Associations between pro-environmental behaviour and neighbourhood nature, nature visit frequency and nature appreciation: Evidence from a nationally representative survey in England.

Progress on changing human behaviour to meet the challenges of regional and global sustainability has been slow. Building on theory as well as small-scale survey and experimental evidence that exposure to nature may be associated with greater pro-environmentalism, the aim of the current study was to quantify relationships between exposure to nature (operationalised as neighbourhood greenspace, coastal proximity, and recreational nature visits) as well as appreciation of the natural world, and self-reported pro-environmental behaviour for the adult population of England. Using data from a nationally representative sample (N = 24,204), and controlling for potential confounders, a structural equation model was used to estimate relationships. Indirect effects of neighbourhood exposures via nature visits and nature appreciation were accounted for. We found positive relationships between both recreational nature visits and nature appreciation and pro-environmental behaviour across both the whole sample and key socio-demographic groups. The more individuals visited nature for recreation and the more they appreciated the natural world, the more pro-environmental behaviour they reported. Although rural and coastal dwellers tended to also be more pro-environmental on average, patterns were complex, potentially reflecting situational constraints and opportunities. Importantly, positive associations between pro-environmental behaviours and high neighbourhood greenspace and coastal proximity were present for both high and low socio-economic status households. Improving access to, and contact with, nature, e.g., through better urban planning, may be one approach for meeting sustainability targets.

Public involvement in research about environmental change and health: A case study.

Involving and engaging the public are crucial for effective prioritisation, dissemination and implementation of research about the complex interactions between environments and health. Involvement is also important to funders and policy makers who often see it as vital for building trust and justifying the investment of public money. In public health research, 'the public' can seem an amorphous target for researchers to engage with, and the short-term nature of research projects can be a challenge. Technocratic and pedagogical approaches have frequently met with resistance, so public involvement needs to be seen in the context of a history which includes contested truths, power inequalities and political activism. It is therefore vital for researchers and policy makers, as well as public contributors, to share best practice and to explore the challenges encountered in public involvement and engagement. This article presents a theoretically informed case study of the contributions made by the Health and Environment Public Engagement Group to the work of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Protection Research Unit in Environmental Change and Health (HPRU-ECH). We describe how Health and Environment Public Engagement Group has provided researchers in the HPRU-ECH with a vehicle to support access to public views on multiple aspects of the research work across three workshops, discussion of ongoing research issues at meetings and supporting dissemination to local government partners, as well as public representation on the HPRU-ECH Advisory Board. We conclude that institutional support for standing public involvement groups can provide conduits for connecting public with policy makers and academic institutions. This can enable public involvement and engagement, which would be difficult, if not impossible, to achieve in individual short-term and unconnected research projects.

Beyond greenspace: an ecological study of population general health and indicators of natural environment type and quality.

BACKGROUND: Many studies suggest that exposure to natural environments ('greenspace') enhances human health and wellbeing. Benefits potentially arise via several mechanisms including stress reduction, opportunity and motivation for physical activity, and reduced air pollution exposure. However, the evidence is mixed and sometimes inconclusive. One explanation may be that "greenspace" is typically treated as a homogenous environment type. However, recent research has revealed that different types and qualities of natural environments may influence health and wellbeing to different extents. METHODS: This ecological study explores this issue further using data on land cover type, bird species richness, water quality and protected or designated status to create small-area environmental indicators across Great Britain. Associations between these indicators and age/sex standardised prevalence of both good and bad health from the 2011 Census were assessed using linear regression models. Models were adjusted for indicators of socio-economic deprivation and rurality, and also investigated effect modification by these contextual characteristics. RESULTS: Positive associations were observed between good health prevalence and the density of the greenspace types, "broadleaf woodland", "arable and horticulture", "improved grassland", "saltwater" and "coastal", after adjusting for potential confounders. Inverse associations with bad health prevalence were observed for the same greenspace types, with the exception of "saltwater". Land cover diversity and density of protected/designated areas were also associated with good and bad health in the predicted manner. Bird species richness (an indicator of local biodiversity) was only associated with good health prevalence. Surface water quality, an indicator of general local environmental condition, was associated with good and bad health prevalence contrary to the manner expected, with poorer water quality associated with better population health. Effect modification by income deprivation and urban/rural status was observed for several of the indicators. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that the type, quality and context of 'greenspace' should be considered in the assessment of relationships between greenspace and human health and wellbeing. Opportunities exist to further integrate approaches from ecosystem services and public health perspectives to maximise opportunities to inform policies for health and environmental improvement and protection.