounds and research views [54,55]. Generally speaking, social capital can be explained from micro, medium, and macro perspectives according to the different objects of social capital (countries, organizations, and individuals). From a micro perspective, social capital is the interaction among different individuals in their networks and groups; from a medium perspective, social capital is the difference between the social status and treatment of the members of the community determined by the community organization; from a macro perspective, social capital is a group of social members to meet production needs, management needs, solidarity, and cooperation [56]. Social networks play an important role in social capital. Social capital and networks are inseparable. As a resource, social capital plays a positive role in different groups of societies and can bring corresponding returns to different members of the network. Social capital can be considered as a combination of resources. There are two ways to measure community social capital: one is to construct the overall social network of community residents (to represent social capital) through questionnaires or interviews and to explain the accumulation of social capital in the network with the characteristics of the overall network structure, node network value, network connection strength, etc. [57]. The social network data in recent years provides new possibilities for building the overall network, and the second is to start from the basic concept of social capital and use the form of a questionnaire to let residents answer questions representing different dimensions of social capital (fill in the quantity or judgment degree) to measure community social capital. Based on foreign research, domestic scholars have constructed a multi-dimensional measurement system suitable for China’s national conditions (including seven dimensions: local social network, community sense of belonging, community cohesion, non-local social networking, volunteerism, reciprocity and general trust, and community trust). and completed a test of the measurement system based on the city of Shanghai community survey data [58].

Scholars have measured social capital. Narayan believes that the measurement of social capital should include dimensions such as trust, community participation, general norms, neighborhood connections, harmonious coexistence, daily socializing, and volunteerism, and refined social capital into four aspects for measurement: collective efficacy, community awareness, community cohesion, and community capacity [59]. Based on the Social Capital Assessment Tools (SCAT) developed by the World Bank, scholars such as Harpham optimized A-SCAT to measure structural social capital from dimensions such as participation in public affairs, collective action, and organizational connections [60]. Cognitive social capital was measured from dimensions such as trust, social support, social cohesion, community belonging, and reciprocity and cooperation De Silva suggests measuring social capital from eight dimensions: community participation, social support, social cohesion, community belonging, social trust, public affairs participation, and family social capital. Based on the relevant research results from abroad, domestic scholars have developed richer measurement indicators [61]. Zhao measured the community social capital of residents in the western region in two dimensions: trust and public participation [62]. Pei Zhijun measured village social capital in six dimensions: universal trust, normative trust, shared vision, social support, formal networks, and informal networks [63]. Yong and Guirong measured community social capital from seven dimensions and twenty-nine factors, including local social networks, community belonging, community cohesion, non-local social interaction, volunteerism, reciprocity and general trust, and community trust [55].

By summarizing and integrating previous research results, the questionnaire for this study was formed [64,65,66]. The whole questionnaire contained three main contents: first, the basic description of personal situation; second, social capital measurement; and last, the environmental perception measurement of community public space. Referring to relevant research on the perception of the public space environment [67,68,69,70,71], this article selects three elements of public space. Referring to Zhang’s research [72], the text constructs a social cohesion index. The measurement of social capital mainly included six aspects: “social cohesion”, “sense of community belonging”, “social participation”, “social network”, “social interaction”, and “neighborhood relationship”, with a total of twenty-three questions (

Table 1. Six dimensions of residents’ social capital in their communities.

Dimensions	Indicator (23 Questions)
Social cohesion	High rate of receiving care and assistance
	The proportion of equal educational opportunities is relatively high
	The proportion of equal conditions in public facilities is relatively high
	Good social security situation
	A higher proportion of people believe that they can get along well with each other
Community attachment	Be proud of your community
	I like my neighborhood
	It would be a pity if we had to move
	Most residents have a high spirit of participation
Social participation	Frequency of participating in community public activities
	Participation: community political activities
	Participation: community public welfare activities
	Members: volunteer organizations
	Participation: community cultural and entertainment activities
	Participation: community public affairs management activities
Social network	The number of residents who greet each other when meeting in the community
	A good relationship with the number of residents who can visit
	Number of ordinary friends living in the community
	Number of intimate friends living in the community
Social interaction	The number of neighbors visiting you in the past two weeks
	The number of times you visit your neighbors in the past two weeks
Neighborhood relations	Can borrow tools from neighbors smoothly
	Number of types of neighborhood conflicts (negative)

).

