Domestic gardens and self-reported health: a national population study

Is there any difference between the owners and the public in their visual impact assessments?--A case study of the front garden of multi-storey residential buildings

As a special garden unique to China, the front garden of multi-storey residential buildings has certain public attributes but is managed by a single owner. In this study, the front gardens of multi-storey residential buildings in Jiangsu province, China, were set as research object. Meanwhile, the size of garden, plant type, plant vertical structure, color number, plant coverage, and fence material were chosen as the landscape features to be explored. Then the experiments were conducted to reveal the visual impact assessment rendered by the public with different demographic attributes and the results obtained were analyzed. As is indicated by the statistical analysis, significant differences exist between the owners and the public in their visual impact assessments of the front gardens; the six landscape features are the main factors that influence the public's visual impact assessment; and the public with different demographic attributes would render different visual impact assessments of front gardens. This study offers valuable help for the design of front gardens of multi-storey residential buildings.

Modern Aspects of the Complex Interactions between Biodiversity and the Main Neuropsychiatric Disorders

The high incidence of psychopathologies recorded in today's human society, correlated with the high percentages of biodiversity loss, point to the need for an interdisciplinary approach of the scientific fields under study-neuroscience and biodiversity conservation. Thus, our approach here presents, in a synergistic manner, the significant correlation between mental health and the increased values of biodiversity in the ecosystems located in the immediate vicinity, especially those located in the middle of cities. Our approach aims to emphasize the importance of biodiversity conservation in the context of preserving mental health and general well-being. There are a series of recent experimental demonstrations that outline the influence of natural elements on the human psyche and, implicitly, the effects of nature in the prevention and reduction of stress, anxiety, and depression. And beyond the cognitive barriers of humanity in relating to the surrounding biodiversity must lie the desire to know the values of biodiversity and the absolute importance of its conservation. The sustainable relationship between humans and living nature, seen as a complex of biodiversity, is dealt with by a branch of science called human ecology. Therefore, this study emphasizes the crucial need to know and respect the connection between man and nature, based, since time immemorial, on biophilia. And with the regression of ignorance and the correlated approach of several scientific fields, some at the intersection of the humanities and natural sciences, one can observe the progress of preserving the dynamic balance within ecosystems and, implicitly, the preservation of mental health and human well-being.

Child, parent, and family mental health and functioning in Australia during COVID-19: comparison to pre-pandemic data

The COVID-19 pandemic presents significant risks to population mental health. Despite evidence of detrimental effects for adults, there has been limited examination of the impact of COVID-19 on parents and children specifically. We aim to examine patterns of parent and child (0-18 years) mental health, parent substance use, couple conflict, parenting practices, and family functioning during COVID-19, compared to pre-pandemic data, and to identify families most at risk of poor outcomes according to pre-existing demographic and individual factors, and COVID-19 stressors. Participants were Australian mothers (81%) and fathers aged 18 years and over who were parents of a child 0-18 years (N = 2365). Parents completed an online self-report survey during 'stage three' COVID-19 restrictions in April 2020. Data were compared to pre-pandemic data from four Australian population-based cohorts. Compared to pre-pandemic estimates, during the pandemic period parents reported higher rates of parent depression, anxiety, and stress (Cohen's d = 0.26-0.81, all p < 0.001), higher parenting irritability (d = 0.17-0.46, all p < 0.001), lower family positive expressiveness (d = - 0.18, p < 0.001), and higher alcohol consumption (22% vs 12% drinking four or more days per week, p < 0.001). In multivariable analyses, we consistently found that younger parent age, increased financial deprivation, pre-existing parent and child physical and mental health conditions, COVID-19 psychological and environmental stressors, and housing dissatisfaction were associated with worse parent and child functioning and more strained family relationships. Our data suggest wide-ranging, detrimental family impacts associated with the COVID-19 pandemic; and support policy actions to assist families with financial supports, leave entitlements, and social housing.

