PERCEIVED EFFECTIVENESS OF GREEN OPEN SPACES IN URBAN POLLUTION MITIGATION: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MELAKA AND PADANG

Abstract

Green open spaces (GOS) are widely examined as ecological infrastructure, yet less attention has been given to how regular users perceive their pollution-mitigation functions across contrasting spatial and governance contexts in Southeast Asia. This qualitative comparative study examines perceived effectiveness and limitations of GOS in relation to air pollution, traffic and urban noise, and water pollution in Melaka, Malaysia, and Padang, Indonesia. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 purposively selected park users-five per city-across two parks in each city. Participants were selected for their long-term residency, regular park use and awareness of local green-city initiatives, providing focused experiential evidence for cross-city comparison. Interview data were analysed thematically using NVivo; two researchers independently coded the transcripts, coding decisions were compared and reviewed, member checking and literature triangulation were undertaken, and COREQ guided reporting. Participants in both cities most consistently perceived air-related benefits, particularly in relation to vehicle emissions and carbon-dioxide regulation, while perceptions of noise buffering, haze-related air-quality protection and water-pollution mitigation were more variable. Participants in Melaka more consistently perceived benefits across the three pollution domains, whereas participants in Padang more frequently highlighted constraints associated with smaller park areas, limited vegetation coverage, proximity to major roads and fragmented management arrangements. The findings represent perceived rather than objectively measured environmental effectiveness. They extend Ecosystem Services Theory by showing that perceived regulating services are shaped by the interaction of ecological design, urban exposure and governance capacity.