The role of regular engagement with non-companion animals and proximity to green and blue space for mental health, wellbeing, and loneliness during Covid-19 social-distancing measures: findings from a UK survey study
Emily Shoesmith
A * and Elena Ratschen A
A Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK.
Abstract
The Covid-19 pandemic led to increased use of green/blue space as indoor spaces became frequently inaccessible. These changes affected the direct interactions between humans and nature.
To investigate the links between mental health, loneliness, wellbeing, and interaction with non-companion animals, proximity to and use of green/blue space.
A cross-sectional online survey of adult UK residents was conducted between April and June 2020. The questionnaire included validated and bespoke items measuring demographics and exposures and outcomes related to mental health, wellbeing, loneliness, human–animal interactions with non-companion animals (wildlife/farm animals), and proximity to and use of green/blue space before and since the first UK Covid-19 lockdown.
Of 5926 participants, 4408 (74.4%) reported interacting with non-companion animals at least every other day. Frequent engagement with non-companion animals was significantly associated with smaller decreases in mental health scores (b = 0.131, 95% CI [0.007–0.256], P = 0.038) and smaller increases in loneliness scores (b = −0.135, 95% CI [−0.241–0.030], P = 0.012). Just under half (48.4%, n = 2867) reported living directly next to a green/blue space, and over half (52.3%; n = 3097) reported using such space at least every day since lockdown. Regular use of green/blue space since lockdown was significantly associated with higher mental health (b = 0.154, 95% CI [0.037–0.272], P = 0.010), lower loneliness (b = −0.334, 95% CI [−0.430 – −0.238], P = 0.001), and higher wellbeing (b = 0.810, 95% CI [0.572–1.047], P = 0.001). Closer proximity to such space was significantly associated with lower loneliness scores (b = −0.224, 95% CI [−0.319 – −0.130], P = 0.001), and higher wellbeing scores (b = 0.632, 95% CI [0.391–0.873], P = 0.001).
The multi-faceted human–nature relationship may promote key human health benefits in the context of the lockdown.
These findings have highlighted the importance of green/blue space and the human–animal relationship, and how they might play a critical role in maintaining people’s mental health within a pandemic context. Further targeted investigations relating to these areas and links with human health are important within both pandemic and non-pandemic contexts.
Keywords: behaviour, ecosystem, environment, human–animal interaction, loneliness, mental health, non-companion animals, species interactions, statistics, wildlife interactions.
References
Amiot CE, Bastian B (2015) Toward a psychology of human–animal relations. Psychological Bulletin 141, 6-47.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Bell SL, Phoenix C, Lovell R, Wheeler BW (2014) Green space, health and wellbeing: making space for individual agency. Health & Place 30, 287-292.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Bell SL, Westley M, Lovell R, Wheeler BW (2018) Everyday green space and experienced well-being: the significance of wildlife encounters. Landscape Research 43, 8-19.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological) 57, 289-300.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Bratman GN, Anderson CB, Berman MG, Cochran B, de Vries S, Flanders J, Folke C, Frumkin H, Gross JJ, Hartig T, Kahn PH, Kuo M, Lawler JJ, Levin PS, Lindahl T, Meyer-Lindenberg A, Mitchell R, Ouyang Z, Roe J, Scarlett L, Smith JR, van den Bosch M, Wheeler BW, White MP, Zheng H, Daily GC (2019) Nature and mental health: an ecosystem service perspective. Science Advances 5, eaax0903.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Britton E, Kindermann G, Domegan C, Carlin C (2020) Blue care: a systematic review of blue space interventions for health and wellbeing. Health Promotion International 35, 50-69.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Brooks HL, Rushton K, Lovell K, Bee P, Walker L, Grant L, Rogers A (2018) The power of support from companion animals for people living with mental health problems: a systematic review and narrative synthesis of the evidence. BMC Psychiatry 18, 31.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Brooks SK, Webster RK, Smith LE, Woodland L, Wessely S, Greenberg N, Rubin GJ (2020) The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. The Lancet 395, 912-920.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Cartwright BDS, White MP, Clitherow TJ (2018) Nearby nature ‘buffers’ the effect of low social connectedness on adult subjective wellbeing over the last 7 days. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 15, 1238.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Cox DTC, Shanahan DF, Hudson HL, Plummer KE, Siriwardena GM, Fuller RA, Anderson K, Hancock S, Gaston KJ (2017) Doses of neighborhood nature: the benefits for mental health of living with nature. BioScience 67, 147-155.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Dallimer M, Irvine KN, Skinner AMJ, Davies ZG, Rouquette JR, Maltby LL, Warren PH, Armsworth PR, Gaston KJ (2012) Biodiversity and the feel-good factor: understanding associations between self-reported human well-being and species richness. BioScience 62, 47-55.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Dawwas EB, Dyson K (2021) Covid-19 changed human-nature interactions across green space types: evidence of change in multiple types of activities from the West Bank, Palestine. Sustainability 13, 13831.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
de Bell S, White M, Griffiths A, Darlow A, Taylor T, Wheeler B, Lovell R (2020) Spending time in the garden is positively associated with health and wellbeing: results from a national survey in England. Landscape and Urban Planning 200, 103836.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