Do sex and gender modify the association between green space and physical health? A systematic review

A growing literature shows that green space can have protective effects on human health. As a marginalized group, women often have worse life outcomes than men, including disparities in some health outcomes. Given their marginalization, women might have "more to gain" than men from living near green spaces. Yet, limited research has deliberately studied whether green space-health associations are stronger for women or men. We conducted a systematic review to synthesize empirical evidence on whether sex or gender modifies the protective associations between green space and seven physical health outcomes (cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, general physical health, non-malignant respiratory disease, mortality, and obesity-related health outcomes). After searching five databases, we identified 62 articles (including 81 relevant analyses) examining whether such effect modification existed. We classified analyses based on whether green space-health were stronger for women, no sex/gender differences were detected, or such associations were stronger for men. Most analyses found that green space-physical health associations were stronger for women than for men when considering study results across all selected health outcomes. Also, women showed stronger protective associations with green space than men for obesity-related outcomes and mortality. Additionally, the protective green space-health associations were slightly stronger among women for green land cover (greenness, NDVI) than for public green space (parks), and women were also favored over men when green space was measured very close to one's home (0-500 m). Further, the green space-health associations were stronger for women than for men in Europe and North America, but not in other continents. As many government agencies and nongovernmental organizations worldwide work to advance gender equity, our review shows that green space could help reduce some gender-based health disparities. More robust empirical studies (e.g., experimental) are needed to contribute to this body of evidence.

Understanding the Role of Nature Engagement in Supporting Health and Wellbeing during COVID-19

The importance of natural environments in supporting health and wellbeing has been well evidenced in supporting positive mental and physical health outcomes, including during periods of crisis and stress. Given the disproportionate impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have been greatest for those who are most vulnerable, understanding the role of natural environment and alternative forms of nature engagement in supporting health and wellbeing for vulnerable groups is important. This study explored how nature engagement supported health and wellbeing in those with a pre-existing health condition during the first UK lockdown. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 adults with a pre-existing health condition and analysed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA). Four themes were identified: COVID-19 versus nature; Nature as an extension and replacement; Nature connectedness; and Therapeutic nature. The findings show the importance of nature in supporting health and wellbeing in those with a pre-existing health condition through engagement with private and public natural environments, micro-restorative opportunities, nature connection as an important pathway, and the therapeutic benefits of nature engagement. The present research extends the evidence-base beyond patterns of nature engagement to a deeper understanding of how those with existing health conditions perceived and interacted with nature in relation to their health and wellbeing during the first UK lockdown. Findings are discussed in relation to health supporting environments, micro-restorative opportunities, and policy implications.

Amount of and proximity to blue spaces and general health among older Chinese adults in private and public housing: A national population study

A growing body of research indicates that exposure to outdoor blue spaces is associated with better physical and mental health. However, few studies have explored the associations between different blue space indicators (e.g., amount of and proximity to freshwater and seawater) and general health. Moreover, research has rarely attempted to address the residential selection bias associated with the salutogenic effect of access to blue spaces. Therefore, this study explores the associations between the amount (percentage of blue space within a 1 km circular buffer) of and proximity (Euclidean distance to the edge of the nearest blue space) to blue space and older adults' general health across the entire country of China using the micro-data sample of one-percent national population sample survey in 2015. It adds to the existing literature by taking into account the neighbourhood selection mechanism for different housing tenures and examining the salutogenic effect of blue spaces separately for public housing residents and private housing residents. The results indicated that greater neighbourhood seawater coverage and living near a coastline were associated with better general health among older adults in both private and public housing, while the percentage of freshwater blue spaces within neighbourhoods and the distance to freshwater blue spaces were associated with better general health among private housing residents only. The blue spaces-general health associations were stronger among urban participants, participants in deprived neighbourhoods, males, participants aged under 80 years, and low- and medium-educated participants. Our findings indicated that living near the coast was beneficial to older adults' health, and residential selection bias confounded the association between freshwater blue spaces and health.

