J. People Plants Environ Search

CLOSE


J. People Plants Environ > Volume 26(6); 2023 > Article
Kim and Huh: Analysis of Satisfaction and Characteristics of Using University Campus Gardens for Enhancing the Mental Well-Being of University Students

ABSTRACT

Background and objective: Recently, mental health problems of university students have emerged due to low employment rates and increased unemployment. Therefore, this study attempted to examine the effect of the characteristics of and satisfaction with university campus gardens on mental well-being and to suggest ways to create and utilize campus gardens as a means of promoting mental health for university students.
Methods: A survey was conducted on university students and graduate students attending G University located in J City, Gyeongsangnam-do. The survey was conducted from July 1 to December 10, 2019. The survey results of 516 subjects were ultimately used, and the survey items consisted of general characteristics, satisfaction with garden use, garden use characteristics, and mental well-being. The survey results were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics 25.
Results: In the case of garden use characteristics, ‘simple travel path’ was the most common purpose of use, and the highest frequency of use was 1–2 times a week. The factor that had the strongest positive correlation with overall satisfaction was satisfaction with using the garden as a leisure and recreation space, and the frequency of use also had a positive correlation. As a result of examining the effect of satisfaction and frequency of use on mental well-being, it was found that symbolism, visual beauty, and frequency of garden use had a positive effect.
Conclusion: In order for university students to use campus gardens as a tool to improve their mental well-being and as a place for leisure and recreation, efforts must be made to adequately arrange the characteristics of the region where each university campus is located and the symbolic elements of each university, to enhance the scenic beauty so that students can experience visual beauty, and to fulfill visual satisfaction by arranging plants or facilities with distinct characteristics for each season.

Introduction

Upon entering adulthood, university students suffer great stress not only from identity issues and academic stress that continue from adolescence, but also from economic dependence and independence, employment uncertainty, and the burden of success (Park et al., 2009). In particular, social instability due to the recent long-term recession and economic slump has brought about problems such as low employment rates and increased unemployment among university students, which has a negative impact on their mental health (Kim et al., 2023). Negative mental health problems cause suicide (47.2%) to be the number one cause of death among people in their 20s, and this is further aggravated by various stressors such as recently worsening unemployment crisis, academic achievement, and self-development (Choi and Kim, 2014).
University students spend much time on campus and engage in various activities in addition to studying. Thus, turning gardens on campus where university students spend time into spaces where they can relieve stress from daily life and studies will have a positive impact on the mental health of students. In regards to this, many previous studies are reporting the effect of natural landscape on stress relief of university students. Yi (2015) investigated the impact of natural landscape on stress relief and cognitive performance of university students using tools such as skin protrusion, heart rate, and psychological measurement and reported that natural landscape had a greater therapeutic effect than urban landscape on psychological stress relief and cognitive improvement. Moreover, Chen et al. (2022) discovered that the recovery experience of the campus green landscape and the appeal factors of landscape had a positive impact on the quality of life of university students. As a natural landscape, campus gardens can help solve mental health problems in university students.
According to many study results, gardens in living spaces provide various benefits to users as nature in the city. Howarth et al. (2020) conducted a scoping review of the grounds for the impact of gardens on health and well-being and discovered the positive impact of gardens and gardening activities on psychological, mental, and social aspects, and thus recommended gardens and gardening activities as nature-based non-medical treatments. Moreover, de Bell et al. (2020) examined the impact of gardens according to the characteristics of garden use, and the results showed that people using gardens showed better health and well-being in terms of mental health compared to those not using gardens, and also engaged in more physical activities. Lampert et al. (2021) revealed that using community gardens had a significant effect on improving health factors such as life satisfaction, happiness, overall health, mental well-being, and social cohesion among all users regardless of age. As such, gardens bring various health benefits to users.
Accordingly, this study was conducted to determine the effect of characteristics of and satisfaction with university campus garden use on mental well-being and to suggest ways to create and utilize campus gardens as a means to promote the mental health of university students suffering all kinds of stress.

Research Methods

Subjects and survey method

Subjects

The subjects of this study were university students and graduate students attending G University located in J City, Gyeongsangnam-do. The subjects were selected using G Power 3.1 with effect size 0.05, alpha-error 0.05, power 0.95, number of measurement items 13, and two-tailed test under the conditions of multiple regression analysis. The results showed that there were minimum 543 samples. Thus, considering a 10% dropout rate, 600 subjects were selected, but the final questionnaire was collected from 552 subjects. Data from 516 subjects were used for final analysis excluding the ones with insufficient responses.

