Research on the Evaluation of Cultural Ecosystem Services in Zhengzhou Urban Parks Based on Public Perceptions

Abstract

Urban parks are the primary green infrastructure for urban residents to pursue psychological restoration, promote health, relax and connect with nature. The various cultural ecosystem services (CES) provided by urban parks directly impact people’s health and well-being. Understanding the correlation between CES provided by urban parks and the different characteristics of specific groups can promote public willingness to engage with the nature and their health and well-being, and the effective information provided by CES can be used to protect and improve specific or traditional areas of parks. This study focuses on two urban parks (People’s Park and Xiliu Lake Park) located in the central urban area of Zhengzhou, Henan Province, China. A questionnaire survey and participatory mapping methods were employed to explore the priority for 10 types of CES among both local residents and visitors, aiming to reveal the public demand for CES in urban parks and provide a basis for the landscape design or renovation of urban parks. The results show that (1) the main purposes for the public visiting the parks are mental relaxation, scenery appreciation, and leisure and fitness. (2) The public has a rich perception of various types of CES in the urban parks, especially in terms of entertainment and aesthetic value. (3) The impact of education level on cultural services was substantial. (4) The trade-offs and synergies of CES of urban parks are complex and diverse. (5) The public’s perception of urban park CES and spatial value tend to be similar, with a wide distribution. Therefore, to maintain urban sustainable development, urban managers and landscape designers should consider different perspectives on CES provided by urban park stakeholders and enhance their CES through landscape design and renovation practices in urban parks, thereby improving the health and well-being of the public.

1. Introduction

Cities represent intricate socio-ecological systems, and a resilient socio-ecological system can effectively uphold urban sustainability and maintain stability in its development [1], wherein the influences of human activities and natural ecological processes are deeply intertwined [2,3]. As global urbanization accelerates [4], international exemplars of urban development have advocated for enhancing the sustainability of urban growth. Urban sustainability, as an enduring progression, aims to cultivate more alluring green spaces within cities, fostering the well-being of urban dwellers and facilitating the accrual of benefits from nature [5]. People are increasingly recognizing the necessity of enhancing human health and well-being through the provision of a range of cultural and ecosystem services offered by urban parks and similar resources [6]. This plays a critical role in urban sustainability and constitutes a significant aspect of the urban ecological system [7]. Following the outbreak of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in 2019, urban parks have emerged as crucial spaces for people to experience the outdoors, connect with nature, and promote psychological recovery and health, thereby directly influencing human health and well-being [8,9]. Consequently, urban parks have come under meticulous scrutiny due to their unique importance and irreplaceable roles.

Ecosystem Services (ESs) have become a bridge between ecosystems and social systems for the (active or passive) creation of ecosystems for human well-being, and are widely understood as a framework for sustainability in the relationship between humans and nature [10]. In recent years, among the different types of ESs (provisioning, regulating and cultural) provided by urban parks, cultural ecosystem services have increasingly become one of the new research hotspots [11,12]. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) characterizes Cultural Ecosystem Services (CESs) as the “non-material benefits that humans procure from ecosystems, which include spiritual enrichment, cognitive development, reflection, recreation, and aesthetic experiences,” spanning aspects such as aesthetics, leisure and recreation, spirituality, sense of place and cultural heritage, inspiration, and science education [13]. These types of services functions are deemed central to human well-being [14]. CESs have greater potential to improve urban ecology and socio-economics by directly reflecting on the interactions between people and nature and providing opportunities for recreation, environmental education and spiritual enhancement that inspire public attachment to the living environment and broader protection and support for sustainable ecosystems [15]. While CESs are viewed as a societal linchpin in urban park planning and management, understanding of CESs remains unsatisfactory. Compared to other ESs, CESs often receive less consideration in high-density urban parks [3].

National and international researchers have used a variety of methods to assess CESs to give them greater weight in policy decisions and sustainable management [16]. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) have generally classified these evaluation methods into biophysical methods and preference-based methods [17]. Christie et al. further divided preference-based methods into monetary methods and non-monetary methods [18]. Braat et al. and Hirons et al. succinctly classified all the methods into monetary methods and non-monetary methods [14,19]. Contemporary research efforts, both domestically and internationally, are increasingly focused on evaluating and quantifying CES [20], with a particular emphasis on non-monetary value assessment. Comprehensive park evaluation methodologies primarily employ interviews [21], questionnaires [22,23], participatory mapping [24,25] the SolVES model [26], and the Q method [27]. Research indicates that “interviews” and “questionnaires” are the most frequently employed non-monetary CES evaluation techniques [3]. For instance, Seker et al. employed nature walks and public interviews to capture immediate emotional responses [21], while Bryce et al. utilized an online questionnaire of 1220 respondents to analyze various aspects of CES well-being, such as “I have a sense of belonging on these websites,” in order to understand the sense of place relating to CES services [23]. Gai et al. analyzed the perception of CESs among diverse users of Wudaokou Urban parks in Beijing by delivering 204 questionnaires [22]. However, due to the intangible, subjective, and quantitatively challenging nature of CESs [11] and the lack of clarity in evaluation methods across different CES categories, complex correlations arise. Furthermore, traditional research methods, which are time- and resource-intensive, necessitate further exploration and improvement of the evaluation process [28].