Householders Attitude, Preferences, and Willingness to Have Home Garden at Time of Pandemics

The value of home gardens has become more apparent among tenants forced into isolation in difficult and uncertain times arising since the COVID-19 pandemic started at the beginning of 2020. While gardens make a significant contribution to the social and ecological environment of cities, most studies have focused on public green spaces. Investigating householder preferences for gardens during and after the mandatory lockdown period in the UAE is required. The main objective of this study is to analyze the householder’s attitude, preferences, and willingness to have home gardens during the pandemic and after. The data were collected via an online survey of randomly selected respondents. A logistic econometrical model was utilized to analyze the factors affecting respondent preferences regarding having a garden. According to the results, the probability of having a garden increases among respondents who produce some crops, have attained Msc/PhD. level, a backyard, and a larger space to cultivate. It decreases among those who are married, find it hard to take care of a garden, and face a weed problem. In conclusions, it is highly recommended for householders to have home gardens, which can provide a quality lifestyle and enhance leisure time during the pandemic and after.

Going Green and Going Dense: A Systematic Review of Compatibilities and Conflicts in Urban Research

The dilemma of simultaneously promoting the advantages of urban densification and urban liveability, namely the environmental and social benefits of urban green spaces, has been widely acknowledged in the research literature. This paper aims to provide an overview of the current state of evidence on benefits, conflicts and challenges emerging from fostering both urban densification and urban greening aims. A systematic review following the PRISMA guidelines was conducted. Searches for peer-reviewed papers were conducted in Scopus and Web of Science. Our search yielded an initial 357 papers, which were then further sorted and screened to the 117 manuscripts retained and included in this review. The authors systematized the multiple perspectives in which the interactions between urban densification and urban greening have been explored. Moreover, the results revealed a lack of clear agreement about the existence or not of conflicts emerging from fostering both urban densification and urban greening aims, suggesting that the positive or negative interactions are not absolute but depend on the scale or the context on which the studies are conducted. Further research should explore multiple potential mediating variables (e.g., the mediator effect of scale and context) to deepen our understanding of interactions between density and greening.

Metabarcoding of Soil Fungi from Different Urban Greenspaces Around Bournemouth in the UK

Soil microbes are important for public health. Increasing urbanisation is adversely affecting soil microbiota, which may be contributing to the global rise of immune-related diseases. Fungi are key components of urban environments that can be negatively impacted by altered land-use, land-management and climate change, and are implicated in the development and exacerbation of non-communicable diseases such as allergy, asthma and chronic inflammatory conditions. Fungal metagenomics is building knowledge on fungi within different environments (the environmental mycobiome), fungi on and within the human body (the human mycobiome), and their association with disease. Here, we demonstrate the added value of a multi-region metabarcoding approach to analyse soil mycobiomes from five urban greenspaces (lawns, parklands, bareground, young forest and old forest). While results were comparable across the three regions (ITS1, ITS2 and LSU), each identified additional fungal taxa that were unique to the region. Combining the results therefore provided a more comprehensive analysis across all fungal taxonomic ranks, identifying statistically significant differences in the fungal composition of the five soil types. Assignment of fungal taxa into ecological guilds revealed those differences of biological relevance to public health. The greatest differences were between the soil mycobiome of lawns and forests. Of most concern was the significant increase in the known human allergens Alternaria, Bipolaris, Cladosporium and Fusarium within urban lawn and parkland vs forest soils. By improving our understanding of local variations in fungal taxa across urban greenspaces, we have the potential to boost the health of local residents through improved urban planning.

Self-reported well-being and the importance of green spaces - A comparison of garden owners and non-garden owners in times of COVID-19

This study focuses on the effects of the use of green spaces on the self-reported well-being measures of life satisfaction and mental well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. We compare two distinct groups of people: garden owners and non-garden owners. We collected quantitative data and data from an open-ended question online from 495 people living in all regions of Germany in May 2020. To analyze our quantitative data, we used a combination of descriptive statistics and hierarchal regressions. Here, results indicated that garden owners had substantially greater life satisfaction and mental well-being than non-garden owners. Additionally, the two groups differed statistically significant in many socioeconomic factors (e.g., income, age, fear of job loss), in the context of time spent outside, as well as personality traits. Our analyses suggest that these differences are valuable for understanding differences between the two groups' self-reported well-being. To analyze the open-ended question, we followed the main steps of a qualitative content analysis. Here, we found that the vast majority of participants associated positive meanings (e.g., freedom and joy) with private gardens and public green spaces during the pandemic. Our findings have implications for policies to promote and support the design and use of public green spaces. Overall, our findings support governmental decisions in Germany (as elsewhere) to keep public green spaces open during the first wave of the outbreak of COVID-19, suggesting that green spaces provide valuable support for self-reported well-being in these difficult times of COVID-19 contagion.

