Explore the vast range of titles available.

The COVID-19 pandemic and its global response have resulted in unprecedented and rapid changes to most people’s day-to-day lives. To slow the spread of the virus, governments have implemented the practice of physical distancing (“social distancing”), which includes isolation within the home with limited time spent outdoors. During this extraordinary time, nature around the home may play a key role in mitigating against adverse mental health outcomes due to the pandemic and the measures taken to address it. To assess whether this is the case, we conducted an online questionnaire survey (n = 3,000) in Tokyo, Japan, to quantify the association between five mental health outcomes (depression, life satisfaction, subjective happiness, self-esteem, and loneliness) and two measures of nature experiences (frequency of greenspace use and green view through windows from home). Accounting for sociodemographic and lifestyle variables, we found that the frequency of greenspace use and the existence of green window views from within the home was associated with increased levels of self-esteem, life satisfaction, and subjective happiness and decreased levels of depression, anxiety, and loneliness. Our findings suggest that a regular dose of nature can contribute to the improvement of a wide range of mental health outcomes. With the recent escalation in the prevalence of mental health disorders, and the possible negative impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on public mental health, our findings have major implications for policy, suggesting that urban nature has great potential to be used as a “nature-based solution” for improved public health.

Engagement with nature is an important part of many people’s lives, and the health and wellbeing benefits of nature–based activities are becoming increasingly recognised across disciplines from city planning to medicine. Despite this, urbanisation, challenges of modern life and environmental degradation are leading to a reduction in both the quantity and the quality of nature experiences. Nature–based health interventions (NBIs) can facilitate behavioural change through a somewhat structured promotion of nature–based experiences and, in doing so, promote improved physical, mental and social health and wellbeing. We conducted a Delphi expert elicitation process with 19 experts from seven countries (all named authors on this paper) to identify the different forms that such interventions take, the potential health outcomes and the target beneficiaries. In total, 27 NBIs were identified, aiming to prevent illness, promote wellbeing and treat specific physical, mental or social health and wellbeing conditions. These interventions were broadly categorized into those that change the environment in which people live, work, learn, recreate or heal (for example, the provision of gardens in hospitals or parks in cities) and those that change behaviour (for example, engaging people through organized programmes or other activities). We also noted the range of factors (such as socioeconomic variation) that will inevitably influence the extent to which these interventions succeed. We conclude with a call for research to identify the drivers influencing the effectiveness of NBIs in enhancing health and wellbeing.

Although many people affected by COVID-19 suffer from some form of psychological distress, access to proper treatment or psychosocial interventions has been limited. This study aimed to examine the feasibility and preliminary effects of a therapeutic gardening program conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. The program consisted of 30 sessions and was conducted at 10 nationwide sites in Korea from June to November 2021. Mental health and well-being were assessed using the Mental Health Screening Tool for Depressive Disorders, Mental Health Screening Tool for Anxiety Disorders, Engagement in Daily Activity Scale, brief version of World Health Organization Quality of Life, and Mindful Attention Awareness Scale. Cohen’s d value was calculated for the effect size, and a multilevel analysis was used to determine the longitudinal effects of therapeutic gardening. The effect sizes for depression, anxiety, daily activities, quality of life, and mindfulness were 0.84, 0.72, 0.61, 0.64, and 0.40, respectively. Multilevel analyses showed that all five mental health variables improved significantly over time as the therapeutic gardening program progressed. Therapeutic gardening is promising and applicable as a nature-based intervention to improve the mental health of individuals experiencing psychological distress especially in the COVID-19 pandemic.

