Observational analysis compared aesthetic resources in Dongqiao Town, highlighting the need for sustainable development strategies.
With increasing global efforts to increase the quality of rural spaces, traditional planning models, which emphasise engineering-related and economic considerations, are no longer able to fully meet the public’s diverse aesthetic demands. Therefore, it is necessary to introduce an aesthetic perspective to conduct research on evaluation of and planning strategies for rural spaces. Taking Dongqiao Town in Fuyang District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province, China, as a case study, this study constructed a comprehensive evaluation system that integrated indicators related to aesthetic subjects (demand, perception, satisfaction) with those related to aesthetic objects (richness, aggregation, radiation). Point of interest data collection, Geographic Information System spatial analysis, questionnaire surveys, and interviews were used to analyse and compare the characteristics of 11 administrative villages in Dongqiao Town in terms of aesthetic resources, spatial structure, and transportation accessibility. In addition, the study examined the mechanism of the interaction between aesthetic subjects and objects and its impact on the survival and construction of the focal spaces. The results showed that core regions such as Dongqiao Village, Xiande Village, and Sanxi Village stood out in terms of aesthetic resources and transportation advantages, while more remote villages faced challenges such as a lack of aesthetic elements and poor accessibility. In response to these characteristics and shortcomings, the research proposed optimisation strategies such as differentiated and zoned construction and the participation of multiple entities in dynamic evaluation and regulation, providing theoretical support and practical guidance for improving the quality of rural spaces, strengthening regional culture, and achieving sustainable development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yin et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: