Exploring public risk perceptions of microplastics: Findings from a cross-national qualitative interview study among German and Italian citizens.

Microplastics are receiving growing attention in the public debate, while the scientific assessment of risks of microplastics to ecological and human health is still ongoing. Previous studies suggest concerns among the general public with country-specific differences. However, little is known about the reasoning underlying these concerns. By conducting qualitative interviews with German (n = 15) and Italian citizens (n = 15), this study adopted a cross-national perspective to investigate which concepts shape citizens' perceptions of microplastics. A qualitative content analysis was used, with coding categories and subcategories developed inductively. Results showed that interviewees formed assumptions around microplastics despite own uncertainties, transferred knowledge from macro- to microplastics, and used the concepts of accumulation and dose-response relationship to make sense of the topic. Moreover, they saw the domains of human health and the environment as intertwined and expressed helplessness when discussing solutions to the microplastics issue. Many themes on the topic were similar in both samples, but there were also some differences. For instance, whereas Italian participants talked about marine-related microplastics, German participants talked about airborne sources; also, German participants tended to recognize more strongly the actions their country was putting in place to address the problem. These findings underscore the need for proactive risk communication despite remaining gaps in scientific risk assessment. Beyond providing technical information, communicators should consider the reasoning behind risk perception on microplastics and address scientific uncertainty as well as the interconnectedness between the domains of human health and the environment.

The Soothing Sea: A Virtual Coastal Walk Can Reduce Experienced and Recollected Pain.

Virtual reality (VR) distraction has become increasingly available in health care contexts and is used in acute pain management. However, there has been no systematic exploration of the importance of the content of VR environments. Two studies tested how interacting with nature VR influenced experienced and recollected pain after 1 week. Study 1 (n = 85) used a laboratory pain task (cold pressor), whereas Study 2 (n = 70) was a randomized controlled trial with patients undergoing dental treatment. In Study 1, nature (coastal) VR reduced both experienced and recollected pain compared with no VR. In Study 2, nature (coastal) VR reduced experienced and recalled pain in dental patients, compared with urban VR and standard care. Together, these data show that nature can improve experience of health care procedures through the use of VR, and that the content of the VR matters: Coastal nature is better than urban.

Can Beach Cleans Do More Than Clean-Up Litter? Comparing Beach Cleans to Other Coastal Activities.

Coastal visits not only provide psychological benefits but can also contribute to the accumulation of rubbish. Volunteer beach cleans help address this issue, but may only have limited, local impact. Consequently, it is important to study any broader benefits associated with beach cleans. This article examines the well-being and educational value of beach cleans, as well as their impacts on individuals' behavioral intentions. We conducted an experimental study that allocated students (n = 90) to a beach cleaning, rock pooling, or walking activity. All three coastal activities were associated with positive mood and pro-environmental intentions. Beach cleaning and rock pooling were associated with higher marine awareness. The unique impacts of beach cleaning were that they were rated as most meaningful but linked to lower restorativeness ratings of the environment compared with the other activities. This research highlights the interplay between environment and activities, raising questions for future research on the complexities of person-environment interactions.

Lifestyle factors and Alzheimer's disease in people with Down syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Lifestyle has previously been associated with the onset of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in the typically developing population, but research investigating this association in Down syndrome (DS) is limited. METHOD: Adults with DS and AD (n = 27) were compared to adults with DS without AD (n = 30) on physical activity, diet, weight, where participants currently lived, where participants had lived for the majority of their lives, educational attainment, occupational attainment and cognitive activity. RESULTS: There was a significant difference between samples on where participants currently lived, with the majority of the clinical sample living in institutionalized settings and the majority of the control sample living in independent/supported living settings. This may reflect a tendency to move people once they start to deteriorate which, if correct, is contrary to clinical recommendations that people with AD should be supported to "die in place." CONCLUSIONS: Further research into the way in which lifestyle factors, particularly living environment, could contribute to the increased risk of AD in adults with DS is required. This may support interventions aimed at preventing or delaying the onset of the disease.

