RESEARCH ARTICLE

Characterizing the Urban Green Spaces in Davao City,

Philippines: Implications for Design and Management

Ryan C. Songcayauon
University of the Philippines Mindanao, PHILIPPINES

Abstract

Urban green spaces (UGS) are important contributors to urban quality of life. UGS support human well-being
by providing ecosystem services such as climate regulation, the capture of pollutants, and flood regulation.
They also help in the communities' social interactions. This study defines the UGS in Davao City, Philippines
by considering their physical and social dimensions. Using a geographic information system (GIS) software,
QGIS, and a spatial pattern analysis program, Fragstats, the physical characteristics of the UGS were measured
by factoring in the indicators of quality, quantity, spatial distribution, and accessibility. The study surveyed six
UGS by applying the Public Space Index (PSI), which measures how good the UGS are in terms of inclusiveness,
meaningful activities, safety, comfort, and pleasurability, alongside users’ needs and preferences. Results showed
that the green space per inhabitant is only 0.37 square meters (m2), which is below the recommendations cited
by numerous studies. The shape index is 1.03 and aggregation is 50.15, which means that the majority of UGS
are square and are neither aggregated nor fragmented. The average PSI of all six surveyed UGS is 66.09 with
71.64 as the highest individual score. User perceptions varied accordingly, which are directly correlated with the
results of the computed PSI. Even though the average result is high, each UGS should also be viewed separately
to determine its strengths that may be emulated and weaknesses that needs to be improved. Space planners,
designers, and policymakers may use these results in planning and appropriating UGS in Davao City.

Keywords: urban green space · urban parks · public space index · GIS · Davao City · Philippines

Correspondence: RC Songcayauon. Department of Architecture, College of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of the
Philippines Mindanao, Mintal, Davao City, Philippines 8022. Telephone: +63 082 293 0863. Email: [email protected]
Editors: Raymundo R. Pavo, PhD, University of the Philippines Mindanao, PHILIPPINES
Isidoro R. Malaque III, PhD, University of the Philippines Mindanao, PHILIPPINES
Received: 10 May 2022 Accepted: 04 October 2022 Published: 11 October 2022
Copyright: © 2022 Songcayauon. This is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal article.
Funding Source: Personally-funded project
Competing Interest: The author has declared no competing interest.
Citation: Songcayauon, Ryan C. 2022. "Characterizing the Urban Green Spaces in Davao City, Philippines: Implications for
Design and Management." Banwa A 15: art073.

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 1 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

Characterizing the square meters per inhabitant (m2/inh) of the
neighborhood (Taylor et al. 2011; Van Herzele
Urban Green Spaces and Wiedemann 2003; Caspersen et al.
in Davao City, Philippines: 2006; Kabisch and Haase 2013; International
Organization for Standardization 2014).
Implications for Design However, this indicator does not capture the
and Management overall characteristics and assessment of the
UGS such as the actual distribution in the city
or unit, the ecosystem services provided (Yao
et al. 2014), and its accessibility to different
Ryan C. Songcayauon population groups (Reyes-Paecke and Aldunce
2010; Weiland et al. 2011; Zhou and Kim 2013;
University of the Philippines Mindanao, PHILIPPINES
la Rosa 2014). For these reasons, other studies
considered quantity, quality, and accessibility
Introduction (Chen et al. 2009; Wright Wendel et al. 2012;
Zhou and Kim 2013; Yao et al. 2014), and
Urban green spaces (UGS) are important further investigated availability, fragmentation,
contributors to urban quality of life. These public-private ownership, and accessibility
spaces support human well-being by providing in detail (le Texier et al. 2018). Mehta (2014)
ecosystem services such as climate regulation, proposed the public space index to measure the
the capture of pollutants, flood regulation, and quality of public spaces such as parks and green
support for the interaction of neighborhoods spaces. Few studies considered integrating
and communities (Carrus et al. 2015; Marselle these indicators to fully assess the UGS (de la
et al. 2015; Chiesura 2004; Dobbs et al. 2014; Barrera et al. 2016). Thus, there is a need to
Larondelle et al. 2014). They also provide a look deeper and consider the relationships
favorable place for health, relaxation, and of these indicators in assessing UGS.
nature contemplation (Lee and Maheswaran The World Health Organization (WHO)
2011). Previous studies concluded that UGS recommends nine square meters (9 m2) of
benefits vary according to size, distance, and green space per inhabitant, and the European
accessibility (Box and Harrison 1993; Harrison Environment Agency (Stanners and Bourdeau
et al. 1995). The United Nations Development 1995) recommends access to green space within
Programme’s (UNDP) sustainable development 15 minutes of walking distance or about 1.61
goals (SDGs) state that to create sustainable cities kilometers (one mile), and the Brazilian Society
and communities, one should invest in public of Urban Arborization (SBAU) proposed 15
transportation, create green public spaces, and m2/inh minimum index for recreational use
improve urban planning and management in (SBAU 1996). A study in the City of Bogota in
participatory and inclusive ways. Protection Colombia (Gantiva et al. 2018) found that only
of biodiversity and the urban green areas has 4 m2 of green space is available per inhabitant
always been a significant subject in discussing and suggested locations and distributions
sustainable urban development, especially in the of green space around the city for the year
post-COVID-19 times since outdoor spaces will 2040 using ordinary least squares (OLS)
provide a safe space for people to socialize and and geographic weighted regression (GWR)
escape from the confines of their homes (UNDP models. In the case of Sao Paulo, Brazil, its
2020). Thus, there is a need to characterize UGS unplanned development led to serious impacts
to fully understand the services it provides. on its green areas that caused many worsening
There are several indicators that can be social and environmental problems (Gomes
used in assessing UGS. One of the widely et al. 2011). Kurban (2017) suggested adopting
used indicators is the total area of UGS with two parameters of bioclimatic indicators of
respect to the total population, expressed in green space for the Metropolitan Area of San

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 2 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

Juan, Argentina: area of green spaces with its They also highlighted other issues such as
population and area of urban land. Tisma and informal settlement and maintenance, lack of
Neto (2011) used three indicators, namely: primary amenities, and inadequate tree covers
quantity, quality, and usability to analyze the (IDIS 2017). Given these scenarios, the UGS of
green spaces of Randstad, the Netherlands, and Davao City is assessed according to whether
found out that there are deficiencies in green these are enough to support the well-being of its
spaces for recreation. People do not use these citizens and provide the needed services to its
green spaces according to their functions, and users despite numerous policy recommendations
environmental quality is not an important initiated by various concerned organizations.
precondition in the perception of the quality This study, therefore, aims to characterize
of these green spaces. A report by Plant (2017) the UGS of Davao City guided by the following
found that people in Australia give importance questions: What are the physical qualities and
to the quantities of urban trees and canopy social aspects of each UGS? What policies
cover above that of the measure in use and can be recommended to better improve the
experience. Other discussed measures were the UGS services? This assessment includes
ecosystem services and accessibility. Among quantification and qualification (physical
other discussion points, the report also stated dimension) of the UGS of Davao City and a user
the context of privatization of public green space survey regarding their needs and preferences
and the need to quantify the loss of value. Thus, (social dimension) in these spaces. By doing
there is a need to assess the UGS of a given locality this, a general definition of the existing UGS will
and thoroughly examine the indicators that be determined and therefore aid in formulating
directly impact ecological and social dimensions strategies to plan and manage the UGS.
since some of these localities have their UGS
neither partly assessed nor totally assessed. Characterizing Urban Green Space
In the case of the Philippines, a study
by Gonzales and Magnaye (2017) provided Green Space Defined
an analytical approach to assessing urban The World Health Organization (2016)
biodiversity in the City of Manila. The study only defines green space as parks and sports fields,
focused on the relationship of urban biodiversity woods and natural meadows, and wetlands or
with human settlement resiliency, particularly other ecosystems that represent an essential
in areas where flooding occurs, to propose urban part of any urban ecosystem. It states that green
planning and development interventions. Their urban areas facilitate activity and relaxation,
comprehensive documentation and analysis form a refuge from noise, and perform a critical
provided valuable recommendations, especially role in cooling cities. Green space provides
in incorporating biodiversity in urban planning safe routes for walking and cycling; and a site
and development, and formulation of an urban for physical activities, social interaction, and
biodiversity development and management plan general recreation. They are also important
(Gonzales and Magnaye 2016). In the context of to mental health since having access to these
Davao City, a few studies have focused on this spaces can reduce health inequalities, improve
problem. A position paper published by Interface well-being, and aid in the treatment of mental
Development Interventions (IDIS), Inc. on the illnesses (Hartig et al. 1991) as evidenced by the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) and recovery of attentional capability, which natural
Zoning Ordinance reported that green spaces in settings restore since they facilitate recovery
Davao City are below the WHO standard (IDIS from mental fatigue—people feel rejuvenated
2019). The same organization also highlighted after a wilderness trip and being away from one’s
in their report, which is aimed at improving and day-to-day routine.
making more accessible green open spaces, that There are a number of technical definitions
the city lacks access to public open spaces as of “greenspace” or “green space” used in varying
compared to other cities in developing countries. disciplines, cultures, and contexts. Taylor and

