The Effect of Landscape Features implemented in Egyptian Parks on
satisfying the Human needs and well-being
MARIANNE NABIL GUIRGUIS, RANIA RUSHDY MOUSSA, KHALED M. DEWIDAR,
& NAGLAA MOHAMED YOSSIF
Architectural Engineering Department
The British University in Egypt (BUE)
El-Sherouk City, Cairo 11837
EGYPT
Abstract: - Recently, parks have been recognized as one of the main contributors in the strategic objectives of
urban projects, since they provide job opportunities, place attractiveness, increase the real estate market and
property values, tourist development, increase the since of social belonging between the residents, improving
the public health and the quality of the residents’ life. The presented research is aiming to investigate the effect
of Landscape features on the quality of life (QOL) inside Egyptian parks. This study has been inspired by early
theorists like “Maslow” and other theorists who have followed Maslow’s footsteps. They analysed and
measured the concept of quality of life (QOL)into two well-known terms “human needs” and “well-being”. The
study explores the impact of landscape features towards “human needs and well-being”. Lately, Egypt is
suffering from inflation and economic crisis which affect the Egyptians life style. Most of the Egyptian society
is living a stressful life; this study will examine whether the Egyptian parks help Egyptians as an escape way
where all the negative vibes are going to meet with nature resulting in a positive outcome. This research used
qualitative investigation method to measure the impact of implementing landscape features in Egyptian parks
on enhancing the quality of the Egyptian life by measuring the (QOL) with regards to “human needs and well-
being”. The presented research investigated the impact of landscape elements implemented in Al-Azhar Park
and Family Park on “human needs and well-being”. That shall pave the way to investors, policymakers,
architecture and civil practitioners to realize the potentials of designing and constructing parks in Egyptian
urban environment, as an efficient tool to improve the quality of Egyptian life.
Keywords: -Landscape features; Quality of life (QOL); Al-Azhar Park; Family Parks; Well-being
Human needs;
Received: May 5, 2021. Revised: November 11, 2021. Accepted: December 12, 2021. Published: January 9, 2022.
1 Introduction
During the thirties of the past century,
researchers and theorists started to study and eager
to classify, analyse, probe the concept of
(QOL)[1].(QOL) not only became a debatable
subject among researches, but also, it gained the
interest of theorists, economists and politicians. For
example, in fifties, Osborn and Ordway well-known
economists, debated over the economic context of
the term of (QOL)[1].A number of years later,
theorists began to publish books that try to study the
concept into depth. For example, Galbraith wrote a
couple of books published named, "The Affluent
Society" and "The Industrial State". Through his
writings, Galbraith ensured the industrial age that
influence in a positive way the economy whilst
ruining human's (QOL). The concept is distinctly
demonstrated by his writings "What counts is not
the quantity of our goods but the quality of life" [1].
Years back, in the seventies, the quality of life
expression turned out to be an area of study,
precisely an academic field. Plentiful of studies,
academic articles and journals whichever study
(QOL) and well-being got considerable [2]. Ever
after 1985, the average of written articles got
regularly growing to the point it counted 20900
articles [2]. Furthermore, (QOL) assemblies began
to emerge like "The International Society for
Quality of Life Studies" assembly whichever
encouraged researchers and theorists to dispute and
analyse that concept [2]. For more than three
decades until current, the (QOL) concept got
fostered and raised by a lot of governments,
organizations, and agencies internationally [2]. The
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ENVIRONMENT and DEVELOPMENT
DOI: 10.37394/232015.2022.18.11
Marianne Nabil Guirguis, Rania Rushdy Moussa,
Khaled M. Dewidar, Naglaa Mohamed Yossif
E-ISSN: 2224-3496
100
Volume 18, 2022
UNESCO, the OECD, and the WHO execute
fundamental studies regarding (QOL) with a view to
observe the differences occurred within states,
provinces, as well as cities [2]. Lastly, scientists
reached the conclusion that quality of life is a
comprehensive concept which adopt a lot of
different fields such as education, health,
enjoyment, personal freedom, and [1].
The concept of (QOL)expanded throughout the
past years. Theorists fostered and developed the
concept over the year's long time ago, to include
several other fields. The concept attracts individual
researchers and grew to be the fundamental study of
governments and organizations as well. (QOL)
would still be a very interesting field of study for the
forthcoming year.
The aim of this research is to investigate the
effect of landscape elements on the quality of life
and its effect on satisfying the human needs and
well-being.
1.1 Measurements and Parameters of
(QOL)
The (QOL) shall get demonstrated and deliberated
in singular definitions; a path wherever any subject
or person make their own terms and expressions
whichever might considered further convenient
measure [3].
Several fields of research began studying (QOL)
ever after the thirties [4]. Researchers attempted to
distinguish the components and parameters of
(QOL) and contrasted different geographical regions
like cities, states and nations by means of
(QOL)indicating that they adopted
[5,6,7,8,9].Moreover, researchers and international
organizations such as [16].have been developing
measures on their own for the (QOL), this is the
reason we now got a lot of measurements and
parameters whichever determine the (QOL), that
gives the conclusions of several outcomes of studies
on the (QOL) as a result of the variance in the
selected sets of variable aspects and measurements
[10]. In table [1] it's almost impossible to get the
same aspects set of (QOL) in the literatures;
although, (QOL) have similar aspects like
Environmental, Social and finally Economic. (QOL)
aspects are only in exceptional times measured by
the same unit. These aspects names may be
misguiding in a lot of cases. Ulengin (2001) stated
that: “Some of those aspects are measured with
irrelevant indicators such as Wish (1986) criticized,
Liu (1976) he had measured his social aspect by
fifty-four indicators which are common between
political and economic aspects and those indicators
are common with the social component, which leads
to double counting, and to bias” [4,5,10].
A lot of studies sustain to give more weight for
several schemes and aspects or even variables
further than another aspect or variable. In a lot of
different studies, the weighting process (whether it
is similar weights or various) is totally up to the
researcher decision.
