Effects of indoor plants on office workers: a field study in multiple Dutch organizations

In the period 2019–2020, the effect of plants in the workspace on (a) the physical indoor climate, (b) the perception of the workspace by office workers, and (c) their health, well-being and functioning was investigated in nine organizations. This paper reports the outcomes of the latter part. A conceptual model describing the short-term, medium and long-term effect of plants on people was formulated, containing 18 outcome variables. A “Before After Control Impact” quasi-experimental research design was used. A control workspace and an intervention workspace were selected in each of the organizations. A pre-measurement was conducted in both. Correlational analyses, based on the pre-measurements in all organizations and workspaces, confirmed the associations proposed by the conceptual model to a large extent. After placing plants in the intervention workspace, a maximum of two post-intervention measurements were conducted (due to COVID-19 not in all nine organizations), the last one at least 4 months after the introduction of the plants. Overall significant effects were found on complaints about dry air (fewer), the sense of privacy (higher), the attractiveness of the workspace (higher), satisfaction with the workspace (greater) and having a health-related complaint, especially when at work (fewer). The first three effects were already observed in the analyses only including the first post-measurement. The latter two effects only showed up in the analyses including two post-measurements. No direct effect of the plants could be demonstrated on the 13 other outcome variables. The observed effects mainly concern outcome variables that are positioned at the beginning of the proposed causal chain, starting with plants and ending with mental health, absenteeism and job satisfaction

Mapping landscape attractiveness: A GIS-based landscape appreciation model for the Dutch countryside

Offering people scenic beauty is one of the most frequently mentioned landscape services. In the Netherlands it also has become an explicit policy goal: “we want a beautiful country to live and work in”. However, instruments to help policy makers and spatial planners to implement this relatively new goal are largely lacking. Where do people like the landscape in their living environment and where do they not? And which physical characteristics influence this appreciation and to what extent? To provide such information in a cost-efficient way, a model was developed to map, monitor, and simulate precisely this: the GIS-based Landscape Appreciation Model (GLAM). The model predicts the attractiveness of the landscape based solely on nationally available GIS-data on its physical aspects for each 250 x 250 metre cell. The model was calibrated using attractiveness ratings from a national survey among residents. The final model was evaluated using data from another Dutch survey of landscape appreciation among residents living in the vicinity of 52 areas that landscape experts considered being of high quality. In this article, we describe the theoretical background to GLAM, the attributes in the current version of the model, the final steps in calibrating the model, as well as its validation. We conclude with a discussion on the usefulness of GLAM for spatial policy

Types and characteristics of urban and peri-urban blue spaces having an impact on human mental health and wellbeing: a systematic review

Urbanization is increasingly putting pressures on biodiversity, ecosystems and ecosystem services. Evidence indicates that green and blue spaces can support the mental health of urban residents. Policy makers, city planners, other decision makers, healthcare professionals, and land managers now face a major challenge to maintain and enhance natural areas and characteristics. Knowing which types and characteristics of blue and green space are beneficial for mental health is necessary to inform planning and management decisions. EKLIPSE received a request from the Ministry in charge of the Environment of France (MTES) to review: “Which types of urban and peri-urban green and blue spaces, and which characteristics of such spaces, have a significant impact on human mental health and wellbeing?”. After a preliminary scoping, a decision was made to perform two systematic reviews assessing the specific types and characteristics of blue space (review 1) and green space (review 2) on mental health and wellbeing. The systematic searches were supported and conducted by an experienced team of librarians, made possible by the financial support of the WHO. This report presents the systematic review for blue space (Review 1)

Linking demand and supply factors in identifying cultural ecosystem services of urban green infrastructures:A review of European studies

Urban green infrastructure provides a number of cultural ecosystem services that are greatly appreciated by the public. In order to benefit from these services, actual contact with the respective ecosystem is often required. Furthermore, the type of services offered depend on the physical characteristics of the ecosystem. We conducted a review of publications dealing with demand or social factors such as user needs, preferences and values as well as spatially explicit supply or physical factors such as amount of green space, (bio)diversity, recreational infrastructure, etc. and linking demand and supply factors together. The aim was to provide an overview of this highly interdisciplinary research, to describe how these linkages are being made and to identify which factors significantly influence dependent variables such as levels of use, activities or health and well-being benefits. Commonly used methods were the combination of questionnaires with either on-site visual recording of elements or GIS data. Links between social and physical data were usually established either by using statistical tools or by overlaying different thematic maps. Compared to the large number of variables assessed in most studies, the significant effects in the end were relatively few, not consistent across the studies and largely dependent on the context they were seen in. Studies focused on aesthetic and recreational services, while spiritual, educational and inspirational services were not considered when creating links to spatially explicit ecological structures. We conclude that an improvement and harmonization of methodologies, cross-country studies and an expansion of this line of research to a wider range of services and more user groups could help clarify relationships and thereby increase applicability for urban management and planning.</p

Green space in urban and peri-urban areas and mental health: which green space types and characteristics are most beneficial?

Urban green space plays an important role in the mental and physical health of urbanites, as well as of people working in or visiting urban areas (WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2016). But green space can be very diverse in its typology, including for instance urban forests, parks, playgrounds, allotments and urban farming locations. These green space types can also differ greatly in their defining characteristics; for instance, parks can differ in scenic beauty, vegetative composition or openness. Globally, continuing urbanization, as well as climate change, is increasingly putting pressure on the existence of green spaces within urban areas (e.g. Dallimer et al., 2011; Richards & Belcher, 2020). The scarcity of urban green space and the desire to create liveable cities requires in-depth knowledge on how different green space types and characteristics influence mental health, to facilitate well-informed design and planning choices

Green space in urban and peri-urban areas and mental health: which green space types and characteristics are most beneficial?

Urban green space plays an important role in the mental and physical health of urbanites, as well as of people working in or visiting urban areas (WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2016). But green space can be very diverse in its typology, including for instance urban forests, parks, playgrounds, allotments and urban farming locations. These green space types can also differ greatly in their defining characteristics; for instance, parks can differ in scenic beauty, vegetative composition or openness. Globally, continuing urbanization, as well as climate change, is increasingly putting pressure on the existence of green spaces within urban areas (e.g. Dallimer et al., 2011; Richards & Belcher, 2020). The scarcity of urban green space and the desire to create liveable cities requires in-depth knowledge on how different green space types and characteristics influence mental health, to facilitate well-informed design and planning choices

Blue space in urban and peri-urban areas and mental health: which blue space types and characteristics are most beneficial?

There is an increasing awareness that besides green spaces, blue spaces can also positively influence mental as well as physical health (see for example, Völker & Kistemann, 2011; Gascon et al., 2017). Blue spaces are: “outdoor environments – either natural or manmade – that prominently feature water and are accessible to humans either proximally (being in, on or near water) or distally/virtually (being able to see, hear or otherwise sense water)” (Grellier et al., 2017, p. 3). Examples include coasts, lakes, ponds and pond systems, wadis systems, artificial buffer basins and water courses. Together with green spaces they form the green-blue infrastructure. Therefore, a second systematic review focused on effects of blue spaces on mental health