Does biological quality matter? Direct and reflected appraisal of biodiversity in temperate deciduous broad-leaf forest

Johansson, Maria; Gyllin, Mats; Witzell, Jesper; Küller, Marianne

doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2013.10.009

Cited by 53 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The number of participants varied considerably among the recently published studies: ranging from 35 (Johansson et al 2014) through to the millions (with the use of data from the national census, Wheeler et al 2015). Participant type also differed, including university students (Cracknell et al 2016(Cracknell et al , 2017Saw et al 2015) and staff (Johansson et al 2014), adults participating over the internet (White et al 2017;Wolf et al 2017), group walkers over the age of 55 (Marselle et al 2015;Marselle et al 2016), park users (Carrus et al 2015), visitors to forests (Foo 2016), and residents of specific countries or regions as previously detailed (Annerstedt van den Bosch 2015;Cox et al 2017;Duarte-Tagles et al 2015;Jones 2017;Rantakokko et al 2018;Wheeler et al 2015).…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specifically, 9 studies (Annerstedt van den Bosch, et al 2015;Cox et al 2017;Cracknell et al 2016Cracknell et al , 2017Foo 2016;Marselle et al 2015Marselle et al , 2016Saw et al 2015;White et al 2017) used the Attention Restoration Theory (Kaplan and Kaplan 1989;Kaplan 1995) and the Stress Reduction Theory (Ulrich 1983;Ulrich et al 1991) to explain the effects of biodiversity on mental health and/or well-being. Additionally, the Biophilia hypothesis (Kellert and Wilson 1993) was also mentioned (Annerstedt van den Bosch et al 2015; Carrus et al 2015;Saw et al 2015;Wolf et al 2017), as was appraisal theory (Johansson et al 2014). Four studies (Duarte-Tagles et al 2015;Jones 2017;Rantakokko et al 2018;Wheeler et al 2015) did not articulate a theory for why or how biodiversity may be related to better health and well-being.…”

Section: Theoretical Positionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Review of the Mental Health and Well-being Benefits of Biodiversity

Marselle

Martens

Dallimer

et al. 2019

Biodiversity and Health in the Face of Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Little is known about the contribution that biodiversity has on mental health and well-being. To date, only one systematic review has investigated the health and well-being benefits from contact with biodiversity (Lovell et al. J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev 17(1):1-20, 2014). The number of research studies investigating the health and well-being effects of biodiversity has increased since this publication. Here, we provide an update, focusing on the impact of biodiversity on mental health and well-being. Our objectives are to: (i) identify and describe the literature published after 2012; and (ii) synthesise all results from Lovell et al. (J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev 17(1):1-20, 2014) and the more recently published literature to assess whether biodiversity influences mental health and wellbeing. Sixteen recently published studies met the inclusion criteria. The literature is varied with different study designs, measures of biodiversity, mental health and well-being. The synthesis of results was drawn from 24 studies: nine from Lovell et al.

show abstract

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Theoretical Positionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of the Mental Health and Well-being Benefits of Biodiversity

Marselle

Martens

Dallimer

et al. 2019

Biodiversity and Health in the Face of Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The highest level of biodiversity might be so complex that it is difficult to grasp the number of species. For instance, in a study with three levels-high, intermediate, low-of forest vegetation biodiversity, the participants preferred the biotope with an intermediate level of biodiversity (Johansson et al 2014). In the present paper, we use the word Bhigh^in a relative sense by making comparisons with other levels of measured biodiversity in urban green space.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of biodiversity and environment-related attitude on perception of urban green space

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Green space in cities contributes to the quality of life for city dwellers, e.g., by increasing the opportunity for recreation. However, perception of urban green space is influenced by multiple factors. We investigated effects of biodiversity and environment-related attitudes on visual and auditory perceptions of urban green space. Field measurements of biodiversity were conducted in six sites across an urban gradient in Gothenburg, Sweden, and three categories of biodiversity-high, medium, low-were established. Households were sent a survey on aesthetic perception of urban green space, sound perception and the importance of trees and plants for the perception of bird species. Each respondent focused on the site that was located nearby. The environment-related attitudes comprised BNature-oriented^and BUrban-oriented^persons and were based on participants' own attitude estimations. It was shown that participants' Bsubjective^aesthetic and sound-related perception of urban greenery were in line with the Bobjectively^measured subdivisions of high, medium and low biodiversity. So also were their estimations of the importance of trees and plants for perception of bird species in urban greenery, although differing only between high and medium/ low biodiversity conditions. Persons rating themselves as highly nature-oriented were shown to give higher scores to urban green space aesthetics and to value greenery-related sounds higher, and to attach greater importance to trees and plants in their perception of bird species in urban greenery, than less nature-oriented persons. Highly urban-oriented persons compared to less urban-oriented persons did the same, but only regarding urban greenery-related aesthetics and sounds of nature. We conclude that environment-related attitudes influence perceptions of green space. Moreover, our findings support the idea that biodiversity per se also influences perceptions; people value green space significantly more with high than with low measured biodiversity. Urban planning needs to provide city inhabitants with green spaces that are species-rich, lush, varied and rich with natural sounds.

show abstract

“…Additional studies comparing meadows with other alpine land-use types such as forests and pastures are necessary to gain a deeper understanding of health effects of alpine landscapes. Additional studies may also assess physical health parameters such as cortisol measurements (Lee et al 2009), heart rate variability (Frohmann et al 2010) or brain activities (Johansson et al 2014).…”

Section: Discussion and Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Emotional and physiological responses to different states of biodiversity in temperate decidious broad-leaf peri-urban forests in Sweden were conducted by presenting images of biotopes with a low, an intermediate and a high degree of biodiversity, which differed in tree species composition and diversity of shrub and herb layer (Johansson et al, 2013). Although the participants had a rather correct perception of biodiversity levels, emotional appraisal showed a preference for an intermediate degree of biodiversity and higher brain activity for a low degree of biodiversity.…”

Section: Linkages Between Ecosystem Services and Biodiversitymentioning

confidence: 99%