Spatial statistical analysis of the relationship between self-reported mental health during the COVID-19 lockdown and closeness to green infrastructure

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has produced alterations in the behaviour and psychological health of people, who have had to learn living under uncertain circumstances escaping their control. This situation has been aggravated in those countries applying strict home confinement rules to try bending their epidemic curve. This is the case of Spain, where the stringent lockdown period was extended over three months. This study aimed at proving a research hypothesis whereby living close to Green Infrastructure (GI) during the confinement period was beneficial for mental health. To this end, La Palma (Canary Islands) and Zaragoza (Peninsular Spain) were taken as case studies, since both locations distributed a questionnaire to address citizenry’s self-reported mental health under strict lockdown conditions. A spatial statistical analysis of the responses collected by these questionnaires revealed that variables such as stress, anger, medication use, alcohol consumption or visits to the doctor significantly decreased if citizens were close to GI, whereas people having very high expectations of enjoying the city after the confinement were positively correlated to proximity of green areas. Although these outcomes are limited by the inferential capacity of correlation analysis, they point out to a sense of relief derived from having visual contact with vegetated landscapes and feeling stimulated about using them for recreation, aesthetical or sporting purposes. The joint consideration of these psychological gains with the social and environmental benefits provided by GI emphasizes the importance of approaching urban regeneration through the design and implementation of interconnected green spaces.

Prevalence and Relationships between Alexithymia, Anhedonia, Depression and Anxiety during the Belgian COVID-19 Pandemic Lockdown

“…Further studies are needed to support the variability in the proportion of alexithymic subjects following lockdown and uncover what the exact factors are. It would be interesting to study either the influence of the environment (city versus countryside) [ 46 ] or to test the hypothesis that specific groups of subjects are, more vulnerable such as healthcare professionals [ 47 ] or older people with physical disabilities [ 48 ]. Accepting the variability of the trait also implies the possibility of taking action and of treating alexithymic patients [ 10 ].…”

Nature exposure and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: A Navigation Guide systematic review with meta-analysis

“…Among our reviewed articles, twelve studies reported the nature availability indicators during COVID-19, which included the satellite-derived vegetation indices (e.g., NDVI, EVI), percentage of greenspace area, and tree canopy coverage (Cheng et al, 2021;Heo et al, 2021;Jato-Espino et al, 2022;Larson et al, 2022;Lõhmus et al, 2021;Robinson et al, 2021;Samuelsson et al, 2021;Soga et al, 2020;Vos et al, 2022;Wortzel et al, 2021;Yao et al, 2022;Zhang et al, 2022). Several studies used different satellites (e.g., Landsat-8 Operational Land Imager, Sentinel-2) with varying resolutions (e.g., 30m, 10m) at different scales (e.g., city, residence), and they used different indices.…”

“…Multiple studies assessed the percentage of greenspace area in the neighborhood. Of these, three studies measured the greenspace area as the percentage of land cover with greenspace (Jato-Espino et al, 2022;Samuelsson et al, 2021;Vos et al, 2022), where one study used the CORINE land cover map at a European scale (Jato-Espino et al, 2022), one study conducted in Belgium used orthographic images for land cover map (Vos et al, 2022) and the remaining one obtained national land cover data from Swedish Environmental Protection Agency mapped on a 10 m resolution raster during the years 2017-2019 (Samuelsson et al, 2021). Two studies estimated park area as greenspace exposure using publicly available data (Larson et al, 2022;Yao et al, 2022), such as the Statistical Yearbook of Chinese Cities 2019 (Yao et al, 2022).…”

“…Two studies estimated park area as greenspace exposure using publicly available data (Larson et al, 2022;Yao et al, 2022), such as the Statistical Yearbook of Chinese Cities 2019 (Yao et al, 2022). Studies used multiple radius distances surrounding the greenspace area, urban park, and vegetative area ranging from 50-m to 1000-m (Jato-Espino et al, 2022;Vos et al, 2022). One study used greenspace area and abundance at 50-m, 100-m, 250-m, and 500-m distances (Robinson et al, 2021).…”

“…Thirteen studies (22%) reported an association between nature exposure and stress, including nine cross-sectional designs (Basu et al, 2021;Bourion-Bédès et al, 2021;Jato-Espino et al, 2022;Lõhmus et al, 2021;Mintz et al, 2021;Pearson et al, 2021;Ribeiro et al, 2021;Sansal et al, 2021;Sundara Keeren et al, 2021), two cohorts (Vos et al, 2022;Wortzel et al, 2021) and two ecological study design (Robinson et al, 2021;Yao et al, 2022) (Table 1). Of these, three studies used a 10-item perceived stress scale (PSS) (S. Cohen et al, 1983) & Bekker, 1992), one study reported 5-item interactive assessment of COVID-19 related stress, one study used mental stress index, and the remaining three studies reported self-reported 1-item question for measuring stress.…”