Analysis of the Design Needs of Urban Pet-friendly Parks from the Perspective of Human-pet Coexistence

Authors

  • Yiling Diao Sichuan University of Science & Engineering, Zigong, China

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54097/g4e3h797

Keywords:

Human-pet coexistence, pet-friendly park, user demand analysis, functional zoning design, digital management

Abstract

Under the background of accelerated urbanisation, the rapid growth of the number of pets has promoted the transformation of public space, and pet-friendly parks have become a key measure to balance the human-pet relationship and enhance the vitality of the city. From the perspective of human-pet coexistence, this article builds a multi-dimensional analysis framework. First, it deeply explores the differentiated demands of pet owners, pet individuals and diverse groups. Secondly, it systematically sorts out the specific requirements of functional layout, facility materials and ecological integration. Finally, it puts forward the phased design path and sustainable management strategy. The research adopts a combination of demand-driven and practice-oriented methods, emphasising safety, comfort and inclusion, and reducing conflicts and promoting interaction through spatial innovation and technology empowerment. Finally, a complete plan from foundation transformation to demonstration guidance is formed, which not only provides reference for the planning department, but also creates a harmonious and shared leisure environment for residents. Practical application shows that such parks can significantly reduce management pressure, improve use satisfaction, and help the construction of ecological cities.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Lamotte, K. E. (2013). Assessing the validity of preconceptions about dog parks: Cleanliness and disease transmission (Senior Honors Project). St. Catherine University. https://sophia.stkate.edu/shas_honors/27

[2] Forrest, A., & St. Clair, C. C. (2006). Effects of dog leash laws and habitat type on avian and small mammal communities in urban parks. Urban Ecosystems, 9(1), 51–66.

[3] Burgess-Cady, L. J. (2016). Dog parks and their users: A study of four dog parks in the Greater Oklahoma City Metropolitan Area (Doctoral dissertation). University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK.

[4] Cutt, H. E., Giles-Corti, B., Wood, L. J., Knuiman, M. W., & Burke, V. (2008). Barriers and motivators for owners walking their dog: Results from qualitative research. Health Promotion Journal of Australia, 19(2), 118–124. https://doi.org/10.1071/he08118

[5] Rashid, W., Shi, J., Rahim, I. u., Sultan, H., Dong, S., & Ahmad, L. (2020). Research trends and management options in human-snow leopard conflict. Biological Conservation, 242, 108413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108413

[6] Throop, D. M., Meehan, S. K., & Jarobski, T. A. (2012). Should Nantucket pursue the establishment of a fenced-in dog park. Worcester Polytechnic Institute. https://digitalcommons.wpi.edu/iqp-all/1509

[7] Brown, L. M. (2012). Landscape barkitecture: Guidelines for behaviorally, mentally and physically responsive dog parks (Master’s thesis). Ball State University, Muncie, IN.

[8] Shyan, M. R., Fortune, K. A., & King, C. (2003). “Bark parks”-A study on interdog aggression in a limited-control environment. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 6(1), 25–32.

[9] LaPointe, D. (2021). “Golden ears. Everybody and their dog goes there”: An investigation of park user perceptions of dogs in Golden Ears Provincial Park (Doctoral dissertation). Royal Roads University, Victoria, BC, Canada.

[10] Romo, A. B. (2018). Dog owners’ perceptions and behaviors related to the disposal of pet waste in City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks (Master’s thesis). The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA.

Downloads

Published

28-05-2026

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Diao, Y. (2026). Analysis of the Design Needs of Urban Pet-friendly Parks from the Perspective of Human-pet Coexistence. Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies, 1(2), 42-46. https://doi.org/10.54097/g4e3h797