Table 2.
Characteristics of visitation of UGS during the lockdown.
| A) Motivation to visit UGS | Red zones | Non-red zones | Significance | All groups |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Physical exercise | 20% | 32% | *** | 26% |
| Taking the dog out | 28% | 21% | ns | 25% |
| Relaxing | 24% | 19% | * | 21% |
| Taking the kids outdoor | 9% | 8% | ns | 8% |
| Observing nature | 10% | 10% | ns | 10% |
| Other | 7% | 9% | ns | 8% |
| Meeting people | 1% | 1% | 1% | |
| Reading | 1% | 0% | 0% | |
| Tot responses (n) | 320 | 318 | 638 | |
| B) Type of UGS | ||||
| An urban park | 42% | 37% | ns | 40% |
| An urban garden | 16% | 15% | ns | 16% |
| A tree-lined street | 5% | 5% | ns | 5% |
| River banks | 13% | 14% | ns | 13% |
| Green area outside the town | 19% | 25% | ns | 22% |
| Other | 3% | 4% | ns | 4% |
| Tot responses (n) | 315 | 318 | 632 | |
| C) Frequency of visitation | ||||
| More than once a week | 50% | 50% | ns | 50% |
| Once a week | 18% | 22% | ns | 20% |
| Less than once a week | 11% | 11% | ns | 11% |
| Once | 21% | 17% | ns | 19% |
| Tot responses (n) | 320 | 318 | 637 | |
| D) Distance of UGS | ||||
| Less than 200 m | 42% | 35% | ns | 38% |
| Between 200 and 500 m | 29% | 31% | ns | 30% |
| More than 500 m | 29% | 34% | ns | 32% |
| Tot responses (n) | 320 | 318 | 638 | |
| E) Means of transportation | ||||
| On foot | 84% | 80% | ns | 82% |
| Car | 7% | 11% | ns | 9% |
| Bike | 8% | 8% | ns | 8% |
| Public transportation | 1% | 1% | 1% | |
| Tot responses (n) | 320 | 318 | 636 |
Significant differences between the two groups (red zones vs. non-red zones) were identified by the Chi square test and marked by * at p < 0.05, ** at p < 0.01, *** at p < 0.005 and ns for no significance.