Virtual Reality (VR) is an emerging technology that allows for the simulation of green spaces and the restoration of ecological landscapes separate from the real environment, guiding us in the transition to sustainable development [29]. VR technology has seen rapid advancements in recent years, particularly in the post-COVID-19 era, where it serves to attract online tourists via virtual networks, thereby offering a novel alternative to physical locations and enhancing positive experiences [29,30]. As a result, geographically referenced social media data in forms such as images and videos are being increasingly employed as a novel approach to understand the perception of Cultural Ecosystem Services (CES) [28,31]. Compared to traditional forms of media, VR technology provides immersive, innovative, and interactive advantages [32]. Instances of its application include the use of drones and VR technology in the construction and design guidelines of global landscape systems, and the simulation of different rest environments as a means to experience nature [33]. Participatory Mapping (PM) represents a crucial approach to spatially quantify respondents’ perceptions and behavioral preferences, utilizing Public Participation GIS (PPGIS) [34], and thus offers a public participation method. Examples of this method’s application include Gréta et al.’s use of GPS to depict the spatial distribution of landscape features in relation to cultural services, confirming mountainous landscapes as having the highest CES supply capacity [35]. Zhao Xiaolong et al. developed their own PPGIS WeChat program to collect spatial location information regarding physical activity in green spaces for residents during the winter and spring seasons in Harbin [36]. Xin Cheng et al. assessed the bundling, coordination, and balancing effects of CES in Chengdu’s Huanhuaxi Park using the PM method to identify landscape features impacting the scene [24]. At present, the application of VR panoramic display in urban parks is limited [33], but it presents a promising avenue for combining immersive experiences and landscape interaction, leveraging VR as an effective medium and PM as a useful tool to capture stakeholder values.

Research into ESs and CESs is primarily influenced by the natural sciences and economics, while CES research benefits from a multidisciplinary approach, incorporating perspectives from social sciences, humanities, and environmental sciences [37]. These factors have become important spatial units for evaluating sustainable development between regions [1]. However, in densely populated cities, the impact of diverse social groups on CESs in urban parks has been insufficiently explored [22,38], with studies predominantly focusing on individual attributes and characteristics [39]. For instance, it is challenging to distinguish and identify the true value of each service for specific groups, due to the interconnectedness of ecological, aesthetic, and entertainment values among other cultural services. Several studies have shed light on these issues [40]. Bertram et al. compared usage patterns of four European urban parks, revealing differences between individual preferences and local culture and habits [41]. Plieninger et al. understood the spatial patterns perceived by different background populations, presenting six types of CES views [31]. Zhao Yuqing et al. used PM spatial distribution patterns to analyze perceptual differences between tourists and residents toward CES [36]. Jiang Qianzi et al. used Jinan City’s main urban park to perceive CES from different types of parks [42]. As urbanization, societal demand, and public awareness evolve, there is an increased expectation for urban parks to display greater adaptability. Understanding the relationship between various CES and specific group characteristics can foster public engagement with nature and enhance public health and well-being [43]. The “CES—human well-being” framework also serves as an extension of the relationship between ecological processes and human interests in sustainability science [44]. CESs can provide valuable information to protect and enhance specific and traditional areas of the park.

This research aims to assess stakeholder perceptions of CES in urban parks from a user-centric perspective, employing a questionnaire survey methodology to unravel the interplay between humans and nature. Utilizing participatory mapping techniques, the study enhances public involvement via VR panoramic displays, closely examining the relationship between the park’s internal environmental space and its cultural services. Additionally, it draws comparisons across diverse stakeholder groups with the intent of discerning the management priorities for different types of cultural services. The study further uncovers the disparities in CESs and the varying perceptions of distinct public demographics concerning urban parks and the environment; further inter-regional sustainability leads to a strategy for improving the urban parks. Two representative urban parks situated in the principal urban zone of Zhengzhou City serve as the focal point of the research. The results of the study are expected to inform ongoing managers and landscape architects in enhancing the outdoor activities and health and well-being of urban residents through urban park design practices.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

Zhengzhou, serving as the political, economic, cultural, financial, and scientific hub of Henan Province, stretches over 166 km from east to west, encompassing a total area of approximately 7446 square kilometers. The urban area, covering about 1057 square kilometers, includes the Jinshui District, Erqi District, Huiji District, Zhongyuan District, and Guancheng Hui Nationality District, as well as the newly established eastern city district. Within its jurisdiction are national-level zones such as Zhengdong New District, the High-tech Zone, the Economic Development Zone, and the Zhengzhou Airport Economy Comprehensive Experimental Zone. Zhongmu County oversees Xinzheng City and four additional county-level cities. As of the close of 2022, the city’s permanent populace numbered 12.828 million, with the urban population accounting for 10.185 million [45].

In recent decades, Zhengzhou has experienced rapid urbanization and faces the challenges and opportunities of sustainable urban development [46]. Resulting in substantial shifts in population and land utilization within the central urban region. This transition has spurred significant growth in urban green spaces, particularly urban parks. However, the layout of urban parks in Zhengzhou focuses primarily on promoting spatial equilibrium, falling short in catering to the diverse needs of users and imbalances in social backgrounds [43]. To preserve spatial continuity and ensure comprehensive coverage of park users in Zhengzhou’s main urban area, this study selected eight representative urban parks across the five administrative districts, including the newly formed eastern district. These parks are Nanhuan Park in Erqi District, People’s Park in Jinshui District, Xiliu Lake Park in Zhongyuan District, Beilong Lake Wetland Park in Zhengdong New District, Central Park in Huiji District, Butterfly Lake Forest Park in the Economic Development Zone, Tianjian Lake Park in the High-tech Zone, and Shangdu Heritage Park in Guancheng Hui Nationality District (Figure 1). The selection was based on the location, administrative division of urban parks, and the diversity of cultural service types assessed. The parks were categorized into two types: comprehensive and specialized, according to the “Urban Green Space Classification Standard” (CJJT85–2017) [47]. One of the specialized parks and a comprehensive park, which respondents perceived to offer strong CESs, were selected as part of this study’s foundation, thus serving as a reference for the design and planning of future specialized and comprehensive parks and providing a scientific basis for building an efficient urban park CES and sustainable urban development.

