Green Prescriptions and Their Co-Benefits: Integrative Strategies for Public and Environmental Health

Abstract

There is a growing recognition of the links between the increasing prevalence of noncommunicable diseases, environmental concerns including biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation, and socioecological issues such as ecological (in)justice. This has encouraged a number of recent calls for the development of integrative approaches aimed at addressing these issues—also known as nature-based solutions. An example of an emerging nature-based solution is a ‘green prescription’, broadly defined as a nature-based health intervention. Green prescriptions are typically designed for patients with a defined need and they have the potential to supplement orthodox medical treatments, particularly those aimed at addressing noncommunicable diseases. It is also thought that green prescriptions could bring about significant environmental, economic, and social co-benefits. However, researchers have recently expressed concerns over taking the ‘dose of nature’ approach, in that it may be too reductionistic for the complex social settings in which it is provided. Here we frame a holistic philosophical perspective and discuss green prescribing logic, types, mechanisms and fundamental remaining questions and challenges. We place a significant emphasis on the potential co-benefits of green prescriptions, and the importance of taking a planetary health approach. More research is needed to determine how this potential can be realised, and to further understand the complexities of the nature–human health relationship. However, with additional research and support, there is huge potential for green prescriptions to contribute to both reactive (health care) and proactive (health promoting) public health solutions whilst enhancing the natural environment.

Rekindling old friendships in new landscapes: The environment–microbiome–health axis in the realms of landscape research

“…Integrative strategies and their potential co‐benefits for humans and the environment. Considering the environment–microbiome–health axis could be important (created by authors, adapted from Robinson & Breed, 2019)…”

“…Green prescribing schemes (prescribed nature‐based interventions, which build on the 1990's concept of prescribing exercise and dietary‐based interventions) have the potential to provide co‐benefits for public and environmental health through integrative approaches (Gribben, Goodyear‐Smith, Grobbelaar, O'Neill, & Walker, 2000; Robinson & Breed, 2019; Swinburn, Walter, Arroll, Tilyard, & Russell, 1998). Green prescribing schemes can include therapeutic horticulture, biodiversity conservation activities or simply social activities in greenspaces, which could potentially enhance interactions between humans and environmental microbiota.…”

Clinical Ecology—Transforming 21st-Century Medicine with Planetary Health in Mind

“…Utilizing nature relatedness scales opens up a door to provider-patient discourse on possible routes to health and vitality (determining how much active/passive time a patient spends in the outdoors, and the writing of "Green Prescriptions" [124][125][126]); since nature relatedness is also associated with pro-environmental and pro-social attitudes and behaviors-likely because experience in/with the natural world promotes concern for planetary health [127][128][129][130]-assessments allow for discussions concerning a collective "treatment" of personal and global problems, actively engaging both clinician and patient in planetary health [131]. Clinicians now have an opportunity to track nature relatedness with functional aspects of health.…”

A walk on the wild side: How interactions with non‐companion animals might help reduce human stress

“…This is particularly interesting given the recent focus of social prescribing in primary care, where ‘nature’ or natural experiences can be prescribed to help improve well‐being in patients with challenging health problems. Such nature‐based social prescribing includes nature walks (Robinson & Breed, ), where (provided the participant is resident in or can travel to a sufficiently green space) there may be opportunities for witnessing animals or rare plants. However, as little as 30% of the UK population spend substantial time (>75%) in nature (Cox et al, ), so if such areas are not accessible, or otherwise not accessed, the present findings indicate that individuals may be able to visit zoological parks to obtain similar benefit.…”