Table 1. Parameters affecting the quality of life (QOL)
Source: adapted from Moussa, 2013
Sourc
e
Aspects
[5]
(1) Environmental; (2) Economic; (3) Social; (4) Political
and (5) educational &health
[6]
(1)Health care & environment, (2)Education,
(3)Economics, (4)Housing, (5)Arts, (6)Crime, (7)Climate,
(8)Transportation, and (9)Recreation
[7,8]
(1) heating degree days, (2) coast, (3) total suspended
particulates, (4) cooling degree days, (5) violent crime, (6)
NPDES effluent discharges, (7) wind speed, (8) teacher
pupil ratio, (9) landfill waste, (10) sunshine, (11)
visibility, (12) superfund sites, (13) Precipitation, (14)
central city, (15) humidity, and (16) treatment, storage and
disposal sites
[9]
(1)Living space, (2)Education, (3)Clean air, (4)Housing
standard, (5)Public health, (6)Food cost, (7) Traffic flow,
(8)Public safety, (9)Peace and quiet, and (10)
Communication
[10]
(1)Economic environment quality, (2)Social environment
quality, (3)Transportation & communication quality, and
(4)Physical environment quality
Flynn
et, al.
(2002)
(1)Economic indicators, (2)Social indicators, and
(3)Environmentally indicators
[11]
(1)Economic, (2)Ecological, (3)Social
[12]
(1)Public health benefits, (2) Economic benefits, (3)
Environmental Benefits, (4) Social Benefits
[13]
(1)Air pollution in the urban spaces, (2)Aesthetics and the
environment, (3)Open spaces, the environment quality in
residential neighbourhoods and the built density, (4)Public
participating and the urban environment,
(5)Environmental evaluation system for building and
spaces, (6)Noises in the urban spaces, and
(7)Transportation factor
[14]
(1)Social benefits, (2)Aesthetic and architecture benefits,
(3)Climatic and physical benefits, (4) Ecological benefits,
(5)Economic benefits
[15]
(1)Social, (2) Economic, (3) Ecological Values
[16]
(1)Environmental, (2) Economic, (3) Social
[17]
(1)Environmental, (2) Social, (3)Economic
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ENVIRONMENT and DEVELOPMENT
DOI: 10.37394/232015.2022.18.11
Marianne Nabil Guirguis, Rania Rushdy Moussa,
Khaled M. Dewidar, Naglaa Mohamed Yossif
E-ISSN: 2224-3496
101
Volume 18, 2022
Furthermore, a quite large figure of tests was
established for measuring the (QOL). The(QOL)
differs majorly regarding concept, construction and
content; subsequently, a direct comparison is not
always convenient with one another [18]. Each of
the indicators of objectives and subjectives are
considered as measures for the (QOL). Objective
measures characterized by not being subjected to the
error of observation; however, they are not sensitive
to all sensations about the subject[19]. All of those
measures have and been demonstrated concerning
the dependability of several measures, for instance:
income, housing density and crime rates[20]. Well-
being parameters are a subjective parameters and
they include utility, job satisfaction, welfare,
happiness for persons or clusters and perceptions of
health and morale encompass subjects getting told
for making decisions regarding their lives; that is the
power of subjective measures.“People's perceptions
however, uninformed they may be, are real and
people act on the basis of them" [19].
1.2 Framework of (QOL)
In this research, the framework of the(QOL) got
fostered as a result of it being utmost convenient
framework regarding such research and it was the
latest framework when this research started. It
describes the meaning of the (QOL) and the needs
of this generation and this time period [21].
Costanza, et al. (2007) specified (QOL) to
estimating human needs by subjective well-being or
happiness. (QOL) has presented as a multi-scale,
multi-dimensional concept that accommodates
interacting elements both objective and subjective.
Furthermore, they make a relation between (QOL)
and the chances whichever given for reaching
human needs in the form of natural capital, built,
social and human as shown in figure [1]. The
adapted framework of [21] specified (QOL) with a
definition of 'objective human needs in relation to
personal or group perceptions of subjective well-
being'[21]. However, measurement in terms of
'human needs' and ' well-being' can be done as
shown in figure [2].
1.2.1 Human Needs:
Abraham Maslow is a pioneer theorist that
developed the 'Hierarchy of Needs'
theory,considered to be an original example for the
humanist philosophy followed by many others
theorists[22]. Maslow's theory of hierarchy of
human needs specified five different levels of needs,
whichever involve 'physiological', 'safety',
'belonging', 'esteem' and 'self-actualization' needs.
All of the five levels require to be fulfilled so as to
achieve a healthy and full-functioning human being.
Recently, he included two more levels into that
hierarchy, named 'cognitive' and 'aesthetic' needs,
whichever got allocated prior to 'self-actualization'
within this frame of reference.
if one or more of Maslow's needs is not satisfied, the
individual will tend to be arrested at that
developmental stage, unable to progress to further
stages until that need is met” [22].
Kök, (2007) added “human needs are a powerful
source of explanation of human behaviour and
social interaction ... social systems must be
responsive to individual needs, or be subject to
instability and forced change” [23].
Fig. 1.Quality of Life (QOL) as the interaction of human
needs and the subjective perception of their fulfilment, as
mediated by the opportunities available to meet the needs.
Source: Costanza et al. (2007)
Fig. 2.The Adopted model for
studying Quality of Life (QOL)
Source: Adopted from Costanza et
al. (2007)
Quality of
Life
Subjective Well-Being
Human Needs
Subsistence
Reproduction
Security
Affection
Understanding
Participation
Leisure
Spirituality
Creativity
Identity
Freedom
Happiness
Utility
Welfare
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ENVIRONMENT and DEVELOPMENT
DOI: 10.37394/232015.2022.18.11
Marianne Nabil Guirguis, Rania Rushdy Moussa,
Khaled M. Dewidar, Naglaa Mohamed Yossif
E-ISSN: 2224-3496
102
Volume 18, 2022
Maslow
Burton
Rosenberg
Max Neef
Costanza et
al.