Factors That Can Undermine the Psychological Benefits of Coastal Environments: Exploring the Effect of Tidal State, Presence, and Type of Litter.

The beneficial effects of blue environments have been well documented; however, we do not know how marine litter might modify these effects. Three studies adopted a picture-rating task to examine the influence of litter on preference, perceived restorative quality, and psychological impacts. Photographs varied the presence of marine litter (Study 1) and the type of litter (Studies 2 and 3). The influence of tide and the role of connectedness were also explored. Using both quantitative and qualitative methods, it was shown that litter can undermine the psychological benefits that the coast ordinarily provides, thus demonstrating that, in addition to environmental costs of marine litter, there are also costs to people. Litter stemming from the public had the most negative impact. This research extends our understanding of the psychological benefits from natural coastal environments and the threats to these benefits from abundant and increasing marine litter.

Marine Biota and Psychological Well-Being: A Preliminary Examination of Dose-Response Effects in an Aquarium Setting.

Exposure to natural environments can have calming and stress-reducing effects on humans. Moreover, previous studies suggest that these benefits may be greater in areas with higher species richness. Our study took advantage of a "natural experiment" to examine people's behavioral, physiological, and psychological reactions to increases in levels of marine biota in a large aquarium exhibit during three stages of restocking: Unstocked, Partially stocked, and Fully stocked. We found that increased biota levels were associated with longer spontaneous viewing of the exhibit, greater reductions in heart rate, greater increases in self-reported mood, and higher interest. We suggest that higher biota levels, even in managed settings, may be associated with important well-being and health benefits, particularly for individuals not able to access the natural analogues of managed environments.

Making Heat Visible: Promoting Energy Conservation Behaviors Through Thermal Imaging.

Householders play a role in energy conservation through the decisions they make about purchases and installations such as insulation, and through their habitual behavior. The present U.K. study investigated the effect of thermal imaging technology on energy conservation, by measuring the behavioral effect after householders viewed images of heat escaping from or cold air entering their homes. In Study 1 (n = 43), householders who received a thermal image reduced their energy use at a 1-year follow-up, whereas householders who received a carbon footprint audit and a non-intervention control demonstrated no change. In Study 2 (n = 87), householders were nearly 5 times more likely to install draught proofing measures after seeing a thermal image. The effect was especially pronounced for actions that addressed an issue visible in the images. Findings indicate that using thermal imaging to make heat loss visible can promote energy conservation.

Nature visits, but not residential greenness, are associated with reduced income-related inequalities in subjective well-being.

Nature exposure can promote human health and well-being. Additionally, there is some, albeit mixed, evidence that this relationship is stronger for socio-economically disadvantaged groups (equigenesis). Using a cross-sectional survey of the Austrian population (N = 2300), we explored the relationships between both residential greenness and recreational nature visits, and affective (WHO-5 Well-Being Index) and evaluative (Personal Well-Being Index-7) subjective well-being. Partially supporting the equigenesis hypothesis, regression analyses controlling for potential confounders found that recreational visit frequency, but not residential greenness, moderated the effect of income-related disparities in both subjective well-being metrics. Results suggest that merely making neighborhoods greener may not itself help reduce inequalities in subjective well-being. Additionally, greater efforts are also needed to support individuals from all sectors of society to access natural settings for recreation as this could significantly improve the well-being of some of the poorest in society.

Environmental protection is more important to European citizens of all political persuasions than economic growth: A 14-country study in the marine context.

To focus on voters' priorities, Bill Clinton's campaign famously used the slogan, "It's the economy stupid." With growing environmental crises, is this still true? We explored this issue for the marine sector, using representatively-weighted survey data from 14 European countries (N = 11,130). Citizens were asked about their own and policy makers' (perceived) preferences for marine-related economic, environmental, and human health policy goals. Results found the public consistently prioritised environmental protection and, to a lesser extent, health over economic growth. However, the public believed that policy makers cared less about the environment and health, but more about the economy than they did themselves. These patterns were consistent across all countries, all points of the political spectrum, and among coastal and inland residents. Marine policy makers who care about public opinion, may want to start considering that, at least for the European public, it is increasingly about "the environment, stupid!".