2.2. The Selection of CES Evaluation Indicators

This study first established types of ecosystem cultural services through a review of both the domestic and international literature, using this initial evaluation index to inform the practical survey of urban parks. The primary indicators are drawn from the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) and research related to the “International Ecosystem Service Common Classification” (CICES) [2,13] (

Table 1. Cultural ecosystem services definition.

Value Type	Index Connotation
Aesthetic value	Discovering the enjoyment or aesthetic value of beauty from different aspects of the area
Recreation	Places for recreational activities in the park
Ecological value	Characteristic of a natural or restored landscape
Health value	In the post-pandemic era, parks can improve the public’s physical and mental health
Learning value	The regional environment provides a place for learning and experimentation
Artistic inspiration	The area can be a source of inspiration for sketch creation
Place identity	Have a sense of dependence and belonging to the park
Interpersonal relationship	Provide networking opportunities for the public
Biodiversity	Habitat for wildlife
Cultural Heritage	Important historical landscape and cultural area

). Since the introduction of ecosystem services in the MEA in 2005, these services have been thoroughly examined from various standpoints. Additionally, The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) assessment also includes mental and physical health, ensuring that CES can impact the physical and mental health of the public in urban parks [17]. The diverse categories of ES epitomize the breadth of benefits that ecosystems offer to humans, either directly or indirectly. Utilizing the MEA and other studies comprehensively and adhering to the principles of simplicity, completeness, practicality, and independence [2], a CES index system was developed. This system then formed the basis for the subsequent investigation.

2.2.1. Questionnaire Survey

Data for this study was gathered through a questionnaire survey administered in eight representative parks between 18 and 26 August 2022. This timeframe was selected as it represents the peak season for plant growth and observation. Approximately 50 questionnaires were disseminated in each park, with randomly distributed questionnaires summing up to a total of 400. Out of these, 341 were deemed valid, yielding an effective response rate of 82.6%. Among the valid questionnaires, 253 were filled by local residents (representing 74.1%), and 88 were completed by tourists from outside the town, accounting for 25.8% (

Table 2. Basic information of urban park.

Administrative Division	Park Name	Park Area/hm2	Park Type	Valid Questionaire	Effectiveness of the Questionnaire (%)
Erqi District	South Ring Park	24.67	Comprehensive park	42	0.8
Jinshui District	People’s Park	30.14	Comprehensive park	49	1.0
Zhongyuan District	Xiliu Lake Park	320.00	Special park	43	83.7
Zhengdong New District	Beilong Lake Wetland Park	16.40	Special park	41	78.0
Huiji District	Central Park	6.93	Comprehensive park	43	83.7
Economic Development Zone	Diehu Forest Park	150.88	Specialized Parks	43	83.7
High-tech Zone	Tianjian Lake Park	60.00	Comprehensive park	40	75.0
Guancheng District	Shangdu Site Park	41.60	Special park	40	75.0

).

In order to preserve the scientific integrity of the questionnaire survey, the purpose of the study and the types of CES values were initially explained to both visitors and residents prior to commencing the formal survey. The survey comprised three sections: the first pertaining to the personal information of the respondent, including user type (local resident or tourist), gender, age, occupation, and so forth; the second section introduced the 10 cultural services of the urban park CES, ensuring that respondents grasped the meaning of each cultural service through the questionnaire’s text and verbal explanation. The third section measured the importance and satisfaction of cultural services, utilizing the Likert five-point scale to assign values [48], attributing scores from 1 to 5, respectively, for assessments ranging from “not important at all” to “very important”, and from “very dissatisfied” to “very satisfied”, soliciting respondents’ views on measures to improve the park and their opinions. To ensure the reliability of the survey results, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was employed to test the reliability of the importance and satisfaction survey outcomes of cultural services. A coefficient value greater than 0.7 signifies the high reliability of the survey results [49]. The test results demonstrate that all Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for each index exceeded 0.7; thus, all passed the consistency test (

Table 3. Reliability analysis.

Related Parameters	Residents		Visitors		Special Parks		Comprehensive Parks
	Imp	Sat	Imp	Sat	Imp	Sat	Imp	Sat
Number of oserved	10	10	10	10	10	10	10	10
Cronbach’s alpha	0.75	0.72	0.72	0.79	0.76	0.75	0.71	0.79

Imp: Importance; Sat: Satisfaction.

).

2.2.2. Participatory Mapping

For each city, the total count of cultural services, as assessed by all respondents, was calculated to determine the most valued specialized and comprehensive parks in this survey [50]. For instance, if two respondents allocated 10 cultural services each to People’s Park within a comprehensive park, the park’s total score is the average of the two scores, which equates to 72.4 points. The results indicate that the specialized and comprehensive parks scored the highest are Xiliu Lake Park and People’s Park, respectively. These parks serve as references for the participatory mapping of these two types of urban parks.

Data collection for participatory mapping adheres to the principle of integrating targeted and random approaches [36]. The process is implemented through offline stationary surveys and online VR panoramic techniques to holistically understand public evaluations of various CES facets. Online channels incorporate WeChat Moments forwarding, WeChat group forwarding, and Sina Weibo push. A total of 396 participants completed the participatory mapping of these two parks, yielding 198 valid questionnaires and collective distribution of 5496 and 5256 cultural service value points.

