邻里目的地建成环境对老年日常活动机会的影响——基于感知和参与视角

doi:10.18306/dlkxjz.2023.01.008

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

老年人的日常活动水平与身心健康密切相关，且受到多种邻里目的地空间的复杂干预。但目前研究较少关注到老年人的活动机会特征和以邻里目的地为中心的建成环境范围。论文结合“城市人”理论，从老年人的生存、接触和社交等需求出发，以大连市主城区为例，基于老年人对日常活动感知和参与数量的问卷调查数据，并选取商业服务设施、医疗卫生设施、教育设施和休闲娱乐设施作为老年人潜在接触的邻里目的地，借助聚类分析、线性回归和Logistic回归模型探究活动机会类型及其建成环境影响因素。研究结果表明：老年日常活动机会可分为旁观型、目标型和活跃型3类；商业服务设施对活动感知、休闲娱乐设施对活动参与有显著影响；医院的环境适宜性对旁观型老年人、商场的空间区位条件对活跃型老年人分别存在较大的作用效应。研究结果可为精细化地建设老龄友好城市提供新思路。

关键词: 邻里目的地, 建成环境, 老年人, 城市人理论, 日常活动感知, 日常活动参与

Abstract:

Daily activities of the elderly population are closely related to their physical and mental health, and are complicatedly affected by the attributes of multiple neighborhood destination built environments. However, current research has paid little attention to the activity opportunity characteristics of the elderly population and scope of the built environment centered on neighborhood destinations. Combined with the theory of homo-urbanicus, this study constructed a research framework on the relationship between neighborhood destinations and daily activity opportunities from the needs of the elderly for survival, contact, and social interaction. Taking the main urban area of Dalian City as an example, data on the perception and participation in daily activities were collected from 1149 older adults in 2017 and 2019. From the three dimensions of accessibility, attractiveness, and friendliness, built environment indicators were measured for the neighborhood destinations that the elderly have potential contact with, including commercial, medical, educational, and leisure facilities. We used the multiple linear regression and the multinomial logistic regression methods to analyze the impact of neighborhood destination built environments on older adults' daily activity opportunities. The main findings of the study are as follows: 1) The daily activity opportunities of the elderly can be divided into three categories: bystander type, target type, and active type. In addition to being severely constrained by individual attributes, these types also show heterogeneity in their spatial distributions. 2) Commercial facilities have a significant impact on activity perception, and leisure facilities have a significant impact on activity participation. Specifically, indicators such as the proportion of residential areas around community activity centers and the distance to shopping mall intersections have a greater impact on activity perception. The road network density around chess and card rooms and the proportion of cars around community activity centers have a greater impact on activity participation. 3) The environmental suitability of hospitals has an effect on the bystander elderly, and the spatial location of shopping malls has an effect on the active elderly. The research results show that in the optimization of the built environment of urban public service facilities, it is necessary not only to meet the needs of the elderly for the use of space, but also to meet their needs for rest and observation. In addition, urban planners should pay attention to the differences in the impact of different types of service facilities on daily activity opportunities of the elderly, and carry out targeted planning and policy interventions. This study provides new ideas for the refined construction of age-friendly cities.

Key words: neighborhood destination, built environment, elderly population, homo-urbanicus, daily activity perception, daily activity participation

魏越, 杨东峰. 邻里目的地建成环境对老年日常活动机会的影响——基于感知和参与视角[J]. 地理科学进展, 2023, 42(1): 89-103.

WEI Yue, YANG Dongfeng. Impact of neighborhood destination built environments on daily activity opportunities of the elderly population: Based on perception and participation[J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2023, 42(1): 89-103.

