INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND SCIENCE EDUCATION
Research Article
Jan 01, 2021 845 381

Present and Future Perception of Urban and Suburban Riverscapes from Drawings Made by Children and Adolescents

Ana Faggi 1 * ,
Nora Madanes 2,
Virginia Diaz Villa 2,
Sophie Eisenreich 3,
Jürgen Breuste 3
1 Flores University, Buenos Aires, ARGENTINA2 Buenos Aires University, ARGENTINA3 Salzburg University, AUSTRIA* Corresponding Author
Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 2021, 17(2), e2235, https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/9334
Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study is to reveal how children portray their relationships with a nearby riverscape. We studied the differences in environmental perception by analyzing drawings at two scales: urban vs. suburban and present state vs. future visions. A total of 118 children, aged nine to 13, were asked to draw pictures of their neighboring river landscape. The elements represented were classified in four categories: biotic, abiotic, recreation and infrastructure and were analyzed using a generalized linear model. The results showed that the children perceived the current landscape as a contaminated space. The elements like garbage and dead animals were very relevant. The comparison between urban and suburban sectors showed significant differences in the biotic and infrastructure categories, and such differences were even greater between the present images and future visions. The participants had a strong attachment to nature and highly valued the riverscape as a place for recreation. Research suggests a high level of interest in environmental concern.

KEYWORDS

riverscape contamination perception preservation recreation drawings

CITATION (APA)

Faggi, A., Madanes, N., Diaz Villa, V., Eisenreich, S., & Breuste, J. (2021). Present and Future Perception of Urban and Suburban Riverscapes from Drawings Made by Children and Adolescents. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 17(2), e2235. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/9334
Harvard
Faggi, A., Madanes, N., Diaz Villa, V., Eisenreich, S., and Breuste, J. (2021). Present and Future Perception of Urban and Suburban Riverscapes from Drawings Made by Children and Adolescents. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 17(2), e2235. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/9334
Vancouver
Faggi A, Madanes N, Diaz Villa V, Eisenreich S, Breuste J. Present and Future Perception of Urban and Suburban Riverscapes from Drawings Made by Children and Adolescents. INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED. 2021;17(2):e2235. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/9334
AMA
Faggi A, Madanes N, Diaz Villa V, Eisenreich S, Breuste J. Present and Future Perception of Urban and Suburban Riverscapes from Drawings Made by Children and Adolescents. INTERDISCIP J ENV SCI ED. 2021;17(2), e2235. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/9334
Chicago
Faggi, Ana, Nora Madanes, Virginia Diaz Villa, Sophie Eisenreich, and Jürgen Breuste. "Present and Future Perception of Urban and Suburban Riverscapes from Drawings Made by Children and Adolescents". Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education 2021 17 no. 2 (2021): e2235. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/9334
MLA
Faggi, Ana et al. "Present and Future Perception of Urban and Suburban Riverscapes from Drawings Made by Children and Adolescents". Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, vol. 17, no. 2, 2021, e2235. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/9334