There is compelling evidence that both connection to nature itself and engagement with nature‐based activities promote positive physical, mental and social well‐being outcomes. Most of this evidence comes from studies of urban residents, overlooking the importance—and opportunity—of nature‐based interventions for rural communities. We use data from two large‐scale surveys totalling 7254 New Zealanders to show that (1) there is a positive relationship between Nature Relatedness (a measure of connection to nature) and well‐being and current and anticipated future life satisfaction across the urban–rural gradient; (2) the relationship between Nature Relatedness and well‐being/life satisfaction is stronger for urban residents; and (3) Nature Relatedness is associated with well‐being and current life satisfaction among both commercial farmers and non‐commercial rural residents. Moreover, while people are on average optimistic about their life satisfaction in the future, we find that those with higher Nature Relatedness are disproportionately optimistic. While our findings are correlational, they suggest that promoting a connection to nature may be a viable strategy for enhancing well‐being and life satisfaction outcomes regardless of where people live. We discuss the implications of these findings including the importance of considering context of developing of interventions that are suitable for urban and rural communities. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. Whakarāpopototanga Arā te nui o te taunakitanga e mea ana mā te pakari o te whanaungatanga ki te ao tūroa e whakapiki ake i tō tātou oranga, engari, he ōrite anō tēnei whakapikinga mō te hunga noho tāone, noho tuawhenua rānei? I whakahaeretia e mātou ngā rangahau e rua me ngā tāngata 7200 o Aotearoa ki te wetewete he pēhea te hononga ki te oranga o te whanaungatanga o te tangata ki te ao tūroa, oti rā, ki te oranga ngākau o nāianei, o te ānamata hoki e whakapaetia ana mā ngā tāngata noho tāone, noho tuawhenua anō hoki. Kua kitea he nui ake te whanaungatanga ki te ao tūroa a te hunga noho tuawhenua i te hunga noho tāone, i te nuinga o te wā. Ka whakaū hoki mātou i tō mātou whakapae e whai pānga ana taua whanaungatanga ki te ao tūroa ki te pikinga ake o te oranga me te oranga ngākau ki ngā taiao e rua o te tāone me te tuawhenua. Ko te mea mīharo, he pakari ake tēnei whanaungatanga i roto i te hunga noho tāone, he nui ake te pikinga o te oranga i runga i te whanaungatanga ki te ao tūroa i tā te hunga noho tuawhenua. Kātahi ka whāiti ake te titiro ki ngā tauira i roto i te tīpakonga tuawhenua hei tūhura mehemea he rerekē ngā hua ki tēnā tangata, ki tēnā tangata mehemea he rerekē te noho tuawhenua – he āta titiro ki ngā kaipāmu ā‐arumoni me ngā kaipāmu runaruna te mahi. Kua kitea e mātou he whai pānga te whanaungatanga ki te whenua ki te oranga me te oranga ngākau o te noho o nāianei o ngā tāngata i ngā rōpū e rua. Kua tohua mai e ngā hua he whai hua te poipoi i te whanaungatanga ki te ao tūroa hei tautoko i te oranga me te oranga ngākau, ahakoa ki hea noho ai te tangata, heoi anō, he rautaki nui ake pea ōna whai hua ki te hunga noho tāone, i te hunga noho tuawhenua. Ka mutu, ko tā tēnei rangahau he whakatakoto i ngā tirohanga iho ki ngā hōhonutanga he pēhea te whanaungatanga ki te ao tūroa e whai pānga ana ki te oranga me te oranga ngākau mō te tangata he rerekē te noho. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Understanding how activities in natural settings, such as gardening, improve health and well‐being is important for designing nature‐based health interventions. Our study focused on a sociodemographic‐diverse group of new gardeners (n = 34) who had participated for one season in the community gardens as part of the Denver Urban Gardens initiative in Denver, CO USA. New gardeners participated in semi‐structured qualitative interviews to determine how and why gardening influenced their well‐being. Interview transcripts were analysed iteratively using grounded theory and comparative case study methodologies. Analysis revealed that new gardeners' previous gardening experience, social support systems and overcoming gardening challenges increased gardening engagement and improved outcomes. Within‐garden outcomes that were nearly universally experienced by new gardeners included food production, physical activity in the garden and a ‘gardening triad’: (1) caretaking, nurturance or love and sense of responsibility for garden plants; (2) feelings of accomplishment, success and pride and (3) connection to nature including appreciation, restoration and wonder. We found that the elements of the ‘gardening triad’ were meaningful to gardeners and connected to both continued engagement of participants and others in the garden, and social and emotional well‐being outcomes including new and/or strengthened social relationships; purpose and meaning; self‐learning, self‐worth and confidence; joy, immersion, restoration and respite; and management of mental health conditions. Gardening with others, including other gardeners, garden leaders, friends and family, amplified the well‐being effects of the ‘gardening triad.’ Identification of the ‘gardening triad’ expands understanding of the salient health‐promoting characteristics of gardening beyond simple exposure to nature, food production and physical activity. It embeds gardeners in relationship with their gardens as active participants eliciting universal emotional processes which, in turn, manifested as improved social and emotional well‐being. Gardening, as an avenue for improving well‐being, should be supported widely. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Worsening impacts of climate and ecological change have led to a rise in eco‐distress and related psychological impacts of these crises. Interventions, including both nature‐based activities and contemplative practices, have been developed to help individuals experiencing eco‐distress. However, the integration of contemplation and nature engagement remains unexplored. In this study we explore how these two practices support adaptive outcomes concerning eco‐distress. We conducted 11 semi‐structured interviews and two workshops with teachers and leaders of contemplative nature engagement practices, to understand the practices and pathways linking practices to outcomes related to eco‐distress. Thematic analysis of interview data identified four key pathways to adaptive change: (1) restoration and reduced stress through presence; (2) facing and working with difficult emotions; (3) shifting and expanding self‐boundaries; and (4) strengthening values and commitments to action. These insights build on theoretical work in both contemplative studies and environmental psychology literature by proposing a layered and reciprocal set of mechanisms that build on and reinforce each other over time. Analysis of workshop data identified intervention design recommendations to inform the practical design and implementation of contemplative nature engagement practices for individuals experiencing eco‐distress. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Nature-based health interventions (NBHIs) are utilised to treat a range of physical and mental health conditions, and this rapid review sought to describe the breadth of instrumentation utilised to measure the effectiveness of NBHIs on the different domains of health and wellbeing. A total of 14,385 records were extracted from three databases, and a review of titles and abstracts and then of full text resulted in a final dataset of 167 articles that met the review criteria. NBHI settings were categorised as Garden/Horticulture, Blue Spaces, Urban Green Spaces, Wild Nature, and Camps/Residential. For each of these settings, major population groups included in the studies, health domains and outcomes addressed, as well as assessment tools used to measure NBHIs' effectiveness were described and analysed in aggregate. A total of 336 measurement tools were utilised across the dataset, with only 29 being specifically designed to assess NBHIs. Most studies investigated mental health domains and measured the effectiveness of NBHIs to improve psychological factors and physical, behavioural, and healthy eating outcomes. Future research should interrogate how nature- based tools and outcome measurements could be used most effectively in NBHI settings. [Author abstract]

