Abstract
Although spending time in nature can improve subjective wellbeing (SWB), little is known about how different types of nature exposure are associated with different dimensions of SWB or the consistency of associations across national/cultural contexts. Using data from 18 countries, associations between green, coastal and freshwater blue space exposures (including residential availability, visits ‘yesterday’ and visits in the previous four weeks) and hedonic, eudaimonic, and evaluative wellbeing were estimated. Overall, residential nature availability showed little association with any wellbeing outcome, whereas visiting green and coastal locations ‘yesterday’ was associated with better hedonic wellbeing. Although frequently visiting green, coastal and freshwater spaces were all associated with greater evaluative wellbeing, greater eudaimonic wellbeing was only associated with frequent visits to green and freshwater spaces. Variations existed across countries. Results suggest that different types of nature exposure vary in their association with different dimensions of SWB. Understanding these differences may help us maximise the potential of natural environments as SWB-promoting resources.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 102479 |
| Journal | Journal of Environmental Psychology |
| Volume | 100 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Dec 2024 |
Funding
We thank Ben Butler, Gavin Ellison, and Tom Powell at YouGov for managing the data collection pertaining to this study. This project received support from the European Union\u2019s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 666773 (BlueHealth). MvdB and MN acknowledge support from the grant CEX2018-000806-S funded by MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033, and support from the Generalitat de Catalunya through the CERCA Program.The funders had no role in the conceptualisation, design, analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.Data collection in California was supported by the Center for Conservation Biology, Stanford University. Data collection in Canada was supported by the Faculty of Forestry, University of British Columbia. Data collection in Finland was supported by the Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke). Data collection in Australia was supported by Griffith University and the University of the Sunshine Coast. Data collection in Portugal was supported by ISCTE\u2014University Institute of Lisbon. Data collection in Ireland was supported by the Environmental Protection Agency, Ireland. Data collection in Hong Kong was supported by an internal University of Exeter\u2014Chinese University of Hong Kong international collaboration fund. Data were obtained from the BlueHealth International Survey (BIS) (Elliott & White, 2020). BIS is an 18-country survey of health, wellbeing, and natural environment engagement carried out within the BlueHealth project (Grellier et al., 2017). BIS data have been used in studies focusing on different types of nature exposure including: childhood (Vitale et al., 2022), visit (Garrett et al., 2023) and neighbourhood exposures (Pasanen et al., 2023); for different mental health outcomes (White et al., 2021), including sub-samples with common mental health disorders (Tester-Jones et al., 2020); and more generic health outcomes (Elliott et al., 2023). However, to date, the BIS data have not been used to explore relations with different dimensions of SWB across different exposure types. Ethical approval for this research was granted by the University of Exeter's College of Medicine and Health Research Ethics Committee (Ref: Aug16/B/099).We thank Ben Butler, Gavin Ellison, and Tom Powell at YouGov for managing the data collection pertaining to this study. This project received support from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 666773 (BlueHealth). MvdB and MN acknowledge support from the grant CEX2018-000806-S funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033, and support from the Generalitat de Catalunya through the CERCA Program.The funders had no role in the conceptualisation, design, analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.Data collection in California was supported by the Center for Conservation Biology, Stanford University. Data collection in Canada was supported by the Faculty of Forestry, University of British Columbia. Data collection in Finland was supported by the Natural Resources Institute Finland. Data collection in Australia was supported by Griffith University and the University of the Sunshine Coast. Data collection in Portugal was supported by ISCTE\u2014University Institute of Lisbon. Data collection in Ireland was supported by the Environmental Protection Agency, Ireland. Data collection in Hong Kong was supported by an internal University of Exeter\u2014Chinese University of Hong Kong international collaboration fund.
Austrian Fields of Science 2012
- 501002 Applied psychology
Keywords
- Blue space
- Happiness
- Life satisfaction
- Nature
- Public health
