Is physical activity in natural environments better for mental health than physical activity in other environments?

• Published in: Social science & medicine (1982) Vol. 91; pp. 130 - 134
• Main Author: Mitchell, Richard
• Format: Journal Article Conference Proceeding
• Language: English
• Published: Kidlington Elsevier Ltd 01.08.2013; Elsevier; Pergamon Press Inc
• Subjects: Access; Biological and medical sciences; Correlation analysis; Environment; Environment Design - statistics & numerical data; Exercise; Green space; Health; Health Surveys; Humans; Medical sciences; Mental Health; Miscellaneous; Motor Activity; Natural Environment; Physical activity; Physical Fitness; Public health. Hygiene; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine; Risk; Risk assessment; Scotland; Well Being; Wellbeing; United Kingdom; Scotland; Great Britain; Europe; Green space; Physical activity; UK; Mental health; Wellbeing; Environment; Scotland; Physical exercise; Human; Green area; Well being; Physical environment; Natural environment; Urbanization; Social medicine; Social aspect; Public health
• ISSN: 0277-9536; 1873-5347
• DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.04.012

Experimental evidence suggests that there may be synergy between the psychological benefits of physical activity, and the restorative effects of contact with a natural environment; physical activity in a natural environment might produce greater mental health benefits than physical activity elsewhere. However, such experiments are typically short-term and, by definition, artificially control the participant types, physical activity and contact with nature. This observational study asked whether such effects can be detected in everyday settings at a population level. It used data from the Scottish Health Survey 2008, describing all environments in which respondents were physically active. Associations were sought between use of each environment, and then use of environments grouped as natural or non-natural, and the risk of poor mental health (measured by the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ)) and level of wellbeing (measured by the Warwick Edinburgh Mental health and Wellbeing Score (WEMWBS). Results showed an independent association between regular use of natural environments and a lower risk of poor mental health, but not for activity in other types of environment. For example, the odds of poor mental health (GHQ ≥ 4) among those regularly using woods or forests for physical activity were 0.557 (95% CI 0.323–0.962), compared to non-users. However, regular use of natural environments was not clearly associated with greater wellbeing, whilst regular use of non-natural environments was. The study concludes that physical activity in natural environments is associated with a reduction in the risk of poor mental health to a greater extent than physical activity in other environments, but also that activity in different types of environment may promote different kinds of positive psychological response. Access to natural environments for physical activity should be protected and promoted as a contribution to protecting and improving population mental health. ► Experimental studies show physical activity in natural environments may be better for mental health than activity elsewhere. ► Such studies tend to be small, brief and not to test effects of activity in natural environments as part of everyday life. ► This study looked for evidence of such effects in a large, real-world population. ► It found evidence that physical activity in natural environments is better for mental health than activity elsewhere. ► Each additional use of a natural environment per week is associated with about a 6% lower risk of poor mental health.