The COVID-19 period reshaped how people in Moscow choose places to unwind, with a noticeable shift toward quieter spots in the city’s parks. Focused observations from Moscow’s research community highlight this trend as residents sought calmer outdoor environments during and after lockdowns.
In 2020, Moscow implemented quarantine measures to curb the spread of the virus. Among these measures, access to city parks was restricted to minimize close contact. While the intention was to protect public health, the provisional ban affected well-being and social rhythms. After restrictions were eased, residents appeared more inclined to spend extended time outdoors, raising questions about how the pandemic altered preferences for recreational spaces.
Researchers from the Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, along with colleagues from other institutions, undertook a comparative study to understand how Muscovites chose recreation areas before and after the pandemic. Employing machine learning techniques, the team analyzed more than 20,000 photos posted by residents on the VKontakte social network, covering January 2019 through December 2020 in three city parks: Timiryazevsky Park, Sokolniki Cultural and Amusement Park, and the Central Park named after M. Gorky. Culture and Leisure.
These parks represent distinct types of urban green spaces. Timiryazevsky Park is effectively a woodland area with limited infrastructure, Sokolniki is a forest park with broader amenities, and Gorky Park is a traditional urban park designed to host large events and public activities. The analysis revealed a decline in the number of park-related photos during quarantine across all sites, most pronouncedly at Gorky Park, where image counts fell as much as tenfold. Notably, participation peaked in September 2020, even though most restrictions had begun to ease in June.
The study yielded several surprising patterns. Before the pandemic, visitors to Sokolniki and Gorky Park tended to cluster around exhibition venues and sports facilities, followed by visits to park paths and natural areas, and then to event spaces and other built infrastructure. After quarantine, there was a subtle shift: photos focusing on park nature increased by roughly 5–7% compared with the same period in 2019. This suggests that post-lockdown visitors may have been seeking closer contact with natural settings as a way to counteract prolonged isolation.
Overall, the research indicates a nuanced rebalancing of preferences—between built recreational facilities and more tranquil natural experiences—driven by the pandemic’s long-term impact on how people perceive safety, crowding, and the restorative value of green spaces. The findings underscore the importance of cultivating diverse park experiences that accommodate both active and passive recreation, particularly as urban residents continue to recalibrate their routines in a post-pandemic context.
Recent inquiries into memory and aging note that elderly or at-risk populations may benefit from accessible outdoor environments, where natural settings support cognitive and emotional well-being. While this line of investigation is distinct from the Moscow study, it reinforces a broader conclusion: accessible, varied outdoor spaces can contribute positively to community health in urban settings.