Nature-based biopsychosocial resilience: An integrative theoretical framework for research on nature and health.

Nature-based solutions including urban forests and wetlands can help communities cope better with climate change and other environmental stressors by enhancing social-ecological resilience. Natural ecosystems, settings, elements and affordances can also help individuals become more personally resilient to a variety of stressors, although the mechanisms underpinning individual-level nature-based resilience, and their relations to social-ecological resilience, are not well articulated. We propose 'nature-based biopsychosocial resilience theory' (NBRT) to address these gaps. Our framework begins by suggesting that individual-level resilience can refer to both: a) a person's set of adaptive resources; and b) the processes by which these resources are deployed. Drawing on existing nature-health perspectives, we argue that nature contact can support individuals build and maintain biological, psychological, and social (i.e. biopsychosocial) resilience-related resources. Together with nature-based social-ecological resilience, these biopsychosocial resilience resources can: i) reduce the risk of various stressors (preventive resilience); ii) enhance adaptive reactions to stressful circumstances (response resilience), and/or iii) facilitate more rapid and/or complete recovery from stress (recovery resilience). Reference to these three resilience processes supports integration across more familiar pathways involving harm reduction, capacity building, and restoration. Evidence in support of the theory, potential interventions to promote nature-based biopsychosocial resilience, and issues that require further consideration are discussed.

The Minderoo-Monaco Commission on Plastics and Human Health.