Survey method

This study was approved by the Gyeongsang National University Institutional Review Board (GIRB-A19-Y-0039). The survey was conducted from July 1 to December 10, 2019. Those who participated in the survey had given consent before participation and were rewarded with small gifts.

Composition of the questionnaire

The questionnaire was composed of 7 items for demographic characteristics of the subjects such as gender, age, college year, major, and satisfaction with garden use, 2 items for garden use characteristics, and 14 items for mental well-being (Table 1).
To measure satisfaction with garden use, items for 6 factors suggested by Kil (2015) as factors for satisfaction with using contemporary gardens in the public sector were modified for better understanding of the subjects in this study. In particular, a preliminary survey was conducted to determine whether the content about garden satisfaction is easy for university students to understand according to the research purpose even though they are not majors, after which the survey was revised and supplemented. The preliminary survey was developed by collecting the opinions of 2 professors in the major and 1 doctoral student about the survey items. Then, the survey was conducted on 5 randomly selected university students, and the final questionnaire was developed after reviewing whether those students understood the content. Satisfaction with garden use was rated on a 10-point Likert scale from ‘Not at all satisfied (0 point)’ to ‘Very satisfied (10 points)’. For satisfaction with garden use, the internal reliability of the tool was not provided in previous studies, but Cronbach’s alpha in this study was .933.
A nominal scale was used to measure garden use characteristics, examining the main purpose of using gardens and the frequency of using them. The purpose of using gardens was determined by items such as leisure and recreation, education and hobbies, meeting place, place for conversations, place for a light meal, and simple travel path. The frequency of use was determined by items such as almost every day, 3–4 times a week, 1–2 times a week, 1–2 times a month, 1–2 times every 3 months, 1–2 times every 6 months, and rarely used.
Mental well-being was measured using the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS), a relatively recently developed tool related to mental health, that was adapted and validated by Kim et al. (2014). There are 14 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale from ‘None of the time’ (1 point) to ‘All of the time’ (5 points), with the total scores ranging from 14 to 70 points, with higher scores indicating higher mental well-being. The validation study proved that 14 items constitute a single factor. Cronbach’s alpha, which represents internal consistency as the reliability of the tool, was .944, showing high reliability coefficient. Cronbach’s alpha in this study was also high at .929.

Analysis method

IBM SPSS Statistics 25 was used for statistical analysis. Frequency analysis, descriptive statistics, reliability analysis, correlation analysis, and multiple regression analysis were conducted on the measures of general characteristics, satisfaction with garden use, garden use characteristics, and mental well-being of the subjects. The correlation analysis and multiple regression analysis were validated at a significance level of 95%.

Results and Discussion

General characteristics of subjects, satisfaction with campus garden use, and garden use characteristics

Demographic characteristics

The demographic characteristics of the participants are as shown in Table 2. There were 292 male (56.6%) and 224 female students (43.4%). The average age of the subjects was 21.6, and 176 were in the third year (34.1%), 161 in the second year (31.2%), 118 in the fourth year (22.9%), 50 in the first year (9.7%), and 11 in more than the fourth year (2.1%). By major, 351 were in agriculture (68.0%), followed by natural sciences (82, 15.9%), social sciences (33, 6.4%), humanities (24, 4.7%), engineering (22, 4.3%), education (3, 0.6%), and medicine and health (1, 0.2%). The mean score of mental well-being measured by the WEMWBS was 51.4 (SD = 9.0).

Satisfaction with campus garden use

For satisfaction with campus garden use, overall satisfaction was the highest at 6.19 (SD = 1.99). For specific factors of satisfaction, there was aesthetics at 6.18 (SD = 2.01) regarding ‘How visually beautiful is the garden?’, followed by leisure and recreation at 5.98 (SD = 2.19) regarding ‘Does the garden provide enough leisure and recreation space for rest or play?’, educational function at 5.44 (SD = 2.32) regarding ‘What is the educational value of the garden as a venue for all kinds of nature education?’, symbolism at 5.35 (SD = 2.36) regarding ‘Are the elements that symbolize the university well expressed?’, creativity at 5.25 (SD = 2.30) regarding ‘Is the design of the garden interesting and creative?’, and originality at 4.85 (SD = 2.37) regarding ‘Does the garden have originality (uniqueness) that is not seen in a nearby park or garden?’ (Table 3).