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 3 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

Hochuli (2017) tried to define “greenspace” et al. 2012; Zhou and Kim 2013). However,
after reviewing the literature regarding few studies have evaluated these aspects in an
greenspace and found that many have failed integrated manner, which is summarized below:
to define the word that emerged with multiple Quantity refers to the size and shape of UGS,
definitions. They recommended that instead which means that the larger the size, the greater
of trying to have a detailed typology for such the magnitude and diversity of the ecosystem
word, greenspace should be both quantified and the UGS provide. It also allows various activities
qualified to have a more meaningful definition. such as cultural services, health and wellness,
They proposed an example of how to define and other gatherings (Sugiyama and Thompson
greenspace in different contexts (Table 1). Thus, 2008; Maas et al. 2009; Krellenberg et al. 2014).
urban green space in this study, represents UGS that have larger portions covered by trees
urban space accessible to people, which includes are more effective in providing regulating
parks, gardens, yards, urban forest, and urban services such as climate regulation and flood
farms (vegetated variant of open space in the control (Chiesura 2004; Jenerette et al. 2007;
urban environment) supported by indicators Cavan et al. 2014; Niemela 2014).
that help in assessing these green spaces. Quality, on the other hand, is a function of
size, shape, and elements inside the UGS (Taylor
Urban Green Space Indicators et al. 2011; Dobbs et al. 2014; Tian et al. 2014).
A number of indicators can be considered in One key element of green spaces is vegetation as
assessing these UGS. For example, the effective one of the main providers of ecosystem services,
assessment of UGS and its ecosystem service and can be used as a measure of quality of a UGS
provision depends on its quantity, quality, and (Cilliers et al. 2012; Zhou and Kim 2013).
accessibility (Chen et al. 2009; Wright Wendel

TABLE 1 Criteria in defining greenspace (with reference from Taylor and Hochuli 2017)
Examples of Category of Example of
Examples of how the criteria might be defined
Criteria criteria discipline
Greenspace refers to urban parks and wetlands that
Definition Qualitative Urban ecology
comprise some vegetation
Greenspace refers to small urban parks, including
Examples public parks, street verges, cemeteries, and sports Qualitative Urban planning
grounds
Size The greenspace has an area of 2 ha. or less Quantitative Public health

The greenspace is located on public land that is

Ownership Qualitative Geography
maintained by the local government or council
The greenspace is calculated across the full extent of
Qualitative
Landscape the city, as defined by the local GIS boundaries and Psychology
and Quantitative
zonal statistics
All greenspace has a minimum biodiversity of at least
Ecological
10 different tree species, 8 shrub species, lawn, and 5 Quantitative Ecology
information
bird species have been counted there during one visit.
All greenspaces are located within 10 km of the
Access Quantitative Public health
participants’ homes.
Greenspaces are chosen because they have amenities
that made them accessible to low-mobility residents,
Amenities Qualitative Sociology
requiring paths, flat surfaces, and numerous benches
for frequent rests.
In order to reduce urban heat, greenspace considered Cooling
Tree cover in this study includes vegetated land comprised of Quantitative and carbon
>40% mature tree cover. sequestration

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 4 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

 Accessibility to the UGS relates to their which may be located outside the considered
spatial distribution throughout the urban area spatial entity (Nicholls 2001; Sister et al. 2009;
(Schipperijin et al. 2010; Krellenberg et al. 2014). Loukaitou-Sideris and Sideris 2009). Other
Other indicators may include other variables advancements have been put forth including the
not included as those previously stated. For consideration of overcrowding of parks through
example, Le Texier et al. (2018) defined the the use of the two-step floating catchment area
assessment and suggested four indicators that (2SFCA) method and/or access via different
are related to provision and access: modes of transportation (Dai 2011; Dony et al.
Availability concerns itself with the size of 2015).
the UGS. Some studies excluded UGS smaller Given these dimensions and indicators, a
than two hectares (Coombes et al. 2010) since thorough valuation may be conducted that will
such sites are too small to support physical specifically characterize the UGS of a particular
activities. Larger UGS have more diverse flora locality. Quantity, quality, and accessibility are
and fauna that affect ecological qualities of the the three main indicators and under each of these
UGS. UGS with many trees and green vegetation indicators are specific variables that can measure
decrease temperature and pollution rates, which the UGS in detail.
affect the health and quality of life of the close-
by population. The green space ratio metric is Good Public Space
commonly used to measure availability of UGS Public spaces were used as a venue to
(Haq 2011). aid the basic survival, communication and
Fragmentation is important since small entertainment needs; and to perform a number
UGS are more likely to be evenly spread across of political, religious, commercial, civic, and
a city but provide fewer benefits (Talen and social functions (Mehta 2014). However, many
Anselin 1998). It may also result from residential of these functions changed to private, virtual
preferences for close-by green space. Enlarging spaces or to various forms of privatized and
the provision of green space rather than parochial spaces (Brill 1989; Rybczynski 1993;
designing it as a unique belt for instance, can Banerjee 2001). These changes increased the
increase utility (Caruso et al. 2008; 2015). requirement for proper, well-designed spaces
Public-private ownership is a significant for people to spend time, relax, socialize, and be
aspect of provision as private UGS offer an one with the urban life (Gehl and Matan 2009).
opportunity to compensate for the absence of Nevertheless, the public still depends on public
public UGS (Ibes 2015; Barbosa et al. 2007; space for functional, social, and leisure activities.
Dehring and Dunse 2006). Some studies Researchers clarified that public space is
considering only parks listed by authorities fail to needed in political, social, and cultural contexts
notice the significance of informal green spaces as a venue for the growth of the individual
(Shafer et al. 2013). Both private and informal and the society. Thomas (1991), for example,
UGS play a role in supporting biodiversity and emphasized the social role of public space and
providing ecosystem services in urban areas and proposed that “public space is an essential arena
act as a substitute to public green space (Barbosa which provides opportunities for individuals and
et al. 2007; Rupprecht and Byrne 2014). Using communities to develop and enrich their lives”
the presence of vegetation as the only criteria to and identified four social roles of public space
define UGS would overestimate provision and as: (1) space for public life, (2) gathering place for
access to UGS as it would include smaller units different social groups, (3) place for the showcase
than an analysis focusing on formal green space of symbols and images in society, and (4) part
(Barbosa et al. 2007; Nicol and Blake 2000). of the communication system between urban
Accessibility indices are defined to measure activities. This is further emphasized by Mehta
relative remoteness and proximity to UGS, (2014) by stating that good public space creates
thus complementing availability within the a stage for meeting and discussion, for planned
neighborhood with more accessible alternatives, and unprompted encounters, and for learning of

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 5 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

diverse attitudes and beliefs. the shapes and arrangements that compose the
Public spaces such as parks, open space, and physical elements of the space, the colors, the
greenspace truly reflect the society of a particular smell, and other visual elements present in the
locality as they reveal the many facets of the city: space.
social, cultural, political, spiritual, psychological,
and physiological that not only define the public
space but also define its people.