3.2. Measurement of Spatial Environment Perception of Public Buildings

For the measurement of public space environment perception, we mainly start with two aspects: public space environment perception and building external environment perception and make detailed inquiries to have a comprehensive grasp of the overall space environment. In the measurement of residents’ perception of the space environment, the author asked 12 questions to understand the perception of the space environment of public buildings. The details are as follows: space elements of public activity space (diversity, enclosure, and accessibility); facility elements (the abundance of commercial facilities, the comfort of activity facilities, landscape work, the satisfaction of fitness facilities and landscape greening, the abundance of service facilities, and the distribution of activity facilities), and social factors (public security level, traffic service, and sanitation level) are assigned. According to a five-point Likert scale, 1 = very satisfied, 2 = relatively satisfied, 3 = general, 4 = relatively dissatisfied, and 5 = very dissatisfied. In addition, three subjective questions were added: the way you like to chat with others; the most suitable place to chat with family or friends; if there is a space in the community that can be provided for nearby children to play or share with nearby residents, are you willing to participate? The main purpose is to provide directions for future recommendations on the optimized design of public building spaces. Through the measurement of the environmental perception of the building space, we can understand the residents’ perception of the space in the process of living and analyze the correlation with social capital.

4. Data Sources and Research Methods

Considering the limitations of research capabilities and costs, the Zhengtong community with universal representativeness was selected from the local Shanghai city. As shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2, the Zhengtong Community was founded in 2003, with a total area of approximately 1 square kilometer and more than 20,000 people. The Zhengtong Community is a new type of industrial and trade area formed in recent years in the construction of new rural areas and rural housing projects. The commercial economy in the community is prosperous, and the composition of internal personnel is diverse. It has good representativeness among many local communities and is a suitable research object with research value.

4.1. Study Area and Data Source

This study uses first-hand data from a survey of residents’ social capital and environmental perception in Shanghai City in May 2021. The survey adopts the method of staged random sampling: First of all, 30 typical communities were selected according to the geographical location, housing type, construction age, and other conditions, and the survey area covered 6 municipal districts and 11 streets in Shanghai city; Secondly, 50 samples aged 18–65 were randomly selected from each residential community and distributed questionnaires. A total of 1500 questionnaires were distributed, and 1480 valid questionnaires were returned, with an effective recovery rate of 98.67%. This study selects 1425 samples with complete records (samples with no missing values of the variables concerned in the study and living in the current residence for more than 1 year) to build a basic database.

Table 2. Respondents’ Socio-economic Attributes (n = 1425).

Variable		Quantity/Average	Proportion (%)/Standard Deviation
Gender	Female	841	50.9
	Male	584	49.1
Residence	Non-local	385	27.0
	Local	1040	73.0
Marriage	Unmarried	254	17.8
	Married	1171	82.2
Age	18–35	373	26.2
	36–45	311	21.8
	46–55	274	19.2
	56–65	467	32.8
Monthly income	Less than RMB 5000	226	15.9
	5000–15,000	856	60.2
	More than RMB 15,000	343	24.1
Average length of residence		14.16	12.23

shows the socioeconomic characteristics of the sample, in which there are slightly more women than men, and the age distribution is relatively balanced. Most residents are married and have local household registration. The monthly income of the family was mainly between 5000 and 15,000 yuan, and the average length of residence in the current residence was 14.16 years. Overall, the distribution of socio-economic attributes of the sample is relatively balanced, which is close to the overall level of Shanghai City.