Food,
water,
shelter
Distribut
ive
justice
Physical
Nurturance
Subsisten
ce
Subsistence
Safety
and
security
Safety,
Security
Interdepen
dence
Protection
Reproduction
Belonging
or love
Belongin
gness
Love
Integrity
Affection
Security
Self-
esteem
Self-
esteem
Autonomy
Understan
ding
Affection
Cognitive
needs
Personal
fulfilmen
t
Play
Creation
Understandin
g
Aesthetic
needs
Identity
Celebration
and
mourning
Identity
Participation
Self-
actualizati
on
Cultural
security
Spiritual
Communio
n
Leisure,
Idleness
Leisure
Freedom
Freedom
Spirituality
Participa
tion
Participati
on
Creativity/em
otional
expression
Identity
Freedom
Established upon the above table [2], we came to
know that those researchers and philosophers
adjusted Maslow's model of human needs so as to
achieve accommodation to the time period. That
became the fundamental reason of choosing
Costanza's model. The framework of human needs
of Costanza, et al. (2007) was based on Max-Neef's
(1992) Matrix of Human Needs and Abraham
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Human Needs[21,28].
Max-Neef's (1992) divided the human needs into
nine aspects as follows:
Subsistence: wholeness, order, consumption, wasting,
motion, activity, heat, accessibility, flexibility,
growing and willingtobealive.
Protection: keeping physical livelihood, keeping
mentally and emotionally well-being.
Affection: enjoyment, belief, devotion, admiration,
beauty, sense. Engagement: receive and give.
Understanding: awareness, knowledge, learning and
reflexing.
Creation: transfigure, change symbols and reshaping.
Idleness: cleansing and relief.
Identity: physical distinction and looks, mentality,
previous experiences and desire.
Freedom: worth, choosing and preference.
Transcendence: declaration of living and avoidno
meaningful absurd.
Costanza et al. (2007) framework of human
needs[21, 24, 28], whichever was adjusted from
Max-Neef, contains eleven aspects as presented and
designated in table [3].
Table 3. Costanza et al., (2007) list of human needs and their
description
Source: Costanza. et al. (2007)
Human needs
Description (direct satisfiers)
Subsistence
Food, shelter, vital ecological
services(clean air and water, etc.)
healthcare, rest
Reproduction
Nurturing of children, pregnant
women
Transmission of the culture
Homemaking
Security
Enforced predictable rules of
conduct
Safety from violence at home and
in public
Security of subsistence into the
future
Maintain safe distance from
crossing critical
ecological thresholds
Stewardship of nature to ensure
subsistence into the future
Care for the sick and elderly
Affection
“Being able to have attachments to
things and persons outside
ourselves; to love those who love
and care for us, to grieve at their
absence.” (Nussbaum as referenced
in Costanza)
Solidarity, respect, tolerance,
generosity, passion, receptiveness
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ENVIRONMENT and DEVELOPMENT
DOI: 10.37394/232015.2022.18.11
Marianne Nabil Guirguis, Rania Rushdy Moussa,
Khaled M. Dewidar, Naglaa Mohamed Yossif
E-ISSN: 2224-3496
103
Volume 18, 2022
Understanding
Access to information
Intuition and rationality
Participation
Act meaningfully in the world
Contribute to and have some
control over political, community,
and social life
Being heard
Meaningful employment
Citizenship
Leisure
Recreation, relaxation, tranquillity,
access to nature, travel
Spirituality
Engaging in transcendent
experiences
Access to nature
Participation in a community of
faith
Creativity/emotional
expression
Play, imagination, inventiveness,
artistic expression
Identity
Status, recognition, sense of
belonging, differentiation, sense of
place
Freedom
“Being able to live one's own life
and nobody else's. This means
having certain guarantees of non-
interference with certain choices
that are especially personal and
definitive of selfhood, such as
choices regarding marriage,
childbearing, sexual expression,
speech and employment”
((Nussbaum as referenced in
Costanza)
Mobility
1.2.2 Subjective Well-Being (SWB)
Between the sixties and the seventies, it was very
clear that the measures of economic and social well-
being indicating points were insufficient for
capturing the true well-being of individuals; this is
the reason researchers and scientists frequently
investigating the variation among meanings and
measurements of subjective well-being [29].
Dieneret al. (2003) [41] suggested the theory of
well-being in psychology so it became major set
point theory of human well-being whichever got
much development during time and researches. The
theory of [41] considered that everyone has his own
"happiness set point", that happiness set point
various for each person due to differences in each
one's genes, personality and experiences of
deviations as a result of living events, circumstances
or situations. Dieneret al. (2003) indicates about the
SWB shall be considered as a basis for the genetic
form of the public, in addition to not get influenced
by various aspects like environmental amenities,
education, income and health. May researchers such
as [21,30]and a lot others concurred upon subjective
well-being evaluates in addition to analyses any
study about individuals lives by both of evaluations
of individual's emotions and moods, also cognitive
judgments of life satisfaction. The subjective well-
being could get measured through holding
interviews to groups or individuals and to ask them
to start evaluating life satisfaction, well-being,
utility, happiness and welfare of their own.
Subjective measurements usually focus on
distinctive description of life experience that
complement health, economic and social factors
indicating like the degree whichever a perceived
need that getting encountered in addition to the
significance of this "perceived need" for person's
altogether (QOL). Subjective measures normally
depend upon surveys or interviews tools to collect
participants' detailed evaluation for their lived
experiences presented as self-reporting about
satisfaction, happiness, well-being or different near-
synonym. The SWB evaluated by answers of
individuals or groups for asked about happiness, life
satisfaction, utility, or welfare [21]. This study is
based on explaining human needs and well-being
based on previous mentioned researchers and
scientists. This research investigates the effect of
landscape features on the quality of Egyptian life's
which can be measured by Human needs and
subjective well-being.
1.3 Parks Features
In order to describe the parks, we need to talk about
parks' elements. The fundamental scope of this
study is not the design of parks, the components of
parks are used for estimating the main connection
between parks and the (QOL). Nevertheless, to get
further details regarding the components of parks
you can research in[31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36].
The framework of the parks features shown in figure
[3] were utilized through this research. It was
fostered from Moussa and Mahmoud. (2017)
framework diverged the parks features into five
categories as follows:
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ENVIRONMENT and DEVELOPMENT
DOI: 10.37394/232015.2022.18.11
Marianne Nabil Guirguis, Rania Rushdy Moussa,
Khaled M. Dewidar, Naglaa Mohamed Yossif
E-ISSN: 2224-3496
104
Volume 18, 2022
1.3.1 Trail/Path
Several fundamental elements in landscape such as:
trails, paths, pavements and footpath, these elements
also let people enjoy the landscape. This landscape
can be made by nature as inland waterways,
mountains, forests and coastal or it can be made by
man as artificial parks and farms [31, 33].
