Despite a long-held popular belief that nature is ‘healthy’ for people, exactly how or even whether this is true has only recently been subject to scientific scrutiny. This report reviews key literature relevant to the relationship between conservation and health and wellbeing (HWB) benefits, with a particular focus on public conservation areas (PCAs) managed by the New Zealand Department of Conservation (DOC). The review takes a broad approach both to the types of natural environments that may offer HWB benefits and to the scope of HWB. Overall, there is a large body of internationally relevant modern research that suggests that exposure to natural environments has direct positive effects on human HWB. However, much of this research was either anecdotal or descriptive. Of the relatively small number of experimental studies that have rigorously tested differences between natural and non-natural settings, many of the positive effects were not statistically significant or related to very small sample groups. Therefore, further investigation of activities undertaken in PCAs and their HWB outcomes is required to better understand conservation/human HWB relationships in New Zealand. The report identifies sources of data and expertise that are required to further analyse the relationships between conservation investment and human health, discusses the value of conservation investment as measured by health outcomes, and describes measures that would improve the alignment between conservation management and potential HWB benefits in New Zealand. Recommendations focus on requirements for research relevant to New Zealand natural areas, and the need for an integrated approach between DOC, other managers of public natural areas, and managers and stakeholders in the health and volunteering sectors. Keywords: human health, wellbeing, New Zealand, public conservation area, wilderness, green space, natural area, recreation, environmental volunteering
Purpose
This review aimed to:
1. Assess the key literature relevant to the relationship between conservation resources and management (including the biodiversity and recreation responsibilities of DOC) and HWB benefits (including both mental and physical health), with a particular focus on New Zealand.
2. Identify and document the main sources of data and expertise required to further analyse the relationship between conservation investment and human HWB in New Zealand.
3. Carry out a preliminary analysis of the value of conservation investment as measured by health outcomes in New Zealand, including a broad national dollar value if possible.
4. Make recommendations on how to progress knowledge and monitor the relationship between conservation investment and HWB outcomes in New Zealand and, if appropriate, to improve the alignment between conservation management and potential HWB benefits.
Methodology
Electronic databases currently hold more than 20 000 articles on various aspects of the relationships between the natural environment and HWB (Bowler et al. 2010). However, it was not possible or desirable to systemically review even a fraction of this large number here. Instead, I have taken two approaches: first I provide an overview and analysis of the range of research in this field, and then I present a focused analysis of international and New Zealand research that pertains to the kinds of green spaces that are of most relevance to DOC.
Through these approaches, I aim to answer five key questions:
1. How does exposure to natural environments influence HWB?
2. What HWB benefits can be attributed to exposure to natural environments?
3. How strong is the evidence of a link between nature and HWB?
4. What are the limitations of current research regarding the relationship between nature and HWB?
5. How applicable to New Zealand are international findings in this area?
The results of the literature review (Objective 1) are presented in three main sections:
1. A summary and commentary on four major international reviews of the topic published between 2004 and 2010 (section 3.2):
- ‘Nature and Health’ (Health Council of the Netherlands & RMNO 2004)
- ‘Healthy parks, healthy people: the health benefits of contact with nature in a park context’ (Maller et al. 2008—for Parks Victoria, Australia)
- ‘Parks and other green environments: essential components of a healthy human habitat health’ (Kuo 2010—for National Recreation and Park Association, USA)
- ‘Systematic review of evidence for the added benefits to health of exposure to natural environments’ (Bowler et al. 2010—not commissioned)
These four reviews were identified through discussions with DOC staff and prior personal literature review. The first three were substantial, wide-ranging and relatively recent studies that were commissioned by government or park agencies. The final review (Bowler et al 2010) is one of a small number of uncommissioned recent systematic reviews in this area, and was selected for comprehensive review because, of these systematic reviews, it includes the greatest number of individual studies. My commentary covers the whole spectrum of work covered in the reviews, including their context as well as their recommendations for further research and for application of the findings.
2. A critical review of the evidence base for a relationship between direct contact with green spaces and human HWB (section 3.3). This review concentrates on English language research that has investigated nature settings equivalent to DOC-administered PCAs and research that has been conducted in New Zealand (regarding any kind of public green space, natural or constructed).
3. A brief review of New Zealand research relevant to the topic, including consideration of the applicability of international research to New Zealand (sections 3.4 and 3.5).
The results of the above three review elements are presented and discussed in section 3, while
section 4 addresses Objectives 2–4.