Background: Plastics have conveyed great benefits to humanity and made possible some of the most significant advances of modern civilization in fields as diverse as medicine, electronics, aerospace, construction, food packaging, and sports. It is now clear, however, that plastics are also responsible for significant harms to human health, the economy, and the earth's environment. These harms occur at every stage of the plastic life cycle, from extraction of the coal, oil, and gas that are its main feedstocks through to ultimate disposal into the environment. The extent of these harms not been systematically assessed, their magnitude not fully quantified, and their economic costs not comprehensively counted. Goals: The goals of this Minderoo-Monaco Commission on Plastics and Human Health are to comprehensively examine plastics' impacts across their life cycle on: (1) human health and well-being; (2) the global environment, especially the ocean; (3) the economy; and (4) vulnerable populations-the poor, minorities, and the world's children. On the basis of this examination, the Commission offers science-based recommendations designed to support development of a Global Plastics Treaty, protect human health, and save lives. Report Structure: This Commission report contains seven Sections. Following an Introduction, Section 2 presents a narrative review of the processes involved in plastic production, use, and disposal and notes the hazards to human health and the environment associated with each of these stages. Section 3 describes plastics' impacts on the ocean and notes the potential for plastic in the ocean to enter the marine food web and result in human exposure. Section 4 details plastics' impacts on human health. Section 5 presents a first-order estimate of plastics' health-related economic costs. Section 6 examines the intersection between plastic, social inequity, and environmental injustice. Section 7 presents the Commission's findings and recommendations. Plastics: Plastics are complex, highly heterogeneous, synthetic chemical materials. Over 98% of plastics are produced from fossil carbon- coal, oil and gas. Plastics are comprised of a carbon-based polymer backbone and thousands of additional chemicals that are incorporated into polymers to convey specific properties such as color, flexibility, stability, water repellence, flame retardation, and ultraviolet resistance. Many of these added chemicals are highly toxic. They include carcinogens, neurotoxicants and endocrine disruptors such as phthalates, bisphenols, per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), brominated flame retardants, and organophosphate flame retardants. They are integral components of plastic and are responsible for many of plastics' harms to human health and the environment.Global plastic production has increased almost exponentially since World War II, and in this time more than 8,300 megatons (Mt) of plastic have been manufactured. Annual production volume has grown from under 2 Mt in 1950 to 460 Mt in 2019, a 230-fold increase, and is on track to triple by 2060. More than half of all plastic ever made has been produced since 2002. Single-use plastics account for 35-40% of current plastic production and represent the most rapidly growing segment of plastic manufacture.Explosive recent growth in plastics production reflects a deliberate pivot by the integrated multinational fossil-carbon corporations that produce coal, oil and gas and that also manufacture plastics. These corporations are reducing their production of fossil fuels and increasing plastics manufacture. The two principal factors responsible for this pivot are decreasing global demand for carbon-based fuels due to increases in 'green' energy, and massive expansion of oil and gas production due to fracking.Plastic manufacture is energy-intensive and contributes significantly to climate change. At present, plastic production is responsible for an estimated 3.7% of global greenhouse gas emissions, more than the contribution of Brazil. This fraction is projected to increase to 4.5% by 2060 if current trends continue unchecked. Plastic Life Cycle: The plastic life cycle has three phases: production, use, and disposal. In production, carbon feedstocks-coal, gas, and oil-are transformed through energy-intensive, catalytic processes into a vast array of products. Plastic use occurs in every aspect of modern life and results in widespread human exposure to the chemicals contained in plastic. Single-use plastics constitute the largest portion of current use, followed by synthetic fibers and construction.Plastic disposal is highly inefficient, with recovery and recycling rates below 10% globally. The result is that an estimated 22 Mt of plastic waste enters the environment each year, much of it single-use plastic and are added to the more than 6 gigatons of plastic waste that have accumulated since 1950. Strategies for disposal of plastic waste include controlled and uncontrolled landfilling, open burning, thermal conversion, and export. Vast quantities of plastic waste are exported each year from high-income to low-income countries, where it accumulates in landfills, pollutes air and water, degrades vital ecosystems, befouls beaches and estuaries, and harms human health-environmental injustice on a global scale. Plastic-laden e-waste is particularly problematic. Environmental Findings: Plastics and plastic-associated chemicals are responsible for widespread pollution. They contaminate aquatic (marine and freshwater), terrestrial, and atmospheric environments globally. The ocean is the ultimate destination for much plastic, and plastics are found throughout the ocean, including coastal regions, the sea surface, the deep sea, and polar sea ice. Many plastics appear to resist breakdown in the ocean and could persist in the global environment for decades. Macro- and micro-plastic particles have