Use of the Natural Outdoor Environment in Different Populations in Europe in Relation to Access: Implications for Policy

Abstract

This cross-cultural study explores the relationship of natural outdoor environment (NOE) use with NOE access. Most urban planning recommendations suggest optimal accessibility to be 300 m–500 m straight distance to spaces with vegetation of at least 1 hectare. Exploring this recommendation, we used data (n = 3947) from four European cities collected in the framework of the PHENOTYPE study: Barcelona (Spain), Doetinchem (The Netherlands), Kaunas (Lithuania) and Stoke-on-Trent (United Kingdom) to obtain residential access to NOE (straight or network distances, using 300 m and 150 m buffers, to NOE larger than 1 hectare or 0.5 hectare) and use of NOE (i.e., self-reported time spent in NOE). Poisson regression models were used to examine the associations between residential access and use of NOE. The models with the strongest association with time spent in NOE in the combined sample were for those living within 300 m straight line distance to either 0.5 ha or 1 ha NOE. Noting that the only indicator that was consistent across all individual cities was living with 150 m network buffer of NOE (of at least 1 ha), this warrants further exploration in reducing recommendations of 300 m straight-line distance to 150 m network distance to 1 ha of NOE for a general indicator for cities within Europe.

Advancing urban green and blue space contributions to public health

“…11 Moreover, where such evidence exists, there are indications that the development of and access to UGBS is not equitably distributed. 43,56 Two reviews 11,57 on UGBS in LMICs included the following recommendations:…”

The Economic Value of Health Benefits Associated with Urban Park Investment

“…One of the most extensively researched links between urban park exposure and improved health and well-being outcomes is through increased physical activity [ 1 , 7 , 9 , 10 , 11 ]. Physical activity can protect against a range of diseases and adverse health outcomes, including cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, hypertension, obesity, depression, osteoporosis, and premature death [ 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ]. The World Health Organization (WHO) identifies physical inactivity as the fourth leading risk factor for global mortality [ 4 ].…”

“…Factors influencing the intensity and frequency of park users engaging in physical activities include neighbourhood demographics, socio-economic conditions, park proximity, park size, park amenities, park programs, and perceived security [ 7 ]. Numerous studies have shown that proximity to parks and neighbourhoods with higher amounts of urban greenspace are positively associated with higher levels of engagement in physical activity [ 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 ]. A study by Villeneuve et al, examining recreational physical activities in Ottawa, Canada, based on neighbourhood greenness using a Google Street View greenness index, found that those living in areas scoring in the upper quartile on the index spent on average 5.4 more hours weekly on recreational physical activities relative to those in the lowest quartile [ 15 ].…”