Search

The "mobility turn" in environmental health studies promoted the integrated 3S (GIS, GPS, and remote sensing) approach in the study of urban residents' exposure to green space and corresponding health outcomes. However, few studies have examined the uncertainty induced by contextual settings when measuring people's exposure to green space using the conventional and integrated 3S approaches. In this paper, we compared the differences in green space exposure obtained from different geographic contexts using residence-based and mobility-based methods, multiple spatial resolutions, and buffer zones. We collected 7-day GPS trajectories from 208 participants at the 1-minute temporal resolution in Hong Kong. Entire Hong Kong's green space was delineated using multiple remote sensing data sources at 3 m, 10 m, and 30 m spatial resolutions. Lastly, the residence-based and mobility-based measurements of exposure to green space were calculated for each participant using 100 m, 300 m, and 500 m buffer zones at three spatial resolutions. Descriptive analyses, t-tests, and logistic regression were employed to examine the influence of different contextual settings on different measurements of green space exposure and their health effects. The results indicate multiple significant disparities. The most striking difference is that mobility-based measurements of exposure to green space are significantly higher than those of residence-based measurements, manifesting the uncertain geographic context problem (UGCoP). For future studies, we suggest using mobility-based measurements of exposure to green space, smaller buffer zones, and finer spatial resolutions, which enable more accurate measurements of green space exposure for the study of green space's health effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]