1.3.2 Designated and Specific Use Areas
These areas include: picnic areas, camping sites,
open spaces, meadows, wooded areas, shelters
(pavilion or gazebo), entertainment venues/stage,
areas around parks, wildlife or pet areas and parking
lots. Years ago, it was The Greeks who were the
starters of making public spaces or even areas for
specified usage such as the temenos and the agora
[19].
1.3.3 Water Areas
Water represents a fundamental part in landscape.
Different water features include fountains, ponds,
lakes, fishing areas, streams or creeks, wetland,
reflective pools and waterfalls [32 ,36].
1.3.4 Other Amenities and Facilities
The execution of the site is effected positively by
amenities of the site and facilities; they consist of
benches, flag poles, trash receptacles, telephone
booths, tables, bus shelters, vending machines,
kiosks, picnic shelters, mail boxes, memorials,
sculptures, bike racks, walls, fences and
monuments.
1.3.5 Playground Equipment, Fields and
Courts
This set includes: play-set, fictional play structures,
grounding surfaces, anything for swinging/hanging
from it, anything for climbing on/up/through,
elements for standing or walking on, swings and
element for sliding down, etc. It is planned to free
the people away of the capture of brick walls and
glass providing an area wherever kids can be
playing in larger, shaded and safer spaces [34].
2 Study Methods
This research uses qualitative method for
investigating the influence of landscape features
installed in Egyptian parks and its effect on quality
of human life measured in term of human needs and
well-being. Qualitative surveys targeting the park
visitors were undertaken in this research. Two parks
Landscape Elements
• Trails
• Path
• Pavements
• Footpath networks
• Open space
• Wooded area
• Picnic area
• Camping site
• Pavilion
• Area surrounding parks
• Wildlife or pet area
• parking lot
• Lakes
• Ponds
• Fountains
• Fishing area
• Stream
• Wetland
• Reflective Pools
• Waterfall
• Benches
• Trash box
• Tables
• Vending mach.
• Telep. booths
• Kiosks
• mailboxes
• Sculptures
• Walls
• Fences
• Drink fountains
• Picnic shelters
• Playing sets
• Playing structures
• Ground surfaces
• Sliding down things
• Standing or walking
on
• Climbing
through/on/up
• Swinging/hanging
from
1- Trails
& Paths
2- Designated
& Specific Use
Areas
3-
Water
Areas
4- Other
Amenities &
Facilities
5- Playground
Equipment &
Fields & Courts
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ENVIRONMENT and DEVELOPMENT
DOI: 10.37394/232015.2022.18.11
Marianne Nabil Guirguis, Rania Rushdy Moussa,
Khaled M. Dewidar, Naglaa Mohamed Yossif
E-ISSN: 2224-3496
105
Volume 18, 2022
were chosen; “Al-Azhar Park” and “Family Park” to
become the study areas of the research. The surveys
were conducted in order to measure the effect of
landscape features toward Human needs and
subjective well-being.
2.1 Study Area
The study chose Al-Azhar Park and Family Park
randomly among the Egyptian parks because they
are among the largest parks in Egypt and they were
constructed lately which made they attract more
visitors than other Egyptian parks.
2.1.1 Al-Azhar Park
Al-Azhar Park is situated in Old Cairo district. It is
encircled by several historical locations as shown in
figure [4], it is considered among the major parks
within Cairo. Al-Azhar Park designers aimed to
planning a park that re-energize that history and
heritage in order to making it stimulating for
economic and socially development.
2.1.2 FamilyPark
Family Park is situated in New Cairo district and it
is surrounded by new urban districts as shown in
figure [5], it is considered as one of the prime parks
in Cairo. The Park location is considered distinctive
because of its proximity to Cairo-Suez road and
surrounded by new districts such as “Al-Rehab
City” district and “El-tagamoa Al-awal” with
different socioeconomic levels.
2.2 Components of Study Area
2.2.1 Al-Azhar Park
The design of Al-Azhar Park is connected through a
formally designed water channel spine or axis
whichever held jointly through the whole length, the
spine or axis represent a special theme that shows
traditions from Islamic Gardens design [39, 40].
Water features are distributed and gave in to the
freest shape for the lake allocated in the Sothern
meadow as shown in figure [6]. Classically Islamic
traditions have Gardens and pavilions, bordered
with geometrically gardened orchards whichever
strengthen the entry spot by the side of the lake. The
cantered passageway accompanies alleyways and
several formally designed gardens and anchors on
each side around the hilltop restaurant and lakeside
cafe, whichever acts like in park's landmarks[37,
38].A net of informally designed passageways
bordering the further formally designed areas and
give on along each level and corner of the site.(AEC
World Expo, 2009). All these components of the
park are shown in figure [6].
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ENVIRONMENT and DEVELOPMENT
DOI: 10.37394/232015.2022.18.11
Marianne Nabil Guirguis, Rania Rushdy Moussa,
Khaled M. Dewidar, Naglaa Mohamed Yossif
E-ISSN: 2224-3496
106
Volume 18, 2022
2.2.2 Family Park
Family Park consists of six categorizations;
entertainment, cafes, services building, restaurants,
educational building, gaming and greenery spaces as
shown in figure [7]. The components of
entertainment categorization are enjoyment village,
entertainment plaza, safari plaza, safari gazelles, 3D
cinema, amphitheatre, puppet theatre, Roman
theatre, Roman lakeside theatre and dancing
fountain. The park has good distributed number of
restaurants and cafes, one of the restaurants named
IBIS in addition to a couple of cafes named jungle
and rendezvous, additionally five kiosks and a food
court, several buildings like the main and subsidiary
gates, twelve lavatories, three train stations
(Rendezvous, cave and jungle), administration,
emergency clinic and several gifts shops.
Furthermore, the park delivers a different
educational adventure for the kids throughout the
exhibitions, workshops, discovery palace and the
museum. The park has 20066 m2 of green areas.
2.3 Park Visitors
“Al-Azhar” and “Family” Parks are considered the
most public attractive parks in Egypt due to its
modern design and high quality. The numbers of
visitor’s in Al-Azhar Park and Family Park are
presented below in tables 4 and 5, the data were
collected from the social department of the parks.
