How Do Awareness, Perceptions, and Expectations of an Urban Greenway Influence Residents’ Visits and Recreational Physical Activity? Evidence From the Connswater Community Greenway, Belfast, Northern Ireland

Figures & data

Figure 1. The conceptual framework.

Figure 2. CCG (a) before and (b) after the regeneration project.

Source: The Connswater Community Greenway Trust, EastSide Partnership, 2022.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of PARC samples.

Variables	Proportion/mean (SD)
Outcome
Vigorous-intensity recreational PA (MET/week)	263.14 (731.00)
Moderate-intensity recreational PA (MET/week)	335.90 (686.29)
Stage of change PA (%)
Precontemplation	29.48
Contemplation, preparation, maintenance, or action	70.52
PA outcome expectation score (1–5)	4.13 (0.87)
PA self-efficacy (1–5)	2.39 (0.95)
Frequent CCG visits (%)
Yes	17.94
No	82.06
Long duration of CCG visits (%)
Yes	36.10
No	63.90
Predictors
Distance to the CCG (%)
<400 m	16.48
400–800 m	18.61
>800–1,200 m	16.93
>1,200 m	47.98
Positive awareness about the CCG
Have seen, read, or heard advertising or messages promoting the CCG as a means of encouraging local people to be more physically active (%)
Yes	67.94
No	32.06
Number of sources of awareness (numbers)	1.89 (1.83)
Number of positive awareness regarding the functions of CCG (numbers)	1.38 (0.92)
Positive perceptions of the CCG (numbers)
Positive expectations about the CCG
Agree that using the CCG will make PA enjoyable (%)	79.26
Yes	20.74
No
Agree that using the CCG will help people to be more physically active (%)	57.85
Yes	42.15
No
Agree that using the CCG will help people engage more with friends (%)	39.13
Yes	60.87
No
Agree that using the CCG will help people feel better (%)	61.55
Yes	38.45
No	1.54 (1.23)
Individual covariates
Sex (%)
Male	45.40
Female	54.60
Age (years)	50.60 (17.96)
Weekly household income (%)
≤£230 per week	24.10
>£230 per week	75.90
Educational level (%)
Tertiary or equivalent	45.40
Others (secondary school/none or other)	54.60
Marital status (%)
Married	43.83
Other	56.17
Accommodation (%)
Owned outright	32.40
Mortgage/co-ownership or rented	67.60
Area-level deprivation (%)
Least deprived (5th quintile)	45.40
Others (1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th quintiles)	54.60
Dog ownership (%)
Yes	24.78
No	75.22
Functional restriction (%)
Yes	28.48
No	71.52
Safety perception (1–5)	3.72 (0.71)
Season (%)
Spring	26.57
Summer	26.01
Autumn	24.89
Winter	22.53

Table 2. Multilevel model results of associations of information, perceptions, and expectations and perceptions of the CCG and frequency and duration of CCG visits.

	Model 1 (DV: Frequent CCG visits)	Model 2 (DV: Long duration of CCG visits)
	OR (95% CI)	OR (95% CI)
Fixed effects
Distance to the CCG
400–800 m	0.56* (0.30–1.02)	0.73 (0.42–1.26)
>800–1,200 m	0.26*** (0.13–0.54)	0.74 (0.42–1.30)
>1,200 m	0.17*** (0.09–0.32)	0.62* (0.37–1.04)
Positive information about the CCG
Have seen, read, or heard advertising or messages promoting the CCG as a means of encouraging local people to be more physically active
Yes (ref: No)	1.17 (0.59–2.35)	1.75** (1.05–2.91)
Number of sources of information	1.15* (0.99–1.33)	1.14** (1.01–1.29)
Number of positive information regarding the functions of CCG	1.03 (0.81–1.33)	0.93 (0.75–1.14)
Positive perceptions of the CCG	1.29*** (1.07–1.55)	1.24*** (1.07–1.44)
Positive expectations about the CCG
Agree that using the CCG will make PA enjoyable
Yes (ref: No)	0.42* (0.18–1.05)	1.03 (0.59–1.78)
Agree that using the CCG will help people to be more physically active
Yes (ref: No)	1.88* (0.92–3.86)	1.81** (1.09–3.03)
Agree that using the CCG will help people engage more with friends
Yes (ref: No)	2.27*** (1.39–3.71)	1.21 (0.82–1.77)
Agree that using the CCG will help people feel better
Yes (ref: No)	2.94*** (1.30–6.64)	1.72** (1.02–2.91)
Random effects
Var (SOAs)	0.25***	0.12***
Log-likelihood	−314.61	−479.95
AIC	681.22	1,011.91

Note. Models adjusted for covariates. DV = dependent variable; AIC = Akaike information criterion.