The participatory mapping is divided into the following parts: (1) The first part consisted of the regional division of landmarks within the selected park, and the high-resolution Google satellite images in March 2022 are selected to obtain the location and area of the selected park, in particular: ① Comprehensive Park: the People’s Park covers an area of 30.14 hectares and consists of 20 attractions, mainly divided into the Welcome Hill, Playground, Bamboo Garden, Elegant Garden, Hu Gong Ancestral Hall, Euphoria Garden, Peng Gong Ancestral Hall, Peony Garden, and Lotus Pond Square, covering eight attractions. ② Special category park: the Xiliu Lake Park North Park (north of West Jinshui Road, the southern area is under construction) covers an area of 43 hectares, consisting of 25 attractions, mainly distributed in the Sunken Fountain Square, Children’s Playground, Chen Wu Square, Viewing Platform, Jiaxue Hall, Rest Area, Hundred Flowers Garden and Xiliu Stacked Waterfall with 8 attractions (Figure 2). Second, ArcGIS 10.2 software was then utilized to establish a 50 m × 50 m grid, with the final data prepared for export. GPS-RTK coordinate-mapping instruments were used to confirm longitude and latitude positions within the park, ensuring consistency with positions in ArcGIS. (2) The second phase employed Insta360 equipment to capture a total of 177 images from various park areas, comprising 44 panoramic images and 133 2D images [51]. The panoramic area display was completed by color blending, stitching, and packaging the captured images, eventually enabling VR roaming of the urban parks’ panoramic images through the 720-cloud panoramic interactive H5 tool (Xiliu Lake Park: https://www.720yun.com/t/77vk6m8wprh?scene_id=106252244, accessed on 19 February 2023; People’s Park: https://www.720yun.com/t/b1vk6qibs2m?scene_id=105955185, accessed on 19 February 2023). (3) An online questionnaire was designed using the survey website (https://www.wenjuan.com/s/UvQBBj/, accessed on 22 February 2023). Initially, the questionnaire introduced the study to the respondents, followed by allowing them to engage in a panoramic image VR roaming for a cloud tour experience prior to completing the questionnaire. Finally, the respondents were guided to perceive the distinct cultural services within each region of the case area.

2.3. Data Analysis and Method

In order to investigate whether the demographic attributes of respondents influence the Cultural Ecosystem Services function of urban parks in Zhengzhou, data analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics 27. The data’s reliability was initially confirmed through the application of Cronbach’s α coefficient [49]. Descriptive statistics were then employed to analyze the social, economic, and spatial attributes of the participants. Given the aim of this research is to assess public perceptions and evaluations of CES in urban parks, paired sample t-tests, Spearman’s rank correlation, and binary logistic regression analysis were utilized to ascertain any significant discrepancies in respondent’s types of cultural services in parks [20,52]. To pinpoint potential CES bundles, hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) with Euclidean distance was leveraged to examine the survey data [24]. Using GIS 10.2 software, the geographic coordinates of CES in urban park areas as perceived by respondents were compiled into shp files and correspondingly linked with relevant park satellite imagery. Kernel density analysis alongside cold and hot spot distribution were employed to generate density maps for assessing the distribution of respondents’ perceptions of the CES in both comprehensive and specialized parks, represented by People’s Park and Xiliu Lake Park in Zhengzhou [25]. Ultimately, founded on the quantitative grounding of the analysis results, practical design strategies for enhancing urban park CES are proposed. These strategies are intended to serve as a reference for the practical design of urban parks (Figure 3).

3. Results

3.1. Basic Statistics of Respondents

The survey samples demonstrate substantial randomness, capturing public perceptions across diverse demographics and cultural strata. Overall, local residents formed a larger proportion at 74%, with tourists comprising 26%. The gender distribution among both tourists and residents is approximately equal, with 53% of respondents aged between 19 and 35. The overall educational attainment of respondents spans from high school or lower to a master’s degree. The education level of the interviewed tourists is relatively elevated, with a significant number in self-employed occupations. Specifically, 47.7% hold a bachelor’s degree and 10.2% possess a master’s degree or above. Conversely, local residents exhibit a moderate level of education, with a higher proportion of students, and 39.0% and 7.1% holding a bachelor’s degree and a master’s degree or above, respectively. Among the comprehensive and specialized parks, People’s Park, Xiliu Lake Park, and North Dragon Lake Wetland witness a high frequency of usage. The principal motivations for visiting the park include relaxation, sightseeing, and exercise (

Table 4. Frequency Analysis of Basic Situation of Respondents.

Social Characteristics	Type	Residents (%)	Tourists (%)
Gender	Male	49	50
	Female	52	50
Age	18 and under	11	8
	19–35 Age	49	63
	36–50 Age	17	14
	51–65 Age	13	8
	66 years and over	9	7
Monthly income	<2000	24	33
	2000~5000	40	34
	5000~8000	21	16
	8000~12,000	11	3
	12,000~17,000	3	5
	17,000~30,000	0	5
	>30,000	1	5
Education	High School Additionally, Below	28	21
	Junior College	26	22
	Under Graduate	39	48
	Master Degree Additionally, Above	7	10
Profession	Civil Servants	4	6
	Enterprise Staff	31	19
	Private Individuals	11	18
	Student	23	19
	Retirees	11	7
	Freelance	20	31
	Is Less Than	7	3

, Figure 4).

