How Much Did Urban Park Use Change under the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Comparative Study of Summertime Park Use in 2019 and 2020 in Edinburgh, Scotland

Abstract

The importance of urban parks was highlighted during the COVID-19 pandemic, when a number of restrictions on social gatherings were in place and people's movements were often restricted to their local neighbourhood. This study examined the changes in patterns of park use before and during COVID-19 to understand how the pandemic influenced such use. The methods involved behaviour observation and mapping, to offer a comparison of the use of parks in Edinburgh, Scotland, before and in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings show an overall increase in use of urban parks during COVID-19, as expected, with significantly higher use in social areas, sports and fitness areas, and playground areas. However, while there was an overall increase in people visiting parks with others during COVID, in woodland areas there was an increase in lone visitors. This study shows the importance of parks for socialisation, exercise and children's play, but also for spending time alone in natural areas during COVID-19. The value of urban parks at a time of social disruption, such as the pandemic, is highlighted, and their role in supporting a variety of urban dwellers' needs points to priorities for future park planning, design and management.

Keywords: COVID-19; behaviour observation; change over time; lockdown; park usage; urban parks.

Figure A1

Maps prepared by the authors which contain OS DATA © Crown copyright and database rights, 2020. Numbers on the map indicate the location and sequence of observation zones.

Figure A1

Maps prepared by the authors which contain OS DATA © Crown copyright and database rights, 2020. Numbers on the map indicate the location and sequence of observation zones.

Figure A2

Behaviour maps based on sessions in each park. (Left): 2019; (Right): 2020. Maps prepared by the authors, maps contain OS data © crown copyright and database rights, 2020.

Figure A2

Behaviour maps based on sessions in each park. (Left): 2019; (Right): 2020. Maps prepared by the authors, maps contain OS data © crown copyright and database rights, 2020.

Figure A2

Behaviour maps based on sessions in each park. (Left): 2019; (Right): 2020. Maps prepared by the authors, maps contain OS data © crown copyright and database rights, 2020.

Figure 1

Illustration of selection of parks using Google Maps. Example parks in excluded, lower potential, and higher potential categories. (a) Bloomiehall Park, in the excluded category, satellite image [68]; (b) Liberton Gardens Park, in the lower potential category, satellite image [69]; (c) Victoria Park, in the higher potential category, satellite image [70].

Figure 2

The 10 urban parks selected for behaviour observation and mapping study (map prepared by the authors which contains OS data © crown copyright and database rights, 2020).

Figure 3

Example of completed Behaviour Observation log. Numbers on the map indicate the location and sequence of observation zones (observation log created and filled in by the authors, map prepared by the authors which contains OS data © crown copyright and database rights, 2020).

Figure 4

Calculation of experienced density of people (prepared by the authors).

Figure 5

Example of behaviour maps based on observation sessions in Victoria Park, (a) in 2019 and (b) in 2020 (prepared by the authors, maps contain OS data © crown copyright and database rights, 2020).

Figure 6

Comparison of total number of park users observed across all observation sessions in 2019 and 2020 for each park (data collected and graph prepared by the authors).

Figure 7

Comparison of 2019 and 2020 total park users observed, by age and gender (data collected and graph prepared by the authors).

Figure 8

Comparison of 2019 and 2020 total park users observed, by activity categories (data collected and graph prepared by the authors).

Figure 9

Comparison of 2019 and 2020 distribution of broad activity categories, by age and gender (data collected and graph prepared by the authors).

Figure 10

Comparison of 2019 and 2020 total park users observed, by social categories (data collected and graph prepared by the authors).

Figure 11

Comparison of 2019 and 2020 distribution of social categories in adult visitors, by age and gender (data collected and graph prepared by the authors).

Figure 12

Comparison of 2019 and 2020 average experienced density of people. (a) Including any group members; (b) Excluding any group members (data collected and graph prepared by the authors).

Figure 13

Images from parks to illustrate types of area: (a) Woodland; (b) Playground; (c) Social area; (d) Sports (photographs taken by the authors).