## 4 Results and Discussion
### Survey
#### 4.3.2 Cool Pavements  
We interviewed 13 users of the Jangyu Traditional Market parking lot about the installed cool pavement as Table 6. In total, 53.8% of the respondents parked for 1-2 h, whereas 46.2% parked for less than 30 min. The main time zones during which people used the parking lot were from 12:00 to 15:00 (46.2%), 6:00 to 12:00 (38.5%), and 15:00 to 18:00 (15.4%).  
We found that 38.5% of respondents rated climate change mitigation activities as \"very important\", followed by 30.8% \"important\", 0.0% \"not important\", and 30.8% \"do not know\". Only 23.1% of respondents were aware of cool pavement technology before the survey, 61.5% had heard of it, and 15.4% were not aware of it. Notably, 75.0% of respondents who described themselves as \"very interested\" and 25.0% of respondents who were \"neutral\" displayed high levels of interest in the technology.  
Parking lot users scored their own perceptions of temperature reduction in relation to cool pavement as \"very likely\" (7.7%), \"likely\" (23.1%), \"neutral\" (53.8%), \"unlikely\" (15.4%), or \"very unlikely\" (0.0%). Perceptions of alleviated heat illnesses such as heatstroke or heat exhaustion after cool pavement installation were rated as \"very likely\" (15.4%), \"likely\" (15.4%), \"neutral\" (38.5%), or \"unlikely\" (30.8%), or \"very unlikely\" (0.0%). Reduced discomfort because of geothermal heat experienced during the transition to cool pavement was reported as \"very likely\" (15.4%), \"likely\" (30.8%), \"neutral\" (30.8%), \"unlikely\" (23.1%), or \"very unlikely\" (0.0%). Some users reported that heatwaves caused less health damage (e.g., stress or reduced physical strength) after cool pavement installation, with responses of \"very likely\" (15.4%), \"likely\" (15.4%), \"neutral\" (23.1%), \"unlikely\" (46.2%), and \"very unlikely\" (0.0%).  
Users were generally satisfied with the temperature reduction effect of cool pavement, such that 15.4% responded \"very satisfied\", followed by 53.8% \"satisfied\", 23.1% \"neutral\", 7.7% \"unsatisfied\", and 0.0% \"very unsatisfied\". Overall satisfaction scores were 5 points (38.5%), 4 points (30.8%), 3 points (30.8%), 2 points (0.0%), or 1 point (0.0%); the average score was 3.1 points. Among the reasons provided for user dissatisfaction, the most  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Category**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Cool pavement**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Percentage of Respondents (\%)**} \\ \cline{3-6}  & & **Very Unlikely (1)** & **Unlikely (2)** & **Neutral (3)** & **Likely (4)** & **Very Likely (5)** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Opinions} & - Need for climate change mitigation & 0.0 & 0.0 & 30.8 (do not know) & 30.8 & 38.5 \\ \cline{2-6}  & - Awareness of facility & - & 15.4 & - & 61.5 & 23.1 \\ \cline{2-6}  & - Interest in cool pavement installation & 0.0 & 0.0 & 25.0 & 0.0 & 75.0 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Perception of effects} & - Perceived road temperature change & 0.0 & 15.4 & 53.8 & 23.1 & 7.7 \\ \cline{2-6}  & - Perceived reduction in heatstroke & 0.0 & 30.8 & 38.5 & 15.4 & 15.4 \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-6}  & - Perception of reduced inconvenience & 0.0 & 23.1 & 30.8 & 30.8 & 15.4 \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-6}  & - Perceived reduction in heatwave damage & 0.0 & 46.2 & 23.1 & 15.4 & 15.4 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Satisfaction} & - Satisfaction with temperature reduction & 0.0 & 7.7 & 23.1 & 53.8 & 15.4 \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-6}  & - Overall satisfaction & 0.0 & 0.0 & 30.8 & 30.5 & 38.5 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 6: User satisfaction survey results after installation of cool pavements.  
common comments were \"water spattering in rain\", \"dirty\", \"publicity stunt\", \"messy\", \"expansion of construction area\", and \"requires repair and management\". Local residents showed high interest in the technology after construction was completed.