The Pathway from Environmental Perception to Community Resilience: Exploring the Mediating Roles of Cultural Identity and Place Attachment in Rural China

Abstract

Rural communities in China are currently confronting persistent socio-economic and demographic pressures, making the pursuit of long-term sustainability increasingly essential. Enhancing community resilience is widely recognized as a core pathway toward sustainable rural development, yet the socio-psychological mechanisms through which rural public spaces contribute to this process remain underexplored. This study proposes an environmental perception → psychological identity → community resilience framework to clarify how public spaces support sustainable community development. Using survey data from 283 residents across five villages in Zhejiang Province and employing PLS-SEM for empirical analysis, we find that positive perceptions of public spaces significantly enhance community resilience both directly and indirectly through cultural identity and place attachment. A sequential mediation effect is also observed: environmental perception strengthens cultural identity, which subsequently deepens place attachment, jointly promoting resilience. These findings reveal that rural public spaces function as socio-cultural infrastructures that cultivate emotional bonds and collective identity, thereby generating key components of social sustainability. The study contributes to sustainable rural planning by demonstrating that improving public space quality and reinforcing place-based identity processes are vital strategies for fostering resilient and sustainable communities.

1. Introduction

Rapid globalization and urbanization have triggered widespread rural decline, manifested in population loss, economic restructuring, and the erosion of traditional social systems [1,2]. These transformations have reshaped long-standing community structures and interpersonal relationships [3,4], further intensifying the challenges confronting rural communities. Identifying the key factors that support community resilience has therefore become essential. Within this context, rural public spaces serve as critical arenas for revitalization. Persistent issues—including demographic decline, low productivity, weak economic vitality, and deteriorating infrastructure—collectively undermine resilience [5,6], requiring rural communities to cultivate both adaptive and transformative capacities. This paper examines how public spaces contribute to building and sustaining such resilience.

The theory of evolutionary resilience provides a useful framework for this inquiry. It emphasizes that systems enhance resilience through continuous learning and innovation rather than merely returning to a pre-disturbance state [7]. This perspective has reshaped rural development strategies [8,9]. Compared with traditional top-down interventions, place-based approaches more effectively mobilize endogenous local capacities [10].

Within this process, public spaces constitute essential arenas for community interaction and shared participation. As noted, “building a resilient community requires collaboration among multiple actors, and such interaction can be effectively facilitated through public spaces” [11]. In rural contexts, public spaces provide the physical and social foundation for everyday activities that sustain community resilience.

A systematic review of the literature reveals three major research gaps:

(1)

Most resilience studies focus on sudden shocks—such as earthquakes and floods [12]—while overlooking the chronic, long-term disturbances confronting rural areas, including demographic decline, economic restructuring, and cultural disintegration. Expanding resilience research to encompass multidimensional socio-economic and cultural contexts is therefore essential [13].

(2)

Existing research largely prioritizes urban contexts or macro-regional systems, paying limited attention to rural communities as distinctive social units. Rural areas inherently differ from urban settings due to dense kinship networks, close spatial ties, and deep cultural embeddedness [14,15,16]. This study goes beyond identifying this gap by examining how the unique socio-cultural characteristics of rural China—its “acquaintance society” structure, strong lineage ties, and collective cultural memory—shape environmental perception, psychological identity, and community resilience. By focusing on a non-Western, non-urban context, this research offers an original contribution to resilience theory.

(3)

Current studies primarily examine direct links between physical environments and residents’ behaviors or resilience, while overlooking the psychological mechanisms that mediate the relationship between spatial experience and resilience [17]. This “psychological black box” leaves the transformative pathway from public space to community resilience insufficiently understood.

Accordingly, this study addresses a central research gap: the absence of an integrated psychological model explaining how rural public spaces—through their material and symbolic dimensions—enhance community resilience under chronic socio-cultural stress. The theoretical contribution lies in identifying a sequential psychological pathway—“environmental perception → cultural identity → place attachment → community resilience.” Although previous studies have examined individual linkages, few have integrated them into a continuous cultural–emotional–behavioral chain, particularly in rural China. By demonstrating how cultural identity functions as an antecedent that strengthens place attachment and ultimately enhances resilience, this study provides a more holistic framework that advances existing theories.

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 reviews the literature and theoretical framework; Section 3 describes the research design and methods; Section 4 reports empirical results; Section 5 discusses theoretical and practical implications; and Section 6 presents the conclusion.

2. Literature Review and Theoretical Framework

2.1. Rural Community Resilience

The concept of “resilience” originated in physics and mathematics, referring to a system’s capacity to withstand external disturbances. Since then, its conceptual scope has broadened considerably across multiple disciplines. In contemporary research, resilience commonly refers to the capacity of a system or community to anticipate, absorb, adapt to, and recover from both acute shocks and chronic stresses [18,19,20]. Given the multifaceted nature of rural communities, the concept encompasses multiple levels—from the community as a whole to households and individual residents [21,22]. This inherent complexity is reflected in the diverse conceptualizations of “rural community resilience” found throughout the literature. Some studies define resilience as a community’s ability to maintain structural and functional stability when confronted with disturbances [23]. Other scholars emphasize its adaptive and dynamic nature, defining resilience as the community’s capacity to withstand disturbances while pursuing sustainable development [24]. Still others highlight human agency, underscoring the proactive roles of individuals and groups in coping with change [25]. Despite these differing emphases, most definitions converge on the view that resilience reflects a community’s capacity to cope with both internal and external disturbances [17,26,27]. This capacity can generally be summarized into three dimensions: (1) resistance, the ability to maintain basic social structure and functions and avoid collapse during a disturbance; (2) recovery, the ability to restore social functions to pre-shock or acceptable levels after a disturbance; and (3) adaptation, the ability to adjust and reorganize in anticipation of or in response to future challenges and changing conditions [28]. Rural community resilience is multidimensional and closely linked to the resilience of social, economic, built, and ecological systems [29]. Building on this foundation, Norris proposed a widely cited framework, identifying four interrelated dimensions of resilience: social capital, economic development, information and communication, and community competence [19].

