Prioritizing urban rivers' ecosystem services: An importance-performance analysis

Cities 94 (2019) 11–23

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Cities journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cities

Prioritizing urban rivers' ecosystem services: An importance-performance analysis Junyi Hua, Wendy Y. Chen

T

⁎

Department of Geography, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong

ARTICLE INFO

ABSTRACT

Keywords: Urban ecosystem services Importance-performance analysis Urban rivers Social perception and satisfaction Provision prioritization

The importance-performance analysis (IPA) has been developed and widely utilized to understand customer satisfaction and prioritize provision strategies based on the assumption that satisfaction is resultant from a preference (perceived importance) for a service and a relevant judgment of its performance. However, little work has been performed to examine to what degree different social groups are satisfied with diverse ecosystem services provided by urban rivers, being a unique yet underinvested public good. This study pioneers the IPA application to systematically analyze local communities' perceived importance of urban rivers' ecosystem services and their perceptions about how well those ecosystem services have been provided by urban rivers in Guangzhou (south China). We found notable importance-performance gaps for 10 out of 12 ecosystem services. The local residents were more dissatisfied with provision performance than the non-locals even though both groups of residents could explicitly recognize the importance of urban rivers' ecosystem services. Enhancement of water purification was ranked first amongst all ecosystem services by all respondents, irrespective of respondents' hukou status (Chinese household registration system) and residing environment. Thus, this ecosystem service should be prioritized in relevant management and restoration initiatives. These data provide an accurate picture of potential approaches for the improvement and prioritization of ecosystem services that would satisfy the respective target groups' needs. The IPA offers a mechanism to help match local residents' needs with ecosystem services provision. The IPA also has promise as a means of helping decision-makers and practitioners to communicate effectively with various social groups holding diverging expectations and levels of satisfaction. Such communication is essential to curate urban spaces enjoyed and appreciated by diverse social groups via inclusive urban ecosystem governance.

1. Introduction Urban rivers and streams, as one of the most vulnerable zones of human-nature interaction (Delibas & Tezer, 2017), are key and precious natural elements in urbanized areas (Lundy & Wade, 2011), generating diverse and critical provision, regulating, and cultural ecosystem services (Brill, Anderson, & O'Farrell, 2017; Everard & Moggridge, 2012). While the importance of these ecosystem services to citizens' quality of life and well-being has recently received increased recognition (Stepniewska & Sobczak, 2017), little work has been performed to determine whether urban residents are satisfied with various ecosystem services delivered by urban rivers. The findings of the present work will help decision-makers and practitioners to fulfill social desires and account for social perspectives in natural restoration and ecological rehabilitation of urban rivers (Garcia et al., 2017) that have been chronically damaged, degraded, and/or polluted by industrialization

⁎

and urbanization processes (Collier et al., 2015; Delibas & Tezer, 2017; Jiang, Shi, & Gu, 2016; Walsh, 2005). Based on the assumption that satisfaction is resultant from a preference (perceived importance) for a product or service and judgment of its performance (Myers & Alpert, 1968), the importance-performance analysis (IPA) has been developed to understand consumer satisfaction and correspondingly prioritize provision strategies (Sever, 2015). The IPA distinguishes and combines participants' rate of attribute importance and performance of products or services (usually in Likert scales) into a two-dimensional grid (with importance as one axis and performance as the other) with four quadrants, including “Concentrate here” (high importance and low performance), “Keep up the good work” (high importance and high performance), “Possible overkill” (low importance, but high performance), and “Low priority” (low importance and low performance), so that consumer needs can be explicitly plotted, management targets identified (Abalo, Varela, &

Corresponding author at: Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong. E-mail address: [email protected] (W.Y. Chen).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.05.014 Received 10 August 2018; Received in revised form 29 April 2019; Accepted 9 May 2019 0264-2751/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Cities 94 (2019) 11–23

J. Hua and W.Y. Chen

Manzano, 2007), and practical suggestions (such as prioritizing resource allocation) derived appropriately (Oh, 2001). Originally designed as a tool for market researchers (Guadagnolo, 1985; Martilla & James, 1977), the IPA has been increasingly applied in various fields, including hospitality and tourism (e.g., Boley, McGehee, & Hammett, 2017), health care (e.g., Lee et al., 2015), and education (e.g., McLeay, Robson, & Yusoff, 2017). In tandem with the increasing recognition of ecosystem services over the past two decades (Daily & Matson, 2008; Mensah et al., 2017), public preferences and assigned importance for various ecosystem services (e.g., Chen & Hua, 2017; Lo & Jim, 2015; Rey-Valette, Mathé, & Salles, 2017; Swapan, Iftekhar, & Li, 2017; Zhang et al., 2016) and how well the ecosystem services are provided (e.g., Castro et al., 2011; Smith & Sullivan, 2014) have been extensively investigated in order to communicate societal dependence on ecological life support systems via integrating social perspectives into traditional natural perspectives (Castro et al., 2015; Mensah et al., 2017; Rey-Valette et al., 2017). While empirical studies tend to either focus on the rating of importance or the rating of performance, these two theoretically interlinked dimensions would jointly determine customer satisfaction based on the disconfirmation of the expectation paradigm (Sever, 2015). Moreover, preferable ecosystem services-oriented management decisions should be prioritized and supported based on evidence from both aspects (Sever, 2015). Specifically, those ecosystem services that are perceived as most important, but with the least-satisfactory provision, require urgent social and ecological interventions aimed at prioritizing and improving the provision of these ecosystem services to match societal demands (Burkhard, Kroll, Nedkov, & Müller, 2014; Spangenberg, Görg, & Settele, 2015). To our knowledge, no empirical studies have yet simultaneously approached citizens' evaluations of these two dimensions (importance and performance) in relation to their satisfaction with the delivery of various ecosystem services as the result of complex interactions between biophysical processes and societal interventions (Kremer, Andersspn, Elmqvist, & McPhearson, 2015; Reyers et al., 2013), even though the IPA has demonstrated versatility within the context of environmental management (Backlund, Stewart, McDonald, & Miller, 2004; Larson, Stoeckl, Neil, & Welters, 2013; Ou, Mak, & Pan, 2017) and natural resource management (Mountjoy, Seekamp, Davenport, & Whiles, 2013). Thus, a lack of information exists to develop socially-relevant and community-sensitive management strategies aimed at synergizing the provision of ecosystem services and demand from society. This study pioneers the IPA application to systematically analyze local community's perceived importance of urban rivers' ecosystem services, and their perceptions about how well those ecosystem services have been provided by urban rivers in Guangzhou (south China). As most of its urban rivers (including main watercourses and tributaries of the Pearl River, which is the third-longest river and second-largest by water volume in China) have been degraded and polluted to varying extents due to rapid industrialization and intensive urbanization (including outward expansion and inward densification) since the 1980s (Chen, 2017; Guangzhou Environmental Monitoring Center, 2015), local authorities began to resurrect ecosystem services of the Pearl River in 2005, mainly by improving water quality and naturalizing riparian regions (Guangzhou Institute of Water Planning and Design, 2017). In this process, determination of how to integrate the social dimension into traditional engineering and ecological solutions became the key for the so-called “returning the Pearl River to citizens” movement, especially since China is facing a challenging transition from the conventional state-led top-down regulatory paradigm to a bottom-up participatory paradigm in the environmental governance regime (Mol & Carter, 2006; Xu, Du, Cui, & Wei, 2009). We expanded the IPA to elucidate how place attachment (local vs. non-local residents) and administrative demarcation (as a manifestation of environmental heterogeneity) would affect residents' satisfaction towards urban rivers' ecosystem services, so that accurate and realistic improvement strategies

based on the segmentation of residents (i.e., the end-users of these ecosystem services) can be determined (Bruyere, Rodriguez, & Vaske, 2002). Although it would be imprudent to generalize our findings to other communities or other ecosystems and associated ecosystem services, the IPA approach employed in this study constitutes a starting point for probing residents' satisfaction towards ecosystem services provision and optimizing cognate restoration options. Particularly, a need exists to disaggregate beneficiaries of ecosystem services to better reflect the diverse and competing needs arising from different stakeholders, communities, and societies across varying spatial scales, from the micro-district level to the meso-municipal level and the macro-national/global level (Small, Munday, & Durance, 2017). This innovative study shows that detailed and comprehensive information can be elicited to facilitate context- and stakeholder-specific prioritization of ecosystem services. 2. Literature review Over recent decades, the concept of ecosystem services, which serves as a decision support tool by emphasizing linkages between natural ecosystems and human well-being (Polizzi et al., 2015; Turner & Daily, 2008), has attracted increasing attention from scholars, practitioners, and policy-makers. A strength of the ecosystem services framework is that it can promote collaboration amongst the general public, policy-makers, professionals, and other stakeholders in decisionmaking processes pertaining to ecosystem restoration (Spangenberg et al., 2015). Besides the improvement of ecological criteria, human benefits and welfare result from such restorations (Germer et al., 2018). It is thus critical to clearly understand societal preferences and satisfaction with regard to varying ecosystem services potentially generated by ecosystem restoration. Those ecosystem services that are considered as important, but whose provision is unsatisfactory, should be prioritized to match demands from society (Burkhard et al., 2014; Spangenberg et al., 2015). This is so that social concerns can be integrated into ecological interventions (Castro et al., 2015; Rey-Valette et al., 2017), and holistic planning and management of socio-ecological systems can be achieved (Germer et al., 2018). To achieve this, methodological and practical tools are required to investigate the demand for ecosystem services, i.e., to determine whether the public is satisfied with the provision of various ecosystem services. Essentially, these tools must be capable of not only soliciting the public perception of the importance assigned to different ecosystem services (e.g., Chen & Hua, 2017), but also public evaluation of the provision performance of these ecosystem services (e.g., Castro et al., 2011; Smith & Sullivan, 2014). This is because a meaningful comparison between these two aspects can yield valuable insights pertaining to consumers' satisfaction with the provision of ecosystem services. The IPA approach offers a novel means to assess people's satisfaction based on the disconfirmation of expectation paradigm (Oliver, 2010). This paradigm implies that expectations (i.e., perceived importance) that are greater than the provision performance lead to negative disconfirmation (i.e., dissatisfaction), whereas provision performance that is greater than expectation leads to positive disconfirmation (i.e., satisfaction) (Sever, 2015). This technique was initially developed as a marketing tool to optimize management strategies to improve customer satisfaction (Guadagnolo, 1985; Martilla & James, 1977) and its application has been extended to various fields, including tourism, health care, banking services, education, public administration, and information technologies (Sever, 2015). Hitherto, less than a handful of empirical studies in the field of environmental management have applied the IPA. For instance, Larson et al. (2013) investigated residents' perceived importance and their satisfaction concerning the social and cultural values of the Australian Tropical Rivers to identify associated management priorities. Ou et al. (2017) applied the IPA approach to assess both the importance and satisfaction of soundscapes in urban parks, to provide detailed 12