"Biophilic Cities": Quantifying the Impact of Google Street View-Derived Greenspace Exposures on Socioeconomic Factors and Self-Reported Health

According to the biophilia hypothesis, humans have evolved to prefer natural environments that are essential to their thriving. With urbanization occurring at an unprecedented rate globally, urban greenspace has gained increased attention due to its environmental, health, and socioeconomic benefits. To unlock its full potential, an increased understanding of greenspace metrics is urgently required. In this first-of-a-kind study, we quantified street-level greenspace using 751 644 Google Street View images and computer vision methods for 125 274 locations in Ireland's major cities. We quantified population-weighted exposure to greenspace and investigated the impact of greenspace on health and socioeconomic determinants. To investigate the association between greenspace and self-reported health, a negative binomial regression analysis was applied. While controlling for other factors, an interquartile range increase in street-level greenspace was associated with a 2.78% increase in self-reported "good or very good" health [95% confidence interval: 2.25-3.31]. Additionally, we observed that populations in upper quartiles of greenspace exposure had higher levels of income and education than those in lower quartiles. This study provides groundbreaking insights into how urban greenspace can be quantified in unprecedented resolution, accuracy, and scale while also having important implications for urban planning and environmental health research and policy.

The role of perceived public and private green space in subjective health and wellbeing during and after the first peak of the COVID-19 outbreak

Research has consistently shown that access to parks and gardens is beneficial to people's health and wellbeing. In this paper, we explore the role of both public and private green space in subjective health and wellbeing during and after the first peak of the COVID-19 outbreak that took place in the UK in the first half of 2020. It makes use of the longitudinal COVID-19 Public Experiences (COPE) study, with baseline data collected in March/April 2020 (during the first peak) and follow-up data collected in June/July 2020 (after the first peak) which included an optional module that asked respondents about their home and neighbourhood (n = 5,566). Regression analyses revealed that both perceived access to public green space (e.g. a park or woodland) and reported access to a private green space (a private garden) were associated with better subjective wellbeing and self-rated health. In line with the health compensation hypothesis for green space, private gardens had a greater protective effect where the nearest green space was perceived to be more than a 10-minute walk away. This interaction was however only present during the first COVID-19 peak when severe lockdown restrictions came into place, but not in the post-peak period when restrictions were being eased. The study found few differences across demographic groups. A private garden was relatively more beneficial for men than for women during but not after the first peak. The results suggest that both public and private green space are an important resource for health and wellbeing in times of crisis.

Does greenery experienced indoors and outdoors provide an escape and support mental health during the COVID-19 quarantine?

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly changed people's ability to recreate in public green spaces, which is likely to exacerbate the psychological impacts of the pandemic. In the current study, we seek to understand whether greenery can support mental health even with insufficient outdoor exposure in times of physical isolation from the outdoor environment.

METHODS

Between 17 May and 10 June, 2020, we conducted an online survey among 323 students (21.99 ± 3.10 years; 31% male) in health-related programs from two universities in the city of Plovdiv, Bulgaria. Severities of depressive and anxiety symptoms over the past two weeks were measured with the Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale. We employed two self-reported measures of greenery experienced indoors (number of houseplants in the home and proportion of exterior greenery visible from inside the home) and two measures of greenery experienced outdoors (presence/absence of a domestic garden and availability of neighborhood greenery). Restorative quality of the home (the "being away" dimension of the Perceived Restorativeness Scale; PRS) and the neighborhood (the "being away" and "fascination" dimensions of the PRS), engagement with outdoor greenery (frequency of different types of interaction) and perceived social support were treated as mediators. Associations between greenery and mental health were tested using generalized linear regression and logistic regression. Structural equation modelling (SEM) techniques were used to test the theoretically-indicated relations among the variables.