Campus garden use characteristics

The results of garden use characteristics (Table 4) showed that most students used the garden as ‘simple travel path’ with 233 subjects (45.2%), followed by ‘place for conversations’ with 107 subjects (20.7%), ‘leisure and recreation’ with 105 subjects (20.3%), ‘meeting place’ with 24 subjects (4.7%), ‘place for a light meal’ with 22 subjects (4.3%), ‘education and hobbies’ with 18 subjects (3.5%), and ‘other’ with 7 subjects (1.4%).
For frequency of garden use, 182 subjects (35.3%) used the garden ‘1–2 times a week’ and 104 (20.2%) used ‘1–2 times a month’, indicating that more than half of the subjects used the garden 1–2 times a week to 1–2 times a month. This was followed by ‘rarely used’ 98 subjects (19.0%) who ‘rarely used’ the garden, 51 (9.9%) who used ‘3–4 times a week’, 42 (8.1%) who used ‘almost every day’, 23 (4.5%) who used ‘1–2 times every 3 months’, and 16 (3.1%) who used ‘1–2 times every 6 months’.
These results are similar to the results of Lee and Eom (2019) who investigated university students’ use of the cherry blossom tunnel trail on campus. According to their study results, the most common purpose of use was using it as a travel path, and most students used the trail ‘once a week’. In addition, in another survey by Han and Eom (2018) that examined the awareness and preference for healing gardens among university students, the main purpose of use was taking a walk, exercising, and enjoying nature, and most students visited the garden once a week. These results are similar to the results of this study. Accordingly, university campus gardens were mostly used by university students to take talks or as a simple travel path, and were used 1–2 times a week.

Correlation between satisfaction with campus garden use, garden use characteristics, and mental well-being

Correlation between satisfaction with garden use and garden use characteristics

As a result of conducting a bivariate Pearson correlation to determine the correlation between satisfaction with garden use and frequency of garden use (Table 5), there was a significant positive correlation between overall satisfaction, each subfactor, and frequency of use. The subfactor with the strongest positive correlation with overall satisfaction was satisfaction with using the garden as a leisure and recreation space (r = 0.770), followed by venue for nature education (r = 0.732), visual satisfaction (r = 0.730), interesting and creative factors of the garden (r = 0.649), and expression of the university’s symbolic elements (r = 0.633). This result is similar to the study by Kim et al. (2013) that factors such as cultural experience and exercise focused on rest areas affect user preference for hotel rooftop gardens.
Frequency of use had a lower correlation with overall satisfaction compared to subfactors, but there was a positive correlation (r = 0.241) implying that subjects with high frequency of use also have high overall satisfaction. The subfactor with the highest positive correlation with frequency of use aside from overall satisfaction was visual satisfaction (r = 0.221), indicating that to increase user frequency of garden use, it is more important to well arrange visually appealing elements compared to other subfactors. This is similar to the study result by Kim et al. (2013) reporting that users showed high preference for gardens with a theme space using colorful and decorative theme species in all four seasons. Moreover, Lee and Eom (2019) examined user satisfaction with a university campus cherry blossom tunnel and reported that the image and scenic beauty of the space must be improved to promote user satisfaction. In light of this, it is important to improve visual satisfaction to increase overall satisfaction and frequency of use.

Correlation between overall satisfaction, frequency of use, and mental well-being

Table 6 shows the results of conducting a bivariate Pearson correlation to determine the correlation between the three variables: satisfaction with garden use, frequency of use, and mental well-being. Mental well-being, satisfaction with garden use, and frequency of use all showed a positive correlation, and satisfaction with garden use had a stronger correlation with mental well-being. This is similar to the study results by Stepansky et al. (2022) who conducted a pilot study and reported that, when using gardens for more than a certain amount of time, active participation by various components in a therapeutically designed green space has a positive effect on the quality of life. Moreover, this is also similar to the study results by Lee (2019) that higher satisfaction with campus environment among nursing students affects promotion of mental health by lowering stress and improving health perception.