Cities 94 (2019) 11–23

J. Hua and W.Y. Chen

Fig. 1. The study area and sampling sites.

information for guiding soundscape design and improvement of urban parks. However, no empirical studies have yet attempted to comprehensively assess citizens' perceived importance and performance of an array of ecosystem services provided by urban rivers. This IPA study would begin with end-users and their satisfaction and constitute a starting point to identify discrepancies between importance and performance, and therefore provide opportunities for optimal management and improvement of ecosystem services (Honey-Rosés et al., 2013).

ecosystem services. For example, swimming, a very popular recreational activity for Guangzhou's inhabitants, has been prohibited since the late 1990s. Concerns about sustaining the ecological functions and benefits of urban river ecosystems have triggered substantial restoration efforts from the Guangzhou municipal government, involving cleaning up wastewater discharge by constructing several wastewater treatment facilities and greening riparian zones (Chen & Li, 2018; Guangzhou Institute of Water Planning and Design, 2017). Several pilot projects have also been completed, such as the Donghao Stream in Yuexiu, the Liwan Stream in Liwan, and the Shiliugang River in Haizhu. Yet, recent monitoring records reveal that most urban rivers in the study area remain polluted to varying degrees (Guangzhou Institute of Water Planning and Design, 2017).

3. Methodology 3.1. Study area The central built-up region of Guangzhou (Fig. 1), the capital city of Guangdong province (south China), was selected as the study area. This region covers four administrative districts (including Liwan, Yuexiu, Tianhe, and Haizhu), with a total population of 5.3 million inhabitants in an area of approximately 280 km2 (Guangzhou Statistical Bureau, 2016). According to the latest census, approximately 29.2% of Guangzhou's inhabitants in the studied central region are non-local, migrants, and do not hold an official household registration record (hukou) in Guangzhou (Guangzhou Statistical Bureau, 2016). A complex network of watercourses (including the two main waterways and extensive tributaries of the Pearl River), together with small reservoirs and ponds, forms a much-appreciated natural landscape component in Guangzhou (Fig. 1). Approximately 200 urban rivers (excluding buried water channels) exist in the study area, with a total length of 387.53 km (Guangzhou Institute of Water Planning and Design, 2017). However, most urban rivers have been severely degraded and polluted in the past several decades (Chen, 2017; Zhang et al., 2014). According to the latest survey, approximately 187 rivers have become virtual drainage ditches. They are black, oily, and malodorous (Chen, 2017), resulting in degradation or even a loss of many

3.2. Questionnaire design and survey execution A questionnaire was developed based on empirical studies about urban rivers' ecosystem services (e.g., de Groot et al., 2010; Doherty, Murphy, Hynes, & Buckley, 2014; Garcia et al., 2016; Grizzetti, Lanzanova, Liquete, Reynaud, & Cardoso, 2016; Yeakley et al., 2016), focus group discussions (including local scholars, policy-makers, and some residents), and preliminary findings from a pilot survey with open questions about urban rivers' benefits. A total of 12 statements pertaining to urban rivers' benefits (the term ecosystem services was not used as the interviewees are generally not familiar with it, as in Stepniewska & Sobczak, 2017) were included in the questionnaire (Table 1). The questionnaire started with an introductory section about the purpose of the survey and the data confidentiality statement. Then, respondents were asked to rate their perceived importance regarding 12 ecosystem services on ordinal scales (a five-point Likert scale from “1 very unimportant” to “5 - very important”). A description of Guangzhou's urban rivers (their distribution, pollution level, and some 13

Cities 94 (2019) 11–23

J. Hua and W.Y. Chen

Table 1 Statements of ecosystem services used in the questionnaire. Code

Abbreviation

Statement

A B C D E F G H I J K L

BIODIVERSITY IDENTITY PURIFICATION FLOODCONTROL EDUCATION WATERSUPPLY BUSINESS RECREATION NAVIGATION HERITAGE COOLING AMENITY

Urban Urban Urban Urban Urban Urban Urban Urban Urban Urban Urban Urban

restoration projects) was then given verbally by the interviewers on site, and respondents' interactions with local rivers (such as their visits, major activities, motivations, etc.) were probed. This could help respondents to establish an emotional and behavioral link between the current status of urban rivers and the delivery of ecosystem services (Vollmer, Ryffel, Djaja, & Grêt-Regamey, 2016). The provision performance of these 12 ecosystem services by Guangzhou's urban rivers was evaluated by the respondents. The question was phrased as “Do you agree that our urban rivers have sufficiently provided the following benefits?” (from “1 - totally disagree” to “5 - totally agree”). In the final section, respondents' key sociodemographic information, including gender, age, education level, household size, household income, hukou status, and residential district, was solicited. Face-to-face interviews were administrated by two well-trained Ph.D. students from May to June in 2016 at a total of 12 sites selected via a stratified random sampling procedure. Four survey sites were randomly selected from each of the three zones/districts (LiwanYuexiu, Haizhu, and Tianhe). To reflect the urbanization history and reach a balance of the land area and population size, Liwan and Yuexiu, two contiguous old town centers with > 1000 years of development history, were combined together. In comparison, Haizhu has gradually urbanized after 1949 and Tianhe after the 1980s. The four survey sites within each survey zone/district included one riparian park (at the main entrance area), two residential blocks (at the lobby of a community club and/or the major sitting area within a community garden), and one commercial site (at an atrium and/or a main entrance area). At the survey sites, citizens over 18 years old were invited to participate in the interview. Residents over 80 years old, who may have cognitive difficulties in reading or writing, were excluded in the survey. The sample size, together with age and gender distribution, was determined according to the population characteristics of the three zones/districts (Guangzhou Statistical Bureau, 2016).

rivers rivers rivers rivers rivers rivers rivers rivers rivers rivers rivers rivers

offer important natural habitats for diverse floral and faunal species represent the identity of the city and local communities help to purify water pollutants can mitigate floods serve as field laboratory for public to learn about natural environment supply fresh water for multiple uses promote business development (such as river-related tourism) provide many recreational opportunities are used for transporting goods and people are important cultural and historical heritage alleviate high temperature in summer represent natural beauty and aesthetics

respondents, so repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to verify this assumption (Lai & Hitchcock, 2015). The core part of the data analysis was to measure the gaps between importance and performance and to visually plot discrepancies between the perceived importance of specific ecosystem services and performance ecosystem services provision. Respondent segmentations (by place attachment and administrative demarcation), as well as each individual ecosystem service and ecosystem service category (based on the exploratory factor analysis), were incorporated into the IPA plotting to derive specifically targeted strategies. Similarly, ANOVA was employed to examine potential gaps between importance and performance, and possible differences related to place attachment and administrative demarcation. All statistical analyses were performed by Stata 14.0 (StataCorp, 2015). Determining where to best place the cross-hairs within the importance-performance matrix constitutes a major issue in the application of the IPA approach (Boley et al., 2017; Oh, 2001). Conventionally, cross-hairs are simply placed in the middle of the 5-point Likert scale, defined as a “scale-centered” IPA (Martilla & James, 1977). However, a tendency for many respondents to give inflated importance and performance ratings has been observed in IPA surveys, which is referred to as the “ceiling effect”. As a result, the “scale-centered” IPA plotting might fail to reveal some variations existing between respondents' evaluation of importance and performance. To minimize this ceiling effect, the “data-centered” IPA plotting recommended by Azzopardi and Nash (2013), which places the cross-hairs at the mean responses of the importance and performance items measured, respectively, was adopted in this study. Thus, ecosystem services can be compared relative to each other, and variations between respondent segmentations can be examined, as in Eskildsen and Kristensen (2006), Taplin (2012), and Boley et al. (2017). To further facilitate prioritization of the provision of ecosystem services located in the same quadrant, an improvement index was proposed. The index (Ιi) for an ecosystem service or a category of ecosystem services is defined as:

3.3. Data analysis The analytical procedure recommended by Lai and Hitchcock (2015) was adopted. Exploratory factor analysis was first performed with regard to respondents' ratings of their perceived importance of 12 ecosystem services for urban rivers. This could assist in examining the covariance relationship amongst ecosystem services included in the survey, thereby grouping the 12 ecosystem services into several underlying influential domains/categories and checking the construct validity (Fabrigar & Wegener, 2011; Field, 2009). Cronbach's alpha was computed to test the internal consistency of each influential category. Based on the results of this exploratory factor analysis, new scores of perceived importance and performance for each respondent were generated by means of averaging raw scores corresponding to those ecosystem services grouped into an influential category. Moreover, the IPA assumes that the importance ratings are different amongst all

Ii = RIi =

ISi

PSi RIi

ISi ISmin ISmax ISmin

(1)

where ISi is the importance score; PSi is the performance score; RIi is the relative importance of an ecosystem service or a category of ecosystem services; and ISmin and ISmax represent the minimum and maximum values of the importance score, respectively. Essentially, the higher the index value, the more urgent the improvement strategy for the corresponding service. This index integrates the discrepancy magnitude between performance and importance and the relative weight of the importance factor with regard to an ecosystem service. Thus, it offers a supplementary way to prioritize all 14

Cities 94 (2019) 11–23

J. Hua and W.Y. Chen

Table 2 Social-economic characteristics of respondents.