been identified in hundreds of marine species in all major taxa, including species consumed by humans. Trophic transfer of microplastic particles and the chemicals within them has been demonstrated. Although microplastic particles themselves (>10 µm) appear not to undergo biomagnification, hydrophobic plastic-associated chemicals bioaccumulate in marine animals and biomagnify in marine food webs. The amounts and fates of smaller microplastic and nanoplastic particles (MNPs <10 µm) in aquatic environments are poorly understood, but the potential for harm is worrying given their mobility in biological systems. Adverse environmental impacts of plastic pollution occur at multiple levels from molecular and biochemical to population and ecosystem. MNP contamination of seafood results in direct, though not well quantified, human exposure to plastics and plastic-associated chemicals. Marine plastic pollution endangers the ocean ecosystems upon which all humanity depends for food, oxygen, livelihood, and well-being. Human Health Findings: Coal miners, oil workers and gas field workers who extract fossil carbon feedstocks for plastic production suffer increased mortality from traumatic injury, coal workers' pneumoconiosis, silicosis, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and lung cancer. Plastic production workers are at increased risk of leukemia, lymphoma, hepatic angiosarcoma, brain cancer, breast cancer, mesothelioma, neurotoxic injury, and decreased fertility. Workers producing plastic textiles die of bladder cancer, lung cancer, mesothelioma, and interstitial lung disease at increased rates. Plastic recycling workers have increased rates of cardiovascular disease, toxic metal poisoning, neuropathy, and lung cancer. Residents of "fenceline" communities adjacent to plastic production and waste disposal sites experience increased risks of premature birth, low birth weight, asthma, childhood leukemia, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and lung cancer.During use and also in disposal, plastics release toxic chemicals including additives and residual monomers into the environment and into people. National biomonitoring surveys in the USA document population-wide exposures to these chemicals. Plastic additives disrupt endocrine function and increase risk for premature births, neurodevelopmental disorders, male reproductive birth defects, infertility, obesity, cardiovascular disease, renal disease, and cancers. Chemical-laden MNPs formed through the environmental degradation of plastic waste can enter living organisms, including humans. Emerging, albeit still incomplete evidence indicates that MNPs may cause toxicity due to their physical and toxicological effects as well as by acting as vectors that transport toxic chemicals and bacterial pathogens into tissues and cells.Infants in the womb and young children are two populations at particularly high risk of plastic-related health effects. Because of the exquisite sensitivity of early development to hazardous chemicals and children's unique patterns of exposure, plastic-associated exposures are linked to increased risks of prematurity, stillbirth, low birth weight, birth defects of the reproductive organs, neurodevelopmental impairment, impaired lung growth, and childhood cancer. Early-life exposures to plastic-associated chemicals also increase the risk of multiple non-communicable diseases later in life. Economic Findings: Plastic's harms to human health result in significant economic costs. We estimate that in 2015 the health-related costs of plastic production exceeded $250 billion (2015 Int$) globally, and that in the USA alone the health costs of disease and disability caused by the plastic-associated chemicals PBDE, BPA and DEHP exceeded $920 billion (2015 Int$). Plastic production results in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions equivalent to 1.96 gigatons of carbon dioxide (CO2e) annually. Using the US Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) social cost of carbonmetric, we estimate the annual costs of these GHG emissions to be $341 billion (2015 Int$).These costs, large as they are, almost certainly underestimate the full economic losses resulting from plastics' negative impacts on human health and the global environment. All of plastics' economic costs-and also its social costs-are externalized by the petrochemical and plastic manufacturing industry and are borne by citizens, taxpayers, and governments in countries around the world without compensation. Social Justice Findings: The adverse effects of plastics and plastic pollution on human health, the economy and the environment are not evenly distributed. They disproportionately affect poor, disempowered, and marginalized populations such as workers, racial and ethnic minorities, "fenceline" communities, Indigenous groups, women, and children, all of whom had little to do with creating the current plastics crisis and lack the political influence or the resources to address it. Plastics' harmful impacts across its life cycle are most keenly felt in the Global South, in small island states, and in disenfranchised areas in the Global North. Social and environmental justice (SEJ) principles require reversal of these inequitable burdens to ensure that no group bears a disproportionate share of plastics' negative impacts and that those who benefit economically from plastic bear their fair share of its currently externalized costs. Conclusions: It is now clear that current patterns of plastic production, use, and disposal are not sustainable and are responsible for significant harms to human health, the environment, and the economy as well as for deep societal injustices.The main driver of these worsening harms is an almost exponential and still accelerating increase in global plastic production. Plastics' harms are further magnified by low rates of recovery and recycling and