What types of nature exposure are associated with hedonic, eudaimonic and evaluative wellbeing? An 18-country study
Although spending time in nature can improve subjective wellbeing (SWB), little is known about how different types of nature exposure are associated with different dimensions of SWB or the consistency of associations across national/cultural contexts. Using data from 18 countries, associations between green, coastal and freshwater blue space exposures (including residential availability, visits ‘yesterday’ and visits in the previous four weeks) and hedonic, eudaimonic, and evaluative wellbeing were estimated. Overall, residential nature availability showed little association with any wellbeing outcome, whereas visiting green and coastal locations ‘yesterday’ was associated with better hedonic wellbeing. Although frequently visiting green, coastal and freshwater spaces were all associated with greater evaluative wellbeing, greater eudaimonic wellbeing was only associated with frequent visits to green and freshwater spaces. Variations existed across countries. Results suggest that different types of nature exposure vary in their association with different dimensions of SWB. Understanding these differences may help us maximise the potential of natural environments as SWB-promoting resources. • Residing near nature had limited associations with subjective wellbeing (SWB). • Visiting green and blue space was associated with greater life satisfaction. • Blue space visits had mixed associations with different dimensions of SWB. • Visiting natural environments positively associated with SWB 15/18 countries.
Authors
- Mathew P. White (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4168-7289)
- Gregory N. Bratman (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5982-4686)
- Simon Bell (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0986-3887)
- Mark J Nieuwenhuijsen (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9461-7981)
- Anne Roiko (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0395-307X)
- Ann Ojala (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8557-8842)
- Maria Luı́sa Lima (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1171-2962)
- James Grellier (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7458-7479)
- Marta Cirach (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5518-1529)
- Craig McDougall (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1546-4142)
- Matilda van den Bosch (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1410-0099)
- Lora E. Fleming (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1076-9967)
- Lewis R. Elliott (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3864-9465)
Institutions
- Griffith University (AU)
- Jagiellonian University (PL)
- University of Vienna (AT)
- Universitat Pompeu Fabra (ES)
- Estonian University of Life Sciences (EE)
- University of Washington (US)
- University of Exeter (GB)
- Natural Resources Institute Finland (FI)
- Edinburgh College (GB)
- Complexity Science Hub (AT)
- Institute of Psychology (PL)
- Barcelona Institute for Global Health (ES)
- Institute of Social Sciences (RU)
- Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (ES)
- Scottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy (GB)
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Journal of Environmental Psychology
- Published
- 2024-11-05
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2024.102479
- Citations
- 10
- Primary Topic
- Urban Green Space and Health
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 3.15
Funders
- Centres de Recerca de Catalunya
- University of Exeter
- European Commission
- Environmental Protection Agency
- Griffith University
- University of the Sunshine Coast
- Generalitat de Catalunya
- Agencia Estatal de Investigación