Public Space Index

The public space index (PSI) developed by
Mehta (2014) to assess public spaces such as
parks includes five main aspects: inclusiveness,
meaningful activities, comfort, safety, and
pleasurability (Figure 1). Inclusiveness means
that the space should fulfill the needs of users
FIGURE 1 The five aspects of public space
meaning that different activities could be (adopted from Mehta 2014)
performed by different types of people. The PSI
measure the inclusiveness of the space by rating The Physical and Social Dimensions
its accessibility to different types of people and of Urban Green Space
how their activities and behaviors are supported Following the proposition by Taylor and
inside this space. Meaningful activities is Hochuli (2017) on the need to quantify and
measured in the context of the capability of the qualify green space, this paper proposes a
space to support activities the users perform, framework in characterizing UGS using two
sociability, and place meaning. This means that dimensions – the physical and social dimensions
a place is meaningful when it is valuable and presented (Figure 2). The physical dimension will
supports activities that are meaningful both anchor on the studies of de la Barrera et al. (2016)
symbolically and culturally. Safety is determined and le Texier et al. (2018) using the indicators
by how people feel safe, from crimes or traffic, in assessing the UGS, which are grouped into
and every time they are inside these spaces. quantity, spatial distribution and accessibility,
Safety may also be evaluated by the physical and quality. The social dimension will adopt
condition and maintenance of the place, and Mehta’s (2014) Public Space Index (PSI) alongside
the surveillance present that may make them the needs and preferences of the users to make up
feel protected or not. Comfort is affected by the Good Public Space. With this framework, the
different factors. For the PSI, comfort refers to the UGS will be holistically defined not only through
physical set up and environmental factors such its spatial qualities but at the same time relate to
as the weather and temperature. The space may the perceptions of the users of the UGS.
be rated by the provision of tree canopies and
shelter as protection from the natural elements, Methodology
and the ease of use of the amenities and other
physical objects inside the space. Pleasurability The Physical Dimension
is determined by rating the space’s imageability, The quantity of the UGS including other
spatial quality, sensory complexity, and spatial variables were calculated using the
attractiveness of the space. Imageability means Quantum Geographic Information System
that people can remember a strong image of the (QGIS) software, a free and open-source
place. There can be positive and negative images geographic information software (GIS) developed
that a user could relate to a space but the PSI by the Open Source Geospatial Foundation
only considers the positive attributes. There are Project. The quality and spatial distribution and
numerous ways that users could create an image accessibility of these UGS were determined using
of the place and subsequently generate pleasure— Fragstats, a computer software program designed

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 6 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

FIGURE 2 Conceptual framework of the study

to compute landscape metrics developed by and late afternoon spread across weekdays and
McGarigal et al. (2002) as a spatial pattern weekends.
analysis program for categorical maps. A map of
the study area (majority located in the población) Characterizing the Urban Green Spaces
or the urban district was prepared using overlays of Davao City
from Google Maps and Open Street Map and Davao City is a major city in the island of
includes the boundaries of each of the barangay. Mindanao south of the Philippines (Figure 3).
The city has a total population of 1,776,949
The Social Dimension according to the 2020 Census of Population
The PSI survey is composed of two parts: from the Philippine Statistics Authority (2020)
researcher observations and user perception. and a population density of 6.69 persons per
Each of the five aspects has variables hectare. The poblacion area belonging to
belonging to the research observation and user the First Congressional District has a total
perception: inclusiveness has nine variables population of 174,121 from the 40 barangays
for researcher observation and five for user or communities with an average population
perception; meaningful activities has five density of 219.66/ha. and 828.59/ha. as highest
variables for researcher observation and three in a particular barangay. Seventy-six percent
for user perception; comfort has five variable of the population lives in the urban barangays.
for researcher observation and four for user The current Comprehensive Land Use
perception; security has three for researcher Plan (CLUP 2013-2022) of the city sets aside
observation and six for user perception; 61.73 has or 0.03% of its total land as parks,
and pleasurability has seven for researcher and 1,258.80 has or 0.52% of its land area as
observation and three for user perception. The open space or undeveloped areas located in the
user perception survey also has three open-ended urban center. This study focused on the urban
questions. The survey was conducted at the end district of the city (Figure 3) where six major
of 2019 and the beginning of 2020 before the urban green spaces were considered following
COVID-19 lockdown. A total of 236 randomly- Rakhshandehroo’s (2014) classification: People’s
selected respondents participated in the survey Park as a city/central park; Magsaysay Park
conducted wherein 92.37% are residents of as a park with or near water bodies; Davao
Davao City and the remaining are from cities City Botanical Garden as a neighborhood
and municipalities outside of the city. All survey park; Millennium Park as a plaza; and Rizal
materials have free, prior, and informed consent and Quezon Parks, and Osmeña Park as city
from the participants as stated in the survey squares. Other publicly accessible green spaces
form. The survey was conducted in the morning considered were those found in Abreeza Ayala

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 7 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

Mall and an open space in Marfori Heights Quality of UGS
Subdivision, both privately-owned but publicly Davao City’s urban district has an average
accessible. A total of 42 barangays were included UGS size of 0.5 ha (5,157.13 m 2) with a shape
to compose the urban district or study area. index of 1.03, which means that the majority
of the UGS is square or near this shape. The
The Physical Dimension of UGS map shows that most of them are square or
rectangular except those found in Abreeza Ayala
Quantity of UGS Mall where the patches are irregularly shaped.
The urban green spaces add up to about 0.12 Since the total area of these irregularly shaped
square kilometers (km 2) or 118.61 has, which is lesser compared to the other UGS, it has little
represents around 0.96% of the total land area of effect on the shape index.
the urban district (Figure 4). UGS per inhabitant, Mean vegetation cover on the UGS is
based on the 2015 urban district population, is only 0.23%, which is around 0.21 m 2/inh of
just 0.37 square meters per inhabitant (m2/inh), vegetation. This is directly related to the overall
which is far from the WHO's recommendation UGS per inhabitant (0.37 m 2/inh). This low
of about 9 m2 of green space per inhabitant. It is mean vegetation cover is a result of too much
important to note that the case study area only impervious surfaces in the UGS such as that of
covers the urban district of the city and is why Rizal Park and Quezon Park, which is around
a lot of the greenspaces, majority of which are 13–20% only and too many open areas, usually of
not in the urban areas that may increase this grass and shrubs, such as that of the open space
proportion of greenspace per inhabitant, were near Marfori Heights and Abreeza Ayala Mall at
not included. Table 2 presents the summary of around 8–26% only. Details of these vegetation
the computed values for the quantity, quality, cover and its percentage share are in Table 3 and
spatial distribution, and accessibility of the a visual representation of the city’s urban district
identified UGS. vegetation cover and built-up area is in Figure 5.

FIGURE 3 Location of Davao City and its urban district in Mindanao, Southern Philippines

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 8 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

 TABLE 2 Indicators for UGS evaluated in the urban
district area (with reference from de la
Barrera et al. 2016)
Indicators Value
Quantity of UGS
UGS per inhabitant (2015) (m2/inh) 0.37
UGS per built-up area (%) 2.29
UGS per impervious cover (%) 1.66
UGS per bare soil (%) 7.87
UGS per vegetation cover (%) 4.77
Quality of UGS
Mean size of UGS (m2) [SDa in 5,157.13
brackets] [10,455.94]
1.03
Shape index of UGS [SD in brackets]b
[0.162]
Mean vegetation cover per UGS (%) 0.23
[SD in brackets] [564.525]
Vegetation cover on UGS per
0.21
inhabitant (m2/inh)
Spatial distribution and accessibility
Aggregation/Fragmentation index
50.15
of UGS
Share of population supplied by
7.56
all UGS at 100m buffer (%)
Share of UGS>0.5ha. per total
61.96
area (%)
Share of population supplied by
17.96
UGS>0.5ha. at 300m buffer (%)
a
Standard Deviation
FIGURE 4 Urban green space of Davao City b
Shape Index is an a-dimensional indicator, the value is 1 when the
urban district patch is square and increases without limit as patch shape becomes
more irregular

Spatial Distribution and Accessibility their services to all of the population within the
The aggregation index of UGS of the urban 300-meter buffer around its boundaries.
district is only 50.15. A 100 index means the All of the UGS are easily accessed by private
UGS is aggregated and a zero (0) index means vehicles but in terms of public transportation (i.e.,
it is fragmented. Fragments of UGS are not public utility jeep or jeepneys), Clifford Park and
totally aggregated or adjacent to each other but Millennium Park are more accessible with 44 and
not totally fragmented or isolated from each 36 direct jeepney routes, followed by Magsaysay
other. The share of population provided by all Park and Osmeña Park with 31 and 29. Davao
of the UGS listed with a buffer of 100 meters City Botanical Garden has the lowest jeepney
(m) from its boundary is only 7.56% and in the routes available with only three indirect routes
case of UGS, which are more than 0.5 ha and (about a block away). The open space at Marfori
with a buffer of 300m from their boundaries, the Heights has no jeepneys at all. However, these
share will increase to about 17.96%. This slight areas are also accessible by public tricycles that
increase is because 61.96% of the UGS (based come from the corners of JP Laurel Avenue and
on land area) is more than the 0.5 ha parameter. F. Torres Street and trisikad or non-motorized
This means that if the area of each UGS is at least tricycles from Bankerohan Market area.
0.5 ha (5,000 m 2), all of the UGS can provide

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 9 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

 TABLE 3 Vegetation cover per urban green space
Urban green space Vegetation Share in
cover (m2) UGS (%)*
People’s Park 20,892.23 56.92
Magsaysay Park 30,592.70 41.41
Davao City
6,834.82 64.59
Botanical Garden
Millennium Park 528.17 30.20
Clifford Park 1,045.22 56.28
Osmeña Park 3,912.20 64.30
Rizal Park 392.13 13.40
Quezon Park 317.99 22.84
Open Space at
1,058.32 8.86
Marfori Heights
Abreeza Ayala Mall 2,323.48 26.34
FIGURE 5 Distribution of vegetation cover * Means the share in the total UGS vegetation cover calculated on all
and urban green space in the UGS surveyed.