3.2. Relationship between CES Perception and Demographic Characteristics

The mean scores for perceived importance and satisfaction of cultural services among residents and tourists underscore the differences in their public perceptions of varying types of cultural services. These disparities can somewhat indicate the public’s demand for cultural services (Figure 5). The average scores for the importance and satisfaction of cultural services in comprehensive and specialized parks are 3.61 and 3.39, and 3.81 and 3.36, respectively. Health value and recreation constitute the cultural services with the most substantial differences. Overall, both tourists and residents express a positive perspective toward the park’s CES. Spearman’s rank correlation analysis reveals correlations between gender, age, education level, occupation, frequency of park usage, and cultural value. Education level most extensively influences cultural services, with higher education levels correlating to greater expected value and satisfaction for leisure and recreation (0.011), ecological value (0.031), biodiversity (0.032), and learning value (0.005) provided by the parks (

Table 5. Ecosystem cultural services satisfaction relationship as expressed by Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient.

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1 Aesthetic Value	1	0.617 **	0.327 **	0.288 **	0.200 **	0.197 **	0.206 **	0.248 **	0.250 **	0.267 **
2 Recreation		1	0.367 **	0.273 **	0.159 **	0.175 **	0.187 **	0.264 **	0.204 **	0.230 **
3 Ecological Value			1	0.274 **	0.213 **	0.214 **	0.170 **	0.181 **	0.218 **	0.236 **
4 Health Value				1	0.355 **	0.185 **	0.307 **	0.440 **	0.141 **	0.231 **
5 Learning Value					1	0.196 **	0.145 **	0.269 **	0.139 *	0.253 **
6 Artistic Inspiration						1	0.102	0.216 **	0.093	0.334 **
7 Place Identity							1	0.251 **	0.064	0.137 *
8 Interpersonal relationship								1	0.057	0.255 **
9 Biodiversity									1	0.022
10 Cultural Heritage										1

(n = 341; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01). Bold text indicates strong positive correlations.

).

According to the survey, the correlation between aesthetic value and other values in tourists’ and residents’ evaluation of cultural services’ importance and satisfaction is the largest and strongest per Spearman’s correlation coefficient. In importance evaluation, the correlation between aesthetic value and recreation (0.62) is significant, with a notable correlation also present between health value and interpersonal relationship (0.44). In satisfaction evaluation, the correlation between aesthetic value and recreation (0.62), ecological value (0.60), and artistic inspiration (0.44) is significant. A certain correlation exists between recreation and ecological value (0.49) (

Table 6. Ecosystem cultural services importance relationship as expressed by Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient.

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1 Aesthetic Value	1	0.624 **	0.602 **	0.233 **	0.254 **	0.442 **	0.286 **	0.170 **	0.265 **	0.308 **
2 Recreation		1	0.487 **	0.227 **	0.232 **	0.374 **	0.246 **	0.135 *	0.276 **	0.135 *
3 Ecological Value			1	0.313 **	0.248 **	0.323 **	0.289 **	0.141 **	0.292 **	0.183 **
4 Health Value				1	0.186 **	0.229 **	0.193 **	0.170 **	0.128 *	0.147 **
5 Learning Value					1	0.189 **	0.298 **	−0.057	0.162 **	0.282 **
6 Artistic Inspiration						1	0.134 *	0.173 **	0.218 **	0.141 **
7 Place Identity							1	0.175 **	0.054	0.229 **
8 Interpersonal relationship								1	−0.060	0.123 *
9 Biodiversity									1	0.072
10 Cultural Heritage										1

(n = 341; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01). Bold text indicates strong positive correlations.

). Different cultural services have varying correlations with park types. Aesthetic value is the most frequently cited and most concerned cultural service, followed by recreation and ecology. Learning value is the least referenced cultural service. Hence, the public has higher expectations and varying needs for these service types in different park types. Using local tourist status as the dependent variable and CES cultural service perception as the independent variable, the results of an omnibus test surface binary logistic regression was statistically significant, x² = 105.977, p > 0.05, and could correctly classify 74.2% of cases. The results of the variable coefficient study reveal that many independent variables, including aesthetic value (p = 0.033) and place identity (p = 0.035) in cultural services, and income (p = 0.040), distance (p = 0.001), and mode of travel (p = 0.001) in demographic characteristics, are statistically significant for tourists and residents. The dominance ratio results show that with every 1-point increase in the assigned value, the perceived impact on visitors and residents of the aesthetic value of cultural services and place identity increases by a factor of 0.033 and 0.035, respectively. For every 1000 RMB increase in respondent income, the number of visitors and residents visiting the park increases by a factor of 1.783 (

Table 7. Demographic factors affecting the cognition of cultural services in Zhengzhou Urban Parks.

Characteristics	Regression Coefficient	Standard Error	Wald	Sig.	Exp(B)
Cender	0.145	0.322	0.202	0.653	1.156
Age	1.726	0.952	3.905	0.419	1.620
Monthly income	0.551	0.857	13.192	0.040	1.783
Education	0.741	0.610	0.937	0.816	1.294
Profession	3.551	0.900	10.963	0.052	2.557
Frequency	−1.927	0.659	3.805	0.283	0.578

Sig. indicates significance test, Exp(B) indicates dominance ratio. Bold text indicates strong positive correlations.

). Respondents’ perceptions of different cultural services also significantly differed due to variations in the frequency of park use, length of stay, and purpose of activities across parks.

3.3. CES Trade-Offs and Synergistic Relationships

The results of the study show that the ten cultural services in the specialized and comprehensive parks are divided into four and three groups, respectively (Figure 6). Different roles are represented in each group of cultural services, which complement each other and do not overlap. In interpreting the cluster analysis, we applied a top-down logic [53]. Residents perceived higher CES importance (nine items) and satisfaction (six items) for the first combination in the subject category of parks, while visitors perceived higher CES importance (six items). This could be due to the fact that residents visit the parks more frequently and identify more strongly with the parks and have higher expectations. The visitors perceive the expected good service value of the park to be higher. The first combination of CES, satisfaction attribution perceived by residents in Comprehensive Park is greater than the importance attribution, visitors perceive only artistic inspiration in the importance attribution of cultural service, and the rest are all satisfaction attributions of cultural service. The inspiration for artistic inspiration was expressed by residents rating satisfaction higher and visitors rating importance higher. This could be due to the fact that residents visit this type of park frequently, which reduces the impact on artistic inspiration. While visitors pay more attention to the integration of artistic elements when visiting parks, urban parks also provide more services in artistic and innovative places, so visitors are more likely to have artistic associations with parks.