Table 3 Results of the exploratory factor analysis. Sample

Gender (%)

Female Male Age (%) 18–29 30–39 40–49 50–59 ≥60 Monthly household income (%) < RMB10,000 ≥RMB10,000 Education (% with college degree or greater) Local (% of registered permanent residence) District (%) Liwan & Yuexiu Tianhe Haizhu

54.6 45.5 38.9 24.7 18.6 10.6 7.3 50.2 49.8 72.7 53.5 42.2 28.7 29.1

Population a

48.8 51.2a 36.1b 23.6b 18.9b 11.4b 10.0b RMB11,600c⁎ 23.3d 70.8e 39.7f 29.5f 30.8f

Ecosystem services

F1-Cultural

F2-Environmental

F3-Economic

A B C D E F G H I J K L

0.561 0.654 0.072 0.121 0.371 −0.111 0.309 0.587 −0.055 0.506 0.151 0.653

0.157 0.084 0.519 0.615 0.525 0.383 −0.166 −0.257 0.173 0.212 0.519 0.104

−0.058 −0.055 0.098 0.051 −0.092 0.599 0.692 0.367 0.754 0.197 0.251 0.000

0.792 0.278

0.766 0.220

0.794 0.224

BIODIVERSITY IDENTITY PURIFICATION FLOODCONTROL ENVI-EDU WATERSUPPLY BUSINESS RECREATION NAVIGATION HERITAGE COOLING AMENITY

Cronbach's alpha Variance explained (%)

a,b,d

Data from 2010 Population Census of Guangzhou Municipality. Data from Guangzhou Statistical Yearbook 2016. ⁎ The average monthly household income of the study area.

The factor loadings of the items ≥0.500 are highlighted in bold font.

c,e,f

value (0.850) suggested that the exploratory factor analysis was highly appropriate (Kaiser, 1974; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013). Also, the significant result of Bartlett's test (Chi-square = 1326.395, df = 66, p = 0.000) implied that good correlations existed amongst respondents' perceived importance of the 12 ecosystem services, and thus the suitability of the exploratory factor analysis was reconfirmed (Field, 2009). Moreover, because the assumption of multivariate normality was violated (Doornik-Hansen Chi-square = 113.826, p < 0.0001), the principal component factor extraction with a direct oblimin rotation was adopted to identify meaningful categories of influential communalities in respondents' importance ratings (Costello & Osborne, 2005). In the analysis, all items were allowed to be correlated, which is more realistic in social science research. The number of latent factors to be retained was determined based on the scree test (Cattell, 1966), which can plot the breakpoint (which defines the number of factors to retain) in a graph of eigenvalues (Costello & Osborne, 2005). Cronbach's alpha was utilized to test the consistent reliability of the measures for perceived importance. The Cronbach's alpha coefficients range from 0.766 to 0.794 (Table 3), indicating an adequate internal consistency and reliability (Black, 1999). Table 3 presents the results of the exploratory factor analysis. All loadings > 0.500 are in bold font. Three underlying factors were extracted, pertaining to three major dimensions of ecosystem services provided by urban rivers: cultural (F1), environmental (F2), and economic (F3). The first factor (F1) is labeled as “cultural”, which reflects the cultural importance of urban rivers, explained principally by five ecosystem services, including symbolic connotations (B), natural amenities (L), recreational opportunities (H), support of biodiversity (A), and being visible elements of cultural heritage to local communities (J). All of these ecosystem services form a culture-related construct that conveys the cultural values embedded in Guangzhou's urban rivers and associated riparian areas. The Pearl River, together with its extensive tributaries meandering through the entire city, has long constituted a symbol of Guangzhou's culture and identity (Xu, 2014). Although many rivers and streams have been polluted, they (especially those with wellvegetated banks) are still aesthetically appreciated for offering a contrast to surrounding monotonous buildings, and for providing various recreational opportunities (Chen & Li, 2018). Also, some elements and sites within Guangzhou's river networks, such as ancient stone bridges over streams and traditional lichee (Litchi chinensis) orchards, represent cultural and historical heritage to local communities (Xu, 2014). Biodiversity (urban rivers' function as natural habitats to support diverse species), which is a guiding landscape attribute of urban rivers (Chen & Li, 2018; McCormick, Fisher, & Brierley, 2015) to define their naturalness and uniqueness (Garcia et al., 2017), is also a critical perceptual factor influencing public perceptions of urban rivers' natural aesthetics and attractiveness as venues for recreation and relaxation (Garcia et al.,

services regardless of the IPA plots. In this study, both the quadrant plotting and the improvement index were simultaneously considered, compared, and combined to draw meaningful conclusions. 4. Results and discussions 4.1. Characteristics of the respondents A total of 500 residents were invited to participate in the survey. Amongst them, 306 accepted and 275 completed all questions, leading to a response rate of 55%. Table 2 presents the socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents. In comparison with the latest census data (Guangzhou Statistical Bureau, 2012, 2016), a reasonable match between survey participants and the population can be observed with regard to age, household income level, and residential district, albeit females appeared to be slightly over-represented, and the sample had a higher education level. During the process of on-site interviews, we found that female family members who were better educated were usually nominated to answer the survey questions, which led to a higher percentage of female respondents. A total of 46.5% of respondents declared that they did not hold local hukou, which is higher than the census figure (29.2%). On the one hand, our sample might match with Guangzhou's population structure, as the percentage of migrants without local hukou is usually underestimated due to their high mobility (Wang & Maino, 2015). On the other hand, it indicates that many non-local residents have some interest in local environmental issues, which is an important precursor of their involvement in environmental management programmes. The overrepresentation of better-educated residents is not unusual in similar surveys (e.g., Chen, Aertsens, Liekens, Broekx, & De Nocker, 2014; Huang, Han, Zhou, Gutscher, & Bi, 2013; JingLing, Yun, Liya, Zhiguo, & Baoqiang, 2010; Marta-Pedroso, Freitas, & Domingos, 2007), reflecting the fact that better-educated people are usually relatively more aware of environmental issues (Triguero, Álvarez-Aledo, & Cuerva, 2016) and some intangible ecosystem services (Affek & Kowalska, 2017), and thus are more willing to participate in questionnaire surveys (Bishop, Tuchfarber, & Oldendick, 1986). Nevertheless, extrapolating the findings of this study to Guangzhou's whole population should be done cautiously. Perceived importance of urban rivers' ecosystem services (exploratory factor analysis results). The Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin (KMO) test (Kaiser, 1974) and Bartlett's test (Bartlett, 1954) were conducted to determine whether respondents' ratings of the importance of urban rivers' ecosystem services were appropriate for the exploratory factor analysis. The rather high KMO 15

Cities 94 (2019) 11–23

J. Hua and W.Y. Chen

2017; Voigt & Wurster, 2015). The second factor (F2) is mainly characterized by environmentalrelated ecosystem services and thus is labeled as “environmental”. Items scoring high in this factor include flood control (D), water purification (E), cooling effect (K), and environmental education (E). The first three statements focus on urban rivers' benefits associated with environmental quality improvement, and the last one is related to the use of urban rivers and riparian areas for environmental education purposes. An increase of impervious surfaces and river pollution due to Guangzhou's rapid urbanization (Xiong et al., 2012), together with frequent and intense summer heat waves (Zeng et al., 2014), drives the formation of this perceptual construct associated with the importance of environmental benefits, in general. Additionally, for many residents of Guangzhou, their interactions with urban rivers (such as crossing or passing by rivers on their everyday commuting routes, relaxing together with their families at river banks) offer ample opportunities to explore and understand environmental issues related to these rivers. Several restoration projects that have been recently completed and offer exemplars and testimonies to those eager to obtain environmental insights. The third factor (F3) is labeled as “economic”, which is mainly explained by economic-related ecosystem services derived from urban rivers, including river navigation (I), business opportunities (G), and freshwater supply (F). Inland waterway transport has made the Pearl River the second-busiest river in China. Also, > 100 km of water channels within Guangzhou city has long been used for navigation (Dong & Mei, 2010). It also connects three world-class container ports (Hong Kong, Shenzhen, and Guangzhou) with many inland cities in the Pearl River Basin via an environmentally-friendly, yet inexpensive, transport mode (Li, Notteboom, & Wang, 2017), facilitating economic growth in the entire region (Li, 2014). By reviving diverse elements of Guangzhou's urban natural landscape (including both green and blue spaces), the city has become a major metropolis that is favorable for starting businesses and living in south China (Shen & Kee, 2017). Like many overseas cities (such as London, Paris, Lisbon, Quebec, and Seoul), Guangzhou's urban rivers have long constituted the lifeblood of commerce (Paul & Meyer, 2001) and the development axis of the city. Recent re-naturalization projects have transformed once-polluted channels into vibrant urban spaces, which then became popular and attractive sites for many economic and leisure activities (Brun, 2015; Everard & Moggridge, 2012). Additionally, the combination of increasing urban population and economic development has placed consistent pressure on the supply of clean water and sanitation in many Chinese cities (Wang et al., 2017), which has driven urban residents' aspirations and appreciation for urban rivers as a secured source of freshwater (Ren, Wang, Wang, Huang, & Wang, 2017). As all ecosystem services could be correlated (via the application of the oblique rotation), we conclude that urban rivers' educational benefit (E) not only contributes to F2 (environmental) but also F1 (cultural). This probably reflects that this ecosystem service is perceived to have important cultural value due to its environmental value. Similarly, freshwater supply (F) mainly constructs F3 (economic) and partially F2 (environmental), indicating its economic importance as an environmentally-valuable resource. Furthermore, the recreational benefit for Guangzhou's residents is the culturally important ecosystem service (F1), which is obviously connected with some business practices, and thus also economically important (F3). On the basis of the results of this exploratory factor analysis, three additional variables were constructed by categorizing the 12 ecosystem services into three groups: cultural (F1), environmental (F2), and economic (F3). The average of the importance scores and performance scores for those ecosystem services included in each category is computed and applied in the following importance-performance analysis and mapping.