urban district area

The Social Dimension of UGS diverse people, age, gender, and activities that the
space provided through its different amenities.
Public Space Index
Magsaysay Park
People’s Park Magsaysay Park has the second highest
People’s Park scored the highest average overall index of 65.88. This could be attributed
PSI (71.64) among the parks evaluated (Table 9). to the range of activities, community-gathering
This could be because the park’s design provides spaces inside the park, the unique views the
attractiveness, interestingness, and sensory Davao Gulf offers, and the experiences of visitors
experiences—translated from the amenities with the Cultural Village.
and facilities present such as the durian-domed The park scored 67.33 for inclusiveness, 76.14
visitor’s center, statues around the park, children’s for meaningful activities, 58.61 for comfort,
play area, forested areas, and jogging track. 61.11 for safety, and 66.28 for pleasurability as
Specifically, People’s Park scored 73.13 for presented in Figure 7. The park’s low specific
inclusiveness; 66.79 for meaningful activities; score in the aspect of safety from among the
68.07 for comfort; 70.68 for safety; and 79.52 parks evaluated is due to the physical condition
for pleasurability as shown in Figure 6 (see of the spaces inside, which lack maintenance,
Tables 4–8 for detailed scores). Since the park considering its age, and the quality of lighting
is enclosed with a perimeter fence and other during night-time. Even though it scored low
adjacent developments together with strict in this aspect, Magsaysay Park scored the
security checks, People’s Park is considered one highest among the parks surveyed in terms of
of the safest public open spaces in the city. Its meaningful activities. The reason may be the
score for safety is the highest among the parks business establishments present inside the park
evaluated. In terms of comfort, the park scored that offer food and beverages and other activities
the highest given the tree-lined areas inside such as bike and roller skate rentals. Outside the
and ample seating and sheds, and the perceived park’s entrance are vendors selling the famous
noise from outside vehicular traffic. It also scored durian and other fruits in season, which are
highest for being inclusive due to the presence of very popular among tourists and residents of

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 10 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

the city. The park is also readily accessible from the other parks, which may be a result of its
the Davao City Chinatown, which also offers proximity to the street thereby adding to the
a lot of activities such as shopping for cheap vehicular traffic noise experienced by the users.
wholesale products and famous home-grown Given that the park is just a strip of land, the
food establishments that offer Filipino, Chinese, presence of people is limited especially during
and other international cuisines. the day since the space acts as a transition space
between the opposing lanes. The night market
Davao City Botanical Garden slightly improved the score in meaningfulness
Davao City Botanical Garden scored an of the space due to the availability of food and
overall public space index of 62.42. Its overall other businesses.
PSI score landed the garden the second lowest
scores, which may be qualified due to the very Rizal and Quezon Parks
strict rules inside such as no bringing of food, Rizal Park and Quezon Park are in the
pets, and playing of ball games and any remote- vicinity of the Davao City Hall. These two parks
controlled toys. ranked third on the highest overall PSI at 66.71
It scored 68.97 for inclusiveness, 51.43 from among the six evaluated UGS.
for meaningful activities, 56.61 for comfort, Specifically, Rizal and Quezon Parks scored
63.22 for safety, and 71.86 for pleasurability as 72.11 for inclusiveness, 67.96 for meaningful
shown in Figure 8. The botanical garden was activities, 57.17 for comfort, 73.21 for safety,
the lowest in terms of the meaningful activities and 63.11 for pleasurability as shown in Figure
aspect. Seating is also a concern since only a 10. Rizal and Quezon Parks scored the second
portion of the garden is provided with limited highest in meaningful activities as they are one
seats and benches and only one small kiosk of the easily accessible parks in the city due
to act as shade and shelter during rain. Only to its proximity to primary spaces such as the
a number of large-canopy trees are present City Hall, Sanggunian Panlungsod building
in the garden to provide shade. This created a and other key local government offices, the
small portion of the garden that is utilized as a San Pedro Cathedral; and a myriad of business
practice and study area for students, gathering establishments from food services, clothing,
place of families and friends, or relaxation space. and many others. Consequently, these parks
scored the highest in terms of safety. This may
Millennium Park be attributed to the presence of security forces
The Millennium Park scored the lowest in especially during the night and the psychological
the overall public space index at 60.83. The scores effect that the parks are located near the
of inclusiveness, comfort, and pleasurability government center of the city.
significantly contributed to its overall low PSI
score. Osmeña Park
The park has a score of 66.08 for Osmeña Park is located beside the
inclusiveness, 64.54 for meaningful activities, Sangguniang Panlungsod of Davao City. It scored
54.72 for comfort, 68.63 for safety, and 50.20 the second highest in the overall PSI at 69.06 next
for pleasurability as presented in Figure 9. The to Peoples’ Park, which may be attributed to the
park is unique from among the parks evaluated high score in the aspect of comfort.
as it transforms into a bustling space during The park has a specific score of 67.45 for
the night when the Roxas Night Market is inclusiveness, 68.83 for meaningful activities,
assembled adjacent to the park. Since it is in the 70.75 for comfort, 71.83 for safety, and 66.42
middle of the street (Roxas Avenue), its sense of for pleasurability as presented in Figure 11.
enclosure, variety of sub-spaces, spaces providing Osmeña Park scored the highest in terms of
different sensory experiences, and perceived comfort, which could be the result of the climatic
interestingness of the space affect the low score comfort of the space due to the available shade
of pleasurability. Comfort is also compared to and shelter provided by a lot of trees in the area

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 11 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

and also a high score in the perceived minimal include the Davao City Hall Complex where the
noise from traffic outside of the park. The other two parks (Rizal and Quezon) are located,
perception of a cooler environment may have also which are finished in semi- and non-permeable
originated when users compare the temperature surfaces, the Sangguniang Panlungsod building,
of the surrounding areas of the park. These areas and the San Pedro Cathedral.

FIGURE 6 Index rating and places of interests FIGURE 7 Index rating and places of interests
in People’s Park in Magsaysay Park

FIGURE 8 Index rating and places of interests FIGURE 9 Index rating and places of interests
in Davao City Botanical Garden in Millennium Park

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 12 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

FIGURE 10 Index rating and places of interests FIGURE 11 Index rating and places of interest
in Rizal and Quezon Parks in Osmeña Park

Results and Discussion also shield those living near this area from storm
surges during heavy rains and typhoons.
The Physical Dimension. The characterization of The vegetation cover in these UGS of
the UGS of Davao City is made by considering only 0.23% of the UGS land area is due to the
several factors. Each UGS presented has its own impervious surfaces that make up a lot of the
unique environment and users that it caters UGS analyzed. Moreover, aggregation index of
to. With the aid of QGIS and Fragstats, UGS these UGS is only 50.51, which means that they
quantity, quality, and spatial distribution and are not totally adjacent and not totally isolated
accessibility were computed. Results revealed to each other and this translates to about 7.56%
that the UGS per inhabitant in the urban of population to have access given a 100 m buffer
district is only 0.37 m 2/inh , which is below form the UGS boundaries and increases to
the recommendation of WHO (also reflected 17.96% given a 300 m buffer. In addition, all UGS
in the percentage of built-up area in the urban are easily accessible by public utility vehicles that
district). However, there are areas in the urban service these areas. Allocating more UGS in the
district that could be developed into additional urban district will give access to the majority of
UGS. The city’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan the users and visitors in these spaces even with a
proposed that the banks of Davao River bisecting lower buffer of 100 m. Furthermore, planning the
the urban district will be classified as Floodway public transportation routes to consider existing
Mitigation Zone. This proposal is a big step and planned UGS will give users direct access. In
in protecting settlements from the hazards of the planned Floodway Mitigation Zone of Davao
flooding and a great avenue for allocating areas River, small river cruises and transport will be a
that could be developed into urban green spaces. good means to provide direct access from those
This will translate to about 2.95 km2 of green across the river banks.
space within the urban district. Moreover, areas
along the shoreline facing Davao Gulf could also
be developed into mangrove forests which could

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 13 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