图/表 9

图1

表1

表2

图2

表3

图3

图4

表4

邻里目的地建成环境与日常活动感知/参与的多重线性回归结果

变量		模型1：日常活动感知		模型2：日常活动参与
变量		t值	标准系数(β)	t值	标准系数(β)
	常量	-0.606		0.384
个体属性	性别(男=1，女=2)	-3.524	-0.105^***	-0.321	-0.009
	年龄	-3.522	-0.110^***	-10.889	-0.328^***
	教育程度	2.086	0.073^**	4.464	0.150^***
	家庭人数	1.560	0.048	2.737	0.081^***
	收入	1.132	0.040	1.765	0.061^*
便利店	交叉口距离	1.210	0.041	-1.312	-0.043
	居住区占比	-1.156	-0.046	0.919	0.035
	台阶占比	0.219	0.009	-1.192	-0.048
	景观小品比例	-2.338	-0.076^**	-2.513	-0.079^**
	街头家具比例	0.037	0.001	-0.144	-0.005
菜市场	交叉口距离	0.072	0.002	0.010	0.00034
	居住区占比	1.256	0.042	0.424	0.014
	台阶占比	0.456	0.015	-0.176	-0.006
	绿视率	-0.277	-0.010	-2.510	-0.089^**
	指示牌比例	0.948	0.036	-1.631	-0.060
商场	交叉口距离	4.172	0.156^***	2.291	0.083^**
	公交站距离	-2.646	-0.096^***	0.706	0.025
	路面平整度	1.571	0.063	-0.180	-0.007
	障碍物占比	-2.172	-0.122^**	1.148	0.062
	景观小品密度	-2.507	-0.098^**	-0.063	-0.002
药店	居住区占比	2.525	0.105^**	-0.689	-0.028
	台阶占比	0.950	0.038	0.936	0.036
	障碍物占比	-0.099	-0.004	-0.713	-0.025
	指示牌比例	0.550	0.020	0.667	0.024
	路灯比例	1.405	0.052	0.364	0.013
诊所	主干路距离	0.763	0.027	1.025	0.035
	交叉口距离	-0.878	-0.028	-1.570	-0.048
	公交站距离	-0.366	-0.012	-0.309	-0.010
	居住区占比	-0.469	-0.025	0.483	0.025
	天空开阔度	-2.242	-0.120^**	-1.099	-0.057
医院	交叉口距离	1.071	0.042	1.238	0.047
	居住区占比	-1.240	-0.050	-0.466	-0.018
	台阶占比	-2.940	-0.118^***	0.418	0.016
	障碍物占比	0.032	0.001	1.647	0.064
	天空开阔度	1.862	0.093^*	-1.538	-0.074
幼儿园	居住区占比	0.608	0.023	0.395	0.014
	台阶占比	-1.847	-0.068^*	0.940	0.033
	障碍物占比	1.325	0.049	0.175	0.006
	汽车占比	-1.133	-0.046	0.179	0.007
	街头家具比例	0.316	0.011	0.434	0.015
变量		模型1：日常活动感知		模型2：日常活动参与
变量		t值	标准系数(β)	t值	标准系数(β)
小学	居住区占比	-2.242	-0.096^**	-1.582	-0.065
	公交站距离	-0.277	-0.011	-0.418	-0.016
	台阶占比	0.233	0.010	-0.829	-0.035
	障碍物占比	-0.193	-0.007	-1.398	-0.048
	街头家具比例	-0.232	-0.009	-1.394	-0.051
棋牌室	居住区占比	-0.687	-0.032	-0.713	-0.032
	绿色空间占比	-0.991	-0.036	-1.445	-0.051
	路网密度	-0.221	-0.010	-2.510	-0.108^**
	台阶占比	0.162	0.006	0.356	0.013
	天空开阔度	0.622	0.031	-0.332	-0.016
社区活动中心	居住区占比	3.973	0.189^***	0.316	0.014
	路面平整度	0.393	0.016	0.631	0.024
	障碍物占比	-0.411	-0.022	0.896	0.046
	汽车占比	-0.394	-0.023	-1.704	-0.096^*
	天空开阔度	2.277	0.122^**	0.433	0.022
运动馆	公交站距离	-0.230	-0.009	1.956	0.074^*
	路网密度	0.125	0.007	1.945	0.100^*
	主干路密度	1.590	0.068	1.304	0.054
	公交站密度	-0.080	-0.003	0.122	0.005
	景观小品密度	-0.101	-0.004	-0.015	-0.001
R²		0.183		0.239

