Are Rurality, Area Deprivation, Access to Outside Space, and Green Space Associated with Mental Health during the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Cross Sectional Study (CHARIS-E)

Abstract

The study investigated if rurality, area deprivation, access to outside space (Study 1), and frequency of visiting and duration in green space (Study 2) are associated with mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic and examined if individual demographics (age, gender, COVID-19 shielding status) and illness beliefs have a direct association with mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. A serial, weekly, nationally representative, cross-sectional, observational study of randomly selected adults was conducted in Scotland during June and July 2020. If available, validated instruments were used to measure psychological distress, individual demographics, illness beliefs, and the following characteristics: Rurality, area deprivation, access to residential outside space, frequency of visiting, and duration in green space. Simple linear regressions followed by examination of moderation effect were conducted. There were 2969 participants in Study 1, of which 1765 (59.6%) were female, 349 (11.9%) were in the shielding category, and the median age was 54 years. There were 502 participants in Study 2, of which 295 (58.60%) were female, 58 (11.6%) were in shielding category, and the median age was 53 years. Direct effects showed that psychological distress was worse if participants reported the following: Urban, in a deprived area, no access to or sharing residential outside space, fewer visits to green space (environment), younger, female, in the shielding category (demographics), worse illness (COVID-19) representations, and greater threat perception (illness beliefs). Moderation analyses showed that environmental factors amplified the direct effects of the individual factors on psychological distress. This study offers pointers for public health and for environmental planning, design, and management, including housing design and public open space provision and regulation.

Mental Health of Young Australians during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Exploring the Roles of Employment Precarity, Screen Time, and Contact with Nature

“…The largest group in the sample (47.5%) were classified as Struggling, meaning they tended to have moderate-to-high levels of mental well-being, while also experiencing moderate-to-severe psychological distress. This is consistent with most international [ 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 ] and Australian [ 14 , 22 , 23 , 24 ] literature, which indicates that young adults have experienced high levels of psychological distress during the pandemic. A smaller, yet sizeable proportion of the sample (25.5%), were found to be Languishing, meaning they reported no-to-mild levels of psychological distress, but they also reported low levels of mental well-being.…”

“…Consistent with a growing body of other research, our results suggest that investment in green infrastructure is important for supporting young people’s mental health “in place” during lockdowns [ 33 , 70 ]. A UK-based study reported that not having access to a private outdoor space during the pandemic was associated with greater psychological distress [ 20 ], while other studies have highlighted the mental health benefits offered by domestic gardens for both young and older individuals during lockdowns [ 35 , 37 , 71 ]. Similarly, in our study, not having access to a residential outdoor space during the pandemic was associated with a 5-fold risk of worst mental health (i.e., Floundering) among young Australians.…”

“…While increased visitation to urban greenspaces during the pandemic has been reported across a number of studies internationally [ 34 , 38 , 72 , 73 ], some studies have reported decreases in the time people spent in urban greenspaces during the COVID-19 pandemic [ 32 , 40 ] due to mobility restrictions and fear of infection. Individuals who had greater nature engagement during the pandemic typically had better mental health [ 17 , 20 , 35 , 38 , 41 ] and often reported that nature was important for supporting their mental health [ 31 , 40 , 73 ], helping them cope with lockdowns [ 36 , 38 ], and gave them feelings of “being away” [ 37 ]. Similarly, in our study, young Australians who increased their time in nature and agreed that spending time in nature during COVID-19 lockdowns/restrictions felt like “getting away”, had the best mental health (i.e., Flourishing).…”

“…For some, this is a time when financial autonomy is established, while for others study or economic insecurity can increase dependence on parental support [ 16 ]. Indeed, where pandemic-related research has focused on young adults exclusively, or results have been stratified by age in population-wide surveys, young adults are shown to have experienced higher levels of psychological distress than other age groups during the pandemic, both internationally [ 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ] and in Australia [ 14 , 22 , 23 , 24 ].…”

“…In particular, having access to public urban greenspaces [ 32 , 33 , 34 ] and private outdoor spaces [ 35 , 36 ], living in greener neighbourhoods [ 20 , 37 , 38 ], and having ‘natural’ views from home [ 36 , 37 , 39 ] have been linked with better mental health across a range of populations during the pandemic. Beyond access and incidental exposure to nature, purposive time spent in nature during the COVID-19 pandemic has also been linked with better mental health [ 17 , 20 , 26 , 31 , 34 , 35 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 ]. Only two of these studies exploring the influence of nature focused on young people specifically, and were limited to student samples in the USA [ 17 ] and Bulgaria [ 37 ].…”