4.2. Research Methods

This study intends to use the hierarchical linear regression model (HLM) for data analysis and construct the linear function Y of each dimension of the social capital of the surveyed community, so that the influencing factors of the public space of the surveyed community are the set X = {x₁, x₂, x₃}, where x₁, x₂, and x₃ are the facility, social, and space elements, respectively. A multivariate linear function Y for all dimensions of social capital in the survey community Y = α₀ + α_nX_n + ε, N ∈ {1,2,3}, that is, Y = α₀ + α₁X₁ + α₂X₂ + α₃X₃ + ε, is constructed, where X₁, X₂, and X₃ are function arguments; α₀, α₁, α₂, and α₃ are the regression coefficients; ε is a random variable, and its value will change with different values. Therefore, the regression equation is as follows:

$$E(Y)={\mathsf{\alpha }}_0+{\mathsf{\alpha }}_1{\mathrm{X}}_1+{\mathsf{\alpha }}_2{\mathrm{X}}_2+{\mathsf{\alpha }}_3{\mathrm{X}}_3$$

Similarly, the regression equation shown below can be obtained by modeling different spatial elements of public spaces using multiple regression models:

$$\left\{\begin{array}{l}\mathrm{E}(X_1)={\mathsf{\beta }}_{10}+{\mathsf{\beta }}_{11}{x}_{11}+{\mathsf{\beta }}_{12}{x}_{12}+{\mathsf{\beta }}_{13}{x}_{13}\\ \mathrm{E}(X_2)={\mathsf{\beta }}_{20}+{\mathsf{\beta }}_{21}{x}_{21}+{\mathsf{\beta }}_{22}{x}_{22}+{\mathsf{\beta }}_{23}{x}_{23}+{\mathsf{\beta }}_{24}{x}_{24}+{\mathsf{\beta }}_{25}{x}_{25}\\ \mathrm{E}(X_3)={\mathsf{\beta }}_{30}+{\mathsf{\beta }}_{31}{x}_{31}+{\mathsf{\beta }}_{32}{x}_{32}+{\mathsf{\beta }}_{33}{x}_{33}\end{array}\right\}$$

where x₁₁ = diversity, x₁₂ = fitness, x₁₃ = accessibility, x₂₁ = richness of commercial facilities, x₂₂ = comfort of activity facilities, x₂₃ = satisfaction of landscape work, fitness facilities, and landscape greening, x₂₄ = richness of service facilities, x₂₅ = distribution of activity facilities, x₃₁ = security level, x₃₂ = traffic service, and x₃₃ = sanitation level. Then, the least squares method was used to obtain its estimated value and carry out the multivariate coefficient test.

5. Results

The results include the evaluation index of spatial elements (diversity, enclosure, and reachability) in this study; facility elements (the richness of commercial facilities, the comfort of activity facilities, landscape sketches, the satisfaction with fitness activity facilities and landscape greening, the richness of service facilities, and distribution of activity facilities); assigned values to social factors (public security level, transportation service level, and environmental sanitation level), based on the five-point Likert scale, 1 = very satisfied, 2 = quite satisfied, 3 = average, 4 = relatively dissatisfied, and 5 = very dissatisfied (

Table 3. Variable assignments.

Element Types	Valuation Indicators	Assignment Methods
Spatial elements	Diversity	1 = very satisfied; 2 = quite satisfied; 3 = average; 4 = relatively dissatisfied; 5 = very dissatisfied
	Enclosure degree
	Reachability
Facility Elements	Abundance of commercial facilities
	Comfort of activity facilities
	Satisfaction with landscape sketches, fitness facilities, and landscape greening
	Abundance of service facilities
	Distribution of activity facilities
Social element	Public security level
	Transportation services
	Environmental sanitation level

).