TABLE 4 Result of the public space index (PSI) inclusiveness survey of the six UGS of Davao City
(with reference from Mehta 2014)
Aspect of Public Magsaysay Botanical Millennium Osmeña
People's Park Rizal Park
Space Park Garden Park Park
Inclusiveness W*
Presence of
people of diverse 0.40 2.60 1.04 2.60 1.04 2.00 0.80 1.80 0.72 2.80 1.12 2.20 0.88
ages
Presence of
people of 0.40 2.80 1.12 2.80 1.12 2.40 0.96 2.200 0.88 2.80 1.12 2.80 1.12
different gender
Presence of
people of diverse 0.40 2.20 0.88 1.60 0.64 2.00 0.80 2.00 0.80 1.80 0.72 1.60 0.64
classes
Presence of
people of diverse 0.40 1.40 0.56 1.40 0.56 1.40 0.56 1.20 0.48 1.40 0.56 0.60 0.24
races
Presence of
people with
0.40 1.40 0.56 1.20 0.48 1.20 0.48 1.00 0.40 1.60 0.64 1.2 0.48
diverse physical
abilities
Control of
entrance to public
space: presence 1.00 2.40 2.40 2.60 2.60 2.20 2.20 1.40 1.40 2.20 2.20 2.00 2.00
of lockable gates,
fences, etc.
Range of activities
1.00 2.40 2.40 2.20 2.20 1.80 1.80 1.20 1.20 0.80 0.80 2.60 2.60
and behaviors
Opening hours of
1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.40 2.40 2.80 2.80 2.40 2.40 2.00 2.00
public space
Presence of
posted signs to
exclude certain 1.00 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.25 1.25 2.200 2.20 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80
people or
behaviors
The presence
of surveillance
cameras, security
guards, guides,
1.00 2.46 2.46 2.30 2.30 2.82 2.82 2.50 2.50 2.76 2.76 2.68 2.68
ushers, etc. is
intimidating
and privacy is
infringed upon
Perceived
openness and 2.00 2.46 4.92 1.93 3.85 2.65 5.29 2.444 4.889 2.67 5.33 2.20 4.40
accessibility
Perceived ability
to conduct and
participate in 1.00 1.79 1.79 1.61 1.61 1.32 1.32 1.556 1.556 2.18 2.18 1.40 1.40
activities and
events in space
Aggregate score 10.00 21.94 20.20 20.69 19.824 21.63 20.24
Index rating for
73.13 67.33 68.97 66.081 72.11 67.45
Inclusiveness
*Assigned weighting to variable

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 14 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

TABLE 5 Result of the public space index (PSI) meaningful activities survey of the six UGS of Davao City
(with reference from Mehta 2014)
Aspect of Public Magsaysay Botanical Millennium Osmeña
People's Park Rizal Park
Space Park Garden Park Park
Meaningful
W*
Activities
Presence of
community-
2.00 2.80 5.60 2.80 5.60 1.40 2.80 1.40 2.80 1.80 3.60 2.60 5.20
gathering third
places
Range of activities
1.00 2.20 2.20 2.80 2.80 1.60 1.60 1.20 1.20 1.40 1.40 2.60 2.60
and behaviors
Space flexibility to
1.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 1.00 1.00 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.80 1.80
suit user needs
Availability of
food within or at
2.00 1.60 3.20 2.40 4.80 1.60 3.20 3.00 6.00 3.00 6.00 1.80 3.60
the edges of the
space
Variety of business
and other uses at
1.00 1.40 1.40 2.20 2.20 1.80 1.80 2.80 2.80 2.40 2.40 2.00 2.00
the edges of the
space
Perceived
suitability of space
layout and design 2.00 2.10 4.21 1.74 3.48 1.94 3.88 1.64 3.28 1.97 3.94 1.93 3.85
to activities and
behavior
Perceived
usefulness of
1.00 1.23 1.23 1.76 1.76 1.15 1.15 2.08 2.08 1.85 1.85 1.60 1.60
business and
other uses

Aggregate score 10.00 20.04 22.84 15.43 19.36 20.39 20.65

Index rating
for Meaningful 66.79 76.14 51.43 64.54 67.96 68.83
Activities
*Assigned weighting to variable

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 15 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

TABLE 6 Result of the public space index (PSI) comfort survey of the six UGS of Davao City
(with reference from Mehta 2014)
Aspect of Public Magsaysay Botanical Millennium Osmeña
People's Park Rizal Park
Space Park Garden Park Park
Comfort W*
Places to sit
without paying
2.00 3.00 6.00 2.80 5.60 1.80 3.60 2.60 5.20 2.40 4.80 3.00 6.00
for goods and
services
Seating provided
1.00 0.80 0.80 1.60 1.60 0.60 0.60 1.20 1.20 0.60 0.60 1.00 1.00
by businesses
Other furniture
and artifacts in the 1.00 2.40 2.40 1.40 1.40 1.60 1.60 1.40 1.40 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80
space
Climatic comfort
of the space— 2.00 2.00 4.00 1.40 2.80 1.20 2.40 1.40 2.80 1.00 2.00 2.60 5.20
shade and shelter
Design elements
discouraging use 1.00 1.40 1.40 1.60 1.60 2.40 2.40 1.40 1.40 1.80 1.80 1.00 1.00
of space
Perceived physical
condition and
maintenance 2.00 1.97 3.95 1.41 2.81 2.41 4.82 1.72 3.44 2.30 4.61 2.00 4.00
appropriate for
the space
Perceived
nuisance noise
1.00 1.87 1.87 1.74 1.74 1.56 1.56 0.97 0.97 1.55 1.55 2.23 2.23
from traffic or
otherwise

Aggregate score 10.00 20.42 17.56 16.98 16.42 17.15 21.23

Index rating for
68.07 58.52 56.61 54.72 57.17 70.75
Comfort
*Assigned weighting to variable

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 16 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

TABLE 7 Result of the public space index (PSI) safety survey of the six UGS of Davao City
(with reference from Mehta 2014)
Aspect of Public Magsaysay Botanical Millennium Osmeña
People's Park Rizal Park
Space Park Garden Park Park
Safety W*
Visual and
physical
connection and
1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 2.60 1.80 1.80
openness to
adjacent street/s
or spaces
Physical
condition and
maintenance 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.20 2.20 1.60 1.60 2.00 2.00 1.80 1.80
appropriate for
the space
Lighting quality
in space after 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.40 1.40 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.80 1.80
dark
Perceived safety
from presence
of surveillance
cameras,
1.00 2.44 2.44 2.26 2.26 1.65 1.65 2.39 2.39 2.79 2.79 2.45 2.45
security guards,
guides, ushers,
etc. providing
safety
Perceived safety
from crime 2.00 2.26 4.51 2.13 4.26 2.41 4.82 2.28 4.56 2.45 4.91 2.55 5.10
during daytime
Perceived safety
from crime after 2.00 1.97 3.95 1.74 3.48 1.71 3.41 2.19 4.39 2.15 4.30 1.975 3.95
dark
Perceived safety
2.00 2.15 4.31 2.17 4.33 1.44 2.88 1.53 3.06 2.18 4.36 2.325 4.65
from traffic
Aggregate score 10.00 21.21 18.33 18.96 20.59 21.96 21.55
Index rating for
70.68 61.11 63.22 68.63 73.21 71.83
Comfort
*Assigned weighting to variable

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 17 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

TABLE 8 Result of the public space index (PSI) pleasurability survey of the six UGS of Davao City
(with reference from Mehta 2014)
Aspect of Magsaysay Botanical Millennium
People's Park Rizal Park Osmeña Park
Public Space Park Garden Park
Pleasurability W*
Presence of
memorable
architectural
1.00 2.40 2.40 1.60 1.60 2.00 2.00 1.20 1.20 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80
or landscape
features
(imageability)
Sense of
1.00 2.40 2.40 2.40 2.40 1.60 1.60 1.40 1.40 1.20 1.20 2.20 2.20
enclosure
Variety of sub-
1.00 2.40 2.40 2.20 2.20 1.60 1.60 0.80 0.80 1.40 1.40 2.40 2.40
spaces
Density of
elements
in space
1.00 2.60 2.60 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.20 1.20 1.80 1.80 1.40 1.40
providing
sensory
complexity
Variety of
elements
in space
1.00 2.60 2.60 2.00 2.00 2.20 2.20 1.00 1.00 1.80 1.80 1.40 1.40
providing
sensory
complexity
Design
elements
1.00 2.80 2.80 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.80 1.80 2.00 2.00 2.20 2.20
providing focal
points
Visual and
physical
connection
and openness 1.00 2.40 2.40 2.00 2.00 2.60 2.60 2.80 2.80 2.60 2.60 2.40 2.40
to adjacent
street/s or
spaces
Perceived
attractiveness 2.00 2.13 4.26 1.89 3.78 2.53 5.06 1.64 3.28 2.12 4.24 2.05 4.10
of space
Perceived
interestingness 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.91 1.91 2.50 2.50 1.58 1.58 2.09 2.09 2.025 2.025
of space
Aggregate
10.00 23.86 19.89 21.56 15.06 18.93 19.925
score
Index rating for
79.52 66.28 71.86 50.20 63.11 66.42
Pleasurability
*Assigned weighting to variable