Table 4 Results of performance and importance ratings. Ecosystem services

A B C D E F G H I J K L

BIODIVERSITY IDENTITY PURIFICATION FLOODCONTROL ENVI-EDU WATERSUPPLY BUSINESS RECREATION NAVIGATION HERITAGE COOLING AMENITY

Overall F1 Cultural F2 Environmental F3 Economic

Importance

Performance

Gap

p

Mean

Std. Dev.

Mean

Std. Dev.

3.887 3.887 4.320 4.066 3.913 3.644 3.491 3.855 3.342 3.949 3.956 3.996

0.787 0.800 0.709 0.761 0.769 0.987 0.922 0.851 1.011 0.861 0.768 0.790

3.389 3.371 3.349 3.666 3.422 3.298 3.455 3.684 3.149 3.949 3.560 3.647

1.167 1.081 1.105 1.049 1.024 1.161 1.084 1.073 1.207 0.969 1.067 1.102

−0.498 −0.516 −0.971 −0.400 −0.491 −0.346 −0.036 −0.171 −0.193 0.000 −0.396 −0.349

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.645 0.029 0.011 1.000 0.000 0.000

3.859 3.915 4.064 3.492

0.535 0.605 0.576 0.820

3.495 3.608 3.499 3.301

0.826 0.892 0.847 0.996

−0.364 −0.307 −0.565 −0.192

0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003

4.2. Measuring the gaps between importance and performance (pairedsample t-test) The IPA assumes that the ratings of perceived importance for urban rivers' ecosystem services are different. Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to verify this assumption. Mauchly's test of sphericity was firstly used to test the homogeneity of covariance. Its result indicates that the assumption of sphericity is violated (p < 0.001). The degrees of freedom were then corrected using Greenhouse-Geisser estimates of sphericity (ε = 0.692). These results suggested that significant differences existed in respondents' perceived importance of various ecosystem services provided by Guangzhou's urban rivers (F = 37.287, p < 0.001). When respondents' importance ratings are significantly different from corresponding performance ratings for a particular ecosystem service, a performance gap exists and could be identified by individual paired-samples t-test (ANOVA). Table 4 presents the IPA results. Overall, the importance rating (3.859) was greater than the performance rating (3.495), suggesting, in general, that the importance of urban rivers' ecosystem services could be adequately perceived, yet the performance of ecosystem services delivery was not satisfactory. The importance ratings of all ecosystem services (with mean scores ranging from 3.342 to 4.320) were higher than the corresponding performance ratings (with mean scores ranging from 3.149 to 3.949), except for urban rivers' heritage value (J). Interestingly, the performance score of HERITAGE (3.949) was the highest amongst all ecosystem services. This result obviously indicates that the residents were satisfied with the heritage value conveyed by the extensive river network in Guangzhou, although several river stretches were buried in the 1980s (Chen, Hua, Liekens, & Broekx, 2018). This might reflect an evolving interpretation of local history and culture for which the Pearl River and its tributaries have always been a focal point. The lowest importance score (3.342) and the lowest performance score (3.149) were all assigned to NAVIGATION (I), indicating a generally neutral attitude towards this specific ecosystem service. This might be due to a trade-off between the pragmatic economic utilization of urban rivers and other indirect, environmental, and cultural benefits provided by urban rivers. The standard deviations for the 12 individual ecosystem services revealed a relatively higher dispersion degree pertaining to the performance scores (ranging from 0.969 to 1.207) than that of the importance scores (ranging from 0.709 to 1.011). This result implied that the residents could consistently recognize the importance of urban rivers' ecosystem

16

Cities 94 (2019) 11–23

J. Hua and W.Y. Chen

Fig. 2. Scatter IPA plots for 12 individual ecosystem services of all respondents.

cross-point, suggesting the existence of a large discrepancy between residents' importance rating and performance rating for this particular ecosystem service. Overall, people attach great importance to urban rivers' water quality and natural purification function but are dissatisfied with the constrained capacity of urban rivers to dilute water pollution. On the other hand, this result indicates that local residents are eager to have diverse species return to their urban lives, to learn more about this valuable form of nature, and to have clean rivers in their living environs. Another four ecosystem services were accommodated in quadrant I “Keep up the good work”, including HERITAGE (J), FLOODCONTROL (D), AMENITY (L), and COOLING (K). These four ecosystem services were given both high importance scores and high-performance scores. They are core ecosystem services that have a strong influence on overall satisfaction. In general, the respondents were satisfied with the provision of these important ecosystem services. It is indisputable that urban rivers' heritage value, flooding control, and the cooling effect would not be significantly affected by morphological modifications or river water pollution. Moreover, the ecosystem service of flood control has long been consistently reinforced by engineering expertise within the Pearl River network. Although some empirical evidence suggests that water pollution could diminish urban rivers' amenities (Åberg & Tapsell, 2013; Garcia et al., 2017; Wood & Handley, 1999), our respondents clearly appreciated the unique and dynamic natural beauty and aesthetics provided by urban rivers. This might be associated with the fact that most urban rivers in Guangzhou have riparian vegetation (either naturally developed or deliberately installed), which is a key dimension of positive perception of urban rivers' amenities (such as natural beauty and scenery) (Chen & Li, 2018; Gobster & Westphal, 2004; Vollmer et al., 2016). Only one ecosystem service, RECREATION (H), fell into quadrant II “Possible overkill”. This implied that the provision of recreational opportunities received a relatively low importance score, but a relatively high performance score. This ecosystem service, being a high impact secondary attribute, would also have a strong influence on overall satisfaction. It is interesting to note that local residents are generally satisfied with the provision of this specific ecosystem service. A possible reason for this is that the severe air pollution in many Chinese cities might lower urban residents' expectations towards outdoor recreation at riverine areas (Zhang & Yang, 2014), and thus Guangzhou residents have a minimum requirement for this benefit. Additionally, it may

services, yet a distinct discrepancy exists amongst residents' evaluations of how satisfactory these ecosystem services are provided. The importance ratings for 10 out of 12 ecosystem services were significantly greater than their performance ratings (p < 0.05). For two ecosystem services, business opportunities (G) and being visible elements of cultural heritage to local communities (J), the discrepancies between their importance and performance ratings were statistically insignificant. Significant importance-performance gaps existed in three categories of ecosystem services. The greatest gap (0.565) is associated with environmental services (F2), followed by cultural services (F1) and economic services (F3). These results reveal that Guangzhou residents are primarily dissatisfied with the provision of environmental-related services, which confirms the existence of a wide-spread recognition of the urgency to address environmental problems in rapidly urbanizing China (Ge, Stimpson, & Kwan, 2002; Wong, 2003). 4.3. Mapping of the IPA plots (all respondents) Fig. 2 presents the scatter IPA plots of 12 ecosystem services for all respondents. Four ecosystem services fall into the “Concentrate here” quadrant IV, including BIODIVERSITY (A), IDENTITY (B), PURIFICATION (C), and EDUCATION (E). Being plotted in this quadrant, these ecosystem services were assigned high importance scores but low performance scores, suggesting that they are core ecosystem services but have a relatively weak influence on respondents' overall satisfaction. Guangzhou's rapid urbanization has significantly degraded and homogenized its physical environment, which unavoidably led to reduced biodiversity of both freshwater ecosystems and terrestrial ecosystems (Ge et al., 2002). The high expectation and priority of biodiversity (lush vegetation and diverse wildlife) were consistent with a prior study in Tucson, Arizona (Weber & Ringold, 2015). Residents are reluctant to accept that Guangzhou's previous appealing titles “The City on the Water” (Chen & Li, 2018) and “The Pearl on The River” have been used less frequently due to urban river degradation and contamination. This sense of identity and attachment to urban streams was also highly valued by residents in the Besòs River Basin (Catalonia, Spain) (Garcia et al., 2017). Additionally, the rivers are supposed to provide broad opportunities for public education about biology, ecology, engineering, environment, and history. However, there is a general lack of such educational programs for the public. The self-cleaning capacity of Guangzhou's urban rivers (PURIFICATION) was the farthest from the 17