International research likewise highlights that rural resilience depends strongly on internal social processes. Steiner and Atterton demonstrate that local social networks can enhance a community’s capacity for self-organization under long-term pressures [30]. Skerratt finds that community autonomy plays a critical role in sustaining rural communities’ adaptive capacity [31]. Wilson further argues that social capital and local agency shape the pathways through which communities respond to external challenges [22]. Together, these insights provide valuable comparative perspectives for understanding rural resilience in China.

Building on this foundation, the above review indicates that existing research offers a solid, multidimensional basis for understanding rural resilience. However, to address the gap regarding how individual psychological processes shape collective resilience [17], this study adopts a micro-level analytical perspective. The study seeks to translate the abstract concept of resilience into indicators that residents can directly perceive and evaluate. Drawing on the social-capital dimension of resilience frameworks [32,33], this study focuses on internalized psychological and social factors—namely cultural identity and place attachment—that are vital for fostering community resilience. The overarching goal is to clarify how these psychological factors contribute to the construction of community resilience.

2.2. Rural Public Spaces and Environmental Perception

Rural public spaces, as key material environments that evoke the psychological and social dynamics discussed above, play a particularly significant role in contemporary China. With the advancement of urbanization and the deepening of the rural revitalization strategy, both the structural forms of rural public spaces and the socio-cultural systems they embody are undergoing profound and complex transformations [34].

As essential sites of daily life—characterized by openness and accessibility [33]—rural public spaces fulfill multiple social, functional, and cultural roles, including residence, circulation, work, and social interaction [35]. In rural contexts, typical public spaces—such as ancestral halls, village squares, and open grounds beneath ancient trees—extend far beyond their functional purposes. These spaces often serve as cultural domains that preserve local memory, strengthen social interaction, and anchor collective identity.

In the Chinese rural context, these socio-spatial characteristics take on an even more distinctive expression. Rural communities have long functioned as “acquaintance societies,” where everyday interactions are embedded in long-standing kinship and neighborhood ties. Accordingly, public spaces such as ancestral halls or clan squares simultaneously serve as ritual venues, community deliberation sites, and repositories of customary norms [36]. This tight integration of social relations, cultural practices, and spatial settings shapes residents’ perceptions and emotional connections to these environments, forming attachment mechanisms that differ markedly from those found in urban or Western contexts.

Building on this socio-cultural foundation, rural public spaces become crucial arenas through which environmental perception is transformed into cultural identity and place-based emotional bonds. Figure 1 illustrates the key physical elements that characterize these spaces. In essence, these spaces serve as cultural domains and emotional hubs that foster social relationships, preserve collective memory, transmit local knowledge, and reinforce community sentiments [36,37]. Due to their multifunctional nature, high-quality public spaces significantly enhance residents’ physical and psychological well-being, strengthen social cohesion, and improve overall quality of life [38].

Through these functions, public spaces constitute an essential material basis for rural community resilience. To better understand these processes, this study introduces the concept of environmental perception. Rooted in cognitive behaviors such as the recollection of spatial images [35], environmental perception serves as a crucial bridge between objective physical settings and residents’ subjective experiences.

Accordingly, this study divides residents’ environmental perception of public spaces into three dimensions:

(1)

Outdoor spatial elements, referring to functionality, accessibility, safety, aesthetics, and the physical quality of environments such as streets and courtyards;

(2)

Supporting facilities, encompassing the completeness and satisfaction of commercial, recreational, landscape, and service amenities;

(3)

Social elements, involving residents’ experiences with healthcare, culture, public services, transportation convenience, and overall sense of security [39].

Together, these dimensions capture residents’ holistic evaluations of public spaces across physical, functional, and social dimensions. While individual dimensions may appear conventional, their collective perception acts as the crucial initial input into a unique psychological pathway within rural China, distinguishing it from general satisfaction models. Environmental perception is closely linked to residents’ satisfaction and well-being. Numerous studies show that high-quality spatial environments elicit positive psychological and emotional responses, which in turn enhance physical and mental health and foster more frequent, higher-quality social interactions [40]. For example, Tan Lingqian et al. found that stronger perceptions of natural features in neighborhood green spaces are positively associated with residents’ subjective satisfaction and happiness [41]. Moreover, environmental perception is inherently multidimensional and integrative [42], encompassing not only visual contact with nature but also the overall experiences of spatial accessibility, facility completeness, and social atmosphere. These multidimensional perceptions collectively shape residents’ evaluations of public spaces, stimulate psychological and social dynamics, and ultimately enhance community resilience.

2.3. The Mediating Role of Place Attachment and Cultural Identity

Rural public spaces support community resilience both directly and indirectly through socio-psychological mechanisms such as cultural identity and place attachment. Place attachment (PA) refers to the emotional and cognitive bonds that connect individuals to specific places. Its theoretical roots lie in Yi-Fu Tuan’s Topophilia and Proshansky’s Place Identity, which emphasize emotional bonding and self-identification in human–environment relationships [43,44]. However, classical frameworks often overlook collective dimensions and the role of public spaces in shaping shared emotional connections, and they typically conceptualize attachment as static rather than dynamic.

Recent anthropological studies highlight the social and experiential dimensions of place, showing how shared practices and lived experiences shape collective emotional bonds. Feld and Basso demonstrate that a “sense of place” emerges through culturally embedded practices and storytelling [45]. Pink notes that everyday routines and embodied interactions continuously reconstruct place attachments [46], while Riley argues that rural identities are shaped by intergenerational memory and locally grounded narratives [47]. These insights extend classical frameworks by emphasizing that attachment is culturally situated, dynamic, and socially constructed.