表4

表5

参考文献 46

[1]	Moran M, van Cauwenberg J, Hercky-Linnewiel R, et al. Understanding the relationships between the physical environment and physical activity in older adults: A systematic review of qualitative studies[J]. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition & Physical Activity, 2014, 11: 79. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-11-79. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-11-79
[2]	谭少华, 高银宝, 李立峰, 等. 社区步行环境的主动式健康干预: 体力活动视角[J]. 城市规划, 2020, 44(12): 35-46, 56.
	[Tan Shaohua, Gao Yinbao, Li Lifeng, et al. Active intervention of community's walking environment in health: A perspective of physical activity. City Planning Review, 2020, 44(12): 35-46, 56. ]
[3]	Portegijs E, Keskinen K E, Eronen J, et al. Older adults' physical activity and the relevance of distances to neighborhood destinations and barriers to outdoor mobility[J]. Frontiers in Public Health, 2020, 8: 335. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.00335. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.00335 pmid: 32850580
[4]	黄建中, 胡刚钰, 李敏. 城市建成环境与老年人移动性衰退相互关系研究回顾与展望[J]. 华中建筑, 2017, 35(6): 102-107.
	[Huang Jianzhong, Hu Gangyu, Li Min. Research review and prospect on the relationship between urban built environment and mobility decline in the elderly. Huazhong Architecture, 2017, 35(6): 102-107. ]
[5]	梁鹤年. 一个以人为本的规划范式[J]. 城市规划, 2019, 43(9): 13-14, 94.
	[Leung Hoklin. A human-centered planning paradigm. City Planning Review, 2019, 43(9): 13-14, 94. ]
[6]	刘静艳, 黄西华. 影响居民感知和参与重大活动的因素分析: 以广州2010年亚运会为例[J]. 学术研究, 2009(5): 97-102, 160.
	[Liu Jingyan, Huang Xihua. An analysis on the factors influencing residents' feeling of and participation to national important activities: 2010's Asian game as a case. Academic Research, 2009(5): 97-102, 160. ]
[7]	刘合林, 郑天铭, 聂晶鑫. 城市基本公服设施数量与多样性空间配置研究: 以武汉市主城区为例[J]. 城市规划, 2021, 45(2): 84-91.
	[Liu Helin, Zheng Tianming, Nie Jingxin. On the spatial allocation of the quantity and diversity of basic urban public service facilities: A case study of Wuhan inner city. City Planning Review, 2021, 45(2): 84-91. ]
[8]	Liu Z Y, Kemperman A, Timmermans H, et al. Heterogeneity in physical activity participation of older adults: A latent class analysis[J]. Journal of Transport Geography, 2021, 92(5): 102999. doi: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2021.102999. doi: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2021.102999
[9]	Tsunoda K, Kitano N, Kai Y, et al. Prospective study of physical activity and sleep in middle-aged and older adults[J]. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2015, 48(6): 662-673. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2014.12.006 pmid: 25891000
[10]	许婧雪, 谌丽, 张文忠. 建成环境是否影响居民健康生活方式? 基于北京22个社区的实证分析[J]. 地理科学进展, 2021, 40(4): 660-670. doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2021.04.010
	[Xu Jingxue, Chen Li, Zhang Wenzhong. Does the built environment impact residents' healthy lifestyle? Empirical analysis based on 22 communities in Beijing. Progress in Geography, 2021, 40(4): 660-670. ] doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2021.04.010
[11]	Gong Y, Gallacher J, Palmer S, et al. Neighbourhood green space, physical function and participation in physical activities among elderly men: The Caerphilly prospective study[J]. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 2014, 11(1): 40. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-11-40. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-11-40
[12]	于一凡, 刘旭辉. 建成环境健康影响研究的行为变量及其中介效应: 以上海市社区老年人的健康行为为例[J]. 科技导报, 2021, 39(8): 94-101.
	[Yu Yifan, Liu Xuhui. Behavioral variables and its mediating effects in the studies of the impact of the built environment on the health: Case study of the healthy behavior of the older residents in Shanghai communities. Science & Technology Review, 2021, 39(8): 94-101. ]
[13]	董慰, 陈赛怡, 董禹. 老年人生活空间移动性影响要素研究进展[J]. 科技导报, 2021, 39(8): 26-35.
	[Dong Wei, Chen Saiyi, Dong Yu. Review of studies of influences of life-space mobility of the elderly. Science & Technology Review, 2021, 39(8): 26-35. ]
[14]	冷红, 郑春宇, 鲁钰雯. 老龄人口健身出行视角下的寒地城市公共空间可步行性研究[J]. 国际城市规划, 2019, 34(5): 27-32.
	[Leng Hong, Zheng Chunyu, Lu Yuwen. Walkability of public space in winter cities from a perspective of travelling to physical activity by elder people. Urban Planning International, 2019, 34(5): 27-32. ]
[15]	郑振华, 彭希哲. 社区环境对老年人行为与健康的影响研究: 不同年龄阶段老年人的群组比较[J]. 地理研究, 2019, 38(6): 1481-1496. doi: 10.11821/dlyj020181142
