An experimental test of the impact of avian diversity on attentional benefits and enjoyment of people experiencing urban green‐space

State of science: refitting the human to nature

Environmental institutions are realising that the human-nature relationship is a tangible target for a sustainable future. Societal change of that relationship is a challenge involving modifications to both systems and human behaviours. We argue that as Human Factors and Ergonomics (HFE) focusses on relationships, interfaces and systems it is well placed to contribute. After introducing the state of HFE and nature connectedness science an analysis of areas of HFE and human-nature connectedness themes is used to consider current work and future opportunities. We conclude that despite decades-old calls to action, HFE is embedded in a dated paradigm and has had little positive contribution to the human-nature relationship. However, HFE is well placed to create sustainable communities, designed to create a new relationship with nature. To do this, HFE needs to recognise that it should move on from solely fitting the task to the human, to refitting the human to nature.Practitioner Summary: A more sustainable human-nature relationship can be achieved through applying HFE approaches. HFE expertise in human characteristics, systems, people and technology can be applied at differing scales with various social-economic and technical factors to address key themes in our failing relationship with nature.Abbreviations: HFE: Human Factors and Ergonomics; IPBES: Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services; STAMP: System-Theoretic Accident Model and Processes; CWA: Cognitive Work Analysis; NET-HARMS: NETworked Hazard Analysis and Risk Management System; NbS: Nature-based System.

Current methodologies of greenspace exposure and mental health research-a scoping review

Introduction

Greenspaces can provide an important resource for human mental health. A growing body of literature investigates the interaction and the influence of diverse greenspace exposures. In order to gain a comprehensive understanding of the complex connection between greenspace and mental health, a variety of perspectives and methodological combinations are needed. The aim of this review is to assess the current methodologies researching greenspace and mental health.

Methods

A scoping review was conducted. Four electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science) were searched for relevant studies. A wide range of greenspace and mental health keywords were included to provide a comprehensive representation of the body of research. Relevant information on publication characteristics, types of greenspaces, mental health outcomes, and measurements of greenspace exposure and mental health was extracted and assessed.

Results

338 studies were included. The included studies encompassed a multitude of methods, as well as outcomes for both greenspace and mental health. 28 combinations were found between seven categories each for greenspace and mental health assessment. Some pairings such as geoinformation systems for greenspace assessment and questionnaires investigating mental health were used much more frequently than others, implying possible research gaps. Furthermore, we identified problems and inconsistences in reporting of greenspace types and mental health outcomes.

Discussion

The identified methodological variety is a potential for researching the complex connections between greenspace and mental health. Commonly used combinations can provide important insights. However, future research needs to emphasize other perspectives in order to understand how to create living environments with mental health benefits. For this purpose, interdisciplinary research is necessary.

Current methods for evaluating people's exposure to green space: A scoping review

People's exposure to green space is a critical link between urban green space and urban residents' health. Since green space may affect human health through multiple pathways regarding diverse human health outcomes, the measurement of people's exposure to green space must be tailored to concrete study contexts and research questions. In this scoping review, we systematically categorized the available green space representations and metrics in the last two decades that can be used to derive people's exposure to green space regarding different research topics. A three-phase systematic review was conducted after a generalized search of relevant research articles from the three most-used publication databases, namely Scopus, the Web of Science, and PubMed. We identified 260 research articles that particularly discuss green space representations and metrics. We further developed a multi-pathway framework to articulate the complicated context issues in green space studies. We categorized the most relevant green space representations and metrics into five groups, including green space indices, the delineation, inventory, and usage of green space, the spatiotemporal evolution of green space, the attributes and components of green space, and the green space landscape and fragmentation. Finally, we discussed the inter-conversion between different green space representations and metrics, the "mobility-turn" in green space studies and how it may affect the derivation of people's exposure to green space, and other potential methodological issues in measuring people's exposure to green space. Our scoping review provides the most comprehensive framework and categories for deriving people's exposure to green space to date, which may strongly support a broad range of studies that concern green space's health effects.