by the long persistence of plastic waste in the environment.The thousands of chemicals in plastics-monomers, additives, processing agents, and non-intentionally added substances-include amongst their number known human carcinogens, endocrine disruptors, neurotoxicants, and persistent organic pollutants. These chemicals are responsible for many of plastics' known harms to human and planetary health. The chemicals leach out of plastics, enter the environment, cause pollution, and result in human exposure and disease. All efforts to reduce plastics' hazards must address the hazards of plastic-associated chemicals. Recommendations: To protect human and planetary health, especially the health of vulnerable and at-risk populations, and put the world on track to end plastic pollution by 2040, this Commission supports urgent adoption by the world's nations of a strong and comprehensive Global Plastics Treaty in accord with the mandate set forth in the March 2022 resolution of the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA).International measures such as a Global Plastics Treaty are needed to curb plastic production and pollution, because the harms to human health and the environment caused by plastics, plastic-associated chemicals and plastic waste transcend national boundaries, are planetary in their scale, and have disproportionate impacts on the health and well-being of people in the world's poorest nations. Effective implementation of the Global Plastics Treaty will require that international action be coordinated and complemented by interventions at the national, regional, and local levels.This Commission urges that a cap on global plastic production with targets, timetables, and national contributions be a central provision of the Global Plastics Treaty. We recommend inclusion of the following additional provisions:The Treaty needs to extend beyond microplastics and marine litter to include all of the many thousands of chemicals incorporated into plastics.The Treaty needs to include a provision banning or severely restricting manufacture and use of unnecessary, avoidable, and problematic plastic items, especially single-use items such as manufactured plastic microbeads.The Treaty needs to include requirements on extended producer responsibility (EPR) that make fossil carbon producers, plastic producers, and the manufacturers of plastic products legally and financially responsible for the safety and end-of-life management of all the materials they produce and sell.The Treaty needs to mandate reductions in the chemical complexity of plastic products; health-protective standards for plastics and plastic additives; a requirement for use of sustainable non-toxic materials; full disclosure of all components; and traceability of components. International cooperation will be essential to implementing and enforcing these standards.The Treaty needs to include SEJ remedies at each stage of the plastic life cycle designed to fill gaps in community knowledge and advance both distributional and procedural equity.This Commission encourages inclusion in the Global Plastic Treaty of a provision calling for exploration of listing at least some plastic polymers as persistent organic pollutants (POPs) under the Stockholm Convention.This Commission encourages a strong interface between the Global Plastics Treaty and the Basel and London Conventions to enhance management of hazardous plastic waste and slow current massive exports of plastic waste into the world's least-developed countries.This Commission recommends the creation of a Permanent Science Policy Advisory Body to guide the Treaty's implementation. The main priorities of this Body would be to guide Member States and other stakeholders in evaluating which solutions are most effective in reducing plastic consumption, enhancing plastic waste recovery and recycling, and curbing the generation of plastic waste. This Body could also assess trade-offs among these solutions and evaluate safer alternatives to current plastics. It could monitor the transnational export of plastic waste. It could coordinate robust oceanic-, land-, and air-based MNP monitoring programs.This Commission recommends urgent investment by national governments in research into solutions to the global plastic crisis. This research will need to determine which solutions are most effective and cost-effective in the context of particular countries and assess the risks and benefits of proposed solutions. Oceanographic and environmental research is needed to better measure concentrations and impacts of plastics <10 µm and understand their distribution and fate in the global environment. Biomedical research is needed to elucidate the human health impacts of plastics, especially MNPs. Summary: This Commission finds that plastics are both a boon to humanity and a stealth threat to human and planetary health. Plastics convey enormous benefits, but current linear patterns of plastic production, use, and disposal that pay little attention to sustainable design or safe materials and a near absence of recovery, reuse, and recycling are responsible for grave harms to health, widespread environmental damage, great economic costs, and deep societal injustices. These harms are rapidly worsening.While there remain gaps in knowledge about plastics' harms and uncertainties about their full magnitude, the evidence available today demonstrates unequivocally that these impacts are great and that they will increase in severity in the absence of urgent and effective intervention at global scale. Manufacture and use of essential plastics may continue. However, reckless increases in plastic production, and especially increases in the manufacture of an ever-increasing array of unnecessary single-use plastic products, need to be curbed.Global intervention against the plastic crisis is needed now because the costs of failure to act will be immense.

