IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v11y2022i6p904-d838256.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perceived Qualities, Visitation and Felt Benefits of Preferred Nature Spaces during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Australia: A Nationally-Representative Cross-Sectional Study of 2940 Adults

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaoqi Feng

    (School of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
    Population Wellbeing and Environment Research Lab (PowerLab), NSW, Australia
    School of Health and Society, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia)

  • Thomas Astell-Burt

    (Population Wellbeing and Environment Research Lab (PowerLab), NSW, Australia
    School of Health and Society, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia)

Abstract

We investigated how the perceived quality of natural spaces influenced levels of visitation and felt benefits during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia via a nationally representative online and telephone survey conducted on 12–26 October (Social Research Centre’s Life in Australia TM panel aged > 18 years, 78.8% response, n = 3043). Our sample was restricted to those with complete information ( n = 2940). Likert scale responses to 18 statements regarding the quality of local natural spaces that participants preferred to visit were classified into eight quality domains: access; aesthetics; amenities; facilities; incivilities; potential usage; safety; and social. These domains were then summed into an overall nature quality score (mean = 5.8, range = 0–16). Associations between these quality variables and a range of nature visitation and felt benefits were tested using weighted multilevel models, adjusted for demographic and socioeconomic confounders. Compared with participants in the lowest perceived nature quality quintile, those in the highest quality quintile had higher odds of spending at least 2 h in their preferred local nature space in the past week (Odds Ratio [OR] = 3.40; 95% Confidence Interval [95%CI] = 2.38–4.86), of visiting their preferred nature space almost every day in the past four weeks (OR = 3.90; 2.77–5.47), and of reporting increased levels of nature visitation in comparison with before the COVID-19 pandemic (OR = 3.90; 2.54–6.00). Participants in the highest versus lowest perceived nature quality quintile also reported higher odds of feeling their visits to nature enabled them to take solace and respite during the pandemic (OR = 9.49; 6.73–13.39), to keep connected with their communities (OR = 5.30; 3.46–8.11), and to exercise more often than they did before the pandemic (OR = 3.88; 2.57–5.86). Further analyses of each quality domain indicated time in and frequency of visiting nature spaces were most affected by potential usage and safety (time in nature was also influenced by the level of amenity). Feelings of connection and solace were most affected by potential usage and social domains. Exercise was most influenced by potential usage, social and access domains. In conclusion, evidence reported in this study indicates that visits to nature and various health-related benefits associated with it during the COVID-19 pandemic were highly contingent upon numerous qualities of green and blue spaces.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaoqi Feng & Thomas Astell-Burt, 2022. "Perceived Qualities, Visitation and Felt Benefits of Preferred Nature Spaces during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Australia: A Nationally-Representative Cross-Sectional Study of 2940 Adults," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-16, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:6:p:904-:d:838256
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/6/904/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/6/904/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johnston, Robert J. & Thomassin, Paul J., 2010. "Willingness to Pay for Water Quality Improvements in the United States and Canada: Considering Possibilities for International Meta-Analysis and Benefit Transfer," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 39(01), pages 1-18, February.
    2. Clare Rishbeth & Mark Powell, 2013. "Place Attachment and Memory: Landscapes of Belonging as Experienced Post-migration," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(2), pages 160-178, April.
    3. Virginia Harris & Dave Kendal & Amy K. Hahs & Caragh G. Threlfall, 2018. "Green space context and vegetation complexity shape people’s preferences for urban public parks and residential gardens," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(1), pages 150-162, January.
    4. Colleen E Reid & Emma S Rieves & Kate Carlson, 2022. "Perceptions of green space usage, abundance, and quality of green space were associated with better mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic among residents of Denver," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(3), pages 1-21, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Brenda B. Lin & Chia-chen Chang & Erik Andersson & Thomas Astell-Burt & John Gardner & Xiaoqi Feng, 2023. "Visiting Urban Green Space and Orientation to Nature Is Associated with Better Wellbeing during COVID-19," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-12, February.
    2. Mateusz Ciski & Krzysztof Rząsa, 2023. "Multiscale Geographically Weighted Regression in the Investigation of Local COVID-19 Anomalies Based on Population Age Structure in Poland," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(10), pages 1-23, May.