As shown in tables 4 &5, the visitor’s distribution
shows huge differences between national vacations,
weekends and working days. The numbers of
visitors in Friday’s are bigger than the rest of the
week days, because Friday is a weekend in all
Egyptian firms and businesses institutions.
2.4 Data Collection Questionnaires
This research conducted the qualitative survey in the
form of detailed questionnaires. Two questionnaires
took place in this research; the first questionnaire
targets the visitors of Al-Azhar Park. While the
second questionnaire, target the visitors of Family
Park. Each questionnaire was split into two parts.
The first one consists of seven questions
corresponding to visitor characteristics such as:
Name, age, gender, career, educational level, the
number of visiting the park which is the study area
of the research. The second part of the questionnaire
consists of 65 questions, each question measures the
effect of the chosen park elements (representing the
landscape features), and its effect on each (QOL)
aspects (which represent the aspects of Human
needs and SWB). The Park visitors were asked to
indicate how closely the feature installed in Al-
Azhar Park and Family Park affect the aspects of
human needs and subjective well-Being. The
visitors were asked to rate each feature from ‘totally
disagree’ (1 point) to ‘totally agree’ (7 points) in
sequence of measuring the effects of landscape
features on the 'quality of Egyptian life’s' with
regards of measuring the 'human needs' and
'subjective well-being'.
2.5 Characteristics of Participants
The total number of participants participated in this
research are 735 persons. The survey took place
between December 2019 and January 2020. The
participants were selected randomly amongst Al-
Azhar Park and Family Park visitors. The research
sample started with 890 participants, but only 735
participants were considered as those are the sample
that answered all the questions. It was noticed that
an average of 155 participants answered less than
Table 5. The rate of visitors of Family Park
Weekly data
National vacations
Type of day
Number of
visitors
Type of day
Number
of
visitors
Friday
7,000 to
14,000
Eastern vacation
15,475
Saturday
5,000 to 9, 000
Adha 1st day
19,625
Sunday
2,800 to 7,000
Adha 2nd day
22,720
Monday
2,800 to 7,000
Adha 3rd day
21,109
Tuesday
2,800 to 7,000
Adha 4th day
10,945
Wednesday
2,800 to 7,000
Sham el Nesem
40,420
Thursday
5,600 to 10,
000
6 of october
18,910
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ENVIRONMENT and DEVELOPMENT
DOI: 10.37394/232015.2022.18.11
Marianne Nabil Guirguis, Rania Rushdy Moussa,
Khaled M. Dewidar, Naglaa Mohamed Yossif
E-ISSN: 2224-3496
107
Volume 18, 2022
70% of the questionnaire because they found the
questionnaire too long. 410 participants out of 735
participants participated in the research from Al-
Azhar Park while 325 are the number of participants
participated from Family Park. The age of the
participants ranged between 20 to 49 years and they
were selected randomly amongst the visitors. 65%
of them were regular visitors that visited the park
more than once, while the rest visited the park for
the first time on the day of the questionnaire.
2.6 Procedures
This research depended on the qualitative
questionnaire for data collection; the survey was
conducted between December 2018 and January
2019. Two questionnaires took place in this
research; the first questionnaire targeted the visitors
of Al-Azhar Park meanwhile, the other
questionnaire has been done in Family Park. 735
people chose to join the survey of this research. 410
participants participated from Al-Azhar Park while
325 participants participated from Family Park.
People were oncoming in each park then they were
told about the objectives meant by the survey and
also the proper procedures to answer all questions.
With a view to reflect peoples' reflection of their on
spot experience, those wanting to join by choice
were given the questions and got asked to answer
the questions within still staying in the area. The
questions were narrated to the participants before
they started answering them to make sure that they
acknowledge all of the questions. The
questionnaires were handed out all week, both on
weekends and working days, at various times of
each day and in several areas of the park. The
software used for statics SPSS 17.0 was utilized to
perform statistical analysis in order to analyse the
data collected and each data subdivided to pull out
the main parameters of the correspondent scale by
employing the Mean value and the standard
deviation. Subsequently, all of the data collected
were statistically analyzed by SPSS program in
preparation for measuring the effect of landscape
features for the 'quality of Egyptian life' in terms of
'human needs' and 'subjective well-being'.
3 Results
The questionnaire conducted in this research was
self-reported, whichever assess background
information, behaviours in addition to psychological
trails with reference to the visitor's life gratification
to Egyptian parks. The data collected from the 735
participants were used analysed. The main set of
data got split to 65 data subsets, corresponding to 65
variables that were observed the connection between
each landscape feature implemented in the park with
the aspects of human need subjective well-beings.
Statistical software SPSS 17 was used to analyse the
data and tested the Standard Deviation and the Mean
value to the collected data. The results of this study
and explained and summarized by the following
tables and charts.
3.1 Descriptive analysis of Al-Azhar park
Questionnaire
Table [6] summarizes the response to the main
questionnaire. The number of participants that
answered each question (N) could be calculated as
N= 5*410, where 5 represent the parks features and
410 represent number of participant. Mean value is
the mean value of one aspect with the five elements
of park which indicate five places inside the park.
Std. Deviation is the Standard deviation of response
of the participants on one aspect in the five places
inside the park. The main findings of table [6] are:
The participants find that all the (QOL) aspects are
significant in the five elements or places of the park
depending on Mean value that were concluded from
the participant responses, mean value is above 4
which represent the moderate response in
questionnaire. It revealed that Affection and
Happiness are the most effected aspects in the park,
while Participation, Understanding and Welfare are
Table 4. The rate of visitors of Al-Azhar Park
Weekly data
National vacations
Type of
day
Number of
visitors
Type of day
Numbe
r of
visitors
Friday
10,000 to 15,000
Eastern vacation
20,125
Saturday
9,000 to 11, 000
Adha 1st day
26,946
Sunday
4,000 to 8,000
Adha 2nd day
35,445
Monday
4,000 to 8,000
Adha 3rd day
32,177
Tuesday
4,000 to 8,000
Adha 4th day
13,1414
Wednesday
4,000 to 8,000
Sham el Nesem
47,9400
Thursday
9,000 to 11, 000
6 of october
30,157
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ENVIRONMENT and DEVELOPMENT
DOI: 10.37394/232015.2022.18.11
Marianne Nabil Guirguis, Rania Rushdy Moussa,
Khaled M. Dewidar, Naglaa Mohamed Yossif
E-ISSN: 2224-3496
108
Volume 18, 2022
the most unaffected aspects in Al-Azhar Park as
shown below in table [6].