Building on these perspectives, later scholars developed integrative frameworks that capture the complexity of place attachment. Altman and Low’s person–place model emphasizes functional, social, and symbolic interactions, suggesting that attachment emerges from both individual needs and community-constructed meanings [48]. Scannell and Gifford’s person–process–place (PPP) model conceptualizes attachment as a systemic process linking people, physical settings, and psychological mechanisms [49]. Lewicka further underscores its relational and dynamic nature, showing how social interaction, memory-making, and spatial practice continuously reshape attachment [50,51]. Multidimensional models by Raymond et al. and Kyle and Vaske [52] introduce factors such as social bonding and nature connectedness, offering more comprehensive empirical approaches.

Drawing on these developments, this study adopts the two-dimensional framework of Williams et al. [53], which balances emotional and functional aspects of attachment. Place identity and place dependence are used as complementary dimensions to analyze residents’ affective and functional connections to rural public spaces, and to examine how spatial experiences transform into psychological attachment and ultimately contribute to community resilience.

Place identity refers to the emotional bonds and symbolic meanings individuals attribute to a place—such as viewing a village as “home” or recognizing public spaces as repositories of personal memories and collective identity. It forms dynamically through social interaction and memory construction, encompassing both environmental influences and the internalization of local culture [54,55]. Place dependence reflects functional ties [56], indicating how well spaces meet residents’ needs for leisure, social interaction, and daily use, and evolves through accumulated spatial experiences [57,58].

Cultural identity refers to individuals’ psychological sense of belonging to the symbols, values, and practices of a cultural group [59]. According to social identity theory [60], this identification stems from basic needs for self-esteem and belonging. Cultural identity develops through socialization, as participation in collective practices leads individuals to internalize cultural norms and traditions [61]. Fei Xiaotong’s notion of “cultural consciousness” localizes this idea by emphasizing the unity of rational understanding and emotional recognition of cultural values [62].

More recent perspectives—such as Hall’s concept of identity fluidity and Jenkins’s social-constructionist view—stress that cultural identity is dynamic and continually reshaped through interaction and differentiation [63,64].

In rural settings, cultural identity is reflected in residents’ cognitive understanding, emotional attachment, and behavioral orientations toward local traditions and historical culture. Following established research frameworks [65], it can be analyzed across three dimensions: (1) cognitive understanding of local traditions through interaction; (2) emotional attachment and pride in local culture; and (3) behavioral participation and willingness to transmit local cultural practices.

Within this framework, cultural identity serves as a catalyst for the formation and strengthening of place attachment. From the perspective of identity theory, individuals have an inherent motivation to maintain self-continuity and self-esteem, as well as to seek belonging and uniqueness. Rural public spaces (such as ancestral halls and opera stages) act as primary carriers of local cultural symbols [66]. Through participation in cultural activities such as rituals and festivals, residents internalize external cultural norms and collective identity into their self-concept.

Identity Process Theory suggests that cultural identity precedes emotional and functional bonds to place, as individuals anchor their self-concept in cultural categories before forming place-based attachments [67]. Similarly, Social Identity Theory posits that identification with a group provides the cognitive basis for subsequent emotional and behavioral relations with physical settings [68]. Cultural geography and anthropology further show that rural public spaces operate as “symbolic spaces” where collective memory and cultural meaning are spatially embodied [69,70]. Once individuals identify with a cultural community, its associated physical environments become symbols of belonging, thereby reinforcing place attachment. These symbolic spaces also strengthen functional connections (place dependence) [71], and empirical studies demonstrate that cultural identity enhances place dependence by enriching perceived place meaning and functional fit [72,73].

Thus, cultural identification triggers a sequential mechanism—identity consolidation → emotional bonding → functional reliance—that forms the core of the cultural-identity-to-place-attachment pathway.

In related research, place attachment and cultural identity are commonly examined as mediating variables [74]. In this study, their mediating roles unfold as follows: positive environmental perceptions strengthen cultural identity, which in turn enhances place attachment, forming a chain-mediation process. Cultural identity reinforces place attachment, consistent with findings that identity-based meanings are internalized before being expressed as emotional attachment to place [50,75,76]. Strengthened identity further promotes social cohesion, neighborly support, and participation in collective activities [77]. These pro-social behaviors—driven by shared identity and emotional connection—form a resilient foundation that enables communities to organize responses, maintain social functions, and recover effectively from external shocks [78].

2.4. Theoretical Framework and Research Hypotheses

Building upon the preceding discussion, this study develops a conceptual framework of “environmental perception → psychological identity → community resilience” (Figure 2). The model identifies environmental perception of rural public spaces as the independent variable, residents’ cultural identity and place attachment as the core mediating variables, and community resilience as the dependent variable.

Accordingly, the following hypotheses are proposed:

H1. 

Environmental Perception of Public Spaces positively influences cultural identity.

H2. 

Environmental Perception of Public Spaces positively influences place attachment.

H3. 

Cultural identity has a significant positive effect on place attachment.

H4a. 

Residents’ cultural identity has a significant positive effect on community resilience.

H4b. 

Residents’ place attachment has a significant positive effect on community resilience.

H5a. 

Cultural identity mediates the relationship between environmental perception of rural public spaces and community resilience.

H5b. 

Place attachment mediates the relationship between environmental perception of rural public spaces and community resilience.

H5c. 

Cultural identity and place attachment have a chain mediating effect between environmental perception of rural public spaces and community resilience.

3. Research Methods

3.1. Data Collection and Participants

Data were collected through questionnaire surveys conducted between June and August 2025 in five representative villages in Ningbo, Zhejiang Province (see

Table A1. Questionnaire on Rural Public Space Perception and Community Resilience.