Cities 94 (2019) 11–23

J. Hua and W.Y. Chen

reflect that the provision of recreational opportunities might be overemphasized and over-provided in recent urban river restoration, and people would prefer to have natural rivers return to their cities, instead of adding man-made elements. A recent comparative study on residents' preferences for urban river restoration between Guangzhou and Brussels (Belgium) revealed that residents from both cities preferred to have better biodiversity and pristine naturalness, rather than the provision of recreational facilities (Chen et al., 2018). Clearly, urban residents tend to make a trade-off between biodiversity and recreational potential. All three economic services, including NAVIGATION (I), BUSINESS (G), and WATERSUPPLY (F), were located in the “Low priority” quadrant III (with low importance and low performance). On the one hand, this result was consistent with empirical findings that people pay more attention to intangible cultural and environmental benefits (Stepniewska & Sobczak, 2017; Vollmer et al., 2016), rather than direct economic benefits, of urban rivers. For example, the low importance score of NAVIGATION reflects the fact that Guangzhou's inland waterway transport over the Pearl River has been largely replaced by road and railway transport in the past three decades (Li et al., 2017). Guangzhou's citizens clearly understand that heavy navigation and business activities might affect water quality and river ecology, and thus assign a low priority to these economic benefits. Unlike residents of Tucson (within the Santa Cruz River watershed, Arizona) who expressed remarkable concern about water supply and water security (Weber & Ringold, 2015), the little attention given to WATERSUPPLY by Guangzhou residents might be due to the contrasting hydrological characteristics between the Pearl River Basin (humid region, with > 1800 mm of annual rainfall in Guangzhou) and the Santa Cruz River watershed (arid desert basin, with < 300 mm of annual rainfall in Tucson), and the Pearl River is the second-largest by water volume in China (after the Yangtze River). On the other hand, their low performance scores suggested that much opportunity exists for improving the provision of these ecosystem services.

notably lower performance ratings than non-locals (those without Guangzhou's hukou). While the average importance scores given by both local and non-local respondents were quite similar (3.878 from non-locals, 3.842 from locals), the average performance scores were discrepant, with locals at 3.374 and non-locals at 3.634. In China, whether or not a person holds an official household registration record (hukou) of a city would determine his or her rights of access to numerous benefits and opportunities, such as housing, education, and medical services (Afridi, Li, & Ren, 2015; Song, 2014). Consequently, locals are usually more bonded to the place in which they are residing than are non-locals (Afridi et al., 2015; Hernández, Hidalgo, SalazarLaplace, & Hess, 2007). Our results confirmed that all residents had similar attitudes towards the importance of urban rivers' ecosystem services. However, local residents tended to hold higher expectations and were more dissatisfied about provision performance than non-local residents, which was in accordance with a recent finding that neighborhood environmental conditions (such as landscape setting and cleanliness, which determine the effectiveness of ecosystem services provision) would not affect the subjective well-being of new migrants (without local hukou) in Guangzhou (Liu, Zhang, Wu, Liu, & Li, 2017). Our result implies that people's emotional bonds with, and psychological cognitions of belonging to, their residing environment (place attachment) could affect whether they are happy with ecosystem services actually provided by urban rivers (performance, which might lead to potential demands, and be able to transcend into pro-environmental activities), but would insignificantly affect their perceptions about the importance of various ecosystem services. The relative importance of various ecosystem services might be more associated with respondents' ecological knowledge and awareness (Rey-Valette et al., 2017) and social context (Cebrián-Piqueras, Karrasch, & Kleyer, 2017; Chen & Hua, 2017). It is worth noting that three ecosystem services fell into different quadrants between locals and non-locals, including BIODIVERSITY (A), EDUCATION (E), and RECREATION (H). BIODIVERSITY and EDUCATION were located in the “Low priority” quadrant by non-local respondents, but the “Concentrate here” quadrant by local respondents. Local residents are satisfied with the recreational opportunities (the quadrant “Keep up the good work”), but non-locals believe that there are too many recreational opportunities (the quadrant “Possible overkill”). Most non-local residents are migrants from rural areas where more natural landscapes are well maintained. Consequently, they have had extensive opportunities to contact and enjoy diverse nature before they moved to Guangzhou. Their temporary residential status and loose attachment to the city give them little motivation to be concerned about these ecosystem services. The low importance and high performance of RECREATION for non-local respondents might also indicate that nonlocals gain less well-being from urban rivers' recreational opportunities than locals. Therefore, they may neglect the importance of this specific ecosystem service because, although there are sufficient recreational facilities along Guangzhou's urban rivers, non-local residents might not be able to use them frequently.

4.4. Mapping of the IPA plots: local vs. non-local residents Fig. 3 displays the scatter IPA plots for the 12 individual ecosystem services with regard to local and non-local resident segments. Overall, local residents (those respondents who hold Guangzhou's hukou) gave

4.5. Mapping the IPA plots: resident segments by administrative demarcation Figs. 4 and 5 illustrate the different importance-performance scores associated with respondents' residential districts. Overall, residents from different administrative districts gave consistent important scores (Tianhe at 3.783, Haizhu at 3.889, and Liwan-Yuexiu at 3.890), but quite divergent performance scores for urban rivers' ecosystem services. Haizhu residents gave the highest performance score (3.655), followed by Liwan-Yuexiu (3.555), and Tianhe (3.245), suggesting an overall satisfaction of Haizhu and Liwan-Yuexiu residents, but a not very satisfactory attitude of Tianhe residents towards urban rivers' provision of ecosystem services. A possible reason for the satisfaction of Haizhu and Liwan-Yuexiu residents is that many river restoration projects have

Fig. 3. Scatter IPA plots for 12 individual ecosystem services: local vs. non-local residents. 18

Cities 94 (2019) 11–23

J. Hua and W.Y. Chen

biodiversity and local identity, leading to dissatisfaction with the provision of these two specific ecosystem services. Also, severe river water pollution (no restored stretches), together with new plantings in riparian areas (usually dominated by herbaceous covers and small trees), would diminish the cooling effect that is highly valued on Guangzhou's hot summer days. 4.6. Mapping the IPA plots: three categories of ecosystem services Fig. 6 presents the scatter IPA plots for three categories of ecosystem services, with discrepancies between local and non-local resident segments. Overall, the ecosystem services in the economic domain received relatively low importance and performance scores. The other two categories, cultural and environmental services, were all located in the “high importance and high performance” quadrant, indicating general satisfaction with the provision of these ecosystem services. Both locals and non-locals perceived the economic dimension of urban rivers' ecosystem services as “low importance and low performance”, and the cultural dimension as “high importance and high performance”, indicating a similar satisfaction with these two categories of ecosystem services. A distinct difference was that locals tended to accept the performance of environmental-related ecosystem services, whereas non-locals were the opposite, i.e., they assigned a relatively low score to the environmental performance of Guangzhou's urban rivers. Fig. 7 shows the IPA plots for three categories of ecosystem services, with comparisons of administrative segments. Respondents' residential region would not affect their perceptions of the importance and performance of both economic and cultural services, expect for Haizhu respondents' perception of environmental services. The environmentalrelated services in Haizhu's rivers were considered poorly provided and were the first priority for improvement.

Fig. 4. Scatter IPA plots for 12 individual ecosystem services: respondent segments by administrative demarcation.

been completed recently (such as the Liwan Stream in Liwan, the Donghao Stream in Yuexiu, and the Tuhua Stream in Haizhu). The consequent restoration and enhancement of various ecosystem services (such as riparian greening, water quality improvement, and biodiversity enhancement), constituting living exemplars of what “clean and natural” urban rivers will provide and acting as facilitators of urban residents' evaluation of urban rivers' performance, can meet demand from local residents. On the other hand, the relatively low performance score given by Tianhe residents might also reflect their high expectations for urban rivers' ecosystem services provision. With regard to the IPA plotting of individual ecosystem services, all respondents assigned high priority to PURIFICATION (C) (high importance, but low performance) and low priority (low importance and low performance) to all three economy-related services, including WATERSUPPLY (F), BUSINESS (G), and NAVIGATION (I). Some differences associated with the segmentation of respondents' living environs can also be observed. Haizhu respondents assigned BIODIVERSITY (A), IDENTITY (B), and EDUCATION (E) into the “Low priority” quadrant, while Liwan-Yuxiu respondents felt that these ecosystem services were important but indicated low satisfaction (low performance score) with their delivery. Moreover, while Tianhe respondents exhibited similar dissatisfaction with the provision of BIODIVERSITY (A) and IDENTITY (B), they tended to be satisfied with the provision of important educational opportunities (E) associated with urban rivers. Additionally, both Haizhu and Liwan-Yuexiu respondents attached slight importance to RECREATION (H) and might regard it as overprovided (in the “Possible overkill” quadrant). Tianhe residents were satisfied with this ecosystem service (high importance and high performance scores). All respondents considered BUSINESS (G) to be slightly important, yet Tianhe respondents were satisfied with its performance, and respondents from the other two regions were not. While all respondents believed that urban rivers' cooling function (K) is very important, Tianhe respondents were not satisfied with this ecosystem service, whereas all of the others tended to be quite satisfied. These heterogeneous perceptions about the provision of ecosystem services associated with the segmentation of respondents' living region might reflect the influence of urban rivers' bio-morphological conditions. For example, in Tianhe (a newly urbanized region), rapid urbanization has homogenized the urban landscape, which resulted in a loss of

4.7. Prioritization of ecosystem services provision Relying on both the IPA plots and the improvement index, which provide an accurate picture of actual potentials for improvements to satisfy residents' needs, prioritization of ecosystem services provision is listed in Table 5. Overall, the provision of ecosystem services located in quadrant IV should be prioritized, although small variations existed between locals and non-locals, as well as amongst respondents from different administrative districts. Particularly, PURIFICATION (C), which could strongly affect river water quality, should be prioritized, as it was ranked first amongst all ecosystem services by all respondents, irrespective of respondents' hukou status and residing environment. Additionally, the cultural and heritage importance (J) of urban rivers in Guangzhou, which was consistently accorded a low ranking in the importance index, should not be over-prioritized, although it was located in quadrant I and thus might affect residents' overall satisfaction with urban rivers as a high-impact core ecosystem service. Concerning the three categories of ecosystem services, environmental-related services should be prioritized, which were selected as those most requiring improvements by all respondents, irrespective of respondents' hukou status and residing environment. To enhance the overall satisfaction of local residents, more attention should be paid to biodiversity enrichment and natural education during river restoration. For non-local residents, improvement of cooling function and flooding control could increase this group of new migrants' environmental welfare and life satisfaction, thereby increasing their aspiration to pursue a better life in Guangzhou. Considering administrative segmentation, providing more educational programs and enhancing biodiversity in Haizhu and Liwan-Yuexiu (districts with a long development history, and thus deprivation of diverse natural elements) could not only improve residents' overall satisfaction with urban rivers, but also augment their recognition of diverse ecosystem services delivered by urban rivers flowing through their residing neighborhoods. 19

Cities 94 (2019) 11–23

J. Hua and W.Y. Chen

Fig. 5. Ranking of improvement index 12 individual ecosystem services: respondent segments by administrative demarcation.