3.2 Descriptive analysis of Family Park
Questionnaire
Table [7] shows a summary of the main properties
of the response to the main questionnaire. The
number of participants that answered each question
(N) could be calculated as N= 5*325, where 5
represent the parks features and 325 represent
number of participant. Mean value is the mean value
of one aspect with the five elements of park which
indicate five places inside the park. Std. Deviation is
the Standard deviation of response of the
participants on one aspect in the five places inside
the park. The main findings of table [7] are:
The participants find that all the (QOL) aspects are
significant in the five elements or places of the park
depending on Mean value that were concluded from
the participant responses, mean value is above 4
which represent the moderate response in
questionnaire.
3.3 Relation between Al-Azhar park
Elements and (QOL) Aspects
The subsequent tables illustrate the connection
between all of the elements of the park on the
different (QOL) aspects. In preparation for
acknowledging the implication of elements on
(QOL) characteristics, it was decided to select the
characteristic that the participants announced over 5
to be the highest gratification characteristics that
please the park visitors. The total number of
response is 7 and 4 is the moderate effect so we
chose 5 which is more than the moderate to make
clear that this characteristic is pleasing the visitors
of the park in those specific areas. From 4 to 4.9
was decided to be the moderate value, and less them
4 if the lowest gratification characteristics that
please the visitors. In the subsequent tables,
significant (QOL) characteristics are dark shaded
while non-significant aspects are faded.
Table 8. Relation between (QOL) aspects and Al-Azhar park
landscape features
Elements of Parks
Trails/Path
Designated &
Specific use
areas
Water Areas
Other
Amenities &
facilities
Playground
equipment &
fields &
courts
Security
Security
Security
Subsistence
Security
Affection
Affection
Affection
Security
Affection
Leisure
Leisure
Understanding
Affection
Freedom
Spirituality
Spirituality
Leisure
Leisure
Happiness
Creativity
Creativity
Spirituality
Happiness
Identity
Identity
Creativity
Freedom
Freedom
Identity
Happiness
Happiness
Freedom
Happiness
Utility
Table 6. The Mean value and standard deviation of Al-Azhar
Park participants
Analysis
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Subsistence
2050
4.42
1.812
Security
2050
4.86
1.622
Affection
2046
4.99
1.644
Understanding
2049
4.15
1.798
Participation
2050
4.03
2.322
Leisure
2049
4.84
1.802
Spirituality
2050
4.92
1.799
Creativity
2050
4.72
1.739
Identity
2050
4.46
1.753
Freedom
2050
4.68
1.729
Happiness
2050
5.05
1.689
Utility
2048
4.30
1.789
Welfare
2048
4.16
1.855
Table 7. The Mean value and standard deviation of Family
Park participants
Analysis
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Subsistence
1625
4.41
1.767
Security
1624
4.20
1.715
Affection
1623
4.63
1.706
Understanding
1625
4.18
1.706
Participation
1624
4.18
1.680
Leisure
1625
4.37
1.627
Spirituality
1625
4.56
1.611
Creativity
1623
4.27
1.614
Identity
1620
4.16
1.676
Freedom
1625
4.25
1.681
Happiness
1625
4.84
1.785
Utility
1622
4.09
1.841
Welfare
1625
4.12
1.752
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ENVIRONMENT and DEVELOPMENT
DOI: 10.37394/232015.2022.18.11
Marianne Nabil Guirguis, Rania Rushdy Moussa,
Khaled M. Dewidar, Naglaa Mohamed Yossif
E-ISSN: 2224-3496
109
Volume 18, 2022
Table 9.Relation between (QOL) aspects and Family park
landscape features
Elements of Parks
Trails/Path
Designated &
Specific use
areas
Water Areas
Other
Amenities &
facilities
Playground
equipment &
fields & courts
Happiness
Happiness
Happiness
Happiness
Happiness
Affection
Affection
Affection
Affection
Affection
Spirituality
Spirituality
Spirituality
Spirituality
Spirituality
Creativity
Creativity
Creativity
Creativity
Creativity
Security
Security
Security
Security
Security
Leisure
Leisure
Leisure
Leisure
Leisure
Freedom
Freedom
Understanding
Freedom
Participation
Identity
Identity
Utility
Identity
Understanding
Freedom
Freedom
The findings of this research gave out that the
landscape features installed in the parks have major
participation for human needs and subjective well-
being (SWB). These results were introduced on
various figures as shown in figures (8, 9, 10, 11, 12,
13, 14, 15, 16 and 17). The figures demonstrate the
effect of Al-Azhar Park and Family Park elements
which illustrate several areas in each park on each
(QOL)aspect. The graphs represent the mean value
(5 or more) in order to be the significant aspect.
Since the highest value in the answers is 7 and 1 is
the lowest value while 4 is the moderate one, it was
decided to take the value of 5 or more as a
significant value and a range between 4.5 to 5 to be
the moderate significant value in order to make sure
that the aspect is really valid.
The study investigated to eventually conclude the
similarities and the differences between the effect of
landscape features inside Al-Azhar Park and Family
Park on (QOL) aspects.
The results of this research revealed that the
Egyptians feel a high level of happens and Affection
in both parks while they were not satisfied with
Egyptian parks the utilities and welfare as shown in
figures 18 and 19.
4 Conclusion
4 Conclusion
After analysing the results, it was conducted that a
lot of landscape features put up to human needs and
SWB. The study additionally showed that the
features of parks have a major consequence for
fulfilling the (QOL) aspects mainly specific needs
like 'Happiness' and 'Affection'.