1. Environmental Perception of Public Space

Outdoor Space Elements

- Satisfaction with village roads

- Satisfaction with courtyards

- Satisfaction with public squares

- Satisfaction with green spaces

Supporting Facilities

- Satisfaction with accessibility facilities

- Satisfaction with lighting

- Satisfaction with commercial facilities

- Satisfaction with leisure facilities

Social Elements

- Perception of local healthcare conditions

- Perception of local cultural development

- Convenience of local transportation

- Satisfaction with environmental management

2. Cultural Identity

Behavior

- I am willing to devote time or effort to preserving and inheriting our village’s traditional culture.

- I actively participate in our village’s traditional festivals and rituals.

- I enjoy introducing and promoting our village’s culture to outsiders.

Emotion

- Our village’s traditions make me feel safe and have a sense of belonging.

- I am proud of our village’s cultural history and traditions.

- I strongly identify with our village’s culture, history, and values.

Cognition

- I am familiar with our village’s founding history, name origin, or key historical events.

- I understand our village’s unique traditional customs and their meanings.

- I can name our village’s representative cultural symbols.

3. Place Attachment

Place Identity

- I feel a strong sense of belonging in this village.

- I strongly identify with the village’s overall atmosphere and values.

- I have deep affection for this village.

Place Dependence

- It would be hard to find another village as convenient to live in as this one.

- I am very familiar with various places in the village.

- This village provides most of the resources and services I need.

4. Community Resilience

Satisfaction

- Overall, I am satisfied with my current life.

- Overall, I feel happy with my life.

- I feel mentally healthy and stable.

Future Vision

- Overall, I am confident about the future.

- I believe our village’s economy will keep improving.

- I expect the living environment and quality in our village will improve in the future.

Neighborhood Relations

- I am willing to participate in public affairs and activities organized by the village.

- I feel comfortable and helpful in interacting with other villagers.

- I feel that I am an important member of this community.

for questionnaire details). Considering the practical challenges of maintaining response quality and data depth across a broader area, the sampling sites were confined to the Ningbo region, which is known for its rich historical heritage and strong foundation in rural development.

The selected villages include both hilly and coastal terrains. Economically, they represent areas dominated by agriculture or labor migration, while culturally, they preserve long-standing traditions, folk narratives, and historical lineages. This multi-dimensional sampling strategy helped ensure the typicality and representativeness of the research sample. The spatial distribution of the sample is illustrated in Figure 3.

The study employed a random sampling approach, distributing questionnaires to permanent residents in each village. A total of 325 questionnaires were distributed across the five villages, and on-site verification and data cleaning were subsequently performed. Invalid questionnaires were excluded due to issues such as ineligible respondents, inconsistent answers (e.g., selecting “5” for all items), or extremely short response times (less than one second per item). After data screening, 283 valid responses were retained, yielding an effective response rate of 87.1%. The ratio of measurement dimensions to sample size exceeded the recommended 10:1 threshold, ensuring adequate robustness for PLS-SEM analysis [79].

The demographic characteristics of the sample are shown in

Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of the Sample.

Variables		Frequency	Percent
Residential Village	Chaqianshan Village	119	42.0%
	Fengtan Village	93	32.9%
	Tiantan Village	31	11.0%
	Tanhe Village	14	4.9%
	Wanshousi Village	26	9.2%
Gender	Male	149	52.7%
	Female	134	47.3%
Educational Level	Primary school or below	116	41%
	Junior high school	57	20.1%
	Senior high school	54	19.1%
	College or above	56	19.8%
Age Group	<18	42	14.8%
	18–33	31	11%
	34–49	62	21.9%
	50–65	85	33%
	>65	63	22.3%
Duration of Residence	≤10 years	45	15.9%
	11–20 years	17	6%
	21–30 years	25	8.8%
	≥31 years	196	69.3%
Annual Net Income (CNY)	None	19	6.7%
	<30 k (<4200 USD)	145	51.2%
	30 k–50 k (4200–7000 USD)	61	21.5%
	50 k–100 k (7000–14,000 USD)	48	16.9%
	>100 k (>14,000 USD)	11	3.9%
Occupation	Unemployed	42	14.8%
	Industrial Worker	23	8.1%
	Farmer	153	54.1%
	Tourist	8	2.8%
	Student	23	8.1%
	Migrant Laborer	17	6%
	Other	17	6%

.

Most respondents were aged 41 and above, accounting for over 70% of the sample—a pattern consistent with local demographic trends of population aging and rural depopulation [75]. Gender distribution was relatively balanced. In contrast, educational attainment exhibited a polarized pattern, with 61.6% of respondents having completed junior high school or below. More than half reported an annual income of less than 30,000 yuan.

The majority of participants were long-term residents, which strengthens the contextual reliability of the survey data. Occupational statistics further show that agriculture remains the predominant livelihood source, with a large share of respondents being middle-aged or elderly farmers. The relatively high proportion of individuals classified as “unemployed” likewise reflects the demographic aging of the sample.

3.2. Measurement

Data were collected via a structured questionnaire survey. The questionnaire was divided into four main sections. In addition to basic demographic information, the core research variables were measured using multi-item five-point Likert scales (1 = “strongly disagree”; 5 = “strongly agree”). All scales were adapted from validated instruments used in domestic and international studies, with appropriate contextual modifications for the rural Chinese setting. The questionnaire encompassed four dimensions: personal demographics; environmental perception of community public spaces (independent variable); place attachment and cultural identity (mediating variables); and community resilience (dependent variable).

The demographic section collected information on gender, age, occupation, education level, income, duration of residence, and health status. Environmental perception of community public spaces was measured following the three-dimensional framework established in the literature—outdoor spatial elements, supporting facilities, and social elements—using a total of 12 items.

Place attachment was assessed using the scale developed by Williams and Vaske [80], which includes two core dimensions: place identity and place dependence. Six high-loading items from the original scale were selected to measure residents’ emotional attachment and functional dependence on their community. This scale has been widely applied in environmental psychology and tourism research, including studies by [81] and Chinese scholars [82].