Moreover, urban rivers' cooling function should be prioritized in Haizhu, which was ranked second in Haizhu, but only sixth in the other two regions. Another notable difference is that, for Tianhe residents, construction or re-formation of a unique local identity associated with urban rivers (ranked second) could help them to acquire a sense of belonging and emotional attachment to this newly urbanized district as an important aspect of spiritual wellness (Mohabir, Jiang, & Ma, 2017), which might have been gradually lost in the process of rapid urbanization (Liu, He, Wu, & Webster, 2010). It is, however, a key influential factor for social responsibility and active engagement in curating the natural landscape in their lives to serve their needs (Gorgul, Luo, Wei, & Pei, 2017).

gaps between local communities' perceived importance and performance of ecosystem services delivered by urban rivers in Guangzhou (south China). The IPA plot and the improvement index provide an accurate picture of opportunities for the improvement and prioritization of ecosystem services to satisfy the respective target groups' needs (Spangenberg et al., 2015). Our survey results demonstrate that, overall, within the study area of Guangzhou, residents accorded high importance to urban rivers' ecosystem services yet exhibited slightly less satisfaction towards the provision of these ecosystem services. Notable importance-performance gaps were detected for 10 out of 12 ecosystem services, and citizens were generally satisfied with business opportunities brought by urban rivers and their heritage value. While all residents could explicitly recognize the importance of urban rivers' ecosystem services, local residents, in comparison with non-locals, were more dissatisfied with provision performance due to their stronger place attachment. Residents' living environs, where urban rivers manifest varying biomorphological conditions, could also affect their satisfaction with ecosystem services provision. The enhancement of water purification, which would be crucial for other ecosystem services, should be prioritized, as it was ranked first amongst all ecosystem services by all respondents, irrespective of respondents' hukou status and residing environment. This result demonstrates that these citizens fully realized

5. Conclusion Despite the increasing conceptual role that ecosystem services play in academic literature and policy dialogue in both developed and developing countries, practical tools to understand citizens' various nuanced satisfaction and expectations towards diverse ecosystem services – so as to inform public policy – remain limited (PattisonWilliams, Yang, Liu, & Gabor, 2017; Spangenberg et al., 2015; Zulian et al., 2018). This study constitutes a pioneer work by using the IPA – a useful tool that is widely employed in market analysis – to estimate the 20

that good water quality underpins the provision of many ecosystem services (such as recreation, water supply, amenities, etc.), which was consistent with empirical findings that water quality improvement is a major driving force of river restoration and an indicator of status recovery (Chen et al., 2018; Viswanathan & Schirmer, 2015). This study falls within the challenging application of ecosystem services conceptual framework to support decision-making processes. The IPA can serve as a novel, yet easily applicable, tool for policymakers and urban river managers to facilitate context- and stakeholderspecific prioritization of ecosystem services improvements, as they optimize the use of available resources in river restoration, or other environmental projects aiming at resurrecting the provision of an array of ecosystem services. The importance-performance gaps likely impact perceivers' satisfaction with ecosystem services and willingness to

21

0.227 0.565 0.000

Ecosystem services categories F1 Cultural I F2 Environmental I F3 Economic III 2 1 3

5 3 1 2 4 8 10 9 11 12 6 7 I I III

IV IV IV I IV III III I III I I I 0.374 0.627 0.000

0.457 0.381 1.000 0.374 0.420 0.134 0.043 0.295 0.000 0.033 0.301 0.373

Ii

2 1 3

2 4 1 5 3 9 10 8 12 11 7 6

Ranking

I IV III

III IV IV I III III III II III I I I

Quad

0.111 0.492 0.000

0.118 0.194 0.937 0.213 0.155 0.076 0.000 −0.026 0.003 −0.028 0.195 0.104

Ii

Non-locals

2 1 3

6 4 1 2 5 8 10 11 9 12 3 7

Ranking

Note: Quad I: Keep up the good work; Quad II: Possible overkill; Quad III: Low priority; Quad IV: Concentrate here.

0.277 0.288 0.971 0.296 0.286 0.107 0.005 0.089 0.000 0.000 0.249 0.234

BIODIVERSITY IDENTITY PURIFICATION FLOODCONTROL EDUCATION WATERSUPPLY BUSINESS RECREATION NAVIGATION HERITAGE COOLING AMENITY

IV IV IV I IV III III II III I I I

A B C D E F G H I J K L

Quad

Quad

Ii

Locals Ranking

Fig. 7. Scatter IPA plots for three categories of ecosystem services: respondent segments by administrative demarcation.

All respondents

I I III

IV IV IV I IV III III II III I I I

Quad

0.186 0.541 0.000

0.259 0.254 1.000 0.246 0.347 0.145 0.004 0.064 0.000 −0.031 0.182 0.150

Ii

Liwan-Yuexiu

Fig. 6. Scatter IPA plots for three categories of ecosystem services: local vs. non-local residents.

Ecosystem services

Table 5 Prioritization of ecosystem services provision.

2 1 3

3 4 1 5 2 8 10 9 11 12 6 7

Ranking

I I III

IV IV IV I I III II I III I IV I

Quad

Tianhe

0.399 0.693 0.000

0.473 0.600 0.987 0.541 0.354 0.091 0.072 0.284 0.000 0.122 0.438 0.511

Ii

2 1 3

5 2 1 3 7 10 11 8 12 9 6 4

Ranking

I IV III

III III IV I III III III II III I I I

Quad

Haizhu

0.116 0.472 0.000

0.151 0.111 0.912 0.168 0.151 0.069 −0.002 −0.005 0.000 −0.046 0.176 0.142

Ii

2 1 3

5 7 1 3 4 8 10 11 9 12 2 6

Ranking

J. Hua and W.Y. Chen

Cities 94 (2019) 11–23

Cities 94 (2019) 11–23

J. Hua and W.Y. Chen

support cognate intervention initiatives. This bi-dimensional framework can provide a mechanism for decision-makers and practitioners to communicate effectively with different social groups holding diverging expectations and satisfaction, and incorporate them as active contributors rather than passive users, which is essential in order to curate urban spaces enjoyed and appreciated by diverse social groups via an inclusive and participatory urban planning and urban ecosystem governance. By this means, other relevant sectors (such as water supply and drainage) can also be informed, and thus holistic inter-sectoral planning can be facilitated. Nevertheless, as the supply and demand of various types of ecosystem services from urban rivers will continually evolve due to changing climatic, as well as socio-demographic and landuse conditions, further studies that investigate dynamic feedback in coupled human and natural systems across varying spatial and temporal scales should be considered vital (Larondelle & Lauf, 2016; Yeakley et al., 2016).

