Use of the natural outdoor environment in different populations in Europe in relation to access: Implications for policy

This cross-cultural study explores the relationship of natural outdoor environment (NOE) use with NOE access. Most urban planning recommendations suggest optimal accessibility to be 300 m-500 m straight distance to spaces with vegetation of at least 1 hectare. Exploring this recommendation, we used...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autores: Masterson, Daniel, Triguero Mas, Margarita, 1985-, Márquez, Sandra, Zijlema, Wilma, Martinez, David, Gidlow, Christopher J., Smith, Graham, Hurst, Gemma, Cirach, Marta, Gražulevičienė, Regina, Van den Berg, Magdalena, Kruize, Hanneke, Maas, Jolanda, Nieuwenhuijsen, Mark J.
Formato: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2022
País:España
Recursos:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
Repositorio:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
OAI Identifier:oai:recercat.cat:10230/53211
Acesso em linha:http://hdl.handle.net/10230/53211
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19042226
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palavra-chave:Access
Distance
Green space
Natural outdoor environments
Time spent
Use
id ES_cd62de182bbb626df19c5571a03c8b32
oai_identifier_str oai:recercat.cat:10230/53211
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Use of the natural outdoor environment in different populations in Europe in relation to access: Implications for policyMasterson, DanielTriguero Mas, Margarita, 1985-Márquez, SandraZijlema, WilmaMartinez, DavidGidlow, Christopher J.Smith, GrahamHurst, GemmaCirach, MartaGražulevičienė, ReginaVan den Berg, MagdalenaKruize, HannekeMaas, JolandaNieuwenhuijsen, Mark J.AccessDistanceGreen spaceNatural outdoor environmentsTime spentUseThis cross-cultural study explores the relationship of natural outdoor environment (NOE) use with NOE access. Most urban planning recommendations suggest optimal accessibility to be 300 m-500 m straight distance to spaces with vegetation of at least 1 hectare. Exploring this recommendation, we used data (n = 3947) from four European cities collected in the framework of the PHENOTYPE study: Barcelona (Spain), Doetinchem (The Netherlands), Kaunas (Lithuania) and Stoke-on-Trent (United Kingdom) to obtain residential access to NOE (straight or network distances, using 300 m and 150 m buffers, to NOE larger than 1 hectare or 0.5 hectare) and use of NOE (i.e., self-reported time spent in NOE). Poisson regression models were used to examine the associations between residential access and use of NOE. The models with the strongest association with time spent in NOE in the combined sample were for those living within 300 m straight line distance to either 0.5 ha or 1 ha NOE. Noting that the only indicator that was consistent across all individual cities was living with 150 m network buffer of NOE (of at least 1 ha), this warrants further exploration in reducing recommendations of 300 m straight-line distance to 150 m network distance to 1 ha of NOE for a general indicator for cities within Europe.This research received funding from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement no: 282996 (ENV.2011.1.2.3-2) (Positive effects of natural environment for human health and well-being), Duration: 1 January 2012–31 December 2015. M.T.-M. was partially funded by a Juan de la Cierva fellowship [FJCI-2017-33842] awarded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness. W.L.Z. is supported by a Sara Borrell grant from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (CD17/00195).MDPI202220222022info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10230/53211http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19042226reponame:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunyainstname:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)InglésInt J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Feb 16;19(4):2226info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/FP7/282996© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:recercat.cat:10230/532112026-05-29T05:05:01Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Use of the natural outdoor environment in different populations in Europe in relation to access: Implications for policy
title Use of the natural outdoor environment in different populations in Europe in relation to access: Implications for policy
spellingShingle Use of the natural outdoor environment in different populations in Europe in relation to access: Implications for policy
Masterson, Daniel
Access
Distance
Green space
Natural outdoor environments
Time spent
Use
title_short Use of the natural outdoor environment in different populations in Europe in relation to access: Implications for policy
title_full Use of the natural outdoor environment in different populations in Europe in relation to access: Implications for policy
title_fullStr Use of the natural outdoor environment in different populations in Europe in relation to access: Implications for policy
title_full_unstemmed Use of the natural outdoor environment in different populations in Europe in relation to access: Implications for policy
title_sort Use of the natural outdoor environment in different populations in Europe in relation to access: Implications for policy
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Masterson, Daniel
Triguero Mas, Margarita, 1985-
Márquez, Sandra
Zijlema, Wilma
Martinez, David
Gidlow, Christopher J.
Smith, Graham
Hurst, Gemma
Cirach, Marta
Gražulevičienė, Regina
Van den Berg, Magdalena
Kruize, Hanneke
Maas, Jolanda
Nieuwenhuijsen, Mark J.
author Masterson, Daniel
author_facet Masterson, Daniel
Triguero Mas, Margarita, 1985-
Márquez, Sandra
Zijlema, Wilma
Martinez, David
Gidlow, Christopher J.
Smith, Graham
Hurst, Gemma
Cirach, Marta
Gražulevičienė, Regina
Van den Berg, Magdalena
Kruize, Hanneke
Maas, Jolanda
Nieuwenhuijsen, Mark J.
author_role author
author2 Triguero Mas, Margarita, 1985-
Márquez, Sandra
Zijlema, Wilma
Martinez, David
Gidlow, Christopher J.
Smith, Graham
Hurst, Gemma
Cirach, Marta
Gražulevičienė, Regina
Van den Berg, Magdalena
Kruize, Hanneke
Maas, Jolanda
Nieuwenhuijsen, Mark J.
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Access
Distance
Green space
Natural outdoor environments
Time spent
Use
topic Access
Distance
Green space
Natural outdoor environments
Time spent
Use
description This cross-cultural study explores the relationship of natural outdoor environment (NOE) use with NOE access. Most urban planning recommendations suggest optimal accessibility to be 300 m-500 m straight distance to spaces with vegetation of at least 1 hectare. Exploring this recommendation, we used data (n = 3947) from four European cities collected in the framework of the PHENOTYPE study: Barcelona (Spain), Doetinchem (The Netherlands), Kaunas (Lithuania) and Stoke-on-Trent (United Kingdom) to obtain residential access to NOE (straight or network distances, using 300 m and 150 m buffers, to NOE larger than 1 hectare or 0.5 hectare) and use of NOE (i.e., self-reported time spent in NOE). Poisson regression models were used to examine the associations between residential access and use of NOE. The models with the strongest association with time spent in NOE in the combined sample were for those living within 300 m straight line distance to either 0.5 ha or 1 ha NOE. Noting that the only indicator that was consistent across all individual cities was living with 150 m network buffer of NOE (of at least 1 ha), this warrants further exploration in reducing recommendations of 300 m straight-line distance to 150 m network distance to 1 ha of NOE for a general indicator for cities within Europe.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022
2022
2022
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10230/53211
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19042226
url http://hdl.handle.net/10230/53211
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19042226
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Feb 16;19(4):2226
info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/FP7/282996
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv MDPI
publisher.none.fl_str_mv MDPI
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
instname:Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
instname_str Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya)
reponame_str Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
collection Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869419827628605440
score 15.812429

Registos relacionados