Human enjoyment of natural environmental settings is common to all cultures. It is a complex, evolutionary, psychophysiological response with notable potential to positively impact both physical and mental health of individuals and populations. Four decades of research have produced a large body of empirical and experimental studies demonstrating the benefits of contact with Nature. A sufficient evidence base now allows for meaningful systematic reviews and meta-analyses to begin to guide health recommendations. This is the first of three articles to review the state of the science on the potential health benefits of contact with Nature, covering Visual Nature, Forest Therapy, Gardening, Residential Greenspace, and Blue Space.
1. Wilson EO. Biophilia. Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1984.
2. Ulrich RS. View through a window may help recovery from surgery. Science. 1984;224(4647):420–1. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.6143402.
3. Tennessen CM, Cimprich B. Views to nature: Effects on attention. J Environ Psychol. 1995;15(1):77–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-4944(95)90016-0.
4. Ulrich RS. Natural versus urban scenes: Some psychophysiological effects. Environ Behav. 1981;13(5):523–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916581135001
5. Ulrich RS, Simons RF, Losito BD, et al. Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. J Environ Psychol. 1991;11(3):201–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80184-7.
6. Parsons R, Tassinary LG, Ulrich RS, et al. The view from the road: implications for stress recovery and immunization. J Environ Psychol. 1998;18(2):113–40. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1998.0086.
7. Tabrizian P, Baran PK, Smith WR, Meentemeyer RK. Exploring perceived restoration potential of urban green enclosure through immersive virtual environments. J Environ Psychol. 2018;55:99–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2018.01.001.
8. Valtchanov D, Ellard C. Physiological and affective responses to immersion in virtual reality: Effects of Nature and Urban Settings. J CyberTherapy Rehabil. 2010;3(4):359–73.
9. Jo H, Song C, Miyazaki Y. Physiological benefits of viewing nature: A systematic review of indoor experiments. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(23):4739. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16234739.
10. Tsunetsugu Y, Park B-J, Ishii HT, et al. Physiological effects of Shinrin-yoku (taking in the atmosphere of the forest) in an old-growth broadleaf forest in Yamagata Prefecture, Japan. J Physiol Anthropol. 2007;26(2):135–42. https://doi.org/10.2114/jpa2.26.135.
11. Park B-J, Tsunetsugu Y, Kasetani T, et al. Physiological effects of Shinrin-yoku (taking in the atmosphere of the forest)—using salivary cortisol and cerebral activity as indicators. J Physiol Anthropol. 2007;26(2):123–8. https://doi.org/10.2114/jpa2.26.123.
12. Antonelli M, Barbieri G, Donelli D. Effects of forest bathing (shinrin-yoku) on levels of cortisol as a stress biomarker: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Biometeorol. 2019;63(8):1117–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-019-01717-x.
13. Ideno Y, Hayashi K, Abe Y, et al. Blood pressure-lowering effect of Shinrin-yoku (Forest bathing): a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2017;17(1):409. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12906-017-1912-z.
14. Wen Y, Yan Q, Pan Y, et al. Medical empirical research on forest bathing (Shinrin-yoku): A systematic review. Environ Health Prev Med. 2019;24(1). https://doi. org/10.1186/s12199-019-0822-8.
15. Hansen MM, Jones R, Tocchini K. Shinrin-yoku (Forest bathing) and nature therapy: A state-of-the-art review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2017;14(8):851. https:// doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14080851.
16. Detweiler MB, Sharma T, Detweiler JG, et al. What is the evidence to support the use of therapeutic gardens for the elderly? Psychiatry Investig. 2012;9(2):100–10. https://doi.org/10.4306/pi.2012.9.2.100.
17. Soga M, Gaston KJ, Yamaura Y. Gardening is beneficial for health: A meta-analysis. Prev Med Reports. 2017;5:92–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. pmedr.2016.11.007.
18. Mitchell RJ, Popham F. Effect of exposure to natural environment on health inequalities: an observational population study. Lancet. 2008;372(9650):1655–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61689-X.
19. Rojas-Rueda D, Nieuwenhuijsen MJ, Gascon M, et al. Green spaces and mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Lancet Planet Heal. 2019;19(970):e469–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(19)30215-3.
20. Carlson TN, Ripley DA. On the relation between NDVI, fractional vegetation cover, and leaf area index. Remote Sens Environ. 1997;62(3):241–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0034-4257(97)00104-1.
21. Gascon M, Triguero-Mas M, Martínez D, et al. Residential green spaces and mortality: A systematic review. Environ Int. 2016;86:60–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVINT.2015.10.013.
22. Kabisch N. The Influence of Socio-economic and Sociodemographic factors in the association between urban green space and health. In: Marselle MR, Stadler J, Korn H, et al., eds. Biodiversity and Health in the Face of Climate Change. Springer; 2019. pp. 91–119. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02318-8.
23. Gascon M, Zijlema W, Vert C, et al. Outdoor blue spaces, human health and well-being: A systematic review of quantitative studies. Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2017;220(8):1207–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheh.2017.08.004.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.