Chen, W. Y. (2017). Environmental externalities of urban river pollution and restoration: A hedonic analysis in Guangzhou (China). Landscape and Urban Planning, 157, 170–179. Chen, W. Y., Aertsens, J., Liekens, I., Broekx, S., & De Nocker, L. (2014). Impact of perceived importance of ecosystem services and stated financial constraints on willingness to pay for riparian meadow restoration in Flanders (Belgium). Environmental Management, 54, 346–359. Chen, W. Y., & Hua, J. (2017). Heterogeneity in resident perception of a bio-cultural heritage in Hong Kong: A latent class factor analysis. Ecosystem Services, 24, 170–179. Chen, W. Y., Hua, J., Liekens, I., & Broekx, S. (2018). Preference heterogeneity and scale heterogeneity in urban river restoration: A comparative study between Brussels and Guangzhou using discrete choice experiments. Landscape and Urban Planning, 173, 9–22. Chen, W. Y., & Li, X. (2018). Impacts of urban stream pollution: A comparative spatial hedonic study of high-rise residential buildings in Guangzhou, south China. The Geographical Journal, 184, 283–297. Collier, C. A., de Almeida Neto, M. S., Aretakis, G. M. A., Santos, R. E., de Oliveira, T. H., Mouräo, J. S., ... El-Deir, A. C. A. (2015). Integrated approach to the understanding of the degradation of an urban river: Local perceptions, environmental parameters and geoprocessing. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, 11, 69. Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10, 1–9. Daily, G. C., & Matson, P. A. (2008). Ecosystem services: From theory to implementation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105, 9455–9456. Delibas, M., & Tezer, A. (2017). ‘Stream Daylighting’ as an approach for the renaturalization of riverine systems in urban areas: Istanbul-Ayamama Stream case. Ecohydrology & Hydrobiology, 17, 18–32. Doherty, E., Murphy, G., Hynes, S., & Buckley, C. (2014). Valuing ecosystem services across water bodies: Results from a discrete choice experiment. Ecosystem Services, 7, 89–97. Dong, Y., & Mei, Y. (2010). Influence of urbanization on the surface water quality in Guangzhou, China. Wuhan University Journal of Natural Sciences, 15(0), 78–084. Eskildsen, J. K., & Kristensen, K. (2006). Enhancing importance-performance analysis. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 55, 40–60. Everard, M., & Moggridge, H. L. (2012). Rediscovering the value of urban rivers. Urban Ecosystems, 15, 293–314. Fabrigar, L. R., & Wegener, D. T. (2011). Exploratory factor analysis. New York: Oxford University Press. Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS: Introducing statistical method (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Garcia, X., Barceló, D., Comas, J., Corominas, L., Hadjimichael, A., Page, T. J., & Acuña, V. (2016). Placing ecosystem services at the heart of urban water systems management. Science of the Total Environment, 563, 1078–1085. Garcia, X., Benages-Albert, M., Pavón, D., Ribas, A., Garcia-Aymerich, J., & Vall-Casas, P. (2017). Public participation GIS for assessing landscape values and improvement preferences in urban stream corridors. Applied Geography, 87, 184–196. Ge, C., Stimpson, P., & Kwan, W. B. (2002). China-Guangzhou. In J. Fien, D. Yencken, & H. Sykes (Vol. Eds.), Young people and the environment: An Asia-Pacific perspective. Vol 1. Young people and the environment: An Asia-Pacific perspective (pp. 23–37). Dordrecht: Springer. Germer, N. V., Nafo, I., Winking, C., Wencki, K., Strehl, C., Wortberg, T., ... Birk, S. (2018). Large-scale river restoration pays off: A case study of ecosystem service valuation for the Emscher restoration generation project. Ecosystem Services, 30, 327–338. Gobster, P. H., & Westphal, L. M. (2004). The human dimensions of urban greenways: Planning for recreation and related experiences. Landscape and Urban Planning, 68, 147–165. Gorgul, E., Luo, L., Wei, S., & Pei, C. D. (2017). Sense of place or sense of belonging? Developing guidelines for human-centered outdoor spaces in China that citizens can be proud of. Procedia Engineering, 198, 517–524. Grizzetti, B., Lanzanova, D., Liquete, C., Reynaud, A., & Cardoso, A. C. (2016). Assessing water ecosystem services for water resource management. Environmental Science & Policy, 61, 194–203. de Groot, R., Fisher, B., Christie, M., Aronson, J., Braat, L., Gowdy, J., ... Ring, I. (2010). Integrating the ecological and economic dimensions in biodiversity and ecosystem service valuation. In P. Kumar (Ed.). The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: The ecological and economic foundations (pp. 1–40). London: Earthscan. Guadagnolo, F. (1985). The importance-performance analysis: An evaluation and marketing tool. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 3, 13–22. Guangzhou Environmental Monitoring Center (2015). Annual report on the water quality of major tributaries the Pearl River. Guangzhou Institute of Water Planning and Design (2017). Guangzhou River network planning. Guangzhou Statistical Bureau (2012). Tabulation on the 2010 population census of Guangzhou municipality. Beijing: China Statistics Press. Guangzhou Statistical Bureau (2016). Guangzhou statistical yearbook. Beijing: China Statistics Press. Hernández, B., Hidalgo, M. C., Salazar-Laplace, M. E., & Hess, S. (2007). Place attachment and place identity in natives and non-natives. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27, 310–319. Honey-Rosés, J., Acuña, V., Bardina, M., Brozović, N., Marcé, R., Munné, A., ... Schneider, D. M. (2013). Examining the demand for ecosystem services: The value of stream restoration for drinking water treatment managers in the Llobregat River, Spain. Ecological Economics, 90, 196–205.

Acknowledgments The authors gratefully acknowledge two General Research Funds from the Research Grants Council, University Grants Committee of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKU759413H and 17252416). We thank Environment Brussels and the Guangzhou Environment Protection Science Institute for their valuable inputs and the surveys. We are also grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments. References Abalo, J., Varela, J., & Manzano, V. (2007). Importance values for importance–performance analysis: A formula for spreading out values derived from preference rankings. Journal of Business Research, 60, 115–121. Åberg, E. U., & Tapsell, S. (2013). Revisiting the River Skerne: The long-term social benefits of river rehabilitation. Landscape and Urban Planning, 113, 94–103. Affek, A. N., & Kowalska, A. (2017). Ecosystem potentials to provide services in the view of direct users. Ecosystem Services, 26, 183–196. Afridi, F., Li, S. X., & Ren, Y. (2015). Social identity and inequality: The impact of China's hukou system. Journal of Public Economics, 123, 17–29. Azzopardi, E., & Nash, R. (2013). A critical evaluation of importance–performance analysis. Tourism Management, 35, 222–233. Backlund, E. A., Stewart, W. P., McDonald, C., & Miller, C. (2004). Public evaluation of open space in Illinois: Citizen support for natural area acquisition. Environmental Management, 34, 634–641. Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A note on multiplying factors for various chi square approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 16, 296–298. Bishop, G. F., Tuchfarber, A. J., & Oldendick, R. W. (1986). Opinions on fictitious issues: The pressure to answer survey questions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 50, 240–250. Black, T. R. (1999). Doing quantitative research in the social sciences: An integrated approach to research design, measurement and statistics. London: SAGE. Boley, B. B., McGehee, N. G., & Hammett, A. T. (2017). Importance-performance analysis (IPA) of sustainable tourism initiatives: The resident perspective. Tourism Management, 58, 66–77. Brill, G., Anderson, P., & O'Farrell, P. (2017). Methodological and empirical considerations when assessing freshwater ecosystem service provision in a developing city context: Making the best of what we have. Ecological Indicators, 76, 256–274. Brun, A. (2015). The “renaturation” of urban rivers: The case of the St Charles River in Quebec. In Q. Grafton, K. Daniell, C. Nauges, J. D. Rinaudo, & N. Chan (Vol. Eds.), Understanding and managing urban water in transition. Global issues in water policy. Vol 15. Understanding and managing urban water in transition. Global issues in water policy (pp. 527–548). Dordrecht: Springer. Bruyere, B. L., Rodriguez, D. A., & Vaske, J. J. (2002). Enhancing importance-performance analysis through segmentation. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 12, 81–95. Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Nedkov, S., & Müller, F. (2014). Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecological Indicators, 21, 17–29. Castro, A. J., Martín-López, B., García-Llorente, M., Aguilera, P. A., López, E., & Cabello, J. (2011). Social preferences regarding the delivery of ecosystem services in a semiarid Mediterranean region. Journal of Arid Environments, 75, 1201–1208. Castro, A. J., Martín-López, B., López, E., Plieninger, T., Alcaraz-Segura, D., Vaughn, C. C., & Cabello, J. (2015). Do protected areas networks ensure the supply of ecosystem services? Spatial patterns of two nature reserve systems in semi-arid Spain. Applied Geography, 60, 1–9. Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245–276. Cebrián-Piqueras, M. A., Karrasch, L., & Kleyer, M. (2017). Coupling stakeholder assessments of ecosystem services by biophysical ecosystem properties reveals importance of social contexts. Ecosystem Services, 23, 108–115.