In specialized parks, residents assigned satisfaction values for artistic inspiration, place identity, and biodiversity value in the second cultural service grouping, while tourists assigned importance values for artistic inspiration and place identity. This could be because residents visit the parks more frequently, have a stronger sense of identity with the park green space, and have a higher tendency to explore nature, while tourists visit mainly for sightseeing and value artistic inspiration and the actual distance traveled. In comprehensive parks, residents perceived a correlation between ecological value and place identity in the second grouping, while tourists were more concerned with interpersonal relationships. This could be because local tourists participate more in park activities and thus obtain more ecological benefits and social values from the park, while tourists visit mainly for leisure and social interaction, and they experience higher interpersonal communication skills in the park.

The third and fourth cultural service groupings in specialized and comprehensive parks had low satisfaction and importance ratings from residents and tourists and can be improved in the future by considering the characteristics of each park green space, such as distance from residents to the park green space and activity space, and thoughtful methods for design and improvement.

3.4. CES Perception Interactive Spatial Distribution Mapping

The analysis of kernel density reveals that the distribution of CES in Zhengzhou’s urban parks is not random and varies across different areas (Figure 7). Respondents’ perceptions of aesthetic, cultural, and interpersonal relationship values show spatial differences. Xiliu Lake Park has a wide range of perceptions of aesthetic, ecological, and health values with multiple labeled points scattered across the park. For example, the number of observation points for waterfalls in Xiliu Lake Park is significantly higher than that of other services in terms of aesthetic value, recreation, and ecological tourism. In contrast, the bamboo garden in People’s Park is most strongly associated with aesthetic value. This suggests that respondents tend to engage in activities in areas of the park that are more developed and have higher characteristic viewing. Moreover, a small fraction of respondents has a strong emotional attachment to the natural landscape and cultural heritage presented by various tourist attractions in the research area for specialized and comprehensive parks.

The overall spatial distribution pattern of the hot and cold areas of CES perceived by the respondents is similar to the distribution of various scenic spots in the park (Figure 8). In People’s Park, the perceived intensity of the hot zone by the respondents shows a decreasing trend from the middle. In Xiliu Lake Park, the perceived intensity of the hot zone by the respondents is mainly distributed in the northwest and northeast regions. Waterfalls and Baihua Garden in Xiliu Lake and Bamboo Gardens and Euphoria Garden in People’s Park are perceived more strongly, indicating that respondents are more concerned about the ecological characteristics of the park. The cold spots of cultural service perception are located in areas with fewer scenic spots and lower attraction, such as Peng Gong Ancestral Hall, Hu Gong Ancestral Hall, Jiaxue Tang, and other places with less scenic spots.

4. Discussion

4.1. Differences in Perceptions between Respondents and CESs

Variations in people’s preferences for cultural services have been attributed to the uneven distribution and diversified development of factors such as background, education level, social activities, religious beliefs, and economic status [38,54,55]. In order to improve the comprehensive effect of questionnaire surveys and experiential activities for different respondents’ perceived CESs, this study integrated and distinguished between on-site questionnaires for residents and tourists and online participatory VR cloud tour experiences for the public. The spatial preferences of the respondents and the connection between the park attractions can reveal the public’s CES needs, facilitating sustainable development goals in urban areas, especially high-density regions, is essential [56]. Such data not only overcomes the limitations of offline questionnaire data, such as subjectivity, instability, sample size, and spatiotemporal scale, but also avoids the bias of user groups and social platforms in online participatory data [11]. However, online data reliability may be impacted by potential lower response rates and graphics workload, especially for similar spatial issues, and may lead to demographic bias toward young population groups [10,57]. To ensure the reliability of survey results, future work should include intentional sampling to obtain representative samples.

Based on the perception results of the respondents, we locate different cultural services from two dimensions: importance and satisfaction. Among the demographic characteristics, education level has a wide-ranging impact on cultural services, and income is positively correlated with perception, while other factors have a relatively small impact [58]. This may be due to the variety of educational and knowledge services offered by the eight parks in the research area, such as People’s Park, with a national huai tree with a lifespan of 170 years, and parks with historical and commercial ruins. The public can obtain relevant knowledge or cultural services during the use of these parks. Additionally, as income increases, so do consumption ability and time cost, which makes it possible for people to use parks more frequently. This is consistent with previous studies that found a negative correlation between income and the perceived recognition of CES in the research area and that low-income groups value parks more than high-income respondents [51].