By weighing and normalizing all influencing factors and their sub-influencing factors, the proportions of the spatial, facility, and social factors were 28.48%, 36.39%, and 35.13%, respectively. It can be seen that facility factors account for the highest proportion among the influencing factors of existing community public spaces. The final impact results for each factor are presented in

Table 4. Variable weighting.

Element Types	Valuation Indicators	Weight Value
Spatial elements	Diversity	10.36226
	Enclosure degree	11.96293
	Reachability	6.149958
Facility Elements	Abundance of commercial facilities	4.254423
	Comfort of activity facilities	13.85847
	Satisfaction with landscape sketches, fitness facilities, and landscape greening	0.758214
	Abundance of service facilities	3.706824
	Distribution of activity facilities	13.81634
Social element	Public security level	14.78517
	Transportation services	5.307498
	Environmental sanitation level	15.03791

.

5.1. Regression Analysis of Three Elements of Public Space

The linear regression analysis results of the factors are shown in

Table 5. Results of Linear Regression Analysis of Factors.

Factor	Independent Variable	Denormalization Coefficient		Beta	t	p	VIF	R2	F	D-W
		B	Standard Error
Spatial element (X1)	constant (β10)	0.716	0.197	-	3.564	0.001		0.712	F(3,45) = 36.125, p = 0.000	1.796
	Diversity (x11)	0.261	0.104	0.395	2.398	0.020	4.027
	Fitness (x12)	0.292	0.15	0.322	1.76	0.084	4.987
	Accessibility (x13)	0.141	0.147	0.1667	0.928	0.358	4.868
Facility elements (X2)	constant (β20)	0.242	0.23	-	1.09	0.285	-	0.752	F(5,46) = 26.221, p = 0.000	2.229
	Abundance of commercial facilities (x21)	0.103	0.107	0.092	0.943	0.352	1.724
	Comfort of activity facilities (x22)	0.331	0.126	0.364	2.581	0.013	3.467
	Fitness facilities and greening satisfaction (x23)	−0.021	0.119	−0.024	−0.165	0.872	3.608
	Abundance of service facilities (x24)	0.088	0.132	0.108	0.667	0.508	4.503
	Distribution of activity facilities (x25)	0.345	0.345	0.198	0.423	3.165	0.003
Social factors	constant (β40)	0.379	0.212	-	1.793	0.08		0.711	F(3,46) = 37.500, p = 0.000	1.664
	Public security (x41)	0.353	0.137	0.398	2.592	0.012	3.178
	Transportation services (x42)	0.125	0.125	0.134	0.984	0.332	2.996
	Sanitation level (x43)	0.357	0.093	0.413	3.905	0.000	1.762

.

5.1.1. Spatial Elements

Taking diversity, fitness, and accessibility as independent variables, and taking spatial elements as dependent variables for linear regression analysis, the R square value of the model is 0.712, meaning that diversity, enclosure, and accessibility can explain 71.2% of the changes in spatial elements; during the F test of the model, it was found that the model passed the F test (F = 36.125, p = 0.000 < 0.05); that is to say, at least one of the diversity, enclosure, and accessibility would have an impact on the spatial elements, and the model formula was: spatial elements = 0.716 + 0.261 × diversity + 0.292 × enclosure + 0.141 × accessibility. Specific analysis shows that: (1) The regression coefficient value of diversity is 0.261 (p = 0.002 < 0.05), which indicates that diversity will have a significant positive impact on spatial elements. (2) The values of p for enclosure and accessibility are greater than 0.05, which means that they will not affect the spatial elements; it can be concluded from the summary and analysis that the degree of the enclosure will have a significant positive impact on the spatial elements. However, the diversity and accessibility variables do not affect the spatial elements.