	[Zheng Zhenhua, Peng Xizhe. The impact of community environment on behavior and health of the elderly: Group comparison of different ages. Geographical Research, 2019, 38(6): 1481-1496. ] doi: 10.11821/dlyj020181142
[16]	李经纬, 范晨璟, 田莉, 等. 社区建成环境对老年人社会交往活动的影响研究[J]. 人文地理, 2021, 36(1): 56-65.
	[Li Jingwei, Fan Chenjing, Tian Li, et al. Study on the impact of neighborhood built environment on social activities of elderly. Human Geography, 2021, 36(1): 56-65. ]
[17]	姜玉培, 甄峰, 孙鸿鹄, 等. 健康视角下城市建成环境对老年人日常步行活动的影响研究[J]. 地理研究, 2020, 39(3): 570-584. doi: 10.11821/dlyj020190069
	[Jiang Yupei, Zhen Feng, Sun Honghu, et al. Research on the influence of urban built environment on daily walking of older adults from a perspective of health. Geographical Research, 2020, 39(3): 570-584. ] doi: 10.11821/dlyj020190069
[18]	申悦, 柴彦威. 基于GPS数据的北京市郊区巨型社区居民日常活动空间[J]. 地理学报, 2013, 68(4): 506-516.
	[Shen Yue, Chai Yanwei. Daily activity space of suburban mega-community residents in Beijing based on GPS data. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2013, 68(4): 506-516. ] doi: 10.11821/xb201304006
[19]	周素红, 彭伊侬, 柳林, 等. 日常活动地建成环境对老年人主观幸福感的影响[J]. 地理研究, 2019, 38(7): 1625-1639. doi: 10.11821/dlyj020180292
	[Zhou Suhong, Peng Yinong, Liu Lin, et al. The impact of built environment on well-being of older adults under different geographic contexts. Geographical Research, 2019, 38(7): 1625-1639. ] doi: 10.11821/dlyj020180292
[20]	King T L, Thornton L E, Bentley R J, et al. The use of kernel density estimation to examine associations between neighborhood destination intensity and walking and physical activity[J]. PLoS One, 2015, 10(9): e0137402. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0137402. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0137402
[21]	邹思聪, 张姗琪, 甄峰. 基于居民时空行为的社区日常活动空间测度及活力影响因素研究: 以南京市沙洲、南苑街道为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2021, 40(4): 580-596. doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2021.04.004
	[Zou Sicong, Zhang Shanqi, Zhen Feng. Measurement of community daily activity space and influencing factors of vitality based on residents' spatiotemporal behavior: Taking Shazhou and Nanyuan streets in Nanjing as examples. Progress in Geography, 2021, 40(4): 580-596. ] doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2021.04.004
[22]	梁鹤年. “城市人”理论的基本逻辑和操作程序[J]. 城市规划, 2020, 44(2): 68-76.
	[Leung Hoklin. Homo-urbanicus: Basic logic and operational procedure. City Planning Review, 2020, 44(2): 68-76. ]
[23]	梁鹤年. 再谈“城市人”: 以人为本的城镇化[J]. 城市规划, 2014, 38(9): 64-75.
	[Leung Hoklin. Further discussion on homo-urbanicus: Human-based urbanization. City Planning Review, 2014, 38(9): 64-75. ]
[24]	周麟, 田莉, 梁鹤年, 等. 基于复杂适应性系统“涌现”的“城市人”理论拓展[J]. 城市与区域规划研究, 2018, 10(4): 126-137.
	[Zhou Lin, Tian Li, Leung Hoklin, et al. "Development of 'homo-urbanicus' theory based on the 'emergence' of complex adaptive system". Journal of Urban and Regional Planning, 2018, 10(4): 126-137. ]
[25]	梁鹤年. 城市人[J]. 城市规划, 2012, 36(7): 87-96.
	[Leung Hoklin. Homo urbanicus. City Planning Review, 2012, 36(7): 87-96. ]
[26]	夏菁. “城市人”视角下残疾人聚居空间满意度研究: 以南京市为例[J]. 城市规划, 2019, 43(2): 46-51, 66.
	[Xia Jing. Satisfaction research on the settlements of people with disabilities based on homo-urbanicus theory: A case study of Nanjing. City Planning Review, 2019, 43(2): 46-51, 66. ]
[27]	魏伟, 洪梦谣, 周婕, 等. “城市人”视角下城市基本公共服务设施评估方法: 以武汉市为例[J]. 城市规划, 2020, 44(10): 71-80.
	[Hong Mengyao, Zhou Jie, et al. Study on evaluation method of spatial equalization of basic public service facilities from the perspective of homo-urbanicus: Taking Wuhan as an example. City Planning Review, 2020, 44(10): 71-80. ]
[28]	黄怡, 朱晓宇. 城市老年人的日常活动特征及其感知评价的影响因素: 以上海中心城社区为例[J]. 上海城市规划, 2018(6): 87-96.
	[Huang Yi, Zhu Xiaoyu. Research on features of daily activities of urban elderly and influence factors of their perception evaluation: A case study of communities in central area of Shanghai. Shanghai Urban Planning Review, 2018(6): 87-96. ]
[29]	Liu Z Y, Kemperman A, Timmermans H. Social-ecological correlates of older adults' outdoor activity patterns[J]. Journal of Transport & Health, 2020, 16(C): 100840. doi: 10.1016/j.jth.2020.100840. doi: 10.1016/j.jth.2020.100840
[30]	张纯, 柴彦威, 李昌霞. 北京城市老年人的日常活动路径及其时空特征[J]. 地域研究与开发, 2007, 26(4): 116-120.
	[Zhang Chun, Chai Yanwei, Li Changxia. The characteristics of daily activity of the elderly in Beijing City. Areal Research and Development, 2007, 26(4): 116-120. ]
[31]	Ewing R, Cervero R. Travel and the built environment[J]. Journal of the American Planning Association, 2010, 76(3): 265-294. doi: 10.1080/01944361003766766