The study’s findings reveal a difference between the perceptions of visitors and residents of comprehensive and dedicated parks based on cultural services. Residents view comprehensive parks as an important community resource that provides opportunities primarily for exercise, socializing, and outdoor recreation. They also have a sense of familiarity and connection to the park [59]. In contrast, visitors to mixed-use parks prioritize experiencing something new and different and may perceive mixed-use parks as lacking uniqueness. Visitors also have a greater preference for specialized parks that highlight the historical, artistic, or natural environmental features of the park area. This highlights the discrepancy between the high demand for CESs in parks and the actual supply. Previous studies have demonstrated that subjective factors such as personal experiences, cultural backgrounds, habits, religious beliefs, and social practices of different groups directly or indirectly influence the perception of CESs values. Stable social relationships have a positive impact on human health and well-being [60]. For instance, Wang Fanglei’s analysis of the perceptions of local visitors and residents of Qufu Mingcheng found that education and occupation were important factors that influenced the perception evaluation [61]. The research of Zhang at al. revealed that there are distinct dichotomous differences in the perception and evaluation of ecosystem services (CES) among different demographic groups. For instance, in densely populated urban areas, younger populations tend to lean towards CES experiences that involve social interactions. On the other hand, in lower population density suburban areas, older populations show a preference for CES experiences that emphasize the natural environment [8]. However, studies have not deeply focused on the CES needs of different cultural services for specific population groups. For example, in the case of learning value, specific areas of the park should be designed to be enhanced based on the needs of different subjects, such as students or those with current learning needs. Identifying differences in the cultural perceptions of different groups of people can help scientifically reflect the magnitude of CES values and assess and protect natural assets.

4.2. The Relationship between the Park Area Landscape and the Perceived Value of CES

The distribution of different CES landscape value types is related to the surrounding environment, human customs, and recreational activities. For example, places with higher education institutions or deep cultural areas in the surrounding environment tend to reflect more cultural values, while the distribution of artistic inspiration can stimulate people’s artistic creative potential. Comparison of the mean importance and satisfaction levels of specialized parks and comprehensive parks reveals that people value the role and value of specialized parks more in experiencing them. Comprehensive parks offer a wider variety of experiences and activities and are better at meeting people’s needs in different areas. The difference between recreational and leisure values is greatest in comprehensive and specialized parks, and this has been shown in other studies to be the most important and desired function for the public of all CESs [5]. Koh at al.’s park user spatial data was used to derive the perceived enrichment benefits of CESs at Ang Mo Kio Park in Bishan, Singapore, in particular, the perceived benefits of recreational and aesthetic services [10]. Parks and green spaces are widely recognized as providing important public benefits, particularly in terms of reducing stress and providing various psychological and emotional benefits after a health crisis [49]. These findings may be valuable for more detailed sustainable design practices. For example, Xin Cheng at al. found that individual CESs interrelate with multiple other CESs, and that not every service has the same impact on other services, and that landscape sustainable practices can be supported through interaction scenarios and landscape features, and that urban park areas can be compensated for through the enhancement of a variety of landscape features during the optimization process [3].

VR live-action displays for participatory mapping allow people to experience different parks anytime and anywhere, thus saving time and avoiding the dangers and inconveniences that may be encountered during the park experience [53]. User perception and performance is very important and in order to design effective virtual environments, it is necessary to understand how users behave in immersive simulations, i.e., which virtual environments are more capable of stimulating and simulating real-world user behavior [62]. As an emerging technology, VR can be detached from the real environment and provide any accessible space for old anyone. The location of different physical space landscape features has a significant impact on people’s perceptions, with aesthetic value and recreation being most prominent in the distribution of landscape spaces in Xiliu Lake and People’s Park. However, there is an intricate interrelationship between different cultural services and landscape spaces [26]. For example, interviewees in the VR Yunyang Experience Xiliu Lake Park interlinked the relationship between the waterfall and the aesthetic, ecological, recreational, and artistic inspiration and place identity of the Hundred Flowers Garden. It can therefore also be inferred that this is likely to be a group of people who prefer to take photographs or are outdoor enthusiasts in urban parks, and whose main purpose for arriving at the park is not to enjoy the scenery or other recreational activities, which may lead to a bias in the type of CESs identified in the urban parks surveyed.

In summary, the results tend to be similar to the perceptions of people’s perceptions of urban parks and perceptions of the value of landscape space in the questionnaire respondents, regardless of whether they have relevant knowledge of CESs. Aesthetic and recreational values should be optimized in urban parks in the main urban area of Zhengzhou, with an emphasis on improving recreational values, ecological values, biodiversity, interpersonal relationships, artistic inspiration, and learning values. Improvement measures should also be proposed for the low-satisfaction perception of cultural services in landscape spaces in Zhengzhou People’s Park and Xiliu Lake Park; this information informs sustainable design practices for the park.

4.3. Urban Parks CES Service Enhancement Strategy

In light of the geospatial differences in perceptions of dedicated and comprehensive parks among visitors and residents, it is crucial to consider people’s perceptions of CESs relating to aesthetics, recreation, and ecotourism, among others. While Mears et al. [63] tried to link landscape indicators with human health, they found no significant association, possibly because they focused on long-term health conditions rather than how visitors feel while in green spaces (parks). Therefore, constructing recreational parks within urban parks, increasing green space areas and diversity of vegetation will not only improve the environment, but also mental and physical health, promoting sustainable development of physical and mental health. Koh et al., using user spatial data from public parks, found that particularly in the areas of recreational and aesthetic CES perceptions, users generally had positive perceptual values, and clusters of CES hotspots were found in the vicinity of redesigned park features, particularly natural water features [10,64]. In order to validate practical urban park design strategies to enhance the CES perceptual experience of the public on the landscape site, three cases of adaptive landscape site design are presented in Haidian Park as an example to enhance the recreational value, aesthetic value, and social interaction value, respectively [28]. These scholars confirm the intention to enhance urban parks by sensing the public’s CES. In the future optimization of urban parks, comprehensive CES science facilities should be constructed, as the integration of ecotourism with modern technology (AI and INT) creates experiential parks with ornamental, popular science, and fitness features such as smart tourism, study tourism, and recreation tourism [32]. For instance, in People’s Park, different plant types can be used to create a “five senses” landscape experience and a series of “healing gardens” in different seasons to provide a rich recreational environment and emotional experience. In future studies, more attention should be given to the experiential needs and behavioral preferences of park users, spatial distribution of accessibility, and leading resources and business perspectives appropriate to the area.