5.1.2. Facility Elements

Considering the abundance of commercial facilities, the comfort of activity facilities, the satisfaction of landscape work, fitness facilities and landscape greening, the abundance of service facilities, and the distribution of activity facilities as independent variables, the facility elements were used as dependent variables for linear regression analysis. The R square value of the model is 0.752, which means the abundance of commercial facilities, the comfort of activity facilities, the satisfaction of landscape work, fitness facilities and landscape greening, the abundance of service facilities, and the distribution of activity facilities can explain 75.2% of the change of facility elements. F test (F = 26.219, p = 0.000 < 0.05) shows that at least one of the commercial facility abundance, activity facility comfort, landscape sketch, fitness activity facility and landscape greening satisfaction, service facility abundance, activity facility distribution will have an impact on the facility elements, and the model formula is as follows: facility element = 0.242 + 0.103 × commercial facility abundance + 0.331 × activity facility comfort −0.021 × landscape sketch Satisfaction with fitness facilities and landscaping + 0.088 × richness of service facilities + 0.345 × distribution of activity facilities. The analysis shows that the comfort of activity facilities and the distribution of activity facilities will have a significant positive impact on the facility elements. However, the abundance of commercial facilities, landscape work, fitness facilities, landscape greening satisfaction, and the abundance of service facilities do not affect the facility elements.

5.1.3. Social Factors

Taking the level of public security, traffic service, and sanitation as independent variables, and taking social factors as dependent variables for linear regression analysis, the R-square value of the model can be obtained from the above model. This means that the level of public security, traffic service, and sanitation can explain 71.1% of the changes in social factors. Model F test (F = 37.406, p = 0.000 < 0.05), which means that at least one of the public security levels, traffic services, or sanitation levels will have an impact on social factors. From the above, we can draw the model formula as follows: social factor = 0.379 + 0.353 × public security level + 0.125 × traffic service + 0.357 × sanitation level. The analysis showed that the level of public security and sanitation will have a significant positive impact on social factors. However, transportation services do not affect social factors.

5.2. Regression Analysis of Social Capital

A large number of sociological studies have shown that personal attributes affect individuals’ attitudes towards neighbors, recognition of community identity, attachment to communities, etc., that is, the social capital of residents’ communities is related to personal attributes [43]. Public space architectural design is more concerned with the impact of community public space elements on social capital. Combining all the factors of public spaces, the main factors were selected and analyzed. The degree of enclosure, the comfort of activity facilities, the richness of service facilities, the level of public security, and the level of sanitation were taken as independent variables, and the six dimensions of social capital were taken as dependent variables for the linear regression analysis (See Figure 3).

5.2.1. Social Cohesion

Regression analysis was conducted on the degree of enclosure, the comfort of activity facilities, the richness of service facilities, public security level, and sanitation level. With social cohesion as the dependent variable, the analysis showed that the degree of enclosure and public security level had a significant positive impact on the social cohesion of the respondents, with regression coefficients of 0.258 and 0.295, respectively, indicating that the higher the degree of enclosure and public security level in the public activity space, the better the social cohesion of the respondents is.

5.2.2. Community Attachment

Taking the sense of community belonging as the dependent variable for regression analysis, the degree of enclosure and the richness of service facilities in the public activity space had a significant positive impact on the respondents’ sense of community belonging. The regression coefficients are 0.365 and 0.224, respectively, indicating that the higher the degree of enclosure and the quality of service facilities in the public activity space, the more conducive respondents’ sense of community belonging is.

5.2.3. Social Participation

Taking social participation as the dependent variable for regression analysis, the comfort of activity facilities, the level of public security, and the level of environmental sanitation in the public activity space had a significant positive impact on the respondents’ sense of community belonging. The regression coefficients are 0.220, 0.376, and 0.265, respectively, which means that the higher the quality of service facilities, public security, and environmental sanitation in the public activity space, the more conducive it is to respondents’ social participation.

5.2.4. Social Network

The analysis showed that the degree of enclosure, the comfort of activity facilities, and the richness of service facilities had a significant positive impact on the social connection of residents, with regression coefficients of 0.243, 0.3, and 0.25, respectively. Good facilities are conducive to mutual communication among the residents.

