## 2 Literature Review  
The current research on evaluating the inclusiveness of park design is generally conducted through two methods: The first method involves the development of an evaluation framework based on theoretical constructs, often grounded in relevant design theories such as inclusive design and universal design. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [20] identified hierarchy, accessibility, safety, and psychological perception as key components of urban public spaces. In this regard, significant progress has been made by studies that proposed a qualitative assessment model for inclusive public spaces. The model covers six dimensions based on universal design principles, including play activities, amenities and opportunities, pathways and entrances, accessibility, natural features, and adjacency [21]. The evaluation criteria also include 11 secondary indicators, namely transparency of accessibility information, external accessibility, facility access solutions, restroom services, safety systems, and internal accessibility guidance. Additionally, quantitative analysis studies based on the capability demand model [22; 23] have identified pilot user groups by evaluating and analyzing users' abilities and needs [24]. The results revealed unmet needs among marginalized groups, highlighting the urgency to address safety, accessibility, and regular maintenance as inclusivity requirements [25]. The second approach involves obtaining research findings through the application of different evaluation methods, including qualitative and quantitative research. For example, a model encompassing 30 factors influencing individuals' perception of inclusive featuresin urban parks was constructed through data coding and analysis. This model further clarifies the paths and key factors for inclusive evaluation, providing theoretical references for future landscape justice research and practices [26]. Furthermore, visual accessibility was determined with an experiential landscape approach, while physical accessibility and activity intensity along pathways were measured using space syntax methods [27]. In the USJ area of Malaysia, geographic information system (GIS) technology was utilized, applying Moran's I and Local Indicators of Spatial Association (LISA) to analyze the accessibility of youth-friendly neighborhood parks [28]. Additionally, studies have assessed the accessibility and usability of public parks and playgrounds in New Zealand using national standards and international guidelines, revealing design, environmental, and safety issues that may hinder the participation of people with disabilities at various stages [29]. Moreover, drawing methods have also been employed as an intuitive and qualitative evaluation approach. Some researchers have used cross-sectional evaluations to compare the inclusive design of multiple parks [21; 29]. Apart from park-focused evaluations, the inclusive design of park facilities has also proven to be an effective method for measuring park inclusivity [30]. However, the literature review mentioned above has identified several research gaps. Firstly, there are concerns regarding the comprehensiveness of the evaluation frameworks. Most of the evaluation frameworks are partial and predominantly consist of qualitative descriptive statements, which present certain difficulties in the evaluation process. Secondly, although some studies have proposed evaluation frameworks and standards, there is a lack of detailed operational guidelines and practical experiences on how to apply these frameworks and standards to actual park design and planning. Additionally, the research samples and sample sizes are limited, with some studies having relatively small sample sizes that may not adequately represent the overall level of parks at the urban dimension. Consequently, the comprehensive level of inclusive design for parks at the urban dimension remains unknown.