The construction of urban parks should give priority to public participation, and comprehensive parks and special parks should be optimized from the factors related to visitors’ use patterns, environmental characteristics, and spatial vitality [65]. Comprehensive parks come with relatively comprehensive and balanced functions, complete facilities, and diverse services, and can provide functional value from multiple perspectives, such as tourism and leisure, ecology, disaster prevention and mitigation, science education, etc. [28]. Special parks are green spaces with specific contents or forms and corresponding leisure and service facilities [66]. The study found that the cultural heritage satisfaction of People’s Park and Xiliu Lake Park users are both low. It is suggested that the historical and cultural connotation of the parks should be thoroughly considered, and beautiful and practical landscape sketches such as cultural and artistic sculptures around the parks should be carried out, as well as activities such as cultural exhibitions, and art exhibitions, etc. and the development of specific content to form a special tourist attraction, and to enhance the richness of the provision of recreational services of the urban parks. Gradually, the city’s image can be strengthened, brought by the park and maintaining the sustainable development of the city. The study shows that People’s Park is closer to the city’s main roads than Xiliu Lake Park, with convenient transport and a richer activity space for park facilities, which is a key factor in attracting tourists to visit the park. Therefore, these results demonstrate the influence of the external environment on park vitality, which is consistent with previous research [67].

Combining the public perceptions pf CSSS with the data from the basic information section of the questionnaire respondents, it can be seen that “distance (i.e., accessibility of the park)” is also one of the relevant factors affecting the study area. In the questionnaire survey, visitors indicated that the main reasons for visiting this park were the proximity to their homes, the variety of recreational spaces, and the high quality of the green landscape. Therefore, increasing fitness facilities and pavilions, improving water quality, and enhancing facility management and maintenance would increase their visits to the park. Dallimer et al. also found that the frequency of visitors to urban parks is determined by the accessibility of the parks (the amount of time an individual spends traveling to the park) [68]. In conclusion, the design and management of urban parks should also take into account human emotions, infrastructures, institutions, and perceptions in order to improve their equitable usability, accessibility, and attractiveness [69].

5. Conclusions

The following conclusions were obtained: (1) The study found that aesthetic value was the most frequently mentioned and highly prioritized cultural service, followed by entertainment and ecology. On the other hand, learning value was the least mentioned. (2) The impact of education level on cultural services was substantial, while income was positively correlated with respondents’ perception of cultural services. Other factors had a relatively minor impact. (3) People’s Park, West Lake, and North Dragon Lake Wetland were highly frequented by visitors among comprehensive and specialized parks. Visitors primarily visited these parks for relaxation, scenery appreciation, and leisurely exercise. The largest discrepancy between importance and satisfaction ratings was observed for cultural services related to health and well-being and leisure and entertainment. (4) The study identified three groups of specialized parks and four groups of comprehensive parks from the perspectives of tourists and residents. The balancing and synergistic effects of CESs are intricate, as single and multiple services can interact, and not every service has the same impact on other services. (5) The range of respondents’ perceptions of cultural service values was extensive and mainly concentrated in areas with dense landscapes. (6) The perception of the spatial value of cultural services tended to be consistent in both online VR and offline questionnaire surveys. The intensity of cultural service value perception in hotspot areas was consistent in both methods of evaluation. Aesthetic value and leisure and entertainment were the most recognized cultural service types and had the most consistent spatial distribution. However, health and well-being value was the most controversial cultural service type. Overall, differences can arise between the types of people and environments in urban parks and the ways in which the public perceives CES appreciation.

This study has several inherent limitations. Firstly, it is necessary to recognize that our sample size was limited and that the study was a pilot study in a specific geographical area, making the study subject to limited constraints. The presence of different demographics in the same area means that urban parks should have different uses and should be considered for their ecological function alongside the impact of more functional parks on the demand for CESs [22]. Considering that urban parks for sustainable development are a collective intervention for the common good, consideration should be given in the respondent research section to the holistic nature of the public, rather than breaking it down into different age groups, as well as other behavioral characteristics of the respondents [70]. Secondly, the survey period was short and only a few days’ worth of data was collected during one season, specifically late summer. Conducting the same study during a different season may have yielded varying results, particularly for visitors. Future research should further integrate multiple sources of data and multiple methods from different research areas. For example, integrating big data sources such as images and videos with traditional data sources like questionnaires and statistics may help bridge the gap in CES assessments [28,71].

In conclusion, while geo-social media data is increasingly being used to comprehend and map CESs and to carry out more efficient evaluations [31], the high complexity and costs associated with existing methods, such as manual or automated image classification, can limit CES estimation costs. The advent of virtual reality-assisted design technologies and platforms has been lauded as a new and valuable marketing resource, as VR can visualize spatial depth in ways that traditional media formats cannot [32]. The effective combination of social media data and virtual reality could offer landscape architects more room for innovation, significantly reducing time and costs while also informing CES evaluations in urban parks. However, VR research is still in its early stages. Empirical studies have yet to fully explore how VR impacts behavioral intentions, and some natural park elements, such as lighting and cameras, can influence the public’s perception of CESs [30]. The future calls for substantial, theory-based VR research to promote the importance of becoming a sustainable human development to compensate for a more scientific evaluation system in CES research. To enable a further step towards sustainable urban development from a CES perspective and to propose optimizations and recommendations for urban parks.