Regression analysis of the effect of satisfaction with campus garden use and frequency of use on mental well-being

Multiple regression analysis was conducted to examine the effect of satisfaction with garden use and frequency of use on mental well-being (Table 7). The results showed that garden satisfaction characteristics that had a significant effect on mental well-being were ‘symbolism (β = .208, p < .001)’ and ‘visual beauty (β = .123, p = .019)’, which had a positive effect, and frequency of garden use (β = .119, p = .005) also had a positive effect on mental well-being. This result is similar to the study results by de Bell et al. (2020) reporting that those who more frequently visit and use gardens show better general health, mental well-being, and physical activity through stability in the gardens. This is also similar to the result that, although there are some differences in how the gardens are used, using gardens for more than a certain amount of time every week can help improve mental health (Fjaestad et al., 2023).

Conclusions

University campus gardens are local public gardens that can be used by anyone as a tool to relieve stress. In particular, public awareness of gardens is recently emphasizing the therapeutic effects of gardens as a space for healing rather than just an object of appreciation and recreation. University students, who are the main users of university campus gardens, are suffering psychological anxiety, depression, and mental fatigue due to stress from studies and employment. Accordingly, this study identifies the relationship between garden characteristics and mental well-being by examining gardens a tool that can be accessed easily by university students to promote mental health in order to improve their mental well-being.
The results showed that university students showed the highest satisfaction with ‘visual beauty’ in using campus gardens, and most used gardens as ‘simple travel path’. For frequency of use, most students used gardens 1–2 times a week. These results about satisfaction and characteristics of use are similar to the results from other studies. As a result of analyzing the effect of satisfaction and garden use characteristics on mental well-being, it was found that ‘leisure and recreation’ had the highest correlation with overall satisfaction. This seems to have reflected the need of university students, who are the main users, to use campus gardens as a space to recover from mental fatigue caused by academic and employment stress or various other problems. Furthermore, as a result of analyzing the effect of satisfaction with garden use and frequency on mental well-being, it was found that higher satisfaction with the symbolic elements and visual beauty of gardens and higher frequency and use of gardens led to higher mental well-being. This result was similar to the studies reporting that garden use has a positive effect on quality of life and mental well-being.
Accordingly, in order for university students to use campus gardens as a tool to improve their mental well-being and as a place for leisure and recreation, the following suggestions can be made regarding the formation of gardens on university campus. First, regarding the symbolic elements that have the greatest impact on mental well-being, the characteristics of the region where each university campus is located and the symbolic elements of each university must be adequately arranged so that users can feel that the space has distinct features. Moreover, to enhance the scenic beauty so that students can experience visual beauty, efforts must be made to fulfill visual satisfaction by arranging plants or facilities with distinct characteristics for each season. With this kind of satisfaction with symbolic and visual beauty, mental well-being can be improved by encouraging users to visit and use gardens.
However, this study has limitations in that the survey was conducted only on the campus of one university, while user characteristics and satisfaction may vary depending on the characteristics of each university campus. Furthermore, this study conducted the survey simply on satisfaction with each element. Thus, further research can be conducted to investigate and reveal the characteristics of using campus gardens as healing gardens in more detail, thereby analyzing the value of university campus gardens. Finally, this study was conducted only on university students, which raises the need to conduct research on the general public to examine their garden use characteristics and promote their use so that university campus gardens can be used as public gardens.

Table 1
Scheme of questionnaire design
Category Variable Reference
Satisfaction Beautiful visual: How beautiful is the visual? Kil (2015)
Symbolize: Are the elements that symbolize the university well expressed?
Creative: Is the design of the garden interesting and creative?
Originality: Do you have originality (or uniqueness) that you cannot see in a nearby park or garden?
Education: What is the level of educational value as a venue for various nature education?
Leisure and recreation: Do you provide enough leisure and recreation space for rest or play?
Overall satisfaction with the use of campus gardens

Use characteristics What purpose are you mainly using? -
How often do you use the gardens on campus?