Cultural identity was assessed across three dimensions—cognitive, emotional, and behavioral—drawing on Xin’s research [83] and supplemented by field interviews and literature analysis. Six items were developed to capture residents’ cognitive understanding, emotional belonging, and behavioral participation in local culture.

Community resilience, as the dependent variable, was measured following the social capital-based frameworks proposed by Chen et al. (2019) [32] and Guan and Wang (2023) [33], across three aspects: social satisfaction, social cohesion, and neighborhood relationships [33]. A total of nine items were used. These items were designed to capture residents’ perceptions of community solidarity, confidence in facing challenges, and mutual support among neighbors, thereby operationalizing the abstract concept of resilience into specific, measurable indicators.

In this study, all first-order constructs (e.g., OSE, SFE, SE) were specified as reflective measures, as their indicators are considered manifestations of the latent variables and are expected to covary. In contrast, second-order constructs (such as community resilience and other higher-order latent variables) consist of conceptually distinct dimensions that are not necessarily highly correlated. These constructs were therefore specified as formative measures. This specification aligns with theoretical criteria for distinguishing formative from reflective measurement and appropriately reflects the structural characteristics of second-order latent variables.

3.3. Data Analysis Strategy

Excel was used to screen and clean the questionnaire data, excluding samples that failed to meet screening criteria or had response times outside the acceptable range. The subsequent analysis focused on the theoretical framework of “environmental perception → psychological identity → community resilience.”

Given the model’s predictive orientation, the limited sample size, and the presence of formative indicators, Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) was employed. Model estimation and hypothesis testing were performed using SmartPLS 4.0. PLS-SEM effectively addresses multicollinearity, imposes minimal assumptions on data distribution, and provides robust explanatory and predictive capabilities [84,85].

4. Research Results

4.1. Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis

This study first conducted descriptive statistical analysis for the main variables, and the results are shown in

Table 2. Descriptive Statistics of Main Variables.

Variable	n	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Standard Deviation	Skewness	Kurtosis
Environmental Perception of Public Space	283	1.58	5.00	3.701	0.659	−1.027	1.106
Outdoor Space Elements	283	1.25	5.00	3.788	0.740	−1.067	0.947
Supporting Facilities	283	1.00	5.00	3.561	0.836	−0.403	−0.613
Social Elements	283	1.00	5.00	3.754	0.796	−1.096	1.172
Cultural Identity	283	1.00	5.00	3.648	0.684	−1.228	2.679
Behavior	283	1.00	5.00	3.620	0.824	−0.629	0.624
Emotion	283	1.00	5.00	3.740	0.856	−0.808	0.870
Cognition	283	1.00	5.00	3.583	0.879	−0.425	−0.044
Place Attachment	283	1.50	5.00	3.794	0.706	−1.177	1.138
Place Identity	283	1.00	5.00	3.752	0.837	−0.927	0.808
Place Dependence	283	1.33	5.00	3.836	0.759	−1.011	0.867
Community Resilience	283	1.00	5.00	3.944	0.728	−0.984	0.820
Satisfaction	283	1.00	5.00	3.843	0.921	−0.909	0.080
Future Vision	283	1.00	5.00	3.896	0.896	−0.972	0.128
Neighborhood Relations	283	1.00	5.00	4.091	0.889	−1.222	0.682

. The mean values of Environmental Perception of Public Spaces, Cultural Identity, Place Attachment, and Community Resilience were 3.701, 3.648, 3.794, and 3.944, respectively, all exceeding the theoretical midpoint of 3, indicating that respondents evaluated these variables above average. Additionally, the absolute skewness values of all variables were less than 3, and the absolute kurtosis values were less than 10, meeting the statistical criteria for approximately normal distribution, which allows for subsequent parameter analysis.

To examine the associations between variables, Pearson correlation analysis was conducted. The results of the correlation analysis between the main variables are shown in

Table 3. Correlation Analysis Between Core Variables.

Variable	Environmental Perception of Public Space	Cultural Identity	Place Attachment	Community Resilience
Environmental Perception of Public Space	1
Cultural Identity	0.573 **	1
Place Attachment	0.537 **	0.493 **	1
Community Resilience	0.467 **	0.445 **	0.469 **	1

** indicates that the correlation is statistically significant at the p < 0.01 level (two-tailed).

. Significant positive correlations were observed among Environmental Perception of Public Spaces, Cultural Identity, Place Attachment, and Community Resilience, with coefficients ranging from 0.445 to 0.573 (p < 0.01). These results provide preliminary empirical evidence of close interrelationships among the key variables, lending statistical support to the subsequent structural modeling.

Table 4. Correlation Analysis Among Variable Dimensions.

Variable	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
Outdoor Space Elements	1
Supporting Facilities	0.581 **	1
Social Elements	0.588 **	0.462 **	1
Behavior	0.313 **	0.350 **	0.382 **	1
Emotion	0.399 **	0.351 **	0.476 **	0.465 **	1
Cognition	0.393 **	0.402 **	0.375 **	0.416 **	0.510 **	1
Place Identity	0.469 **	0.186 **	0.462 **	0.316 **	0.366 **	0.320 **	1
Place Dependence	0.458 **	0.364 **	0.467 **	0.338 **	0.398 **	0.362 **	0.562 **	1
Satisfaction	0.356 **	0.357 **	0.421 **	0.256 **	0.296 **	0.360 **	0.262 **	0.409 **	1
Future Vision	0.295 **	0.201 **	0.321 **	0.254 **	0.288 **	0.313 **	0.325 **	0.381 **	0.500 **	1
Neighborhood Relations	0.346 **	0.174 **	0.365 **	0.215 **	0.305 **	0.296 **	0.338 **	0.303 **	0.447 **	0.482 **	1