The case study survey demonstrates that people like
to visit the Egyptian Parks and this is the reason of
higher level of happiness in all the parks features
whichever exemplify several places in Al-Azhar
Park and Family Park. Nevertheless, visitors do not
have the feeling of a good relation to welfare and
they only find few places or not enough activities to
join in or to allow them to get to know new people
except for the 'Playgrounds Equipment & Fields &
Courts' whichever resemble the kids' areas in the
Fig. 19. Effect of Elements of Family Parks on QOL aspects
Fig. 18. Effect of Elements of Al-Azhar Parks on QOL aspects
Fig. 3.Elements of parks
Source: Moussa and Mahmoud, 2017
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ENVIRONMENT and DEVELOPMENT
DOI: 10.37394/232015.2022.18.11
Marianne Nabil Guirguis, Rania Rushdy Moussa,
Khaled M. Dewidar, Naglaa Mohamed Yossif
E-ISSN: 2224-3496
110
Volume 18, 2022
park. A significant number of people identify the
areas with water such as fountains and the lake,
places that come up with opportunities to learn new
things. This study substantially concluded that
respondent’s perception, normally, of (QOL) of
districts belonging to them were strengthened as a
result of Al-Azhar Park and Family Park
development. These projects present a good chance
of having pleasing jobs, urban services and
sufficient infrastructure; in addition to increasing
commercial values whichever add to the income.
(interview with Al-Azhar park and Family Park
managers). Therefore, the municipal authorities and
those responsible for planning the city, must put
great significance of this type of projects in alike
areas.
These investigation findings are compatible to the
research hypothesis. Needless to say, several aspects
of the QOL are very hard to be influenced, but this
study specifies precedents to assign resources to
enhance the QOL at homogeneous districts of the
old core of Cairo and new districts like New Cairo.
The fundamental finding of this study is the major
influence of parks on QOL and human satisfaction.
Furthermore, this study investigated the positively
effects of parks and nature-made environment on
meeting the human needs and well-being. The
presented study measured the effect of different
park elements on each aspect of human need and
well-being. Parks and trees in urban levels have
evinced beneficial environmentally, socially and
economically for architects, landscape architects and
urban planners. Urban parks are once seen as an
aesthetic element of the city but not anymore, now it
has become a fundamental part of the urban
ecosystem. Careful utilization of those the five
elements of parks with along aware studying the
economic and environmental context would surely
assist to establish sustainable (QOL) among any
urban area. Parks, recreation and public health
executives need to enhance their research and to not
limit their data to show a growth in park visits
ahead. It is needed to be proved that park visits got a
lot of measurable benefits for human health, social
life and economic income. Parks need to have some
measurable benefit for human (QOL).
References:
[1] Forward, S. (2003). State of the Art Report on
Life Quality Assessment in the Field of
Transport and Mobility. Linkoepin- Sweden:
Swedish National Road and Transport Research
Institute.
[2] Galloway, S. (2005). Quality of Life and Well-
being: Measuring the Benefits of Culture and
Sport: Literature Review and Think Piece.
Eidenburgh: Scottish Executive Social Research
[3] Caiman, K.C. (1984). Quality of life in cancer
patients—a hypothesis. J. Med. Ethics 10, 1551.
[4] Wish, N.B. (1986). Are we really measuring the
quality of life? Well-being has subjective
dimensions, as well as objective ones. American
Journal of Economics and Sociology 45 (1),
93±99.
[5] Liu, B.C. (1976). Quality of Life Indicators in
US Metropolitan Areas: A Statistical Analysis.
Praeger, New York.
[6] Boyer, R. and Savageau, D. (1981). Places
Rated Almanac. Rand McNelly, Chicago.
[7] Blomquist, G.C., Berger, M.C. and Hoehn, J.P.
(1988). New estimates of quality of life in urban
areas. American Economic Review 78 (1), 89-
107.
[8] Stover, M.E. and Leven, C.L. (1992).
Methodological issues in the determination of
the quality of life in urban areas. Urban Studies
29 (5), 737±754.
[9] Sufian, A.J.M. (1993). A multivariate analysis
of the determinants of urban quality of life in
the worldÕs largest metropolitan areas. Urban
Studies 30 (8), 1319±1329.
[10] Ulengin, B., Ulengin, F. and Guvenc, U. (2001).
A multidimensional approach to urban quality
of life: The case of Istanbul, ‘European Journal
of Operational Research’, Volume 130, pp 361-
374.
[11] Dyck, B. (2003). Benefits of Planted Forests:
Social, Ecological and Economic. Wellington,
New Zealand: Science & Technology Broker,
PO Box 11236 Palm Beach.
[12] Sherer, P.M. (2003). Report: The benefits of
parks: why America needs more city parks and
open space. San Francisco: Parks for people.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ENVIRONMENT and DEVELOPMENT
DOI: 10.37394/232015.2022.18.11
Marianne Nabil Guirguis, Rania Rushdy Moussa,
Khaled M. Dewidar, Naglaa Mohamed Yossif
E-ISSN: 2224-3496
111
Volume 18, 2022
[13] Kimhi, I. (2005). Urban Environ mental
Quality. The Jerusalem Institute for Israel
Studies, The Center for Environmental Policy.
[14] Tyrväinen, L., Pauleit, P., Seeland, K. and de
Vries, S. (2005). Urban Forests and Trees:
Chapter 4 Benefits and Uses of Urban Forests
and Trees. Netherlands: Springer.
[15] Prato, T. and Fagre, D. (2006). National Parks
& Protected Areas: Approaches for Balancing
Social, Economic, and Ecological Values. State
Ave: 2121 State Ave., Ames, IA 50014. 2005.
446 p. $124.99, hardcover. ISBN 0-8138-1248-
8.
[16] Mahmoud, A. and Rushdy, R. (2009). The Role
of Park Planning in Enhancing the Quality of
Urban Environments. England, 2nd
international Conference on whole life urban
sustainability and its assessment–Loughborough
University.
[17] Priego, C. and Canales, G., (2008).
Environmental, social and economic benefits of
tree plantations for urban societies. Cordova,
Spain. Report. Andalusia: Institute for advanced
social studies of Andalusia, IESA-CSIC, Campo
Santo de los Martires 7, 14004.
[18] Farquhar, M. (1995). Elderly people’s
definitions of quality of life. Britain, Elsevier
Science Ltd Soc. Sci. Med. Vol. 41, No. 10, pp.
1439-1446.
[19] Denham, M.J. (1983). Assessment of quality of
life. In Care of the Long-stay Patient (Edited by
Denham M. J.). Croom Helm, Beckenham.