RESULTS

Clinically-meaningful symptoms of moderate depression and anxiety were reported by approximately 33% and 20% of the students, respectively. The relative abundance of greenery visible from the home or in the neighborhood was associated with reduced depressive/anxiety symptoms and lower depression/anxiety rates. Having more houseplants or a garden was also associated with some of these markers of mental health. As hypothesized, the mental health-supportive effects of indoor greenery were largely explained by increased feelings of being away while at home. Neighborhood greenery contributed to neighborhood restorative quality, which in turn facilitated social support and more frequent engagement with greenery, and that led to better mental health.

CONCLUSIONS

Students who spent most of their time at home during the COVID-19 epidemic experienced better mental health when exposed to more greenery. Our findings support the idea that exposure to greenery may be a valuable resource during social isolation in the home. However, causal interpretation of these associations is not straightforward.

Green Space and Health Equity: A Systematic Review on the Potential of Green Space to Reduce Health Disparities

Disadvantaged groups worldwide, such as low-income and racially/ethnically minoritized people, experience worse health outcomes than more privileged groups, including wealthier and white people. Such health disparities are a major public health issue in several countries around the world. In this systematic review, we examine whether green space shows stronger associations with physical health for disadvantaged groups than for privileged groups. We hypothesize that disadvantaged groups have stronger protective effects from green space because of their greater dependency on proximate green space, as they tend to lack access to other health-promoting resources. We use the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) method and search five databases (CINAHL, Cochrane, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) to look for articles that examine whether socioeconomic status (SES) or race/ethnicity modify the green space-health associations. Based on this search, we identify 90 articles meeting our inclusion criteria. We find lower-SES people show more beneficial effects than affluent people, particularly when concerning public green spaces/parks rather than green land covers/greenness. Studies in Europe show stronger protective effects for lower-SES people versus higher-SES people than do studies in North America. We find no notable differences in the protective effects of green space between racial/ethnic groups. Collectively, these results suggest green space might be a tool to advance health equity and provide ways forward for urban planners, parks managers, and public health professionals to address health disparities.

Modelling and mapping eye-level greenness visibility exposure using multi-source data at high spatial resolutions

The visibility of natural greenness is associated with several health benefits along multiple pathways, including stress recovery and attention restoration mechanisms. However, existing methodologies are inadequate for capturing eye-level greenness visibility exposure at high spatial resolutions for observers located on the ground. As a response, we developed an innovative methodological approach to model and map eye-level greenness visibility exposure for 5 m interval locations within a large study area. We used multi-source spatial data and applied viewshed analysis in conjunction with a distance decay model to compute a novel Viewshed Greenness Visibility Index (VGVI) at more than 86 million observer locations. We compared our eye-level visibility exposure map with traditional top-down greenness exposure metrics such as Normalised Differential Vegetation Index (NDVI) and a Street view based Green View Index (SGVI). Furthermore, we compared greenness visibility at street-only locations with total neighbourhood greenness visibility. We found strong to moderate correlations (r = 0.65-0.42, p < 0.05) between greenness visibility and mean NDVI, with a decreasing trend in correlation strength at increasing buffer distances from observer locations. Our findings suggest that top-down and eye-level measurements of greenness are two distinct metrics for assessing greenness exposure. Additionally, VGVI showed a strong correlation (r = 0.481, p < 0.01) with SGVI. Although the new VGVI has good agreement with existing street view based measures, we found that street-only greenness visibility values are not wholly representative of total neighbourhood visibility due to the under-representation of visible greenness in locations such as backyards and community parks. Our new methodology overcomes such underestimations, is easily transferable, and offers a computationally efficient approach to assessing eye-level greenness exposure.

Home garden use during COVID-19: Associations with physical and mental wellbeing in older adults