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about unprecedented changes to human lifestyles across the world. The virus and associated social restriction measures have been linked to an increase in mental health conditions. A considerable body of evidence shows that spending time in and engaging with nature can improve human health and wellbeing. Our study explores nature’s role in supporting health during the COVID-19 pandemic. We created web-based questionnaires with validated health instruments and conducted spatial analyses in a geographic information system (GIS). We collected data (n = 1184) on people’s patterns of nature exposure, associated health and wellbeing responses, and potential socioecological drivers such as relative deprivation, access to greenspaces, and land-cover greenness. The majority of responses came from England, UK (n = 993). We applied a range of statistical analyses including bootstrap-resampled correlations and binomial regression models, adjusting for several potential confounding factors. We found that respondents significantly changed their patterns of visiting nature as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. People spent more time in nature and visited nature more often during the pandemic. People generally visited nature for a health and wellbeing benefit and felt that nature helped them cope during the pandemic. Greater land-cover greenness within a 250 m radius around a respondent’s postcode was important in predicting higher levels of mental wellbeing. There were significantly more food-growing allotments within 100 and 250 m around respondents with high mental wellbeing scores. The need for a mutually-advantageous relationship between humans and the wider biotic community has never been more important. We must conserve, restore and design nature-centric environments to maintain resilient societies and promote planetary health.

Being exposed to natural environments is associated with improved health and well-being, as these environments are believed to promote feelings of “being away” from everyday struggles, positive emotional reactions and stress reduction. Despite these positive effects, humanity is becoming increasingly more distanced from nature due to societal changes, such as increased urbanization and the reduced accessibility of natural environments. Technology is also partly to blame, as research suggests that people replace nature contact with increased screen time. In this cross-section between nature and technology, we find technological nature which is progressing towards a point where we may be capable of simulating exposure to real nature. Concerns have been raised regarding this technology, as it is feared it will replace real nature. However, research suggests that virtual nature may have a more positive impact on society than a mere replacement of real nature, and this review propose several areas where virtual nature may be a beneficial addition to actual nature (Enable), help people reconnect with the real natural world (Reconnect) and “boost” human-nature interactions (Augment). Based on the current research and theoretical framework, this review proposes guidelines for future research within these areas, with the aim of advancing the field by producing high quality research.

Prescribing nature-based health interventions (green prescribing)—such as therapeutic horticulture or conservation activities—is an emerging transdisciplinary strategy focussed on reducing noncommunicable diseases. However, little is known about the practice of, and socioecological constraints/opportunities associated with, green prescribing in the UK. Furthermore, the distribution of green prescribing has yet to be comprehensively mapped. In this study, we conducted a socioecological exploration of green prescribing. We deployed online questionnaires to collect data from general practitioners (GPs) and nature-based organisations (NBOs) around the UK and conducted spatial analyses. Our results indicate that GPs and NBOs perceive and express some common and distinct constraints to green prescribing. This highlights the need to promote cross-disciplinary communication pathways. Greenspace presence and abundance within close proximity (100 and 250 m) to GP surgeries (but not greenness—as a proxy for vegetation cover) and NBO presence within 5 km were associated with higher levels of green prescribing provision. Lower levels of deprivation were associated with higher frequency of NBOs. This suggests that the availability of greenspaces and NBOs could be important for green prescribing provision, but there could be greater opportunities in less deprived areas. Important foci for future research should be to establish transdisciplinary collaborative pathways, efficient infrastructure management and a common vocabulary in green prescribing—with the overall aim of reducing inequalities and enhancing planetary health.