Mental well-being Korean Version of Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale (14 items) Kim et al. (2014)
Table 2
The demographic and social characteristics, and mental well-being of the respondents
Variable n (%) Mean (SD)
Gender
 Male 292 (56.6)
 Female 224 (43.4)

Age 21.6 (2.0)

College year
 1st 50 (9.7)
 2nd 161 (31.2)
 3rd 176 (34.1)
 4th 118 (22.9)
 More than 4th 11 (2.1)

Major fields
 College of Humanities 24 (4.7)
 College of Social Sciences 33 (6.4)
 College of Natural Sciences 82 (15.9)
 College of Engineering 22 (4.3)
 College of Agriculture 351 (68.0)
 College of Education 3 (0.6)
 College of Medicine and Health 1 (0.2)

Mental well-being 51.4 (9.0)
Table 3
University students’ satisfaction with using campus gardens
Item Mean (SD)
Satisfaction
 How beautiful is the visual? 6.18 (2.01)
 Are the elements that symbolize the university well expressed? 5.35 (2.36)
 Is the design of the garden interesting and creative? 5.25 (2.30)
 Do you have originality (or uniqueness) that you cannot see in a nearby park or garden? 4.85 (2.37)
 What is the level of educational value as a venue for various nature education? 5.44 (2.32)
 Do you provide enough leisure and recreation space for rest or play? 5.98 (2.19)
 Overall satisfaction with the use of campus gardens 6.19 (1.99)
Table 4
Purposes and frequency of campus garden use by university students
Item n %
What purpose are you mainly using?
 Leisure and recreation 105 20.3
 Education and hobbies 18 3.5
 Meeting place 24 4.7
 Conversation place 107 20.7
 Light dining place 22 4.3
 Simple travel path 233 45.2
 Others 7 1.4

Total 516 100.0

How often do you use the gardens on campus?

 Almost everyday 42 8.1
 3–4 times a week 51 9.9
 1–2 times a week 182 35.3
 1–2 times a month 104 20.2
 1–2 times every 3 months 23 4.5
 1–2 times every 6 months 16 3.1
 Rarely used 98 19.0

Total 516 100.0
Table 5
Correlation between university students’ satisfaction with campus garden use and characteristics of use
Factorz Satisfaction Frequency

BV SY CR OR ED LR Overall
BV 1
SY .594*** 1
CR .707*** .765*** 1
OR .567*** .762*** .824*** 1
ED .557*** .617*** .631*** .698*** 1
LR .599*** .557*** .617*** .609*** .698*** 1
Overall .730*** .633*** .700*** .649*** .732*** .770*** 1
Frequency .221*** .162*** .179*** .185*** .236*** .208*** .241*** 1

z BV: beautiful visual, SY: symbolize, CR: creative, OR: originality, ED: education, LR: leisure and recreation.

*** Significant at p < .001 by Pearson correlation analysis.

Table 6
Correlation between overall satisfaction with campus garden use, frequency of use, and mental well-being among university students
Factor Total satisfaction Frequency Mental well-being
Total satisfaction 1
Frequency .241*** 1
Mental well-being .276*** .180*** 1

*** Significant at p < .001 by Pearson correlation analysis.

Table 7
The effect of satisfaction and frequency of use of the garden on mental well-being
Model Independent variable B β t p Tolerance VIF
1 (Constant) 45.312 48.332 .000
Symbolize 1.144 0.300 7.135 .000 1.000 1.000

R2 = .090, Adjusted R2 = .088, F = 50.904, p < .000

2 (Constant) 43.029 36.670 .000
Symbolize 1.061 0.278 6.587 .000 0.974 1.027
Frequency 0.662 0.135 3.187 .002 0.974 1.027

R2 = .108, Adjusted R2 = .104, F = 30.984, p < .000

3 (Constant) 41.378 30.358 .000
Symbolize 0.792 0.208 4.028 .000 0.647 1.546
Frequency 0.585 0.119 2.792 .005 0.950 1.053
Visual 0.551 0.123 2.352 .019 0.632 1.583