Correction: The Minderoo-Monaco Commission on Plastics and Human Health.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.5334/aogh.4056.].

How can we test plastic pollution perceptions and behavior? A feasibility study with Danish children participating in "the Mass Experiment".

Research suggests that behavior change programs can be fast and cost-effective solutions to plastic pollution alongside traditional environmental policy-making. Furthermore, encouraging change in perception and behavior can be a tool to change consumption and waste handling towards increased circularity, which is of high concern in the EU. Beyond knowledge, predictors of pro-environmental behavior include concern, social norms, nature-connectedness, identity and self-efficacy. Citizen Science (CS) as a way to raise awareness and potentially change behavior show promise within plastic litter monitoring. We tested the feasibility of evaluating a nation-wide citizen science intervention, 'the Mass Experiment' (ME), with school students (age 7-16) in Denmark. With more than 57,000 students signed up for ME, this is to our knowledge one of the largest CS activity on plastic debris targeting young people. As an addition to the core CS activity we developed a voluntary and anonymous questionnaire to study the perceptions and behaviors of the students. We hypothesized that the intervention would increase risk perception, self-efficacy and empowerment as well as self-reported actions. Through 931 pre-surveys and 838 post-surveys aggregated at the team level (n = 48), we found that the intervention had no significant overall effect on team, risk-perception, pro-environmental behaviors, nor self-efficacy or empowerment. However, unexpected patterns emerged for age effects, potentially advising some caution over the design of such CS activities particularly for younger children. We discuss methodological limitations, the high baseline for nearly all variables, the Danish context and the intervention itself and make recommendations for studying future CS interventions.

Remembering Social Events: A Construal Level Approach.

Social events are rich in information, yet research into how people remember such events has typically been limited to considering one aspect (e.g., faces, behaviors) at a time. Based on an internal meta-analysis of a program work encompassing 15 laboratory, field, and on-line experiments involving 1,230 participants, we found that construal level influences both the ability to recognize people involved in the event (d = 0.30) and the way the social aspects of the event are described (average d = 0.48). In contrast, memory for background objects/scenes that were present during the event was unaffected by construal level. We discuss these findings in terms of their implications for both event memory (and situations where different aspects of the same event are remembered) and for construal level (and the question of how and when construal is likely to affect memory).

Co-created Future Scenarios as a Tool to Communicate Sustainable Development in Coastal Communities in Palawan, Philippines.

Scenarios can be used to communicate potential future changes and engage and connect different audiences in exploring sustainable solutions. Communicating scenarios using creative visualisation, co-creation and a focus on local contexts are especially promising. This research is conducted on the island of Palawan in the Philippines as part of the GCRF Blue Communities project. With a quasi-experimental design, we investigate the psychological and emotional effects of the engagement with future scenarios as a tool for communicating sustainability. Together with local stakeholders and community members, three distinct, locally relevant scenario narratives (Business as Usual, Best Case, and Worst Case) have been co-created. Subsequently, a sample of N = 109 local high school students was asked to creatively engage with these scenario narratives. Intentions to engage in sustainable behaviour, perceived behavioural control, ascription of responsibility, consideration of future consequences, six basic emotions and connectedness to place were assessed before and after the activity via paper-pencil administrated questionnaires. A mixed-model analysis showed significant increases in intentions to engage in sustainable behaviour, however, this increase disappeared when consideration of future consequences was added as a covariate, suggesting a mediating effect. The level of consideration of future consequences also increased significantly after engaging with any of the future scenarios, which questions the common interpretation of consideration of future consequences as a trait variable. Perceived behavioural control significantly increased following the engagement with each of the scenarios whereas ascription of responsibility and connectedness to place did not show any changes. Overall, the two most emotion-evoking scenarios, Best Case Scenario and Worst Case Scenario, turn out as superior over the Business as Usual Scenario, which points to the relevance of emotional framing for effective messaging in our sample. This is the first systematic, quantitative assessment of the effects of future scenarios as a communication tool.

Ask the Locals: A Community-Informed Analysis of Perceived Marine Environment Quality Over Time in Palawan, Philippines.

Despite the potentially huge contributions that coastal communities might make in marine resource management and sustainability, their participation in such efforts have only been recognized recently, particularly in Southeast Asia. Involving community perceptions can offer new insights for policy makers and resource managers and can elicit strong commitment and support from the communities themselves. This article aims to understand the perceptions of coastal communities of local environmental issues, specifically how these have developed over time, to understand the expectations and perceptions of trends. Sixteen marine environmental issues were identified during stakeholder meetings in Palawan, Philippines. A co-developed survey was administered to 431 respondents from coastal communities in two municipalities (Taytay and Aborlan) and in the city of Puerto Princesa in Palawan. The results show variation in the perceptions and expectations across issues. We find that communities expect positive trends for mangrove coverage, beach tree cover, and seagrass coverage as well as for seaweed farming and quality of drinking water. The amount of plastic litter, wild fish and shellfish, and the severity of sewage pollution are perceived to get slightly worse. The aquaculture sector is expected to remain unchanged in the future as it had been in the past. We also find significant differences in how people from different areas of residence perceive their marine environment. In the discussion, we mapped these different community perceptions on existing policies and their implementation. We further recommend how community perceptions can be integrated into resource management and policy making in the future.

