| 1. |
- Astell-Burt, Thomas, et al.
(författare)
-
More green, less lonely? : A longitudinal cohort study
- 2022
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Epidemiology. - : Oxford University Press. - 0300-5771 .- 1464-3685. ; 51:1, s. 99-110
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundUrban greening may reduce loneliness by offering opportunities for solace, social reconnection and supporting processes such as stress relief. We (i) assessed associations between residential green space and cumulative incidence of, and relief from, loneliness over 4 years; and (ii) explored contingencies by age, sex, disability and cohabitation status.MethodsMultilevel logistic regressions of change in loneliness status in 8049 city-dwellers between 2013 (baseline) and 2017 (follow-up) in the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia study. Associations with objectively measured discrete green-space buffers (e.g. parks) (<400, <800 and <1600 m) were adjusted for age, sex, disability, cohabitation status, children and socio-economic variables. Results were translated into absolute risk reductions in loneliness per 10% increase in urban greening.ResultsThe absolute risk of loneliness rose from 15.9% to 16.9% over the 4 years; however, a 10% increase in urban greening within 1.6 km was associated with lower cumulative incident loneliness [odds ratio (OR) = 0.927, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.862 to 0.996; absolute risk reduction = 0.66%]. Stronger association was observed for people living alone (OR = 0.828, 95% CI = 0.725 to 0.944). In comparison to people with <10% green space, the ORs for cumulative incident loneliness were 0.833 (95% CI = 0.695 to 0.997), 0.790 (95% CI = 0.624 to 1.000) and 0.736 (95% CI = 0.549 to 0.986) for 10–20%, 20–30% and >30% green space, respectively. Compared with the <10% green-space reference group with 13.78% incident loneliness over 4 years and conservatively assuming no impact on incident loneliness, associations translated into absolute risk reductions of 1.70%, 2.26% and 2.72% within populations with 10–20%, 20–30% and >30% green space, respectively. These associations were stronger again for people living alone, with 10–20% (OR = 0.608, 95% CI = 0.448 to 0.826), 20–30% (OR = 0.649, 95% CI = 0.436 to 0.966) and >30% (OR = 0.480, 95% CI = 0.278 to 0.829) green space within 1600 m. No age, sex or disability-related contingencies, associations with green space within 400 or 800 m or relief from loneliness reported at baseline were observed.ConclusionsA lower cumulative incidence of loneliness was observed among people with more green space within 1600 m of home, especially for people living alone. Potential biopsychosocial mechanisms warrant investigation.
|
|
| 2. |
- Barouki, Robert, et al.
(författare)
-
The COVID-19 pandemic and global environmental change : Emerging research needs
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Environment International. - : Elsevier BV. - 0160-4120 .- 1873-6750. ; 146
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The outbreak of COVID-19 raised numerous questions on the interactions between the occurrence of new infections, the environment, climate and health. The European Union requested the H2020 HERA project which aims at setting priorities in research on environment, climate and health, to identify relevant research needs regarding Covid-19. The emergence and spread of SARS-CoV-2 appears to be related to urbanization, habitat destruction, live animal trade, intensive livestock farming and global travel. The contribution of climate and air pollution requires additional studies. Importantly, the severity of COVID-19 depends on the interactions between the viral infection, ageing and chronic diseases such as metabolic, respiratory and cardiovascular diseases and obesity which are themselves influenced by environmental stressors. The mechanisms of these interactions deserve additional scrutiny. Both the pandemic and the social response to the disease have elicited an array of behavioural and societal changes that may remain long after the pandemic and that may have long term health effects including on mental health. Recovery plans are currently being discussed or implemented and the environmental and health impacts of those plans are not clearly foreseen. Clearly, COVID-19 will have a longlasting impact on the environmental health field and will open new research perspectives and policy needs.
|
|
| 3. |
- Bratman, Gregory N., et al.
(författare)
-
Nature and mental health : An ecosystem service perspective
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Science Advances. - : American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). - 2375-2548. ; 5:7
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- A growing body of empirical evidence is revealing the value of nature experience for mental health. With rapid urbanization and declines in human contact with nature globally, crucial decisions must be made about how to preserve and enhance opportunities for nature experience. Here, we first provide points of consensus across the natural, social, and health sciences on the impacts of nature experience on cognitive functioning, emotional well-being, and other dimensions of mental health. We then show how ecosystem service assessments can be expanded to include mental health, and provide a heuristic, conceptual model for doing so.
|
|
| 4. |
- Remme, Roy P., et al.