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 18 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

 The Social Dimension. Evaluation of the user which is narrow and bounded on its sides by
perception revealed that comfort is a major issue roads, affecting its comfort and perception of
of users in all of the parks appraised due to design safety. It may be resolved that People’s Park is an
elements that discourage the use of space (fences, example of a good urban green space considering
hedges, and railings), noise from traffic and the five aspects of public space as shown by its
other sources, absence of businesses providing overall score and a comparative representation
services (e.g., food), and the maintenance of the public space index (Figure 12).
of the space in general. In People’s Park and
Davao City Botanical Garden, no businesses or Implications for Design and Management
vendors selling food are allowed inside the area The survey and analysis of the UGS in
thus incurring a very low score in meaningful Davao City will help the urban planning and
activities. Users could bring food to these parks development authorities by looking into both
but would be a great disappointment for those the physical characteristics and the public’s
who failed to bring food or wanted to take a bite perception of these spaces. Insights may be used
while already inside. The lack of shaded areas and in crafting policies that frame the future of urban
additional furnishings such as tables and benches green space allocation and management of the
added to the low rating of Davao City Botanical city.
Garden in the aspect of comfort. Magsaysay Park Urban green space development. It should
scored low in safety given its physical condition be a continuing program of the city that UGS
and lighting quality at night, which in general be an integral part of any urban development
is dimly lit and a lot of portions do not have to gradually meet the desired green space per
provision for lighting at all. This tends to be true, inhabitant. The city should devise ways that will
based on Kelling and Wilson’s (1982) “Broken encourage private individuals and groups who
Windows,” which theorized that an untended own undeveloped lands in the urban district
place leads to crime. A broken lighting fixture to develop these into UGS or integrate UGS in
or a broken bench would give an impression their planned development. Critical zones such
that the park is unsafe. Numerous studies show as the Davao River and coastal areas should
that safety is affected by the existence of litter, be developed into UGS and categorize them
defacement, and worn-out furniture and building as protected areas. The mouth of Davao River
(Skogan and Maxfield 1982; Hope and Hough is an excellent area to be developed and may
1988; Perkins et. al 1992). This is opposite to that complement the proposed coastal road that will
of People’s Park with its well-maintained facility traverse the coastal area of the urban district
that gave it the highest score for safety. where green spaces could be integrated. Urban
With the evaluation of the UGS, it is greening should be a continuous program of the
presumed that the size of the space greatly affect city including rehabilitation and improvement of
the quality of the park since the more sub-spaces existing UGS in terms of additional vegetation
it could provide, the wider a range of activities it covers and the use of a more sustainable and
could create (Mehta 2014). This is evident from greener materials for hardscapes. The Rizal
the high score of People's Park considering that Park, Quezon Park, and the Millennium Park
it is the largest and well-planned UGS and that may be upgraded and developed to increase their
of Millennium Park (scored the lowest overall), comfortability and pleasurability.

TABLE 9 Result of the overall public space index (PSI) survey of the six UGS of Davao City
People's Magsaysay Botanical Millennium Osmeña
Aspect of Public Space Rizal Park
Park Park Garden Park Park
Total score for all
107.46 98.81 93.63 91.25 100.07 103.59
aspects of public space
Average public space
71.64 65.88 62.42 60.83 66.71 69.06
index

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 19 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

FIGURE 12 Comparative visual representation of the public space index of the six parks

Roles of planning, design, and management Importance of research and development.

authorities. The Office of the City Planning Research conducted by institutions (academic,
and Development Coordinator (OCPDC) and private, and non-government and peoples’
the City Environment and Natural Resources organization, etc.) should be utilized in the
Office (CENRO) have the primary role in the planning and decision-making processes by
appropriation and management of the UGS in the city’s planning authorities. Studies on the
the comprehensive planning and supervision environmental importance of UGS, usage and
and management of UGS. These offices should user behavior patterns, and accessibility to
work together and plan project implementation different types of users (such as children and
in a more efficient way considering time and older population, differently-abled, etc.) are just
funds. The city should allocate funds for the a few of the areas that research on UGS could
capacity training and development of essential be made. The city should review factors (legal,
personnel to investigate and catalog all the UGS financial, social, and other related challenges)
of the city, propose future UGS allocations and that may impede the use of these research and
developments, and oversee the management foster partnership with these institutions for a
of the UGS. Other interventions that should well-designed and managed UGS.
be carried out would include benchmarking
on the best practices in UGS allocation and Conclusions and Recommendations
management in other cities in the country
and abroad, recruitment of qualified planning Assessment of the urban green spaces in Davao
and design professionals, and investing on the City revealed that only 0.37 m 2/inhabitant of
purchase or development of computer-aided green space is available in the urban district.
design (CAD) software to help in the planning This means that it is substantially lower than
and design of the UGS. the suggested green space of 9 m2/inh. Moreover,
the computed shape index is 1.03, which

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 20 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

suggests that the majority of UGS are square in by the illumination quality of these spaces. The
shape and aggregation is 50.15, suggesting that Davao City Botanical Garden may be improved
these spaces are neither totally aggregated nor by allocating more space for various activities
fragmented. Furthermore, these UGS can be like that of Osmeña Park, which has more seating
easily accessed by means of public transport. areas. For future UGS, a land area comparable
The use of geospatial information and spatial to People’s Park should be proposed to have a
pattern analysis software significantly helped more inclusive space that is able to accommodate
in characterizing the physical dimension of the diverse users and more space for various activities
UGS. in which they may engage in.
The average public space index (PSI) for It is recommended that studies of UGS in
all six UGS surveyed is 66.09, with People’s other emerging urban centers should be made in
Park having the highest score of 71.64. For each order to characterize the whole UGS and green
PSI aspect, People’s Park scored the highest space of the city in general as part of enriching
for inclusiveness (73.13) and pleasurability the concept of its physical dimension. Moreover,
(79.52), while Magsaysay Park scored highest in-depth interviews or focus group discussions
in meaningful activities (76.14), Osmeña Park should be made to further substantiate the user
scored highest in comfort (70.75), and Rizal and perceptions, and at the same time, the future
Quezon Parks scored highest in safety (73.21). directions of the city in terms of planning,
While People’s Park scored highest overall due designing, and managing the UGS as part of the
to its well-planned landscape, it should also be social dimension in characterizing UGS.
noted that planners and designers may get ideas
from other UGS that scored high on specific References
aspect of the PSI. The PSI is a powerful tool in
capturing the social impact of the UGS through Banerjee, Tridib. 2001. “The Future of Public
its major aspects and numerous variables. A more Space: Beyond Invented Streets and
in-depth interview with survey participants Reinvented Places.” Journal of the American
may reveal more ideas on why they scored these Planning A ssociation 67 (1): 9–24.
specific indicators of the PSI. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360108976352
This study shows that much should be done
in terms of planning and development of the Barbosa, Olga, Jamie A. Tratalos, Paul
city’s UGS to achieve the required space ratio R. Armsworth, Richard G. Davies, Richard
per inhabitant and accessibility. Furthermore, A. Fuller, Pat Johnson, and Kevin J.
each UGS has its own characteristics that set Gaston. 2007. “Who Benefits from Access to
them above or below the rest with regards to how Green Space? A Case Study from Sheffield, UK.”
good these spaces provide the needed services Landscape and Urban Planning 83: 187–195.
and amenities that users look into. Moreover, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.04.004
existing UGS could serve as a basis in proposing
new urban green spaces and parks or on the Box, John, and Carolyn Harrison. 1993.
rehabilitation and maintenance of these spaces. “Natural Spaces in Urban Places.” Town and
The city may look into these individual aspects Country Planning 62 (9): 231–35.
as it would help designers in proposing new UGS
or retrofitting existing UGS that scored low in Brill, Michael. 1989. “Transformation,
a specific aspect and variable of the PSI. For Nostalgia, and Illusion in Public Life and
example, more trees may be planted inside the Public Place.” In Public Places and Spaces,
Rizal and Quezon and Parks like that of Osmeña edited by Irwin Altman and Ervin H.
Park, which is almost covered in trees as shade Zube, 10:7–29. New York: Plenum Press.
from the sun. Lighting should be improved in
Magsaysay Park and Rizal and Quezon Parks Carrus, Giuseppe, Massimiliano Scopelliti,
to improve the feeling of safety of users affected R a f fa e l e L a f or t e z z a , Gi use ppe
Colangelo, Francesco Ferrini, Fabio

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 21 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

