EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

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

Xiaoqi Feng and Thomas Astell-Burt
Additional contact information
Xiaoqi Feng: School of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
Thomas Astell-Burt: Population Wellbeing and Environment Research Lab (PowerLab), NSW, Australia

Land, 2022, vol. 11, issue 6, 1-16

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.

Keywords: nature; green space; blue space; quality; visit; benefit; solace; physical activity; social connection; safety (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q15 Q2 Q24 Q28 Q5 R14 R52 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/6/904/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/11/6/904/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:6:p:904-:d:838256

Access Statistics for this article

Land is currently edited by Ms. Carol Ma

More articles in Land from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager (indexing@mdpi.com).

 
Page updated 2024-12-28
Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:11:y:2022:i:6:p:904-:d:838256