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected many aspects of people's lives. Lockdown measures to reduce the spread of COVID-19 have been more stringent for those aged over 70, at highest risk for the disease. Here, we examine whether home garden usage is associated with self-reported mental and physical wellbeing in older adults, during COVID-19 lockdown in Scotland. This study analysed data from 171 individuals (mean age 84 ± 0.5 years) from the Lothian Birth Cohort 1936 study who completed an online survey approximately two months after lockdown commenced (May/June, 2020), and reported having access to a home garden. The survey also included items on garden activities (gardening, relaxing), frequency of garden usage during lockdown, and measures of self-rated physical health, emotional and mental health, anxiety about COVID-19, and sleep quality. Ordinal regression models were adjusted for sex, living alone, education, occupational social class, anxiety and depressive symptoms, body mass index, and history of diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Neither gardening nor relaxing in the garden were associated with health outcomes. However, higher frequency of garden usage during lockdown was associated with better self-rated physical health (P = 0.005), emotional and mental health (P = 0.04), sleep quality (P = 0.03), and a composite health score (P = 0.001), after adjusting for covariates. None of the garden measures were associated with perceived change in physical health, mental and emotional health, or sleep quality, from pre-lockdown levels. The results of the current study provide support for positive health benefits of spending time in a garden-though associations may be bidirectional-and suggest that domestic gardens could be a potential health resource during the COVID-19 pandemic.

"It made me feel brighter in myself"- The health and well-being impacts of a residential front garden horticultural intervention

Residential gardens make up 30% of urban space in the UK, yet unlike many other green space typologies, their role in the health and well-being agenda has largely been overlooked. A horticultural intervention introduced ornamental plants to 38 previously bare front gardens (≈ 10 m²) within an economically deprived region of North England, UK. Measures of perceived stress and diurnal cortisol profiles (as an indicator of health status) were taken pre- and post-intervention (over 3 months). Residents reported significant decreases in perceived stress post-intervention. This finding was aligned with a higher proportion of 'healthy' diurnal cortisol patterns post-intervention, suggesting better health status in those individuals. All residents derived one or more reported socio-cultural benefits as a result of the front garden plantings, although overall scores for subjective well-being did not increase to a significant level. Further qualitative data suggested that the gardens were valued for enhancing relaxation, increasing positive emotions, motivation, and pride of place. The results indicate that adding even small quantities of ornamental plants to front gardens within deprived urban communities had a positive effect on an individual's stress regulation and some, but not all, aspects of subjective well-being. The research highlights the importance of residential front gardens to human health and well-being, and thus their contribution to the wider debates around city densification, natural capital and urban planning.

Relationships between health outcomes in older populations and urban green infrastructure size, quality and proximity

Background

There is a growing body of literature supporting positive associations between natural environments and better health. The type, quality and quantity of green and blue space (‘green-space’) in proximity to the home might be particularly important for less mobile populations, such as for some older people. However, considerations of measurement and definition of green-space, beyond single aggregated metrics, are rare. This constitutes a major source of uncertainty in current understanding of public health benefits derived from natural environments. We aimed to improve our understanding of how such benefits are conferred to different demographic groups through a comprehensive evaluation of the physical and spatial characteristics of urban green infrastructure.

Methods

We employed a green infrastructure (GI) approach combining a high-resolution spatial dataset of land-cover and function with area-level demographic and socio-economic data. This allowed for a comprehensive characterization of a densely populated, polycentric city-region. We produced multiple GI attributes including, for example, urban vegetation health. We used a series of step-wise multi-level regression analyses to test associations between population chronic morbidity and the functional, physical and spatial components of GI across an urban socio-demographic gradient.

Results

GI attributes demonstrated associations with health in all socio-demographic contexts even where associations between health and overall green cover were non-significant. Associations varied by urban socio-demographic group. For areas characterised by having higher proportions of older people (‘older neighbourhoods’), associations with better health were exhibited by land-cover diversity, informal greenery and patch size in high income areas and by proximity to public parks and recreation land in low income areas. Quality of GI was a significant predictor of good health in areas of low income and low GI cover. Proximity of publicly accessible GI was also significant.

Conclusions

The influence of urban GI on population health is mediated by green-space form, quantity, accessibility, and vegetation health. People in urban neighbourhoods that are characterised by lower income and older age populations are disproportionately healthy if their neighbourhoods contain accessible, good quality public green-space. This has implications for strategies to decrease health inequalities and inform international initiatives, such as the World Health Organisation’s Age-Friendly Cities programme.

How do natural features in the residential environment influence women's self-reported general health? Results from cross-sectional analyses of a U.S. national cohort

BACKGROUND

The relationship between health and human interaction with nature is complex. Here we conduct analyses to provide insights into potential health benefits related to residential proximity to nature.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to examine associations between measures of residential nature and self-reported general health (SRGH), and to explore mediation roles of behavioral, social, and air quality factors, and variations in these relationships by urbanicity and regional climate.