 Salbitano, Mariagrazia Agrimi, Luigi Chiesura, Anna. 2004. “The Role of Urban
Portoghesi, Paolo Semenzato, and Parks for the Sustainable City.” Landscape
Giovanni Sanesi. 2015. “Go Greener, Feel and Urban Planning 68 (1): 129–38.
Better? The Positive Effects of Biodiversity https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2003.08.003
on the Well-Being of Individuals Visiting
Urban and Peri-Urban Green Areas.” Cilliers, Sarel, Juaneé Cilliers, Rina Lubbe,
Landscape Urban Plan 134: 221–228. and Stefan Siebert. 2012. “Ecosystem
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.10.022 Services of Urban Green Spaces in African
Countries – Perspectives and Challenges.”
Ca ruso, Geoffr ey, Je a n Cava ilhès, Urban Ecosystem 16 (4): 681–702 .
Dominique Peeters, Isabelle Thomas, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-012-0254-3
Pierre Frankhauser, and Gilles Vuidel.
2015. “Greener and Larger Neighbourhoods Coombes, Emma, Andrew Jones, and Melvyn
Make Cities More Sustainable! A 2D Hillsdon. 2010. “The Relationship of Physical
Urban Economics Perspective.” Computers, Activity and Overweight to Objectively
Environment and Urban Systems 54: 82–94. Measured Green Space Access and Use.”
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2015.06.002 Social Science & Medicine 70(6): 816–822.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.11.020
Caruso, Geoffrey, Dominique Peeters,
Jean Cavailhès, and Mark Rounsevell. Dai, Dajun. 2011. “Racial/Ethnic and
2008. “Space-Time Patterns of Urban Sprawl, Socioeconomic Disparities in Urban Green
A 1D Cellular Automata and Microeconomic Space Accessibility: Where to Intervene?”
Approach.” Environment and Planning B 36(6): Landscape and Urban Planning 102 (4): 234–244.
968–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/b34009 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.05.002

Caspersen, Ole H., Cecil C. Konijnendijk, and De la Barrera, Francisco de, Sonia Reyes-
Anton S. Olafsson. 2006. “Green Space Paecke, and Ellen Banzhaf. 2016. “Indicators
Planning and Land Use: An Assessment of for Green Spaces in Contrasting Urban
Urban Regional and Green Structure Planning Settings.” Ecological Indicators 62: 212–219.
in Greater Copenhagen.” Geografisk Tidsskrift- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.10.027
Danish Journal of Geography 106 (2): 7–20.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00167223.2006.10649553 Dehring, Carolyn, and Neil Dunse. 2006.
“Housing Density and the Effect of Proximity
Cavan, Gina, Sar ah Lindley, Fatemeh to Public Open Space in Aberdeen, Scotland.”
Jalayer, Kumelachew Yeshitela, Stephan Real Estate Economics 34 (4): 553–566.
Pauleit, Florian Renner, Susannah https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6229.2006.00178.x
Gill, et al. 2014. “Urban Morphological
Determinants of Temperature Regulating Dobbs, Cynnamon, Dave Kendal, and
Ecosystem Ser vices in Two A frican Craig Nitschke. 2014. “Multiple Ecosystem
Cities.” Ecological Indicators 42: 43–57. Services and Disservice of the Urban
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.01.025 Forest Establishing Their Connection with
Landscape Structure and Sociodemographics.”
Chen, Bo, Ochieng A. Adimo, and Zhiyi Bao. E c olog ic al Indic ator s 43: 4 4 – 45.
2009. “Assessment of Aesthetic Quality https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.02.007
and Multiple Functions of Urban Green
Space from the Users’ Perspective: The Dony, Coline C. , Eric M. Delmelle, and
Case of Hangzhou Flower Garden, China.” Elizabeth C. Delmelle. 2015. “Re-
Landscape and Urban Planning 93(1): 76–82. Conceptualizing Accessibility to Parks
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2009.06.001
in Multi-Modal Cities: A Variable-Width

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 22 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

 Floating Catchment Area (VFCA) Method.” Dawe. 1995. “Accessible Natural Greenspace
Landscape and Urban Planning 143: 90–99. in Towns and Cities: A Review of Appropriate
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.06.011 Size and Distance Criteria.” Peterborough:
Natural England.
Gantiva, Joaquin Andres Fr anco, and
Daniel Pa ez. 2018. “Methodological Hartig, Terry, Martis Mang, and Gary Evans.
Proposal for Measuring and Predicting 1 9 91 . “Restorative Ef fects of
Urban Green Space per Capita in a Land-Use Natura l Env ironment E x periences.”
Cover Change Model: Case Study in Bogota.” Environment and Behavior 23: 3–26.
Dissertation, Universidad de los Andes https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916591231001
Colombia. http://hdl.handle.net/1992/34523
Ibes, Dorothy C. 2015. “A Multi-Dimensional
Gehl, Jan, and Anne Matan. 2009. “Two Classification and Equity Analysis of an
Perspectives on Public Spaces.” Building Urban Park System: A Novel Methodology
Research and Information 37 (1): 106–109. and Case Study Application.” Landscape
https://doi.org/10.1080/09613210802519293 and Urban Planning 137: 122–37.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.12.014
Gomes, Carina Semaglia, and Evnadro
Mateus Moretto. 2011. “A Framework Interface Development Intervention. 2017.
of Indicators to Support Urban Green “Improving Public Parks and Developing
Area Planning: A Brazilian Case Study.” In More Accessible Green Open Spaces in
Proceedings of the International Academy of Davao.” Davao City: Interface Development
Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 47–56. Intervention.
Hong Kong: International Academy of Ecology
and Environmental Sciences. ———. 2019. “IDIS Position Paper on the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) and
Gonzales, Leonora P, and Dina C. Magnaye. Zoning Ordinance (2013-2022).” Davao City:
2016. “Challenges to the Multi-Functional Interface Development Intervention.
Uses and Multifarious Benefits of Urban
Green Spaces: Basis of Urban Biodiversity Hope, T., and M. Hough. 1988. “Area, Crime
Planning and Management in the City and Incivility: A Profile from the British Crime
of Manila, Philippines.” International Survey.” In Communities and Crime Reduction,
Journal on Environmental Science & edited by Tim Hope, and Margaret Shaw, 30-
Sustainable Development 1 (1): 69. 47. London, United Kingdom.

———. 2017. “Measuring the Urban Biodiversity International Standards Organization.

of Green Spaces in a Highly Urbanizing 2014. “ISO 37120: Sustainable Development
Environment and Its Implications for of Communities – Indicators for City
Human Settlement Resiliency Planning: Services and Quality of Life.” ISO.
The Case of Manila City, Philippines.” https://www.iso.org/standard/62436.html
Procedia Environmental Sciences 37: 83–100.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2017.03.024 Jenerette, Darrel, Sharon Harlan,
Anthony Brazel, Nancy Jones, Larissa
Haq, Shah Md Atiqul. 2011. “Urban Green Larsen, and William Stefanov. 2007.
Spaces and an Integrative Approach “Regional Relationships Between Surface
to Sustainable Environment.” Journal of Temperature, Vegetation, and Human
Environmental Protection 2: 601–608. Settlement in a Rapidly Urbanizing
https://doi.org/10.4236/jep.2011.25069 Ecosystem.” Landscape Ecology 22 (1): 353–65.
Harrison, C, J Burgess, A Millward, and G https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-006-9032-z

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 23 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

Kabisch, Nadja, and Dagmar Haase. 2013. Lou k a itou-Sider is, A na sta si a , a nd
“Green Spaces of European Cities Athanasios Sideris. 2009. “What Brings
Revisited for 1990-2006.” Landscape Children to the Park? Analysis and
Urban and Planning 110: 113–122. Measurement of the Variables Affecting
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.10.017 Children’s Use of Parks.” Journal of the
American Planning Association 76(1): 89–107.
Kelling, George, and James Wilson. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360903418338
19 8 2 . “Broken Wi ndows: The
Police a nd Neig hborhood Sa fet y.” Maas, Jolanda, Sonja van Dillen, Robert
T he Atlantic Monthly 127: 29-38. A. Verheji, and Peter P. Groenewegen.
https://w w w.theatlantic.com/magazine/ 2009. “Social Contacts as a Possible Mechanism
archive/1982/03/broken-windows/304465/ Behind the Relation Between Green Space
and Health.” Health & Place 15 (2): 585–595.
Krellenberg, Kerstin, Juliane Welz, and https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2008.09.006
Sonia Reyes-Packe. 2014. “Urban Green Areas
and Their Potential for Social Interaction Marselle, Melissa R., Katherine N. Irvine,
– A Case Study of a Socio-Economically Altea Lorenzo-Arribas, and Sar a L.
Mixed Neighborhood in Santiago de Warber. 2015. “Moving Beyond Green:
Chile.” Habitat International 44: 11–21. Exploring the Relationship of Environment
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2014.04.004 Ty pe and Indicators of Perceived
Environmental Quality on Emotional
Kurban, Alejandra. 2017. “Bioclimatic Urban Well-Being Following Group Walks.”
Green Indicators for the Sustainability of Cities International Journal of Environmental
in Arid Environments.” International Journal Research and Public Health 12 (1): 106–130.
of Applied Science and Technology 7 (2): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph120100106

La Rosa,Daniele. 2014. “Accessibility to McGarigal, Kevin, Sam Cushman, and

Greenspaces:GIS Based Indicators for Eduard Ene. 2002. “FR AGSTATS v4:
Sustainable Planning in a Dense Urban Spatial Pattern Analysis Program for
Context.” Ecological Indicators 42: 122–134. Categorical and Continuous Maps.”
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.11.011 Amherst: University of Massachusetts.