(författare)
-
An ecosystem service perspective on urban nature, physical activity, and health
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. - : Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. - 0027-8424 .- 1091-6490. ; 118:22
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Nature underpins human well-being in critical ways, especially in health. Nature provides pollination of nutritious crops, purification of drinking water, protection from floods, and climate security, among other well-studied health benefits. A crucial, yet challenging, research frontier is clarifying how nature promotes physical activity for its many mental and physical health benefits, particularly in densely populated cities with scarce and dwindling access to nature. Here we frame this frontier by conceptually developing a spatial decision-support tool that shows where, how, and for whom urban nature promotes physical activity, to inform urban greening efforts and broader health assessments. We synthesize what is known, present a model framework, and detail the model steps and data needs that can yield generalizable spatial models and an effective tool for assessing the urban nature-physical activity relationship. Current knowledge supports an initial model that can distinguish broad trends and enrich urban planning, spatial policy, and public health decisions. New, iterative research and application will reveal the importance of different types of urban nature, the different subpopulations who will benefit from it, and nature's potential contribution to creating more equitable, green, livable cities with active inhabitants.
|
|
| 5. |
- Richardson, Elizabeth A., et al.
(författare)
-
Green cities and health : A question of scale?
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. - : BMJ. - 0143-005X .- 1470-2738. ; 66:2, s. 160-165
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Cities are expanding and accommodating an increasing proportion of the world's population. It is important to identify features of urban form that promote the health of city dwellers. Access to green space has been associated with health benefits at both individual and neighbourhood level. We investigated whether a relationship between green space coverage and selected mortality rates exists at the city level in the USA.Methods An ecological cross-sectional study. A detailed land use data set was used to quantify green space for the largest US cities (n=49, combined population of 43 million). Linear regression models were used to examine the association between city-level ‘greenness’ and city-level standardised rates of mortality from heart disease, diabetes, lung cancer, motor vehicle fatalities and all causes, after adjustment for confounders.Results There was no association between greenness and mortality from heart disease, diabetes, lung cancer or automobile accidents. Mortality from all causes was significantly higher in greener cities.Conclusions While considerable evidence suggests that access to green space yields health benefits, we found no such evidence at the scale of the American city. In the USA, greener cities tend also to be more sprawling and have higher levels of car dependency. Any benefits that the green space might offer seem easily eclipsed by these other conditions and the lifestyles that accompany them. The result merits further investigation as it has important implications for how we increase green space access in our cities.
|
|
| 6. |
- Smith, Kirk R., et al.
(författare)
-
Energy and human health
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Annual review of public health (Print). - : ANNUAL REVIEWS. - 0163-7525 .- 1545-2093. ; 34, s. 159-188
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Energy use is central to human society and provides many health benefits. But each source of energy entails some health risks. This article reviews the health impacts of each major source of energy, focusing on those with major implications for the burden of disease globally. The biggest health impacts accrue to the harvesting and burning of solid fuels, coal and biomass, mainly in the form of occupational health risks and household and general ambient air pollution. Lack of access to clean fuels and electricity in the world's poor households is a particularly serious risk for health. Although energy efficiency brings many benefits, it also entails some health risks, as do renewable energy systems, if not managed carefully. We do not review health impacts of climate change itself, which are due mostly to climate-altering pollutants from energy systems, but do discuss the potential for achieving near-term health cobenefits by reducing certain climate-related emissions.
|
|
| 7. |
- Watts, Nick, et al.
(författare)
-
The Lancet Countdown on health and climate change : from 25 years of inaction to a global transformation for public health
- 2018
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. - : Elsevier. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 391:10120, s. 581-630
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Lancet Countdown tracks progress on health and climate change and provides an independent assessment of the health effects of climate change, the implementation of the Paris Agreement, 1 and the health implications of these actions. It follows on from the work of the 2015 Lancet Commission on Health and Climate Change, 2 which concluded that anthropogenic climate change threatens to undermine the past 50 years of gains in public health, and conversely, that a comprehensive response to climate change could be "the greatest global health opportunity of the 21st century". The Lancet Countdown is a collaboration between 24 academic institutions and intergovernmental organisations based in every continent and with representation from a wide range of disciplines. The collaboration includes climate scientists, ecologists, economists, engineers, experts in energy, food, and transport systems, geographers, mathematicians, social and political scientists, public health professionals, and doctors. It reports annual indicators across five sections: climate change impacts, exposures, and vulnerability; adaptation planning and resilience for health; mitigation actions and health co-benefits; economics and finance; and public and political engagement. The key messages from the 40 indicators in the Lancet Countdown's 2017 report are summarised below.
|
|