[32]	魏伟, 潘雪晴, 谢波. 基于“城市人”理论的社区养老设施规划配置研究: 以武汉市主城区为例[J]. 现代城市研究, 2022(1): 30-37.
	[Pan Xueqing, Xie Bo. A research on the planning and allocation of community pension facilities based on the theory of "homo urbanicus": A case study in Wuhan central area. Modern Urban Research, 2022(1): 30-37. ]
[33]	Chen S Z, Wang T, Bao Z K, et al. A path analysis of the effect of neighborhood built environment on public health of older adults: A Hong Kong study[J]. Frontiers in Public Health, 2022, 10: 861836. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.861836. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.861836
[34]	陈曦, 冯建喜. 基于步行性与污染物暴露空间格局比较的建成环境健康效应: 以南京为例[J]. 地理科学进展, 2019, 38(2): 296-304. doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2019.02.012
	[Chen Xi, Feng Jianxi. Health effects of built environment based on a comparison of walkability and air pollution: A case study of Nanjing City. Progress in Geography, 2019, 38(2): 296-304. ]
[35]	苏玲玲, 周素红. 居住迁移背景下邻里环境对幸福感的影响: 不同生命历程阶段的差异[J]. 地理科学进展, 2021, 40(8): 1344-1354. doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2021.08.008
	[Su Lingling, Zhou Suhong. Impacts of neighborhood environment on subjective well-being under the background of residential mobility: Difference in people of different life course stages. Progress in Geography, 2021, 40(8): 1344-1354. ] doi: 10.18306/dlkxjz.2021.08.008
[36]	Yao Y, Wang J L, Hong Y, et al. Discovering the homogeneous geographic domain of human perceptions from street view images[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2021, 212: 104125. doi: 10.1016/j.lurbplan.2021.104125. doi: 10.1016/j.lurbplan.2021.104125
[37]	郭鑫, 陈宏飞, 杨喜平. 建成环境对城市不同年龄群体活力的时空异质性影响研究[J]. 地理与地理信息科学, 2022, 38(1): 63-70, 78.
	[Guo Xin, Chen Hongfei, Yang Xiping. Study on the impact of built environment on spatio-temporal heterogeneity of vitality of different age groups in cities. Geography and Geo-Information Science, 2022, 38(1): 63-70, 78. ]
[38]	Liu M, Zhang B G, Luo T, et al. Evaluating street lighting quality in residential areas by combining remote sensing tools and a survey on pedestrians' perceptions of safety and visual comfort[J]. Remote Sensing, 2022, 14(4): 826. doi: 10.3390/rs14040826. doi: 10.3390/rs14040826
[39]	Reichman S. Travel adjustments and life styles: A behavioral approach[C]// Stopher P R, Meyburg A H. Behavioral travel demand models. Lexington, USA: Lexington Books, 1976: 143-152.
[40]	黄建中, 张芮琪, 胡刚钰. 基于时空间行为的老年人日常生活圈研究: 空间识别与特征分析[J]. 城市规划学刊, 2019(3): 87-95.
	[Huang Jianzhong, Zhang Ruiqi, Hu Gangyu. A research of the elderly's daily life circle based on spatial-temporal behaviors: Analysis of place recognition and spatial features. Urban Planning Forum, 2019(3): 87-95. ]
[41]	刘钢, 刘坤琳, 汪玮茜, 等. 水质感知视角下水库移民满意度分析: 基于有序逻辑回归的实证研究[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(7): 1454-1466.
	[Liu Gang, Liu Kunlin, Wang Weiqian, et al. Analysis of immigrants' satisfaction degree in water quality: Empirical research of ordinal logistic regression. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2018, 27(7): 1454-1466. ]
[42]	吴志建, 王竹影, 宋彦李青, 等. 城市老年人户外体力活动时空特征的社区分异: 基于GIS、GPS、加速度计的实证研究[J]. 人文地理, 2019, 34(5): 53-61.
	[Wu Zhijian, Wang Zhuying, Song Yanliqing, et al. Community differentiation of spatial and temporal characteristics of outdoor physical activity in urban elderly: An empirical study based on GIS, GPS and accelerometer. Human Geography, 2019, 34(5): 53-61. ]
[43]	吕飞, 韩冰冰, 王博. 基于主成分分析法的寒地住区建成环境对老年人情绪健康影响的研究[J]. 城市建筑, 2018(24): 47-50.
	[Lü Fei, Han Bingbing, Wang Bo. The effects of the neighborhood-built environment on emotional health of the elderly in severe cold regions on the basis of principal component analysis. Urbanism and Architecture, 2018(24): 47-50. ]
[44]	陈筝, 翟雪倩, 叶诗韵, 等. 恢复性自然环境对城市居民心智健康影响的荟萃分析及规划启示[J]. 国际城市规划, 2016, 31(4): 16-26, 43.
	[Chen Zheng, Zhai Xueqian, Ye Shiyun, et al. A meta-analysis of restorative nature landscapes and mental health benefits on urban residents and its planning implication. Urban Planning International, 2016, 31(4): 16-26, 43. ]
[45]	冯建喜, 黄旭, 汤爽爽. 客观与主观建成环境对老年人不同体力活动影响机制研究: 以南京为例[J]. 上海城市规划, 2017(3): 17-23.
	[Feng Jianxi, Huang Xu, Tang Shuangshuang. Comparing the influences of objective and subjective built environments on physical activities participation among the elderly: A case study of Nanjing, China. Shanghai Urban Planning Review, 2017(3): 17-23. ]
[46]	扬·盖尔. 交往与空间[M]. 何人可, 译. 北京: 中国建筑工业出版社, 2002.
	[Jan Gehl. Life between buildings. Translated by He Renke. Beijing, China: China Architecture & Building Press, 2002. ]