5.2.5. Social Interaction

The comfort of activity facilities, the richness of service facilities, and the level of public security have a significant positive impact on the social interaction of residents, with regression coefficients of 0.254, 0.33, and 0.27, respectively.

5.2.6. Neighborhood Relationship

The degree of enclosure, the richness of service facilities, and the level of public security had a significant positive impact on the neighborhood relationship in the community. The regression coefficients are 0.264, 0.23, and 0.327, respectively.

5.2.7. Further Discussion

Fang Yaqin’s research found that urban communities in China are not unrelated neighbors but rather become regional communities due to a certain amount of social capital [36]. Guangjun found that urban community social capital is a mutually beneficial relationship formed by individuals and organizations within the urban community through long-term internal and external interactions, under the norms of reciprocity rules. This is similar to the research results in this article [67].

6. Suggestions on the Optimization Design of Community Public Space from the Perspective of Social Capital

The architectural environment can have an impact on people’s psychological behavior. Environmental cognition studies the laws of human cognition and understanding of the environment. Spatial perception has interactivity: residents’ perception of a specific external spatial environment of a building is complex and rich, and one type of psychological sensation may cause or suppress another type of psychological sensation. The process of spatial perception can be divided into obtaining spatial information, establishing spatial patterns, and forming symbolic spaces. Only when the material space environment meets people’s psychological needs, they can obtain good psychological feelings during the perception process of the material space environment, thereby stimulating the occurrence of behavior and promoting the vitality of the environment.

Quality of life in a society is related to social capital and social cohesion. Urban planning should organize the spatial elements of a city (such as green spaces) to promote social cohesion and a sense of locality. Social cohesion can reduce uncertainty because coordinated and conscious citizen networks can create inclusive spaces for the livability of cities. In this case, livability is created by communities with socioeconomic equality and social cohesion. The livability of a community is based on its social cohesion, which can manifest as social networks in specific geographical spaces [73].

Based on the relationship between the social capital of public space and public space elements obtained from the previous analysis, optimization principles and design suggestions for community public space are proposed to improve the quality of life in society.

6.1. Design Principles

6.1.1. Principle of Diversification

Public spaces from different angles and dimensions are optimized. It is advocated to mold community public spaces in different atmospheres using open thinking. According to the function, location, size, users, and other factors of the public space, it can show different characteristics, enrich people’s space experience, and keep the public space full of vitality (See Figure 4).

6.1.2. Humanization Principle

Considering people’s use and feelings as the starting point of facility optimization, rather than simply considering the functionality of the facility, integrating the people-oriented concept into the optimized design will make the facilities more comfortable, convenient, and warm. The humanized design will pay attention to whether details such as scale, location, and operation mode conform to the behavior habits of the residents, so as to attract people to actively use the facilities in the public space, which will increase the popularity and vitality of the space.

6.1.3. Suitability Principle

For different space types, a multilayer optimization strategy was considered (See Figure 5). For example, for a relatively small space, the needs of residents in the surrounding buildings for privacy and low noise should be considered during optimization, so soothing activities and appropriate public communication methods should be set up to promote the vitality of the small space.

6.1.4. Principle of Inclusiveness

All people in the community are treated equally, and their rights and needs are fully considered. Whether it is an elderly resident or a young tenant, an enterprise owner, or a migrant worker, the public space should fully consider accommodating different individuals and providing shelter for different people. The objective is to let people share and use public space together, create strong links between people due to space catalysts, and build a sense of identity belonging to the community.