REFERENCES

  1. Akaike, H. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19 (6), 716–723.
  2. Alerby, E. (2000). A way of visualising children’s and young people’s thoughts about the environment: Study of drawings. Environmental Education Research, 6(3), 205-222. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/13504620050076713
  3. Atkinson, C.L., Golladay, S.W., Opsahl, S.P., & Covich, A.P. (2009). Stream discharge and floodplain connections affect seston quality and stable isotopic signatures in a coastal plain stream. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 28(2), 360-370. doi:10.1899/08-102.1
  4. Barraza, L. (1999). Children’s drawings about the environment. Environmental Education Research, 5(1), 49-66, https://doi.org/doi: 10.1080/1350462990050103
  5. Binngießer, J., & Randler, C. (2015). Environmental attitudes “preservation” and“utilization” with pro-animal attitudes. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 10(3), 477-492. https://doi.org/doi: 10.12973/ijese.2015.255a
  6. Bogner, F.X., & Wilhelm, M.G. (1996). Environmental perspectives of pupils. Development of an attitude and behavior scale. The Environmentalist, 16, 95-110. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01325101
  7. Bogner, F.X., & Wiseman, M. (1997). Environmental perception of rural and urban pupils. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17, 111-122. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1997.0046
  8. Bogner, F.X., & Wiseman, M. (1999). Toward measuring adolescent environmental perception. European Psychologist, 4(3), 139-151. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.4.3.139
  9. Bolzan de Campos, C., Castellá Sarriera, J., Costa-dos-Santos, A., Bomfim, Z A., & Fedrizzi, B. (2014). Percepción de la naturaleza por niños de contextos urbano y costero: un análisis de dibujos y palabras clave. [ Children’s perception of nature from urban and coastal contexts: an analysis of drawings and keywords]. Revista Latinoamericana de Medicina Conductual / Latin American Journal of Behavioral. Medicine, 4(1), 31-40.
  10. Breuste, J., & Astner, A. (2017). Which kind of nature is liked in urban context? A case study of SolarCity Linz, Austria. Mitteilungen der Österreichischen Geographischen Gesellschaft, 159, 105-129. https://doi.org/doi: 10.1553/moegg159s1
  11. Breuste, J., & Breuste, I. (2001), Stadtnaturschutz – theoretische Positionen und empirische Befunde zur Nutzung und Akzeptanz von Pflegegrün und Wildnatur in der Stadt Halle/Saale [Urban nature protection – theoretical positions and empirical findings on utilisation and acceptance of maintained green and wilderness in the city Halle/Saale]. In: Geobotanisches Kolloquium, 16, pp. 25–36. Bundesminsterium für Umwelt.
  12. Cheng, J., & Monroe, M. (2012). Connection to Nature: Children’s Affective Attitude Toward Nature. Environment and Behavior – Environmental Behavoir, 44, 31-49. https://doi.org/doi: 10.1177/0013916510385082
  13. Cherem, G. J., & Driver, B. L. (1983). Visitor employed photography: A technique to measure common perceptions of natural environments. Journal of Leisure Research, 15(1), 65–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.1983.11969541
  14. Freeman, C., van Heezik, Y., Stein, A., & Hand, K. (2015). Natural Neighbourhoods for city children: Report on Research Findings University of Ontago, Dunedin ISBN 978-0-473-3
  15. Gómez, N. (1999). Epipelic diatoms from the Matanza-Riachuelo river (Argentina), a highly polluted basin from the pampean plain: Biotic indices and multivariate analysis. Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management, 2(3), 301-309, DOI: 10.1080/146349899086569661872-7. p. 55
  16. Guida‐Johnson, B., Faggi, A. M., & Zuleta, G. A. (2017). Effects of Urban Sprawl on Riparian Vegetation: Is Compact or Dispersed Urbanization Better for Biodiversity? River Research and Applications, 33(6), 959-969 https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.3138
  17. Hinojosa, M. (2013). Percepciones de los niños de la zona de amortiguamiento del Parque Nacional Cerros de Amotape acerca del bosque aledaño [Perceptions of children in the buffer zone of the Cerros de Amotape National Park about the neighboring forest] Revista Latinoamericana de Medicina Conductual, 25, 137-156.
  18. House, M A., & Sangster, E. K. (1991). Public perception of River‐Corridor management. Water and Environment, 5, 312-316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-6593.1991.tb00624.x.
  19. Johnson, M.P. (2001). Environmental impacts of urban sprawl: A survey of the literature and proposed research agenda. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 33, 717–735. doi:10.1068/a3327.
  20. Kalvaitis, D., & Monhardt, R. M. (2012). The architecture of children’s relationships with nature: a phenomenographic investigation seen through drawings and written narratives of elementary students, Environmental Education Research, 18(2), 209-227, https://doi.org/: 10.1080/13504622.2011.598227.
  21. Le Lay, Y.F., Piégay, H., & Rivière-Honegger, A. (2013). Perception of braided river landscapes: Implications for public participation and sustainable management, Journal of Environmental Management, 119, 12.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.01.006,