维度	指标	测量方法	数据来源
可达性	主干路距离	设施点与最近主干路距离(m)	百度地图
	交叉口距离	设施点与最近交叉口距离(m)	百度地图
	公交站距离	设施点与最近公交站距离(m)	百度地图
	居住区占比	居住区面积/服务区面积	Landsat 8遥感影像
	路面平整度	1-[(路面裂缝+路面石块+土路面积)/道路面积]	腾讯地图街景图片
	台阶占比	(楼梯+台阶面积)/总面积	腾讯地图街景图片
	障碍物占比	(围栏+铁路+柱子+杆子+栏杆面积)/总面积	腾讯地图街景图片
	汽车占比	汽车面积/总面积	腾讯地图街景图片
吸引力	绿色空间占比	绿色空间面积/服务区面积	Landsat 8遥感影像
	绿视率	(树+草+植物面积)/总面积	腾讯地图街景图片
	天空开阔度	可看到的天空面积/总面积	腾讯地图街景图片
	景观小品比例	有花、喷泉、雕塑的图片张数/图片总张数	腾讯地图街景图片
	街头家具比例	有椅子、座位的图片张数/图片总张数	腾讯地图街景图片
友好性	路网密度	路网长度/服务区面积(m/m²)	百度地图
	主干路密度	主干路长度/服务区面积(m/m²)	百度地图
	公交站密度	公交站个数/服务区面积(个/m²)	百度地图
	指示牌比例	有招牌、布告牌的图片张数/图片总张数	腾讯地图街景图片
	路灯比例	有路灯的图片张数/图片总张数	腾讯地图街景图片