6.2. Suggestions on Optimization Design of Community Public Space

6.2.1. Point Space Optimization Design

Point space refers to the relatively independent area between individual residential buildings or between buildings and structures (walls, fences, etc.). It is the public space that residents first contact from the inside of the building to the external environment of the building. The users of this public space are mainly residents of the buildings surrounding the point space. It mainly includes the space in front of the house, the space enclosed by the building, and the boundary. It can change the atmosphere of the space, create a space for residents to communicate, promote the public communication of residents, increase the cohesion between neighbors, and realize the sense of belonging and happiness of residents by improving the artistry and diversity of public space design, including increasing the complexity of venue facilities and the complexity of venue sports functions, improving the diversity of individual spaces by changing the diversity of colors and components, and improving the comfort of social management (optimizing the location of garbage sites, motor vehicle parking areas, etc.).

6.2.2. Linear Space Optimization Design

Linear space mainly refers to the continuous and relatively open space formed by the building horizontally or vertically and is the public transport space in the community and the “public street” in the community. Its function is to connect different public spaces in the community, and it presents a network layout. This can be optimized by optimizing the comfort of motorways, sidewalks, and rest seats.

6.2.3. Surface Space Optimization Design

Facial space mainly refers to a space that covers a large area and is usually located in the center of the overall planning and layout of the community. The surrounding space is usually surrounded by residential, commercial, and public service-supporting houses in the community, which not only meet the daily lives of residents but also play a role in connecting people of different ages in the community. In this public space, spontaneous and social activities of residents account for the largest proportion. The opportunities and frequency of contact of all residents in the community have greatly increased, and the sense of belonging and cohesion of residents has been enhanced through different activities and community organizations. The space optimization design includes improving the richness of sports facilities and the diversity of site functions and adjusting the permeability of landscape facilities.

7. Conclusions

As carriers of social activities, public spaces are closely related to community residents’ daily lives. Scientifically and effectively enhancing the vitality of the existing public space and promoting social interaction are important issues in the public space design of the old community. Based on the survey data of 30 communities in Shanghai City, the optimization design strategy of community public space from the perspective of social capital is mainly discussed through a linear model. The main findings are as follows.

First, three elements of space were analyzed by linear regression, and the key factors affecting the three elements of public space were extracted, that is, diversity will have a significant positive impact on the spatial elements, the comfort of activity facilities and the richness of service facilities will have a significant positive impact on facility elements, and the level of public security and sanitation will have a significant positive impact on social factors. The other sub-items had little or no impact on each element.

Secondly, the correlation between the six dimensions of social capital and the elements of public space is analyzed and studied, specifically as follows: the degree of cohesion and the level of public security have a significant positive impact on social cohesion; the degree of enclosure and the richness of service facilities have a significant positive impact on the sense of community belonging; the comfort of activity facilities, the level of public security and the level of sanitation have a significant positive impact on the sense of community belonging; the degree of enclosure, the comfort of activity facilities, and the abundance of service facilities have a significant positive impact on the social connection of residents; the comfort of activity facilities, the richness of service facilities, and the level of public security have a significant positive impact on the social interaction of residents; the degree of enclosure, the richness of service facilities, and the level of public security have a significant positive impact on the neighborhood relationship of the community.

Third, the principles of diversification, humanization, suitability, and inclusiveness of the optimal design of community public space are put forward, and specific methods and means are given for the design optimization of three types of community public space: point, line, and surface types.

The shortcomings of this study can be summarized as follows: 1. Currently, there is no unified definition of the connotation of community social capital in the academic community; therefore, the concept of urban community social capital defined in this study lacks certain authority and comprehensiveness. 2. The evaluation indicators of community social capital involve a wide range of contents, making it difficult to design a comprehensive, reasonable, and scientific indicator system in theory. Moreover, there are some limitations that must be overcome in empirical screening and optimization indicators. 3. The specific environment of each community is different, and the proposed countermeasures and suggestions are limited by their pertinence and operability.

Future research on community social capital should focus more on the characteristics of different types of communities, classify and discuss community social capital, and establish indicators of community social capital composition with certain universality and dynamic variability. Large-sample repeated questionnaire tests were conducted to verify the rationality of these indicators.