Effects of urban green spaces on human perceived health improvements: Provision of green spaces is not enough but how people use them matters

How could we explain the mechanism driving the effects of Urban Green Space (UGS) on human health? This mechanism is a complex one suggesting, on one hand, an indirect effect of UGS Provision (measured as quantity, quality or accessibility of UGS) on health through UGS Exposure (measured as visit frequency to UGS, duration of visit or intensity of activities taking place during the visit). On the other hand, UGS Provision may have an indirect effect on Exposure, mediated by people’s perception of UGS. The mechanism further suggests that UGS Exposure may influence indirectly human Health but mediated by human motivation to use UGS. We tested these different expectations by fitting 12 alternative structural equation models (SEMs) corresponding to four different scenarios, depending on how UGS Provision was approximated. We show that SEMs where i) Provision is approximated as UGS quantity, and Exposure as duration (SEM(i)), ii) Provision is approximated as quantity, and Exposure as intensity (SEM(ii)) and iii) Provision is approximated as distance of the closest UGS from people’s house, and Exposure as intensity (SEM(iii)) are equally the best of all 12 SEMs tested. However, apart from the SEM(i) that has no significant path, SEM(ii) and SEM(iii) have the same significant path (motivation ~ intensity; β = 7.86±2.03, p = 0.0002), suggesting that visits to UGS may be motivated by opportunities of physical activities offered by UGS. In all our scenarios, the best SEM is always the one where Exposure is measured as intensity, irrespective of how Provision is approximated. This suggests that it is not only UGS provision that matters the most in the mechanism linking UGS to human health improvement, but rather intensity, i.e. the type of activities people engage in when they visit UGSs. Overall, our findings support the theoretical model tested in this study.