Key points
· In a national study, people strongly
preferred neighborhood green spaces that cool the air (by 1–3 °C)
and reduce air pollution (by 20–40%).
· Learning in nature and shorter walking
time to the nearest green space also mattered.
· Noise reduction (10–30 dB) and more
species of birds, butterflies, and native plants didn’t move the needle in
people’s choices.
· Residents near existing nature areas were
not keen on adding new green spaces; those near parks supported
it.
· For hot, dense, tropical cities, cooling and
clean air are the headline ecosystem services to design for.
Why this study matters
We talk a lot about “ecosystem services” — the benefits
we get from nature, like shade, cleaner air, quieter streets, and moments of
calm. But when budgets are tight and space is scarce, city planners need to
know: which benefits do people actually care about most in their daily
lives?
This study answers that for Singapore, a tropical
city-state where heat and haze are real, lived problems. The researchers didn’t
ask people to rate green spaces in the abstract. Instead, they ran a discrete
choice experiment: participants picked between realistic neighborhood green
space options with different features (cooling, air quality change, noise
reduction, biodiversity, walking time, and a learning-in-nature program). From
those choices, we learn what people value enough to “choose with their feet.”
The big findings (in plain English)
1) Cooler is king
People clearly preferred green spaces that lower
temperatures by 1–3 °C. In a hot, humid climate, that kind of relief isn’t
a luxury; it’s health and comfort. The science already shows greenery can cool
cities — this study shows the public demand for it.
2) Clean air is a must-have
A 20–40% drop in air pollution was strongly
preferred. Just as important: any increase in pollution tied to greenery
(for example, if dense plantings trap fine particles along calm streets) was strongly
disliked. Design matters: choose species and layouts that improve
ventilation and filter particles rather than trap them.
3) Shorter walk, higher use
People preferred shorter walking times. That’s a
call for more local micro-green spaces — pocket parks, shaded corridors,
roadside trees, and green walls—within a 5–10 minute walk.
4) Learning in nature helps
A simple “learn in nature” program (think: signs,
guided walks, school tie-ins) boosted preferences. Programming converts green
space from “nice” to useful for families and schools.
5) Biodiversity and noise: important, but not decisive
here
Despite being rated as “important,” adding more bird,
butterfly, or native plant species didn’t significantly shift choices in
this neighborhood context. Same for noise abatement of 10–30 dB.
Possible reasons:
· People may associate biodiversity with larger
parks and nature reserves, not pocket greenery next to homes.
· The tested noise reductions may be below what
residents perceive as meaningful in real street conditions.
Design takeaway: don’t abandon biodiversity or noise goals—pair them with
cooling and clean air, and communicate benefits people can feel day-to-day.
6) Your context matters
People already living near nature areas didn’t
want yet another new green space; those near urban parks did.
Saturation, wildlife concerns, or “we already have it” perceptions can shift
support. Local baselines shape demand.
What city leaders and designers can do tomorrow
Design for shade first.
Plant broad-canopy trees along walking routes and near transit stops;
layer with climbers, shrubs, and permeable surfaces to maximize cooling.
Keep air moving.
Use species and layouts that don’t block wind in narrow streets. Avoid
dense plantings in pollution “canyons”; instead, place greenery where dispersion
works, and use species with high particle capture along busy corridors.
Think “nearby and many,” not “far and few.”
A network of small, reachable green elements often beats one distant showpiece.
Program the space.
Add learning features: seasonal signage, school partnerships, weekend
nature walks. Low-cost programming = high perceived value.
Match biodiversity to place.
In tiny neighborhood sites, aim for resilient, low-conflict plant palettes
and pollinator pockets, while celebrating richer biodiversity in larger
parks and reserves where visitors expect it.
Read the room.
Where residents already live beside nature reserves, focus on maintenance,
access quality, and cooling rather than creating new green plots.
The simple message for tropical cities
If you’re sweating through longer hot seasons and
worrying about air quality, your neighbors probably are too. This study shows
that when people choose, they choose cooler, cleaner, closer, and a bit of
learning. Build your neighborhood green strategy around those four, and
you’ll earn public support — and deliver the kind of everyday benefits that
make city life healthier and happier.
Original article: Jaung, W., Carrasco, L. R.,
Shaikh, S. F. E. B., Tan, P. Y., & Richards, D. R. (2020). Temperature and
air pollution reductions by urban green spaces are highly valued in a tropical
city-state. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 126827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126827