** indicates that the correlation is statistically significant at the p < 0.01 level (two-tailed). n = 283.

presents the correlation analysis table between the dimensions of the main variables. Significant positive correlations were found between the dimensions of environmental perception of public spaces, cultural identity, place attachment, and Community Resilience, with the following correlation coefficients:

4.2. Measurement Model Test Results

The measurement model was evaluated for reliability and validity using SmartPLS 4.0. Specifically addressing potential concerns regarding construct overlap and common method bias (CMB), variance inflation factors (VIFs) were used to assess potential multicollinearity [86]. Results showed internal VIF values ranging from 1.439 to 1.879—well below the recommended threshold of 3.3—strongly indicating no significant multicollinearity concerns and suggesting that CMB is unlikely to substantially affect the findings [87]. Further, to ensure the distinctiveness of our constructs given their conceptual relatedness, the Heterotrait–Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) values were all below 0.85, confirming adequate discriminant validity among all latent variables. Reliability was assessed using latent-variable factor loadings, Cronbach’s α coefficients, and composite reliability (CR) (see

Table 5. Reliability Analysis of Constructs.

Scale	Cronbach’s α	Number of Items
PSP	0.781	3
CI	0.722	3
PA	0.720	2
CR	0.732	3

). Cronbach’s α values ranged from 0.720 to 0.781, all exceeding the acceptable threshold of 0.7, demonstrating good internal consistency of the scales. Model fit was evaluated using the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR), which yielded a value of 0.078, within the recommended threshold (<0.08), indicating an acceptable global model fit. Convergent validity was further assessed through outer loadings, average variance extracted (AVE), and CR values.

Convergent validity was examined by evaluating outer loadings, AVE, CR values, and composite reliability coefficients [88]. As shown in

Table 6. Convergent Validity of Measurement Scales.

Construct	Item	Standardized Factor Loading	CR	AVE
PSP	OSE	0.873	0.872	0.694
	SFE	0.777
	SE	0.847
CI	CB	0.758	0.843	0.642
	CA	0.836
	CC	0.809
PA	PI	0.867	0.877	0.780
	PD	0.900
CR	SS	0.822	0.848	0.650
	SC	0.813
	NR	0.785

, the standardized factor loadings for all items ranged from 0.758 to 0.900, the composite reliability (CR) values ranged from 0.843 to 0.877, all exceeding the standard of 0.7; the average variance extracted (AVE) values ranged from 0.642 to 0.780, all above the recommended value of 0.5. These indicators suggest that the scales exhibit good convergent validity [4].

For the discriminant validity test, the Fornell-Larcker criterion was used for evaluation. As shown in

Table 7. Discriminant Validity Test (Fornell–Larcker Criterion).

Construct	CI	CR	PA	PSP
CI	0.802
CR	0.447	0.807
PA	0.496	0.474	0.883
PSP	0.574	0.480	0.559	0.833

, the square roots of the average variance extracted (AVE) for each latent variable are greater than the correlations between that variable and the other variables [89], indicating satisfactory discriminant validity of the scales.

Because the PLS-SEM method tends to overestimate standardized loadings and inflate AVE values, the Heterotrait–Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) was additionally used to assess discriminant validity [90]. The discriminant validity results, shown in

Table 8. Discriminant Validity Test (Heterotrait–Monotrait Ratio, HTMT).

Construct	CI	CR	PA	PSP
CI
CR	0.611
PA	0.686	0.650
PSP	0.761	0.619	0.725

, indicate that all HTMT values are below 0.85, suggesting that the discriminant validity between variables is good, which is consistent with the results from the Fornell-Larcker criterion.

To further examine the overall influence among constructs, total effects (i.e., direct plus indirect effects) were calculated, as presented in

Table 9. Total Effects of Constructs.

Path	O	M	STDEV	T	p
PSP → CI	0.574	0.575	0.061	9.358	0.000
PSP →PA	0.559	0.561	0.052	10.845	0.001
CI → PA	0.262	0.264	0.071	3.663	0.000
PSP → CR	0.480	0.482	0.058	8.262	0.000
CI → CR	0.256	0.259	0.068	3.790	0.000
PA → CR	0.251	0.256	0.077	3.248	0.001

. The results show that Public Space Perception (PSP) exerts the strongest total effect on Community Resilience (CR) (β = 0.480, p < 0.01), encompassing both its direct influence and its indirect pathways through Cultural Identity (CI) and Place Attachment (PA). This total-effect analysis provides further support for the hypothesized model, demonstrating that environmental perception not only directly enhances community resilience but also contributes substantially through psychosocial mechanisms. These findings are consistent with the path coefficients and mediation analyses, highlighting the multi-level mechanisms through which public spaces shape community outcomes.

4.3. Path Coefficient Evaluation

Based on Partial Least Squares (PLS) path analysis with 5000 bootstrap samples, the standardized path coefficients and their significance are shown in Figure 4.

Table 10. Structural Model Path Coefficients (PLS-SEM Results).

Path	β	se	t	p	R2	Q2
PSP → CI	0.574	0.061	9.358	0.000	0.330	0.207
PSP →PA	0.409	0.073	5.610	0.000	0.358	0.273
CI →PA	0.262	0.071	3.663	0.000
PSP → CR	0.231	0.074	3.101	0.002	0.314	0.196
CI → CR	0.190	0.073	2.615	0.009
PA → CR	0.251	0.077	3.248	0.001

indicate that all hypothesized paths are statistically significant. The specific relationships are as follows:

Public Space Perception (PSP) has a significant positive effect on Cultural Identity (CI) (β = 0.574, p < 0.001). The high coefficient indicates a strong, stable relationship, suggesting that high-quality public spaces not only offer physical comfort and functional convenience but also reinforce residents’ identification with local culture.

PSP also exerts a significant positive effect on Place Attachment (PA) (β = 0.409, p < 0.001). This shows that positive spatial perceptions substantially enhance residents’ emotional connection to their living environment, underscoring public space experience as a critical environmental driver of place attachment.