Key Factors Strengthening Residents’ Psychological Well-Being and Critical Human-Nature Connections within the Living Spaces—An Example from Beijing

Background: Residential green spaces and the co-inhabiting bird communities provide critical cultural ecosystem services for urban dwellers, which is critical for citizens’ psychological well-being but has largely been overlooked, especially in China. This study attempted to delineate the relationship between human-nature interactions occurring at different scenarios in the health deriving procedure, and identify the key factors influencing urban residents’ psychological well-being and the potential critical human-nature connections within their living spaces. Methods: Bird, plant, and social surveys were sequentially conducted. A model selection procedure based on AICc information was used to find the key factors that are responsible for residents’ psychological well-being, and logistic regression analysis was conducted to figure out the key drivers for the occurrence of critical within-living-space human-nature connections. Results: Most of the respondents are aware of the neighborhood biodiversity and most of them are fond of it, and respondents who prefer fauna over flora have a considerably lower depression degree. Watching birds is the only critical within-living-space nature-related activity that is responsible for residents’ psychological well-being. Both residents’ psychological well-being and bird watching activity were simultaneously affected by nature-related activities within and outside the living spaces, while their preference for different aspects of biodiversity and their capability in perceiving them were also important, despite the difference in exact parameters. In addition, personal attributes such as age, financial income, and physical or mental health status also contribute to psychological well-being. Conclusions: This study successfully bridged citizens’ minds with health products, and the major contribution was the demonstration of a spatial-scale-oriented circuit for people-nature connections, which contributes to the practical application of nature-based therapy.

Species traits explain public perceptions of human-bird interactions

The impacts of urbanization on bird biodiversity depend on human-environment interactions that drive land management. Although a commonly studied group, less attention has been given to public perceptions of birds close to home, which can capture people's direct, everyday experiences with urban biodiversity. Here, we used ecological and social survey data collected in the metropolitan region of Phoenix, Arizona, USA, to determine how species traits are related to people's perceptions of local bird communities. We used a trait-based approach to classify birds by attributes that may influence human-bird interactions, including color, size, foraging strata, diet, song, and cultural niche space based on popularity and geographic specificity. Our classification scheme using hierarchical clustering identified four trait categories, labeled as Metropolitan (gray, loud, seedeaters foraging low to ground), Familiar (yellow/brown generalist species commonly present in suburban areas), Distinctive (species with distinguishing appearance and song), and Hummingbird (hummingbird species, small and colorful). Strongly held beliefs about positive or negative traits were also more consistent than ambivalent ones. The belief that birds were colorful and unique to the regional desert environment was particularly important in fortifying perceptions. People largely perceived hummingbird species and birds with distinctive traits positively. Similarly, urban-dwelling birds from the metropolitan trait group were related to negative perceptions, probably due to human-wildlife conflict. Differences arose across sociodemographics (including income, age, education, and Hispanic/Latinx identity), but explained a relatively low amount of variation in perceptions compared with the bird traits present in the neighborhood. Our results highlight how distinctive aesthetics, especially color and song, as well as traits related to foraging and diet drive perceptions. Increasing people's direct experiences with iconic species tied to the region and species with distinguishing attributes has the potential to improve public perceptions and strengthen support for broader conservation initiatives in and beyond urban ecosystems.

Are Lay People Able to Estimate Breeding Bird Diversity?

Studies about biodiversity and well-being used different approaches to assess biodiversity, e.g., scientific counts and censuses or perceived biodiversity estimated by the respondents. Here, we assessed whether laypeople could estimate the breeding bird diversity or species richness at specific places. For comparison, we carried out bird censuses with standard methods of professional ornithologists and used citizen science data from the internet platform Ornitho (Germany). Lay people from the public (1184 respondents) were surveyed between May and July 2022 at 40 different places in southwest Germany between Rottenburg/Tübingen and Stuttgart following the catchment of the river Neckar (30 people surveyed per place). People were asked to estimate the bird species richness/diversity at this current place. Here, we show that the data from the citizen science platform does not correlate with the professional census counts nor with the perceived species richness of laypeople. Laypeople have a generally good assessment of the bird species richness, correlating with the data of professionals (r = 0.325, p = 0.041). On average, the number of species assessed by laypeople lies in between the values of the professional morning and afternoon census. People were most often surveyed in the afternoon; therefore, their assessment must be done on other factors than actual birds present. This result is valuable for future studies on the connection between biodiversity and well-being.