METHODS

Using residential addresses for 41,127 women from the Sister Study, a U.S.-based national cohort, we derived two nature exposure metrics, canopy and non-gray cover, using Percent Tree Canopy and Percent Developed Imperviousness from the National Land Cover Database. Residential circular buffers of 250 m and 1250 m were considered. Gradient boosted regression trees were used to model the effects of nature exposure on the odds of reporting better SRGH (Excellent/Very Good versus the referent, Good/Fair/Poor). Analyses stratified by urbanicity and regional climate (arid, continental, temperate) and mediation by physical activity, social support, and air quality were conducted.

RESULTS

A 10% increase in canopy and non-gray cover within 1250 m buffer was associated with 1.02 (95% CI: 1.00-1.03) and 1.03 (95% CI: 1.01-1.04) times the odds of reporting better SRGH, respectively. Stronger associations were observed for the urban group and for continental climate relative to other strata. Social support and physical activity played a more significant mediation role than air quality for the full study population.

DISCUSSION

Findings from this study identified a small but important beneficial association between residential nature and general health. These findings could inform community planning and investments in neighborhood nature for targeted health improvements and potential societal and environmental co-benefits.

Where the wild things are! Do urban green spaces with greater avian biodiversity promote more positive emotions in humans?

Urban green space can help mitigate the negative impacts of urban living and provide positive effects on citizens’ mood, health and well-being. Questions remain, however, as to whether all types of green space are equally beneficial, and if not, what landscape forms or key features optimise the desired benefits. For example, it has been cited that urban landscapes rich in wildlife (high biodiversity) may promote more positive emotions and enhance well-being. This research utilised a mobile phone App, employed to assess people’s emotions when they entered any one of 945 green spaces within the city of Sheffield, UK. Emotional responses were correlated to key traits of the individual green spaces, including levels of biodiversity the participant perceived around them. For a subsample of these green spaces, actual levels of biodiversity were assessed through avian and habitat surveys. Results demonstrated strong correlations between levels of avian biodiversity within a green space and human emotional response to that space. Respondents reported being happier in sites with greater avian biodiversity (p < 0.01, r = 0.78) and a greater variety of habitats (p < 0.02, r = 0.72). Relationships were strengthened when emotions were linked to perceptions of overall biodiversity (p < 0.001, r = 0.89). So, when participants thought the site was wildlife rich, they reported more positive emotions, even when actual avian biodiversity levels were not necessarily enhanced. The data strengthens the arguments that nature enhances well-being through positive affect, and that increased ‘engagement with nature’ may help support human health within urban environments. The results have strong implications for city planning with respect to the design, management and use of city green spaces.

Population-level linkages between urban greenspace and health inequality: The case for using multiple indicators of neighbourhood greenspace

Exposure to greenspace in urban environments is associated with a range of improved health and well-being outcomes. There is a need to understand which aspects of greenspace influence which components of health. We investigate the relationship of indicators of greenspace quantity (total and specific types of greenspace), accessibility and quality with poor general health, depression, and severe mental illness, in the city of Sheffield, UK. We find complex relationships with multiple greenspace indicators that are different for each health measure, highlighting a need for future studies to include multiple, nuanced indicators of neighbourhood greenspace in order to produce results that can inform planning and policy guidance.

Working out What Works: The Role of Tacit Knowledge Where Urban Greenspace Research, Policy and Practice Intersect

Policymakers and practitioners working in urban greenspace management want to know what kind of interventions are effective in promoting mental wellbeing. In practice, however, they rely on multiple forms of knowledge, often in unwritten form. This paper considers how such knowledge is interpreted and used by a range of stakeholders to identify greenspace interventions to support residents’ health and wellbeing in one UK city. It examines the interface between academic research, policy and practice, drawing on the findings of a three-year study in Sheffield, UK. The Improving Wellbeing through the Urban Nature project investigated the links between ‘urban nature’ and mental health. One strand of the research sought to influence policy and practice, and this article presents findings and reflects on some of the processes of this exercise. It highlights the role of tacit knowledge in practice and its influence on practitioners’ choice of greenspace interventions and the challenges in drawing on such knowledge to influence policy. The findings affirm practice-based knowledge as socially situated, interpretively fashioned and politically weighted. This paper concludes by demonstrating the importance of considering the local context when devising policy prescriptions for greenspace provision and management.