    3. Krzysztof Rząsa & Mateusz Ciski, 2022. "Influence of the Demographic, Social, and Environmental Factors on the COVID-19 Pandemic—Analysis of the Local Variations Using Geographically Weighted Regression," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-26, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Moeltner, Klaus, 2019. "Bayesian nonlinear meta regression for benefit transfer," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 44-62.
    2. Huber, Christopher & Meldrum, James & Richardson, Leslie, 2018. "Improving confidence by embracing uncertainty: A meta-analysis of U.S. hunting values for benefit transfer," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 33(PB), pages 225-236.
    3. Elena Prioreschi & Nici Zimmermann & Michael Davies & Irene Pluchinotta, 2024. "Interrelationships and Trade-Offs between Urban Natural Space Use and Biodiversity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-29, May.
    4. Londoño, Luz M. & Johnston, Robert J., 2012. "Enhancing the reliability of benefit transfer over heterogeneous sites: A meta-analysis of international coral reef values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 80-89.
    5. Alicia Thomas & Muntazar Monsur & Carol S. Lindquist & Thayne Montague & Catherine R. Simpson, 2024. "Impacts of Landscape Types and Flower Colors on the Emotional Perceptions of Military Service Members," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-17, December.
    6. Maria Ignatieva & Duy Khiem Tran & Rosangela Tenorio, 2023. "Challenges and Stakeholder Perspectives on Implementing Ecological Designs in Green Public Spaces: A Case Study of Hue City, Vietnam," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-18, September.
    7. Thomas G. Kuijpers & H. Susan J. Picavet & Jeroen Lakerveld & Johannes Mark Noordzij & G.C. Wanda Wendel-Vos & Barbara A. M. Snoeker, 2025. "Physical Activity Friendliness of Neighborhoods: Do Subjective and Objective Measures Correspond Within a Mid-Sized Dutch Town?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 22(4), pages 1-16, April.
    8. Kovacs, Kent F. & Polasky, Stephen & Keeler, Bonnie & Pennington, Derric & Nelson, Erik & Plantinga, Andrew J. & Taff, Steven J., 2012. "Evaluating the Return in Ecosystem Services from Investment in Public Land Acquisitions," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124660, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Raihan Jamil & Jason P. Julian & Meredith K. Steele, 2025. "Vegetation Structure and Distribution Across Scales in a Large Metropolitan Area: Case Study of Austin MSA, Texas, USA," Geographies, MDPI, vol. 5(1), pages 1-22, March.
    10. Maggie MacKinnon & Rebecca MacKinnon & Maibritt Pedersen Zari & Kain Glensor & Tim Park, 2022. "Urgent Biophilia: Green Space Visits in Wellington, New Zealand, during the COVID-19 Lockdowns," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-14, May.
    11. Francesco Jacopo Pintus, 2023. "Valuing drinking water quality after a PFAS contamination event: results from a meta-analysis benefit transfer," "Marco Fanno" Working Papers 0308, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Marco Fanno".
    12. Alicia Thomas & Muntazar Monsur & Carol S. Lindquist & Thayne Montague & Catherine R. Simpson, 2024. "Evaluation of Military Service Member Preferences of Landscape Design Elements in Therapeutic Gardens," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-15, May.
    13. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Ahtiainen, Heini & Artell, Janne & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2017. "Choosing a Functional Form for an International Benefit Transfer: Evidence from a Nine-country Valuation Experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 104-113.
    14. Aleksandra Lis & Karolina Zalewska & Marek Grabowski & Magdalena Zienowicz, 2025. "Signs of Children’s Presence in Two Types of Landscape: Residential and Park: Research on Adults’ Sense of Safety and Preference: Premises for Designing Sustainable Urban Environments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-26, May.
    15. Mengyao Wang & Yu Yan & Mingxuan Li & Long Zhou, 2024. "Differences in Emotional Preferences toward Urban Green Spaces among Various Cultural Groups in Macau and Their Influencing Factors," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-22, March.
    16. Tzitzi Sharhí Delgado-Lemus & Ana Isabel Moreno-Calles, 2022. "Agroforestry Contributions to Urban River Rehabilitation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-22, June.
    17. Marianne Lefebvre & Masha Maslianskaia-Pautrel & Pauline Laille, 2022. "Alternative adaptation scenarios towards pesticide-free urban green spaces: Welfare implication for French citizens," Post-Print hal-03694169, HAL.
    18. Hyde, Kelly, 2020. "The Regressive Costs of Drinking Water Contaminant Avoidance," GLO Discussion Paper Series 703, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    19. Dupoux, Marion & Martinet, Vincent, 2022. "Could the environment be a normal good for you and an inferior good for me? A theory of context-dependent substitutability and needs," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    20. Lena Lämmle & Eike von Lindern & Dorothee Rummel & Mark Michaeli & Matthias Ziegler, 2022. "Shedding Light onto the City Blues Myth—The Potential of Stimulating and Activating Effects of Urban Public Spaces and the Role of City Relatedness," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-14, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:6:p:904-:d:838256. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.