R2 = .117, Adjusted R2 = .112, F = 22.682, p < .000

References

Chen, G., S.H. Lee, Y.K. Yi. 2022. Restorative quality and recovery experience of campus green landscape on the quality of life of college students. Journal of Korea Landscape Council. 14(1):1-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.36466/KLC.14.1.1
crossref
Choi, W.K., J.S. Kim. 2014. The relationship between college students’ life stress and suicidal ideation: The mediating effects of maladaptive cognitive emotion regulation and frustrated interpersonal needs. The Korea Journal of Youth Counseling. 22(1):1-25.
crossref
De Bell, S., M. White, A. Griffiths, A. Darlow, T. Taylor, B. Wheeler, R. Lovell. 2020. Spending time in the garden is positively associated with health and well-being: Results from a national survey in England. Landscape and Urban Planning. 200:103836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103836
crossref
Fjaestad, S.L., J.L. Mackelprang, T. Sugiyama, M. Chandrabose, N. Owen, G. Turrell, J. Kingsley. 2023. Associations of time spent gardening with mental wellbeing and life satisfaction in mid-to-late adulthood. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 87:101993. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2023.101993
crossref
Han, J.G., B.H. Eom. 2018. Awareness and preference of university students on the healing garden. Daegu Catholic University Journal of the Natural Science. 16(1):35-40.

Howarth, M., A. Brettle, M. Hardman, M. Maden. 2020. What is the evidence for the impact of gardens and gardening on health and well-being: a scoping review and evidence-based logic model to guide healthcare strategy decision making on the use of gardening approaches as a social prescription. BMJ Open. 10(7):e036923. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-036923
crossref pmid pmc
Kil, B.K. 2015. A Study on the Theme Suitability and Visitors’ Satisfaction in Suncheon Bay Garden EXPO. Master’s thesis. University of Seoul, Seoul, Korea.

Kim, G.U., J.C. Sim, S.Y. Im. 2023. The development and validation of job search stress scale for Korean undergraduates. The Korean Journal of Counseling and Psychotherapy. 35(2):441-469. http://dx.doi.org/10.23844/kjcp.2023.05.35.2.441

Kim, H.S., H.K. Kang, S.J. Back. 2013. User satisfaction and preference of the hotel roof garden. Journal of Korean Society for People, Plants, and Environment. 16(4):199-207. http://dx.doi.org/10.11628/ksppe.2013.16.4.199
crossref
Kim, S., H.Y. Jung, K.S. Na, S.I. Lee, S.G. Kim, A.R. Lee, J.T. Cho. 2014. A validation study of the Korean version of warwick-edinburgh mental well-being scale. Journal of Korean Neuropsychiatric Association. 53(4):237-245. http://dx.doi.org/10.4306/jknpa.2014.53.4.237
crossref
Lampert, T., J. Costa, O. Santos, J. Sousa, T. Ribeiro, E. Freire. 2021. Evidence on the contribution of community gardens to promote physical and mental health and well-being of non-institutionalized individuals: A systematic review. PLoS ONE. 16(8):e0255621. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0255621
crossref pmid pmc
Lee, I.G., B.H. Eom. 2019. Evaluation of user satisfaction and image preference of university students for cherry blossom campus trail. Journal of Environmental Science International. 28(12):1101-1110. https://doi.org/10.5322/JESI.2019.28.12.1101
crossref
Lee, J.M. 2019. The influence of perceptions of the campus environment and health perception on stress of nursing college students. Journal of Digital Convergence. 17(2):329-338. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2019.17.2.329
crossref
Park, M.J., J.H. Kim, M.S. Jung. 2009. A qualitative study on the stress of university students for preparing employment. The Korea Journal of Counseling. 10(1):417-435.
crossref
Stepansky, K., T. Delbert, J.C. Bucey. 2022. Active student engagement within a university’s therapeutic sensory garden green space: Pilot study of utilization and student perceived quality of life. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening. 67:127452. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127452
crossref
Yi, Y.K. 2015. Restorative effects of natural landscape on university students’ stress reduction and cognitive enhancement. Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture. 43(6):127-137. http://dx.doi.org/10.9715/KILA.2015.43.6.127
crossref
TOOLS
Share :
Facebook Twitter Linked In Google+ Line it
METRICS Graph View
  • 0 Crossref
  •    
  • 470 View
  • 3 Download
Related articles in J. People Plants Environ.


ABOUT
BROWSE ARTICLES
EDITORIAL POLICY
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Editorial Office
100, Nongsaengmyeong-ro, Iseo-myeon, Wanju_Gun, Jeollabuk-do 55365, Republic of Korea
Tel: +82-63-238-6951    E-mail: jppe@ppe.or.kr                

Copyright © 2024 by The Society of People, Plants, and Environment.

Developed in M2PI

Close layer
prev next