[20] Townsend, P. and Gordon, D. (1992).
Unfinished statistical business on low incomes?
A review of new proposals by the Department
of Social Security for the production of public
information on poverty. University of Bristol,
Report 3, Statistical Monitoring Unit Series.
[21] Costanza, R., Fisher, B., Ali, S., Beer, C., Bond,
L., Boumans, R., Danigelis, N.L., Dickinson, J.,
Elliott, C., Farley, J., Gayer, D.E., Glenn, L.M.,
Hudspeth, T., Mahoney, D., McCahill, L.,
McIntosh, B., Reed, B., Rizvi, S.A.T., Rizzo,
D.M., Simpatico, T. and Snapp, R. (2007).
Quality of life: An approach integrating
opportunities, human needs, and subjective
well-being. Elsevier B.V., Ecological
Economics 61 (2007) 267–276.
[22] Pfeifer, A.A. (1998). Abraham Maslow’s
hierarchy of needs: A Christian perspective.
Austria, The 22' Integration Faith and Learning
Seminar SchlossBogenhofen.
[23] KÖK, H. (2007). Reducing Violence: Applying
the Human Needs Theory to the Conflict in
Chechnya. UluslararasHukukvePolitika, Cilt3,
No: 11 ss.89-108, 2007.
[24] Max-Neef M. (1991). On Human Needs and
Human Scale Development. Available on
http://www.rainforestinfo.org.au/background/m
axneef.htm. Human Scale Development,
published in 1987 in Spanish and Human Scale
Development, published in 1991, New York:
Apex Press.
[25] Burton, J. (1990). Conflict Resolution and
Prevention, New York: St. Martins Press.
[26] Gough, I. and Doyal, L. (1991). A Theory of
Human Need. The Macmillan Press,
Basingstoke.
[27] Rosenberg, M. (2003). Non Violent
Communication. A Language of Life.
California, Puddle Dancer Press.
[28] Max-Neef, M. (1992). Development and human
needs. In: Ekins, P., Max-Neef, M. (Eds.), Real
life Economics: Understanding Wealth
Creation. Routledge, London, pp. 97–213.
[29] Vemuri, A.W. and Costanza, R. (2006). The
role of human, social, built, and natural capital
in explaining life satisfaction at the country
level: Toward a National Well-Being Index
(NWI). Elsevier B.V., Ecological Economics,
58 (2006) 119– 133.
[30] Diener, E. and Suh, E.M., (1999). National
differences in subjective wellbeing. In:
Kahneman, D., Diener, E. and Schwarz, N.
(Eds.), Well-Being: The Foundations of
Hedonic Psychology. Russell Sage Foundation,
New York, pp. 444–450.
[31] Ferris, C.-I. (2009). Recreation and the
Landscape: Providing Trails – A Consideration
of the Challenges Presented in Delivering Trail
Networks for Recreation. Irish National
Landscape Conference 2009.
[32] Hong, S.-K., Nakagoshi, N., Fu, B.J., and
Morimoto, Y. (2008). Landscape Ecological
Applications in Man-Influenced Areas: Linking
Man and Nature Systems, chapter 30: Linking
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ENVIRONMENT and DEVELOPMENT
DOI: 10.37394/232015.2022.18.11
Marianne Nabil Guirguis, Rania Rushdy Moussa,
Khaled M. Dewidar, Naglaa Mohamed Yossif
E-ISSN: 2224-3496
112
Volume 18, 2022
Man and Nature Systems, 505–523. Springer
Science+ Business Media B.V. 2008.
[33] Johnson, L.M. (2010).Trail of Story, Traveller’s
Path. Canada, AU Press, Athabasca University.
[34] Prow, T. (1999). The Power of Trees. The
Illinois Steward, Volume 7 Issue 4.
[35] Saelens, B.E., Frank, L.D., Auffrey, C.,
Whitaker, R.C., Burdette, H.L. and Colabianchi,
N. (2006). Measuring Physical Environments of
Parks and Playgrounds: EAPRS Instrument
Development and Inter-Rater Reliability.
Journal of Physical Activity and Health 2006, 3,
Suppl 1, S190-S207.
[36] Sienkowska, H. (1990). Water in the landscape
of a town using the example of Gdansk and
Gdansk conurbation. Hydrological Processes
and Water Management in Urban Areas, IAHS
Publ. no. 198, 1990.
[37] Moussa, R.R. and Dewidar, K.M. (2020).
Energy-scape web-based application is an
effective tool to overcome the basic knowledge
of architects toward renewable energy
properties. International Journal of Emerging
Technologies in Learning (iJET), 15(10); 42-54.
Retrieved from:
https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i10.13669
[38] Moussa, R.R., Mahmoud, A.H., and Hatem,
T.M. (2020). A digital tool for integrating
renewable energy devices within landscape
elements: Energy-scape online application.
Journal of Cleaner Production, 254; 1-13.
Retrieved from:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119932
[39] Moussa, R.R. (2018). The role of energy-scape
elements in creating sustainable economic
project in Egyptian parks. Ain Shams
Engineering Journal, 9(4); 3045-3053.Retrieved
from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2018.09.001
[40] Moussa, R.R., and Mahmoud, A.H., (2017).
Energy-scape Elements: An Approach on
Integrating Landscape Elements with
Renewable Energy Devices. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 153; 114-130. Retrieved from:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pi
i/S0959652617305127
[41] Diener, E., Oishi, S., Lucas, R.E. (2003)
Personality, Culture, and Subjective Well-
Being: Emotional and Cognitive Evaluations.
Annual Review of Psychology, 54:403-425 of
Li
Contribution of individual authors to
the creation of a scientific article
(ghostwriting policy)
Rania Moussa, & Marianne Nabil, carried out the
analysis and comparison.
Marainne Nabil, Khaled Dewidar and Naglaa
Youssef organized and executed the manuscript.
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
(Attribution 4.0 International, CC BY 4.0)
This article is published under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License 4.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en_US
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on ENVIRONMENT and DEVELOPMENT
DOI: 10.37394/232015.2022.18.11
Marianne Nabil Guirguis, Rania Rushdy Moussa,
Khaled M. Dewidar, Naglaa Mohamed Yossif
E-ISSN: 2224-3496
113
Volume 18, 2022