22

Cities 94 (2019) 11–23

J. Hua and W.Y. Chen

services based on stakeholders perceptions: The Rapid Ecosystem Services Participatory Appraisal (RESPA). Ecosystem Services, 28, 311–319. Sever, I. (2015). Importance-performance analysis: A valid management tool? Tourism Management, 48, 43–53. Shen, J., & Kee, G. (2017). Development and planning in seven major coastal cities in Southern and Eastern China. Cham: Springer. Small, N., Munday, M., & Durance, I. (2017). The challenge of valuing ecosystem services that have no material benefits. Global Environmental Change, 44, 57–67. Smith, H. F., & Sullivan, C. A. (2014). Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions. Ecological Economics, 98, 72–80. Song, Y. (2014). What should economists know about the current Chinese huhou system? China Economic Review, 29, 200–212. Spangenberg, J. H., Görg, C., & Settele, J. (2015). Stakeholder involvement in ESS research and governance: Between conceptual ambition and practical experiencesricks, challenges and tested tools. Ecosystem Services, 16, 201–211. StataCorp (2015). Stata statistical software: Release 14. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP. Stepniewska, M., & Sobczak, U. (2017). Assessing the synergies and trade-offs between ecosystem services provided by urban floodplains: The case of the Warta River Valley in Poznań, Poland. Land Use Policy, 69, 238–246. Swapan, M. S. H., Iftekhar, M. S., & Li, X. (2017). Contextual variations in perceived social values of ecosystem services of urban parks: A comparative study of China and Australia. Cities, 61, 17–26. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Pearson Education. Taplin, R. H. (2012). Competitive importance-performance analysis of an Australian wildlife park. Tourism Management, 33, 29–37. Triguero, A., Álvarez-Aledo, C., & Cuerva, M. C. (2016). Factors influencing willingness to accept different waste management policies: Empirical evidence from the European Union. Journal of Cleaner Production, 138, 38–46. Turner, R. K., & Daily, G. C. (2008). The ecosystem services framework and natural capital conservation. Environmental and Resource Economics, 39, 25–35. Viswanathan, V. C., & Schirmer, M. (2015). Water quality deterioration as a driver for river restoration: A review of case studies from Asia, Europe and North America. Environmental Earth Sciences, 74, 3145–3158. Voigt, A., & Wurster, D. (2015). Does diversity matter? The experience of urban nature's diversity: Case study and cultural concept. Ecosystem Services, 12, 200–208. Vollmer, D., Ryffel, A. N., Djaja, K., & Grêt-Regamey, A. (2016). Examining demand for urban river rehabilitation in Indonesia: Insights from a spatially explicit discrete choice experiment. Land Use Policy, 57, 514–525. Walsh, C. J. (2005). The urban stream syndrome: Current knowledge and the search for a cure. Journal of North American Benthological Society, 24, 706–723. Wang, T., Liu, S., Qian, X., Shimizu, T., Dente, S. M. R., Hashimoto, S., & Nakajima, J. (2017). Assessment of the municipal water cycle in China. Science of the Total Environment, 607-608, 761–770. Wang, M. Y. L., & Maino, J. (2015). How China's “floating population” floats: Recent patterns in migrant workers' spatial mobility and destination choice. In T. C. Wong, S. Han, & H. Zhang (Eds.). Population mobility, urban planning and Management in China (pp. 55–71). New York: Springer. Weber, M. A., & Ringold, P. L. (2015). Priority river metrics for residents of an urbanized arid watershed. Landscape and Urban Planning, 133, 37–52. Wong, K. K. (2003). The environmental awareness of university students in Beijing, China. Journal of Contemporary China, 12, 519–536. Wood, R., & Handley, J. (1999). Urban waterfront regeneration in the Mersey Basin, North West England. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 42, 565–580. Xiong, Y., Huang, S., Chen, F., Ye, H., Wang, C., & Zhu, C. (2012). The impacts of rapid urbanization on the thermal environment: A remote sensing study of Guangzhou, South China. Remote Sensing, 4, 2033–2056. Xu, Z. (2014). River's story-the historical evolution of the river system landscape of Guangzhou old city. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 4, 51–55. Xu, H., Du, Y., Cui, C., & Wei, C. (2009). Structure and function based approaches to reconstructing urban river system in river network area of China. Advances in water resources and hydraulic engineering-proceedings of 16th IAHR-APD congress and 3rd symposium of IAHR-ISHS (pp. 399–404). . Yeakley, J. A., Ervin, D., Chang, H., Granek, E. F., Dujon, V., Shandas, V., & Brown, D. (2016). Ecosystem services of streams and rivers. In D. J. Gilvear, M. T. Greenwood, M. C. Thoms, & P. J. Wood (Eds.). River science: Research and management for the 21st century (pp. 335–352). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. Zeng, W., Lao, X., Rutherford, S., Xu, Y., Xu, X., Lin, H., ... Chu, C. (2014). The effect of heat waves on mortality and effect modifiers in four communities of Guangdong Province, China. Science of the Total Environment, 482, 214–221. Zhang, W., Kato, E., Bhandary, P., Nkonya, E., Ibrahim, H. I., Agbonlahor, M., ... Cox, C. (2016). Awareness and perceptions of ecosystem services in relation to land use types: Evidence from rural communities in Nigeria. Ecosystem Services, 22, 150–160. Zhang, C., Liu, X., Wu, D., Liu, G., Tao, L., Fu, W., & Hou, J. (2014). Teratogenic effects of organic extracts from the Pearl River sediments on Xenopus laevis embryos. Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology, 37, 202–209. Zhang, W., & Yang, J. (2014). Development of outdoor recreation in Beijing, China between 1990 and 2010. Cities, 37, 57–65. Zulian, G., Stange, E., Woods, H., Carvalho, L., Dick, J., Andrews, C., ... Viinikka, A. (2018). Practical application of spatial ecosystem service models to aid decision support. Ecosystem Services, 29, 465–480.

Huang, L., Han, Y., Zhou, Y., Gutscher, H., & Bi, J. (2013). How do the Chinese perceive ecological risk in freshwater lakes? PLoS One, 8, e62486. Jiang, Y., Shi, T., & Gu, X. (2016). Healthy urban streams: The ecological continuity study of the Suzhou creek corridor in Shanghai. Cities, 59, 80–94. JingLing, L., Yun, L., Liya, S., Zhiguo, C., & Baoqiang, Z. (2010). Public participation in water resources management of Haihe river basin, China: The analysis and evaluation of status quo. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 2, 1750–1758. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31–36. Kremer, P., Andersspn, E., Elmqvist, T., & McPhearson, T. (2015). Advancing the frontier of urban ecosystem services research. Ecosystem Services, 12, 149–151. Lai, I. K. W., & Hitchcock, M. (2015). Importance–performance analysis in tourism: A framework for researchers. Tourism Management, 48, 242–267. Larondelle, N., & Lauf, S. (2016). Balancing demand and supply of multiple urban ecosystem services on different spatial scales. Ecosystem Services, 22, 18–31. Larson, S., Stoeckl, N., Neil, B., & Welters, R. (2013). Using resident perceptions of values associated with the Australian Tropical Rivers to identify policy and management priorities. Ecological Economics, 94, 9–18. Lee, Y. C., Wu, H. H., Hsieh, W. L., Weng, S. J., Hsieh, L. P., & Huang, C. H. (2015). Applying importance-performance analysis to patient safety culture. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, 28, 826–840. Li, X. (2014). Development of China's port logistics. In B. Liu, S. Lee, L. Wang, Y. Xu, & X. Li (Eds.). Contemporary logistics in China (pp. 147–169). Berlin: Springer. Li, J. Y., Notteboom, T. E., & Wang, J. J. (2017). An institutional analysis of the evolution of inland waterway transport and inland ports on the Pearl River. GeoJournal, 82, 867–886. Liu, Y., He, S., Wu, F., & Webster, C. (2010). Urban villages under China's rapid urbanization: Unregulated assets and transitional neighbourhoods. Habitat International, 34, 135–144. Liu, Y., Zhang, F., Wu, F., Liu, Y., & Li, Z. (2017). The subjective wellbeing of migrants in Guangzhou, China: The impacts of the social and physical environment. Cities, 60, 333–342. Lo, A. Y., & Jim, C. Y. (2015). Community attachment and resident attitude toward old masonry walls and associated trees in urban Hong Kong. Cities, 42, 130–141. Lundy, L., & Wade, R. (2011). Integrating sciences to sustain urban ecosystem services. Progress in Physical Geography, 35, 653–669. Marta-Pedroso, C., Freitas, H., & Domingos, T. (2007). Testing for the survey mode effect on contingent valuation data quality: A case study of web-based versus in-person interviews. Ecological Economics, 62, 388–398. Martilla, J. A., & James, J. C. (1977). Importance-performance analysis. The Journal of Marketing, (January), 77–79. McCormick, A., Fisher, K., & Brierley, G. (2015). Quantitative assessment of the relationships among ecological, morphological and aesthetic values in a river rehabilitation initiative. Journal of Environmental Management, 153, 60–67. McLeay, F., Robson, A., & Yusoff, M. (2017). New applications for importance-performance analysis (IPA) in higher education: Understanding student satisfaction. Journal of Management Development, 36, 780–800. Mensah, S., Veldtman, R., Assogbadjo, A. E., Ham, C., Kakaї, R. G., & Seifert, T. (2017). Ecosystem service importance and use vary with socio-environmental factors: A study from household surveys in local communities of South Africa. Ecosystem Services, 23, 1–8. Mohabir, N., Jiang, Y., & Ma, R. (2017). Chinese floating migrants: Rural-urban migrant labourers' intentions to stay or return. Habitat International, 60, 101–110. Mol, A. P. J., & Carter, N. T. (2006). China's environmental governance in transition. Environmental Politics, 15, 149–170. Mountjoy, A. J., Seekamp, E., Davenport, M. A., & Whiles, M. R. (2013). The best laid plans: Community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) group capacity and planning success. Environmental Management, 52, 1547–1561. Myers, J. H., & Alpert, M. I. (1968). Determinant buying attitudes: Meaning and measurement. Journal of Marketing, 32, 13–20. Oh, H. (2001). Revisiting importance–performance analysis. Tourism Management, 22, 617–627. Oliver, R. L. (2010). Satisfaction: A Behavioural perspective on the consumer. New York: M.E. Sharpe. Ou, D., Mak, C. M., & Pan, S. (2017). A method for assessing soundscape in urban parks based on the service quality measurement models. Applied Acoustics, 127, 184–193. Pattison-Williams, J. K., Yang, W., Liu, Y., & Gabor, S. (2017). Riparian wetland conservation: A case study of phosphorous and social return on investment in the Black River watershed. Ecosystem Services, 26, 400–410. Paul, M. J., & Meyer, J. L. (2001). Streams in the urban landscape. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 32, 333–365. Polizzi, C., Simonetto, M., Barausse, A., Chaniotou, N., Känkänen, R., Keränen, S., Manzardo, A., Mustajärvi, K., Palmeri, L., and Scipioni, A. (2015) Is ecosystem restoration worth the effort? The rehabilitation of a Finnish river affects recreational ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services 14: 158–169. Ren, N., Wang, Q., Wang, Q., Huang, H., & Wang, X. (2017). Upgrading to urban water system 3.0 through sponge city construction. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 11, 9. Reyers, B., Biggs, R., Cumming, G. S., Elmqvist, T., Hejnowicz, A. P., & Polasky, S. (2013). Getting the measure of ecosystem services: A social-ecological approach. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 11, 268–273. Rey-Valette, H., Mathé, S., & Salles, J. M. (2017). An assessment method of ecosystem

23