Larondelle, Neele, Dagmar Haase, and Mehta, Vikas. 2014. “Evaluating Public Space.”
Nadja Kabisch. 2014. “Mapping the Diversity Journal of Urban Design 19(1): 53–88.
of Regulating Ecosystem Services in European https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2013.854698
Cities.” Global Environmental Change 26: 119–
129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.008 Nicholls, Sar ah. 2001. “Measuring the
Accessibilit y and Equit y of Public
Le Texier, Marion, Kerry Schiel, and Parks: A Case Study Using GIS.”
Geoffrey Caruso. 2018. “The Provision of Managing Leisure 6 (4): 201–219.
Urban Green Space and Its Accessibility: Spatial https://doi.org/10.1080/13606710110084651
Data Effects in Brussels.” PLoS ONE 13 (10).
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0204684 Nicol, Chris, and Ron Blake. 2000.
“Classification and Use of Open Space in
Lee, Andrew , and Rajan Maheswaran. 2011. the Context of Increasing Urban Capacity.”
“The Health Benefits of Urban Green Planning Practice & Research 15 (3): 193–210.
Spaces: A Review of the Evidence.” https://doi.org/10.1080/713691902
Journal of Public Health 33(2): 212–222.
https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdq068. Niemela, Jari. 2014. “Ecology of Urban
Green Spaces: The Way Forward in

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 24 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

 Answering Major Research Questions.” Brazilian Society of Urban Arborization.
Landscape Urban Planning 125: 298–303. 1996. “Letter to Londrina and Ibipora.” Brazil.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.07.014
Schipperijin, Jasper, Ulrika Stigsdotter,
Perkins, Douglas D., John W.Meeks, Ralph Thomas R andrup, and Jens Troelsen.
B.Taylor. 1992. “The Physical Environment 2010. “Influences on the Use of Green Space
of Street Blocks and Resident Perceptions – A Case Study in Odense, Denmark.” Urban
of Crime and Disorder: Implications for Forestry & Urban Greening 9(1): 25–32.
Theory and Measurement.” Journal of https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2009.09.002
Environmental Psychology 12 (1): 21-34.
Skogan, W. and M. Maxfield. 1981. “Coping
Pl a nt R A , Cunningh a m R , Ber ry with Crime: Individual and Neighborhood
F, Madden B, Hageer Y, Huete A. Reactions.” Beverly Hills, California: Sage
2017. “Measuring Urban Green Space Publications.
in Australia.” Final Technical Report
prepared for Horticulture Innovation Shafer, Scott, David Scott, John Baker,
Australia Limited by the Institute for and Kirk Winemiller. 2013. “Recreation and
Sustainable Futures (ISF) and the Faculty Amenity Values of Urban Stream Corridors:
of Science Climate Change Cluster (C3). Implications for Green Infrastructure.”
Australia: University of Technology Sydney. Journal of Urban Design 18 (4): 478–93.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2013.800450
Philippine Statistics Authority. 2020.
“2020 Census of Population and Housing.” Sister, Chona, Jennifer Wolch, and
Republic of the Philippines Philippine Statistcs John Wilson. 20 09. “Got Green?
Authority. https://psa.gov.ph/population-and- Addressing Environmental Justice in
housing/statistical-tables Park Provision.” GeoJournal 75: 229–48.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-009-9303-8
R akhshandehroo, Mehdi, Yusof, Mohd
Johari Mohd. 2014. "Establishing new Stanners, David, and Philippe Bourdeau.
urban green spaces classification for 1995. “Europe’s Environment: The Dobris
Malaysian cities". In IFLA Asia Pacific Assessment.” Copenhagen, Denmark:
Congress 06: 1-13. Malaysia, 28–30 April. European Environment Agency.
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3912.6880
Sugiyama, Takemi, and Catherine Ward
Reyes-Paecke, Sonia, and Isabel Margarita Thompson. 2008. “Association Between
Figueroa Aldunce. 2010. “Distribution, Characteristics of Neighborhood Open
Surface A rea and Accessibilit y of Space and Older People’s Walking.” Urban
Green Areas in Santiago de Chile.” Forestry and Urban Greening 7 (1): 41–51.
EUR E (Santiago) 36 (109): 89–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2007.12.002
http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0250-71612010000300004
Talen, Emily, and Luc Anselin. 1998.
Rupprecht, Christoph D., and Jason A. Byrne. “Assessing Spatial Equity: An Evaluation
2 014 . “ I n for m a l Ur b a n Green- of Measures of Accessibility to Public
Space: Comparison of Qualit y and Playgrounds.” Environment and Planning
Characteristics in Brisbane, Australia A: Economy and Space 30: 595–613.
and Sapporo, Japan.” PLoS ONE 9 (6). https://doi.org/10.1068/a300595
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0099784
Taylor, Bronwen, Peter Fernando, Adrian
Rybczynski, Witold. 1993. “The New Bauman, Anna Williamson, Jonathan
Downtowns.” The Atlantic Monthly, May 1993.

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 25 ojs.upmin.edu.ph

 Cr a ig, a nd Sa lly R edm a n. 2011. “Urban Green Spaces and Health. A Review
“Measuring the Quality of Public Open of Evidence.” Copenhagen, Denmark: World
Space Using Google Earth.” American Health Organization.
Journal of Preventive Medicine 40 (2): 10–112.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2010.10.024 Wright Wendel, Heather E., Rebecca A.
Zarger, and James R. Mihelcic. 2012.
Taylor, Lucy, and Dieter Hochuli. 2017. “Accessibility and Usability: Green Space
“Def ining Greenspace: Multiple Uses Preferences, Perception, and Barriers in a
Across Multiple Disciplines.” Landscape Rapidly Urbanizing City in Latin America.”
and Urban Planning 158: 25 –38. Landscape and Urban Planning 107 (3): 272–82.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.09.024 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.06.003

Thomas, M. 1991. “The Demise of Public Space.” Yao, Liang, Jingru Liu, Rusing Wang, Ke
In Town Planning Responses to City Change, Yin, and Baolong Han. 2014. “Effective Green
edited by Vincent Nadin and Joe Doak. 209– Equivalent – A Measure of Public Green Spaces
24. Aldershot: Avebury. for Cities.” Ecological Indicators 47: 123–27.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.07.009
Tian, Yuhong, CY Jim, and Haiqing Wang.
2014. “Assessing the Landscape and Ecological Zhou, Xiaolu, and Jinki Kim. 2013. “Social
Quality of Urban Green Spaces in a Compact Disparities in Tree Canopy and Park
City.” Landscape Urban Planning 121: 97–108. Accessibility: A Case Study of Six Cities in
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.10.001 Illinois Using GIS and Remote Sensing.” Urban
Forestry & Urban Greening 12 (1): 88–97.
Tisma, Alexandra, and Mariana Neto. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2012.11.004
“A Framework of Indicator System for
Evaluation of Green Spaces in Metropolitan
Regions: The Case of Randstad, Netherlands.”
Netherlands: PBL Netherlands Environmental
Assessment Agency.

United nations De v elopm en t

Progr a mme. 2020. “A Countr y of
Friends Greens its Capita l Cit y.”
https://undp.medium.com/a-country-of-
friends-greens-its-capital-city-767d374d0f9

Van Herzele, Ann, and Torsten Wiedemann.

2003. “A Monitoring Tool for the Provision
of Accessible and Attractive Urban Green
Spaces.” Landscape Urban Plan 63: 109–106.

Weiland, Ulrike, Annegret Kindler, Ellen

Banzhaf, Annemarie Ebert, and Sonia
Reyes-Paecke. 2011. “Indicators for Sustainable
Land Use Management in Santiago de Chile.”
Ecological Indicators 11 (5): 1074–1083.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.12.007

Wor l d h e a lt h orga niz ation

Regional Office for Europe. 2016.

BANWA A (2021–2022) 14: art073 26 ojs.upmin.edu.ph