Looking Through the COVID-19 Window of Opportunity: Future Scenarios Arising From the COVID-19 Pandemic Across Five Case Study Sites.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused (and continues to cause) severe disruption in global and local economies and has forced countries, societies, and individuals to adapt quickly to the unprecedented and unpredictable situations. Despite the obvious negative consequences of the pandemic, many have called for efforts to identify transformative opportunities for sustainable development throughout this disorderly time. In the present paper, we explore such potential opportunities in the context of an interdisciplinary, international research project, which is focusing on sustainable marine management in biosphere reserves and marine parks in Southeast Asia. During a virtual workshop conducted as part of the GCRF (Government's Global Challenges Research Fund) Blue Communities Project, future scenarios were developed depicting the potential effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on five case study sites. All of these sites are in areas of internationally recognized outstanding ecological value (Taka Bonerate Kepulauan-Selayar Biosphere Reserve, Indonesia; Tun Mustapha Park, Sabah, Malaysia; Palawan Biosphere Reserve, Philippines; North Devon Biosphere Reserve, United Kingdom; Cu Lao Cham-Hoi An Biosphere Reserve, Vietnam). At the macro-level, economies, governance structures, and societal norms are undergoing big changes. At the micro-level, the livelihoods, lifestyles, and backyards of local residents have to adapt. Collaboratively, we explored how COVID-19 posed challenges in our five case study sites, but we also focused on the potential COVID-19-related windows of opportunity for future sustainable development. Opportunities could be identified in all three pillars of sustainable development: the environment, the society, and the economy. Although remarkable similarities can be found across all five sites, we conclude that there cannot be a "one-size-fits-all" solution to turn the tide toward achieving sustainable development. Just as before the pandemic, sustainable development starts with engaging with and understanding local environments, challenges, and situations; building on local knowledge; and developing tailor-made solutions for the communities in situ.

Neighbourhood greenspace and smoking prevalence: Results from a nationally representative survey in England.

OBJECTIVE: The current study investigated whether people are less likely to be smokers when they live in greener neighbourhoods, and whether such an association is attributable to lower rates of ever-smoking and/or higher rates of smoking cessation. METHOD: Using a representative sample of the adult population of England (N = 8,059), we investigated the relationships between neighbourhood greenspace and three inter-related smoking outcomes (current smoking, ever-smoking and smoking cessation). RESULTS: After controlling for a range of individual and area-level covariates, including socioeconomic status, income and education, living in the highest greenspace quartile was associated with a 20% lower prevalence of current smoking, compared to living in the lowest greenspace quartile (PR = 0.80, CI = 0.67, 0.96, p < .017). Neighbourhood greenspace was not significantly associated with ever-smoking. However, amongst ever-smokers, residing in the two highest quartiles of neighbourhood greenspace quartiles (vs. 1st quartile) was associated with a 10% and 12% higher prevalence of smoking cessation (PR = 1.10, CI = 1.02, 1.18, p = .012; PR = 1.12, CI = 1.02, 1.22, p = .016, respectively). This suggests that the association between greenspace and current smoking is due to a higher likelihood of smoking cessation, rather than lower rates of ever- smoking. The associations between greenspace, current smoking and smoking cessation were similar in magnitude to those of having high (vs. low) household income and were largely unmoderated by socioeconomic measures. IMPLICATIONS: Our findings advocate the need to protect and invest in local greenspaces, to maximise the public health benefits they may afford. Improving access to greenspace may constitute an overlooked public health strategy for reducing smoking prevalence.