Does Soil Contribute to the Human Gut Microbiome?

Soil and the human gut contain approximately the same number of active microorganisms, while human gut microbiome diversity is only 10% that of soil biodiversity and has decreased dramatically with the modern lifestyle. We tracked relationships between the soil microbiome and the human intestinal microbiome. We propose a novel environmental microbiome hypothesis, which implies that a close linkage between the soil microbiome and the human intestinal microbiome has evolved during evolution and is still developing. From hunter-gatherers to an urbanized society, the human gut has lost alpha diversity. Interestingly, beta diversity has increased, meaning that people in urban areas have more differentiated individual microbiomes. On top of little contact with soil and feces, hygienic measures, antibiotics and a low fiber diet of processed food have led to a loss of beneficial microbes. At the same time, loss of soil biodiversity is observed in many rural areas. The increasing use of agrochemicals, low plant biodiversity and rigorous soil management practices have a negative effect on the biodiversity of crop epiphytes and endophytes. These developments concur with an increase in lifestyle diseases related to the human intestinal microbiome. We point out the interference with the microbial cycle of urban human environments versus pre-industrial rural environments. In order to correct these interferences, it may be useful to adopt a different perspective and to consider the human intestinal microbiome as well as the soil/root microbiome as 'superorganisms' which, by close contact, replenish each other with inoculants, genes and growth-sustaining molecules.

Relating Urban Biodiversity to Human Health With the 'Holobiont' Concept

A relatively unaccounted ecosystem service from biodiversity is the benefit to human health via symbiotic microbiota from our environment. This benefit occurs because humans evolved alongside microbes and have been constantly exposed to diverse microbiota. Plants and animals, including humans, are organised as a host with symbiotic microbiota, whose collective genome and life history form a single holobiont. As such, there are interdependencies between biodiversity, holobionts, and public health which lead us to argue that human health outcomes could be improved by increasing contact with biodiversity in an urban context. We propose that humans, like all holobionts, likely require a diverse microbial habitat to appropriate resources for living healthy, long lives. We discuss how industrial urbanisation likely disrupts the symbiosis between microbiota and their hosts, leading to negative health outcomes. The industrialised urban habitat is low in macro and microbial biodiversity and discourages contact with beneficial environmental microbiota. These habitat factors, alongside diet, antibiotics, and others, are associated with the epidemic of non-communicable diseases in these societies. We suggest that restoration of urban microbial biodiversity and micro-ecological processes through microbiome rewilding can benefit holobiont health and aid in treating the urban non-communicable disease epidemic. Further, we identify research gaps and some solutions to economic and strategic hurdles in applying microbiome rewilding into daily urban life.

Understanding Stakeholder Perceptions of Acceptability and Feasibility of Formal and Informal Planting in Sheffield’s District Parks

Parks are well-visited sites of an urban nature in our cities where users can gain positive social and ecological benefits from vegetation including trees, grass, flowering plants and shrubs. However, ongoing financial public sector budget pressure is adversely affecting the management and quality of parks in the UK, resulting in changing vegetation and planting practices. It is not clear how such changes might affect park users, indicating scope for better understanding of how planting in urban parks is perceived. This paper addresses this gap in knowledge by exploring perceptions held by users who experience vegetation in parks and those involved in the decision-making about planting therein. It examines the feasibility and acceptability of three different planting practices according to different stakeholders in Sheffield, UK. This paper calls on empirical data collected via questionnaire surveys with residents around six district parks, and interviews and focus groups with community groups and professionals to gain an understanding of stakeholders’ perceptions. The paper illustrates different attitudes towards formal and naturalistic (informal) planting, exploring a prevalent shift towards low-maintenance practices in green space management. The findings suggest a range of influences on feasibility and acceptability of planting practices, including the local park context and stakeholder perceptions of public opinion.