  22. Liu, S.C., & Lin, H.S. (2015) Exploring undergraduate students’ mental models of the environment: Are they related to environmental affect and behavior? The Journal of Environmental Education, 46(1), 23-40, https://doi.org/: 10.1080/00958964.2014.953021
  23. Melignani, E. (2015). Índice de Calidad de Ribera [Riverbank quality index] In Faggi A. & Breuste J. (Eds.), La cuenca Matanza-Riachuelo: una mirada ambiental para recuperar sus riberas (pp.22-30). Universidad de Flores.
  24. Muñoz-Pedreros, A. (2018). El paisaje virtual un recurso importante y pobremente conservado. [Virtual landscape an important resource poorly conserved] Health and Place. 54, 221-228.https://doi.org/10.1016/10.002.
  25. Nassauer, J. I., Kosek, S. E. & Corry, R. C. (2001). Meeting public expectations with ecological innovation in Riparian landscapes. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 37(6), 1439-1443, https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2001.tb03650.x
  26. Perelman, P., Breuste, J., Madanes, N., Gropper, C., Melignani, E., & Faggi, A. (2012). Use of visitors’ perception in urban reserves in the Buenos Aires metropolis. Urban Ecosystems. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11252-012-0279-7
  27. Plieninger, T., Dijks, S., Oteros-Rozas, E., & Bieling, C. (2013). Assessing, mapping, and quantifying cultural ecosystem services at community level. Land Use Policy. 33. 118-129. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.12.013
  28. Profice, C., Pinheiro, J. Q., Fandi, A. C., & Gome, A. R. (2015). Children’s environmental perception of protected areas in the Atlantic Rainforest PsyEcology. Revista Bilingüe de Psicología Ambiental / Bilingual Journal of Environmental Psychology, 6(3), 328-358.
  29. R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL: https://www.R-project.org/.
  30. Richards, D.R., & Fries, D. A. (2015). A rapid indicator of cultural ecosystem service usage at a fine spatial scale: Content analysis of social media photographs Department. Ecological Indicators, 53, 187-195
  31. Rios, C., & Menezes, I. (2017). I saw a magical garden with flowers that people could not damage!’: Children’s visions of nature and of learning about nature in and out of school, Environmental Education Research, 23(10), 1402-1413, https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2017.1325450
  32. Shepardson, D.P., Wee, B., Priddy, M., & Harbor, J. (2007). Students’ mental models of the environment, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 327-348. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20161
  33. Staples, A.F., Larson, L.R., Worsley, T.E., Green, G. T., & Carroll, J. P. (2019). Effects of an art-based environmental education camp program on the environmental attitudes and awareness of diverse youth. The Journal of Environmental Education, 50(3), 208-222, https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2019.1629382
  34. Sugimoto, K. (2011). Analysis of scenic perception and its spatial tendency: Using digital cameras, GPS loggers, and GIS. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 21, 43-52. https://doi.org /10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.07.010
  35. Sugimoto, K. (2013). Quantitative measurement of visitors’ reactions to the settings in urban parks: Spatial and temporal analysis of photographs. Landscape and Urban Planning 110, 59– 63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.10.004
  36. Tapsell, S. M. (1997). Rivers and river restoration: A child’s‐eye view, Landscape Research, 22(1), 45-65, https://doi.org/: 10.1080/01426399708706500
  37. Tavera Palomino, M. (2015). Percepción ambiental y prácticas en el espacio geográfico de los niños y niñas de 7 a 12 años del asentamiento humano del pueblo libre, Distrito de Belén, Provincia de Maynas, Departamento de Loreto, Perú. Facultad de Ciencias y Letras Humanas. Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú [Environmental perception and practices in the geographical space of boys and girls from 7 to 12 years of age in the human settlement of the free people, District of Belén, Province of Maynas, Department of Loreto, Peru] http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/6488
  38. Taylor, L. G., Clark, A. F., & Gilliland, J. A. (2018).Context matters: Examining children’s perceived barriers to physical activity across varying Canadian environments . Health & Place, 54, 221-228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2018.10.002
  39. Uzunboylu, H., & Evram, G. (2017). Understanding children’s paintings in psychological counseling with children. New Trends and Issues Proceedings on Humanities and Social Sciences, 3, 449-463. https://doi.org: 10.18844/gjhss.v3i3.1621
  40. Zuur, A., Leno, E. N., Walker, N., Saveliev, A. A., & Smith, G. M. (2009). Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R. Springer Science & Business Media. (pp574). ISBN 978-0-387-87458-6

LICENSE

Creative Commons License
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.