Cultural Identity (CI) further strengthens Place Attachment (PA) (β = 0.262, p < 0.001), indicating that cultural resonance deepens individuals’ emotional ties to place.

For Community Resilience (CR), PSP (β = 0.231, p < 0.01), CI (β = 0.190, p < 0.01), and PA (β = 0.251, p < 0.01) all show significant positive effects, demonstrating that environmental perception and psychosocial factors jointly contribute to enhancing community resilience. Thus, resilience is shaped not only by spatial quality but also by the synergistic interaction of spatial perception, cultural identity, and emotional attachment. High-quality public spaces indirectly bolster adaptive and recovery capacities by fostering cultural recognition and emotional bonding among residents.

The coefficient of determination (R²) reflects the variance explained by the model. The R² values for Cultural Identity (0.330), Place Attachment (0.358), and Community Resilience (0.314) fall within the moderate range typical in social and behavioral research, especially for complex socio-psychological constructs in PLS-SEM. Although some variance remains unexplained—an inherent characteristic of community resilience studies—the goal here is not maximal prediction but the identification and validation of the psychological transmission mechanisms through which environmental perception shapes resilience. From this perspective, the R² values adequately support the model’s theoretical contribution.

In conclusion, hypotheses H1, H2, H3, H4a, H4b, H5a, H5b, and H5c are supported.

4.4. Mediation Effect Evaluation

Based on mediation tests using the bias-corrected Bootstrap method (5000 samples, 95% confidence intervals),

Table 11. Mediation Effect Results Based on 5000 Bootstrap Samples.

Mediating Path	Mediation Effect	Standard Error	t	p	Bias-Corrected Confidence Interval
					Upper Limit	Lower Limit
PSP → PA → CR	0.102	0.037	2.766	0.006	0.036	0.179
PSP → CI → PA → CR	0.038	0.017	2.221	0.026	0.013	0.079
PSP → CI → CR	0.109	0.047	2.319	0.020	0.026	0.211
PSP → CI → PA	0.150	0.047	3.217	0.001	0.070	0.253
CI → PA → CR	0.066	0.028	2.331	0.020	0.022	0.129

shows that the mediation effects for all paths are statistically significant. Here, CI refers to the confidence interval, which defines the range within which the true effect value is likely to fall at a 95% confidence level.

The mediation effect for the path “PSP → PA → CR” is 0.102, 95% CI [0.036, 0.179], indicating that place attachment partially mediates the relationship between public space perception and community resilience. The serial mediation effect for “PSP → CI → PA → CR” is 0.038, 95% CI [0.013, 0.079], reflecting the joint influence of cultural identity and place attachment. The mediation effects for “PSP → CI → CR” (0.109, 95% CI [0.026, 0.211]) and “PSP → CI → PA” (0.150, 95% CI [0.070, 0.253]) further confirm that cultural identity serves as a key intermediary in transmitting the influence of environmental perception to subsequent psychological outcomes. Finally, the mediation effect for “CI → PA → CR” is 0.066 (95% CI [0.022, 0.129]), verifying that place attachment partially mediates the link between cultural identity and community resilience.

Collectively, these significant mediation paths demonstrate that public space perception indirectly enhances community resilience by fostering cultural identity and place attachment, indicating that community resilience emerges through the interactive mechanisms between environmental perception and psychological processes.

5. Discussion

5.1. Results Overview

The findings provide empirical validation for the proposed environmental perception–psychological identity–community resilience model and clarify the socio-psychological mechanisms through which rural public spaces foster community resilience. Residents’ favorable perceptions of public spaces not only directly enhance community resilience but also exert indirect effects through the mediating roles of cultural identity and place attachment [91].

Furthermore, the results show that rural public spaces are not merely physical infrastructures but vital socio-cultural arenas where cultural memory and social interaction are continually reproduced. The spatial quality of these environments shapes residents’ emotional experiences and community participation. Positive spatial encounters evoke resonance with local culture, deepening attachment and reinforcing residents’ sense of belonging [34]. These spatially induced psychological connections strengthen social networks and human–place relationships [92]. Through this socio-spatial interaction, environmental perceptions are gradually transformed into cultural identity and place attachment, providing intrinsic motivation for community cohesion and resilience. Thus, public spaces not only define the material form of rural settlements but also influence residents’ psychological orientations and social dynamics. Even amid economic transformation and demographic mobility, culturally embedded public spaces—such as ancestral halls and village squares—remain pivotal for sustaining collective emotions and activating endogenous resilience [34]. These findings confirm the model’s broader applicability and underscore the unique role of rural China’s socio-cultural context—marked by collectivist values and strong social ties—in shaping community resilience, diverging from mechanisms highlighted in Western or urban-centric studies.

Within this framework, cultural identity and place attachment are identified as key mediating mechanisms linking environmental perception and community resilience. Cultural identity is reinforced as public spaces embody shared traditions and collective memories, while this sense of cultural belonging deepens residents’ functional dependence and emotional ties to the community—manifested as place attachment. These intertwined psychological processes ultimately translate into a collective capacity to adapt and respond to challenges. The findings support Manzo and Devine-Wright’s assertion that place attachment fosters social connectedness [51], and extend their insights by revealing that, in rural settings, spatial perceptions and cultural identities dynamically reinforce each other, generating a self-sustaining cycle of cohesion and resilience [93].

Overall, all hypothesized pathways are statistically supported, indicating strong explanatory power. The results elucidate how the quality of rural public spaces enhances residents’ identity formation and strengthens community resilience, offering important theoretical implications for rural spatial governance and cultural revitalization.

5.2. Theoretical Implications

The empirical findings of this study offer several key theoretical implications, advancing the understanding of rural community resilience and place theory.

