ABSTRACT
An increasing number of people around the world are coming to live in urban areas. Urbanization and the lifestyle changes it entails are in turn contributing to the increased importance of non-communicable diseases as causes of morbidity and mortality. This phenomenon is not limited to Western societies; chronic physical and mental health problems are major problems in all parts of the world (Desjarlais et al. 1995). Moreover, urbanization is proceeding in countries and regions of the world where households and societies have relatively few economic resources to protect them from adverse consequences (Desjarlais et al. 1995; Vlahov and Galea 2002). How might societies deal with the problems posed by these developments? One strategy
receiving increasing attention involves the potential health resource values of contact with nature in the everyday life of urban residents. This is of course not the first time that decision makers, public health authorities and other responsible parties have turned to nature and public green space to soften adverse health consequences of urban growth (Ward Thompson 2011). During the mid-1800s, for example, public parks were developed in many European and North American cities as a reaction to the poor living conditions faced by the people then crowding into cities in search of industrial work (Hall 2002). The parks were meant to allow light and fresh air into the cities, creating healthier residential contexts and preventing the spread of epidemics. Belief in the public health values of urban nature was also integral to the Garden City movement inspired by Ebenezer Howard in Great Britain and the Parkway movement influenced by Fredrik Law Olmsted in the USA (Ignatieva et al. 2011). The provision of light, air
and pleasant scenery are still important services expected of parks in today’s urban planning, as with, for example, the development of green infrastructure plans. Today, however, the public health challenges that parks and green spaces are used to address have shifted from the prevention of epidemics of infectious diseases to the prevention of diseases related to physical inactivity and psychosocial stress. And, with more people living in central areas, the need for improved access to outdoor public spaces is increasing just as the available green spaces are coming under increasing pressure from competing land uses. Thus, the practical challenge today is not simply a matter of improving access by providing more space, but of making more efficient and equitable provisions for access to the space that can be made available. With increasing urban populations and available green spaces under pressure, research to inform design and policy is important to protect these vulnerable areas while ensuring access to the potential health benefits that such spaces can provide (Ode and Fry 2006; van den Berg et al. 2007). A rapidly growing body of research attests to the different ways in which urban nature can
promote health and well-being. In this chapter we cover some of the key lessons that have emerged from the research to date. The chapter begins with an overview of the different mechanisms through which access to green spaces and other urban nature can come to benefit health. Those mechanisms include support for psychological restoration, physical activity, and social interaction, as well as protection from harmful exposures to air pollutants and high ambient temperatures (de Vries 2010). In discussing the different mechanisms, we cover processes and outcomes that are connected to features of the urban landscape that can be modified through planning and design. We then continue the chapter with a discussion of how different mechanisms may interact. Finally, we discuss some of the major limitations in the available knowledge base and we point to some future possibilities for research and application. Our treatment of the topic here is not a comprehensive one, but it provides points of entry into key areas within an expansive literature. A recent comprehensive review has been provided by a large-scale international network with funding from the European Science Foundation (Nilsson et al. 2011).