*p < .10. **p < .05. ***p < .01.

Table 3. Multilevel model results of associations of information, perceptions, and expectations of the CCG; CCG visit frequency and duration; and PA.

	Model 3 (DV: Moderate PA in log form)	Model 4 (DV: Vigorous PA in log form)	Model 5 (DV: Stage of change PA)	Model 6 (DV: PA outcome expectation score)	Model 7 (DV: PA self-efficacy)
	Coef. (SE)	Coef. (SE)	OR (95% CI)	Coef. (SE)	Coef. (SE)
Fixed effects
Distance to the CCG
400–800 m	−0.12 (0.33)	−0.42 (0.29)	1.07 (0.53–2.16)	−0.04 (0.09)	−0.15 (0.09)
>800–1,200 m	0.61* (0.34)	−0.23 (0.30)	0.73 (0.36–1.47)	0.03 (0.09)	−0.08 (0.10)
>1,200 m	0.68** (0.30)	−0.16 (0.27)	0.47** (0.24–0.92)	−0.00 (0.09)	−0.15 (0.09)
Positive information about the CCG
Have seen, read, or heard advertising or messages promoting the CCG as a means of encouraging local people to be more physically active
Yes (ref: No)	−0.58* (0.30)	0.46* (0.26)	2.33*** (1.25–4.31)	0.17** (0.07)	0.02 (0.08)
Number of sources of information	0.21*** (0.08)	−0.08 (0.07)	0.84** (0.71–0.99)	0.00 (0.02)	0.06** (0.02)
Number of positive information regarding the functions of CCG	−0.03 (0.12)	−0.16 (0.10)	1.02 (0.80–1.30)	−0.06** (0.03)	−0.07** (0.03)
Positive perceptions of the CCG	−0.20** (0.09)	0.04 (0.08)	1.05 (0.87–1.25)	0.02 (0.02)	−008*** (0.02)
Positive expectations about the CCG
Agree that using the CCG will make PA enjoyable
Yes (ref: No)	0.49* (0.29)	0.55** (0.25)	0.78 (0.46–1.33)	0.41*** (0.07)	0.19** (0.08)
Agree that using the CCG will help people to be more physically active
Yes (ref: No)	0.53* (0.32)	0.36 (0.27)	0.62 (0.34–1.16)	0.11 (0.08)	0.19** (0.09)
Agree that using the CCG will help people engage more with friends
Yes (ref: No)	−0.32 (0.26)	−0.23 (0.22)	1.07 (0.53–2.16)	0.10 (0.06)	0.06 (0.07)
Agree that using the CCG will help people feel better
Yes (ref: No)	0.38 (0.32)	−0.68*** (0.27)	0.41*** (0.23–0.75)	−0.06 (0.08)	−0.01 (0.09)
Frequent CCG visits
Yes (ref: No)	0.76*** (0.29)	0.54** (0.25)	0.92 (0.48–1.76)	0.20*** (0.07)	0.16** (0.08)
Long duration of CCG visits
Yes (ref: No)	0.85*** (0.23)	−0.18 (0.20)	0.32*** (0.20–0.54)	0.09 (0.06)	−0.03 (0.06)
Random effects
Var (SOAs)	0.04***	0.04***	0.11***	0.02***	0.01***
Var (Individuals)	8.07***	5.91***		0.49***	0.63***
Log-likelihood	−2,196.91	−2,061.16	−335.79	−959.20	−1,065.97
AIC	4,451.834	4,180.331	727.59	1,976.40	2,189.95

Note. Models adjusted for covariates. DV = dependent variable; AIC = Akaike information criterion.

*p < .10. **p < .05. ***p < .01.