类别	维度	内容
日常活动类型	维护性活动	日常事务类	接送孙子女上下学；买菜；购物；买药看病
	可支配活动	休闲社交类	小坐交谈；棋牌活动；文艺活动(唱歌等)；周边游
	可支配活动	体育锻炼类	徒步；器械运动；舞蹈；保健运动(太极拳等)；竞技运动(打球、游泳等)
日常活动机会	活动感知	问题：“在您生活范围内，您知道有做上述活动的场所或有见过老年人做上述活动吗?”
日常活动机会	活动参与	问题：“您平时会做上述活动吗?”

指标		样本量/个	占比/%
年龄	60~70岁	510	44.4
	71~80岁	398	34.6
	≥81岁	241	21.0
性别	男	530	46.1
性别	女	619	53.9
教育程度	未受过教育	97	8.4
	小学	302	26.3
	中学	349	30.4
	高中/中专	235	20.5
	大专/大学	166	14.4
家庭人数	1人	152	13.2
	2人	530	46.1
	3人	158	13.8
	4人	142	12.4
	≥5人	167	14.5
个人月收入	≤1000元	142	12.4
	1001~2000元	103	9.0
	2001~3000元	329	28.6
	3001~4000元	279	24.3
	>4000元	296	25.8
感知日常活动数量	≤6个	138	12.0
	7~9个	527	45.9
	>9个	484	42.1
参与日常活动数量	≤3个	292	25.4
	4~6个	674	58.7
	>6个	183	15.9

变量		C1旁观型			C3活跃型
变量		回归系数(β)	标准误差	Wald	回归系数(β)	标准误差	Wald
	截距	0.535	0.111	23.103	-0.009	0.126	0.005
个体属性	性别[男]	0.383^**	0.168	5.215	0.519^***	0.183	8.067
	[女]	0	—	—	0	—	—
	年龄	-0.133	0.088	2.310	-0.631^***	0.100	39.606
	教育程度	-0.104	0.096	1.169	0.386^***	0.110	12.405
	家庭人数	0.013	0.087	0.023	0.176^*	0.094	3.494
	收入	0.010	0.099	0.011	0.073	0.112	0.422
便利店	景观小品比例	-0.056	0.081	0.477	-0.250^***	0.091	7.556
菜市场	绿视率	-0.018	0.086	0.043	-0.093	0.096	0.950
商场	交叉口距离	0.276^***	0.104	7.049	0.424^***	0.110	14.719
	公交站距离	-0.081	0.087	0.885	-0.235^**	0.096	5.949
	障碍物占比	-0.119	0.111	1.147	-0.124	0.121	1.044
	景观小品密度	-0.098	0.096	1.039	-0.132	0.107	1.532
药店	居住区占比	0.212^**	0.095	5.052	0.141	0.099	2.026
诊所	天空开阔度	0.001	0.119	0.000089	-0.279^**	0.134	4.367
医院	台阶占比	-0.317^***	0.094	11.423	-0.371^***	0.106	12.155
医院	天空开阔度	0.402^***	0.116	12.024	0.263^**	0.126	4.368
幼儿园	台阶占比	-0.089	0.082	1.160	-0.085	0.091	0.868
小学	居住区占比	0.036	0.095	0.145	-0.253^**	0.102	6.176
棋牌室	路网密度	-0.015	0.103	0.020	-0.151	0.115	1.705
社区活动中心	居住区占比	0.230^**	0.103	5.004	0.355^***	0.111	10.191
	汽车占比	0.122	0.120	1.041	0.023	0.130	0.031
	天空开阔度	0.118	0.139	0.723	0.341^**	0.152	5.069
运动馆	公交站距离	-0.090	0.092	0.954	-0.009	0.098	0.008
运动馆	路网密度	-0.268^**	0.118	5.167	-0.157	0.130	1.462