城市野花草甸景观的公众审美偏好^*

Public Aesthetic Preference of Urban Wildflower Meadow Landscape

摘要

【目的】分析公众对野花草甸的审美偏好，为城市野花草甸规划提供依据，以营建契合公众审美的景观。【方法】选取36个植物景观样地，采用美景度评价法(SBE)与层次分析法(AHP)，融合主观偏好与客观权重优势进行综合评价。【结果】1) SBE评价中15个样地得分大于0，整体景观质量中等，优质景观较少；2) AHP准则层权重排序为群落生态性(0.528)>群落观赏性(0.287)>文化含蕴性(0.185)；3) 景观质量综合评价结果为Ⅰ级样地4个(11.1%)、Ⅱ级19个(52.8%)、Ⅲ级12个(33.3%)、Ⅳ级1个(2.8%)，整体质量中等；4) Kendall's W协和系数为0.841(P<0.05)，表明AHP与SBE评价结果具有一致性。【结论】野花草甸景观营建应注重植物适生性、色彩构成与地域特色，优先选用乡土物种，构建低干预、高稳定性的近自然群落，以实现生态与文化效益的协同。未来可加入养护管理强度指标及公众心理感知指标，构建生态-审美-情感多维评价模型，深化对野花草甸审美驱动机制的理解。

Abstract

【Objective】The study analyzes the public's aesthetic preference for wildflower meadows, provide a basis for urban wildflower meadow planning and build a landscape that fits the public's aesthetics. 【Method】Thirty-six plant scape plots are selected and the Scenic Beauty Estimation (SBE) and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) are employed to make a comprehensive evaluation of the plots by integrating subjective preference with objective weights. 【Results】1) Fifteen plots score above 0 in SBE, indicating medium landscape quality with few high-quality landscape; 2) The AHP criterion layer weights are ordered as community ecological value (0.528) > community aesthetic appeal (0.287) > cultural connotation (0.185); 3) The comprehensive landscape evaluation show there are 4 plots of Grade I (11.1%), 19 plots of Grade II (52.8%), 12 plots of Grade Ⅲ (33.3%), and 1 plot of Grade IV (2.8%), indicating a medium quality; and 4) Kendall's W coefficient is 0.841 (P<0.05), indicating the consistency between AHP and SBE. 【Conclusion】Wildflower meadow creation should prioritize plant suitability, color composition, and regional characteristics, and native species should be selected to form near-natural communities of low-intervention and high stability, thereby achieving the coordination of ecological and cultural benefits. In order to deepen the understanding of the aesthetic driving mechanism of wildflower meadow, the maintenance management intensity index and the public psychological perception index are added to construct the ecological-aesthetic-emotional multi-dimensional evaluation model.

关键词

野花草甸 / 植物景观评价 / 审美偏好 / SBE法 / AHP法

Key words

wildflower meadow / plant scape evaluation / aesthetic preference / SBE / AHP

参考文献

[1] 李佳滢， 杨冬冬， 杨菲， 等 . 城市化背景下景观格局对天津市生态系统服务供需匹配的影响[J]. 生态学报， 2024， 44(12): 4987-5002.

[2] WANG Y Y, CAI Y P, XIE Y L, et al. Resilience and dynamism: Innovative modeling of ecological group dynamics in urban landscapes[J]. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 2024, 108: 107613.

[3] AERTS R, VAN CALSTER H, OZEN M, et al. Green space at school and attention in primary school children in Belgium: a stratified matched case—control study[J]. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2025, 105: 128680.

[4] TORIJA M G, QUINTANA J R, PINO—BODAS R, et al. Contribution of ruderal herbaceous vegetation to supporting services in Mediterranean urban green spaces[J]. Biodiversity and Conservation, 2025, 34(1): 173-189.

[5] 袁嘉， 游奉溢， 侯春丽， 等 . 基于植被再野化的城市荒野生境重建:以野花草甸为例[J]. 景观设计学(中英文)， 2021， 9(1): 26-39.

[6] 穆松林， 谭秋芳， 黄兴文， 等 . 基于自然的解决方案(NbS)在中国城市的应用及进展[J]. 城市发展研究， 2025， 32(4): 6-11.

[7] JIANG Y R, YUAN T. Public perceptions and preferences for wildflower meadows in Beijing, China[J]. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2017, 27: 324-331.

[8] 凌霄君， 胡雅琪 . “野花组合”在杭州市园林绿化景观提升中的应用研究[J]. 中国园林， 2024， 40(S2): 137-140.

[9] FERNANDES M P, MATONO P, ALMEIDA E, et al. Sowing wildflower meadows in Mediterranean peri—urban green areas to promote grassland diversity[J]. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 2023, 11: 1112596.

[10] HOYLE H, NORTON B, DUNNETT N, et al. Plant species or flower colour diversity? Identifying the drivers of public and invertebrate response to designed annual meadows[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2018, 180: 103-113.

[11] 李效文， 贾黎明， 郝小飞， 等 . 森林景观SBE评价方法[J]. 中国城市林业， 2007， 5(3): 33-36.

[12] XU X, DONG R, LI Z X, et al. Research on visual experience evaluation of fortress heritage landscape by integrating SBE—SD method and eye movement analysis[J]. Heritage Science, 2024, 12: 281.

[13] SAATY T L. How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 1990, 48(1): 9-26.

[14] 卢月， 宋莉萍， 王洁宁， 等 . 基于美景度评价法的济南地区海棠群落景观评价[J]. 园林， 2023， 40(10): 133-140.

[15] 葛楠， 李鸿祥， 曹峰 . 基于SBE—AHP法的河北塞罕坝森林公园植物景观质量评价[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报， 2023， 43(4): 182-190.

[16] PENG X Y, MOHAMED A F L A M R. A multi—dimensional assessment of pocket park landscapes: insights from scenic beauty estimation and analytic hierarchy process in Dadukou district, Chongqing[J]. Sustainability, 2025, 17(5): 2020.

[17] 西格耳 . 非参数统计[M]. 北京: 科学出版社， 1986.

[18] WILSON E O. Biophilia[M]. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984.

[19] 覃伟， 胡牮 . 游客感知视阈下城市滨水带植物景观效益评价[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报， 2025， 45(1): 191-200.

[20] 刘钊 . 基于AHP法的太原城郊森林公园视觉景观质量评价[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报， 2023， 43(2): 188-200.

[21] 陈家信， 林文戈， 童志成 . 基于AHP—TOPSIS的公共空间植物景观评价分析:以广州市番禺区为例[J]. 绿色科技， 2024， 26(15): 19-22.

[22] 满自红， 刘文兰， 孙嘉乐， 等 . 西北半干旱区湿地公园植物景观评价体系构建与应用[J]. 热带农业工程， 2024， 48(4): 77-84.

[23] LAVOREL S, LOCATELLI B, COLLOFF M J, et al. Co—producing ecosystem services for adapting to climate change[J]. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2020, 375(1794): 20190119.

[24] FUNK J L, STANDISH R J, SUDING K N. Plant functional traits in restoration ecology[M]//CLEWELL A F, ARONSON J. Ecological restoration: principles, values, and structure of an emerging profession. Washington: Island Press, 2017: 89-105.

基金资助

*国家自然科学基金项目(51878531)