First, this study constructs and empirically validates a complete socio-psychological transmission pathway—Environmental Perception → Cultural Identity → Place Attachment → Community Resilience—thereby illuminating the “psychological black box” linking physical environments with collective resilience. Unlike the classic framework of Norris et al., which highlights community resource integration for coping with acute disturbances, this study clarifies the micro-level psychological mechanisms underlying macro-level resilience [19]. We demonstrate how residents’ environmental perceptions are sequentially transformed into Cultural Identity and Place Attachment, which together enhance Community Resilience. By identifying both the components and the sequence of this pathway, the study provides a clearer explanation of how environmental features are translated into collective adaptive capacity through emotional and cognitive processes.

Second, the study deepens the understanding of the socio-psychological value of rural public spaces. Public Space Perception (PSP) significantly shapes residents’ Cultural Identity, demonstrating that public spaces function not only as material infrastructure but also as carriers of shared cultural meanings and key arenas for emotional bonding. This finding confirms that positive spatial experiences are important for fostering and reinforcing socio-psychological capital.

Third, this study broadens the theoretical scope and cross-context relevance of community resilience research. By examining rural communities’ responses to long-term challenges such as population decline and cultural erosion, and by integrating Cultural Identity and Place Attachment into the resilience framework, the study offers an analytical lens applicable to other rural contexts facing similar structural pressures [22]. Socio-psychological capital emerges as a central driver of long-term adaptation and transformation, enriching the conceptualization of community resilience across sociology, environmental psychology, rural studies, and planning disciplines.

Finally, this study makes a distinct contribution to place theory. The findings show that Cultural Identity acts as a catalyst for Place Attachment, revealing how individuals internalize external culture and collective identity into their self-concept, thereby strengthening emotional and functional bonds between people and place. Overall, the results demonstrate that rural community resilience depends not only on economic resources but also on Cultural Identity and Place Attachment, offering a more comprehensive framework for understanding adaptive and transformative processes within rural social–ecological systems.

5.3. Practical Implications

First, rural planners and landscape architects should adopt an integrated, culture- and emotion-oriented planning strategy. Planning should move beyond a narrow focus on physical infrastructure and embrace a holistic approach that incorporates socio-psychological dimensions. In particular, planners should prioritize identifying, preserving, and revitalizing “anchor” public spaces that embody collective memory and cultural symbolism—such as ancestral halls, shaded gathering spaces beneath ancient trees, and traditional village squares [94]. Designing spatial programs that support cultural rituals and everyday social interaction can strengthen residents’ cultural identity and place attachment [95].

Second, community leaders and village committees play key roles in managing public spaces as platforms for community cultural life. Communities are encouraged to use these spaces for regular, institutionalized cultural activities—such as traditional festivals, local opera performances, folk-art workshops, and oral-history exhibitions [96]. Such culture-based practices translate abstract cultural identity into tangible, experiential routines. In doing so, they reinforce social bonds and shared local memories, cultivating emotional capital and cultural resilience that help communities adapt to long-term transformations and challenges.

Finally, local governments and policymakers should incorporate psychological-identity indicators into evaluation frameworks and adjust policy priorities accordingly. Rural revitalization initiatives often prioritize economic projects that yield immediate returns; however, investment in high-quality public spaces and cultural programs is equally vital for building long-term resilience. We therefore recommend that policymakers: (1) recognize that funding high-quality public spaces is not merely aesthetic improvement but a strategic resilience measure comparable to economic investment; and (2) integrate cultural identity and place attachment as core qualitative indicators in the formulation and evaluation of rural development initiatives. Such measures help shift development from “object-centered” approaches to more balanced “people–place” strategies, ultimately fostering more resilient and sustainable rural communities.

5.4. Research Limitations and Future Directions

Several limitations of this study should be acknowledged. First, with regard to sample selection, data were collected from five villages in the Ningbo region of Zhejiang Province, which share similar socio-economic and cultural characteristics. Although the sample size (n = 283) is appropriate for PLS-SEM analysis, the regional homogeneity and modest scale may limit the generalizability of the findings to rural areas in central and western China, where social contexts differ. In addition, some indicators of the “social elements” of public space may show slight empirical proximity to certain psychosocial indicators of community resilience, introducing a minor risk of common method bias. Future studies may further refine construct boundaries to enhance discriminant validity.

Second, with respect to research design, a primary limitation lies in the cross-sectional nature of our data. While cross-sectional data enable the examination of associations and theoretical pathways among variables, they inherently preclude definitive causal inference, leading to potential over-inference in establishing direct causality (e.g., environment → identity → resilience). We acknowledge the possibility of reverse causality, where residents with higher community resilience might, for instance, report more favorable evaluations of public spaces. Furthermore, the research did not examine in-depth the influence of variables such as length of residence or other personal background factors, which have been shown to affect socio-psychological processes [97]. In addition, complex intra-community socio-economic stratification was not fully incorporated, thereby constraining the model’s explanatory power.

Third, the findings are embedded in the unique cultural context of rural China—characterized by lineage networks and collective rituals—which may limit their applicability in different cultural settings.

Future studies should expand to more diverse regions and employ larger, more heterogeneous samples. Incorporating moderating variables such as residence duration and health, along with objective environmental indicators and qualitative approaches, could support the development of a more comprehensive socio-psychological–environmental framework. In addition, to address the aforementioned causal inference limitations, longitudinal or experimental designs are recommended to verify causal pathways and strengthen the theoretical and practical implications for rural planning and governance.

6. Conclusions

This study validates the “environmental perception–psychological identity–community resilience” framework, reaffirming the pivotal role of rural public spaces. Importantly, it identifies a clear sequential mediation pathway in which positive spatial experiences first strengthen cultural identity, which subsequently fosters place attachment, ultimately enhancing the community’s collective capacity to adapt to disturbances. These findings suggest that rural revitalization efforts should move beyond material improvements and instead prioritize the reconstruction of human–place bonds as a foundation for sustainable resilience.