Greenspace programmes for mental health: A survey study to test what works, for whom, and in what circumstances

Effect of nature prescriptions on cardiometabolic and mental health, and physical activity: a systematic review

Nature prescriptions are gaining popularity as a form of social prescribing in support of sustainable health care. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to synthesise evidence on the effectiveness of nature prescriptions and determine the factors important for their success. We searched five databases from inception up to July 25, 2021. Randomised and non-randomised controlled studies featuring a nature prescription (ie, a referral or an organised programme, by a health or social professional, to encourage spending time in nature) were included. Two reviewers independently conducted all steps of study selection; one reviewer collected summary data from published reports and conducted the risk of bias assessment. Random-effect DerSimonian-Laird meta-analyses were conducted for five key outcomes. We identified 92 unique studies (122 reports), of which 28 studies contributed data to meta-analyses. Compared with control conditions, nature prescription programmes resulted in a greater reduction in systolic blood pressure (mean difference -4·82 mm Hg [-8·92 to -0·72]) and diastolic blood pressure (mean difference -3·82 mm Hg [-6·47 to -1·16). Nature prescriptions also had a moderate to large effect on depression scores (post-intervention standardised mean difference -0·50 [-0·84 to -0·16]; change from baseline standardised mean difference -0·42 [-0·82 to -0·03]) and anxiety scores (post-intervention standardised mean difference -0·57 [-1·12 to -0·03]; change from baseline standardised mean difference -1·27 [-2·20 to -0·33]). Nature prescriptions resulted in a greater increase in daily step counts than control conditions (mean difference 900 steps [790 to 1010]) but did not improve weekly time of moderate physical activity (mean difference 25·90 min [-10·26 to 62·06]). A subgroup analysis restricted to studies featuring a referring institution showed stronger effects on depression scores, daily step counts, and weekly time of moderate physical activity than the general analysis. Beneficial effects on anxiety and depression scores were mainly provided by interventions involving social professionals whereas beneficial effects on blood pressures and daily step counts were provided mainly by interventions involving health professionals. Most studies have a moderate to high risk of bias. Nature prescription programmes showed evidence of cardiometabolic and mental health benefits and increases in walking. Effective nature prescription programmes can involve a range of natural settings and activities and can be implemented via social and community channels, in addition to health professionals.

Home and nearby nature: Uncovering relational flows between domestic and natural spaces in three countries during COVID-19

This paper addresses the role of living spaces, neighborhood environments, and access to nearby nature in shaping individual experiences of health and well-being during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Key data is drawn from the GreenCOVID study across Spain, England and Ireland. The survey gathered contextual information about home environments, neighborhood spaces, and access to nature elements, and standardized measures of health and wellbeing between April and July 2020 (n = 3,127). The paper used qualitative data from the survey to document flows between home and nearby nature. These were framed as barriers/mediators with specific focus on differing interpretations of home as both trap and refuge, with additional dimensions of loss, disruption and interruption shaping the broad responses to the pandemic. By contrast nearby nature was an enabler/moderator of health and wellbeing, offering healthy flows between home and nature as well as respite and additional health-enabling factors. Differences were identified between the three countries but important commonalities emerged too, recognising the role nature plays as an asset both within and immediately beyond the home. The use of flow as metaphor also recognises the importance of embodiment and the elastic nature of connections between home and nearby nature for wellbeing. More broadly, flow provides a valuable way to trace affective relational geographers to develop a wider understanding of assemblages of health during pandemics.