Characteristics of physical environments supporting perceived social well-being

Abstract

Urban physical environments provide opportunities for people to engage in various activities beneficial for their health and well-being. While the physical characteristics of spaces that encourage physical activity and provide restorative benefits are well-researched topics, there remains insufficient understanding of which types of physical environments urban residents consider as important for their social life.

This study aims to understand what types of physical environments support perceived social well-being. The research was based on data collected in the city of Turku in 2023 through a map-based survey. Places important for socializing, physical activities and restorative experiences (n=1424) mapped by respondents (n=340) were analysed to study whether places for social activities differ in terms of their spatial patterns and physical environmental characteristics from places for other activities. Marked points were overlaid with register-based GIS data and buffers of 50 m were created around each point to calculate land use variable values necessary for statistical analysis. Further analysis included conducting three subsequent Kernel density analyses to identify spatial clusters of each type of place and compare their distribution. The density-based clusters were further inspected to gain an understanding of the functional use of areas corresponding to their geographical locations.

The results of the study demonstrate that the physical environment significantly differs across the three types of places. The prevalence of commercial areas in places associated with social activities was the most distinct difference in terms of physical environmental characteristics compared to places for other activities. Individuals often perceived institutional areas as both restorative and social settings. Natural and recreational areas were more often perceived as environments for physical activities and restorative experiences. Traffic and residential land uses were notably present in all types of places. The heatmaps illustrated that places for socializing concentrated particularly in the central commercial area, whereas well-visited places for other activities clustered in various locations within the central part of the city. Creating environments that support increased social activity within lower-density areas outside the urban core may be challenging due to lesser concentration of people in these areas but should be strived for to improve residents’ social well-being and quality of life.