de Keijzer C, Bauwelinck M, Dadvand P (2020) Long-term exposure to residential greenspace and healthy ageing: a systematic review. Current Environmental Health Reports 7, 65-88.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Dettmann LM, Adams S, Taylor G (2022) Investigating the prevalence of anxiety and depression during the first cOVID-19 lockdown in the United Kingdom: systematic review and meta-analyses. British Journal of Clinical Psychology 61, 757-780.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Garlick B (2020) Lockdown isn’t good news for all wildlife – many animals rely on humans for survival. The Conversation. Available at https://theconversation.com/lockdown-isnt-good-news-for-all-wildlife-many-animals-rely-on-humans-for-survival-137213
Gascon M, Triguero-Mas M, Martínez D, Dadvand P, Rojas-Rueda D, Plasència A, Nieuwenhuijsen MJ (2016) Residential green spaces and mortality: a systematic review. Environment International 86, 60-67.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Grima N, Corcoran W, Hill-James C, Langton B, Sommer H, Fisher B (2020) The importance of urban natural areas and urban ecosystem services during the COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS ONE 15, e0243344.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Hansen AS, Beery T, Fredman P, Wolf-Watz D (2022) Outdoor recreation in Sweden during and after the Covid-19 pandemic – management and policy implications. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 1-22.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Hartig T, Mitchell R, de Vries S, Frumkin H (2014) Nature and health. Annual Review of Public Health 35, 207-228.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Hockenhull J, Squibb K, Cameron A (2021) How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected the way we access and interact with the countryside and the animals within it? Animals 11, 2281.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Holland KE, Owczarczak-Garstecka SC, Anderson KL, Casey RA, Christley RM, Harris L, McMillan KM, Mead R, Murray JK, Samet L (2021) ‘More attention than usual’: a thematic analysis of dog ownership experiences in the UK during the first COVID-19 lockdown. Animals 11, 240.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Hughes ME, Waite LJ, Hawkley LC, Cacioppo JT (2004) A short scale for measuring loneliness in large surveys: results from two population-based studies. Research on Aging 26, 655-672.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Kingsley JY, Townsend M, Henderson-Wilson C (2009) Cultivating health and wellbeing: members’ perceptions of the health benefits of a Port Melbourne community garden. Leisure Studies 28, 207-219.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
McCabe CJ, Thomas KJ, Brazier JE, Coleman P (1996) Measuring the mental health status of a population: a comparison of the GHQ-12 and the SF−36 (MHI-5). British Journal of Psychiatry 169, 517-521.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Morse JW, Gladkikh TM, Hackenburg DM, Gould RK (2020) COVID-19 and human-nature relationships: Vermonters’ activities in nature and associated nonmaterial values during the pandemic. PLoS ONE 15, e0243697.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Niedzwiedz CL, O’Donnell CA, Jani BD, Demou E, Ho FK, Celis-Morales C, Nicholl BI, Mair FS, Welsh P, Sattar N, Pell JP, Katikireddi SV (2020) Ethnic and socioeconomic differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection: prospective cohort study using UK Biobank. BMC Medicine 18, 160.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Nutsford D, Pearson AL, Kingham S, Reitsma F (2016) Residential exposure to visible blue space (but not green space) associated with lower psychological distress in a capital city. Health & Place 39, 70-78.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Oliva JL, Johnston KL (2021) Puppy love in the time of Corona: dog ownership protects against loneliness for those living alone during the COVID-19 lockdown. International Journal of Social Psychiatry 67, 232-242.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Pierret P, Jiguet F (2018) The potential virtue of garden bird feeders: more birds in citizen backyards close to intensive agricultural landscapes. Biological Conservation 222, 14-20.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Pouso S, Borja Á, Fleming LE, Gómez-Baggethun E, White MP, Uyarra MC (2021) Contact with blue-green spaces during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown beneficial for mental health. Science of the Total Environment 756, 143984.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Pritchard A, Richardson M, Sheffield D, McEwan K (2020) The relationship between nature connectedness and eudaimonic well-being: a meta-analysis. Journal of Happiness Studies 21, 1145-1167.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Ratcliffe E, Gatersleben B, Sowden PT (2013) Bird sounds and their contributions to perceived attention restoration and stress recovery. Journal of Environmental Psychology 36, 221-228.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Ratschen E, Shoesmith E, Shahab L, Silva K, Kale D, Toner P, Reeve C, Mills DS (2020) Human-animal relationships and interactions during the Covid-19 lockdown phase in the UK: investigating links with mental health and loneliness. PLoS ONE 15, e0239397.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Richardson M, Hamlin I, Elliott LR, White MP (2022) Country-level factors in a failing relationship with nature: nature connectedness as a key metric for a sustainable future. Ambio 51, 2201-2213.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Robb GN, McDonald RA, Chamberlain DE, Bearhop S (2008) Food for thought: supplementary feeding as a driver of ecological change in avian populations. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6, 476-484.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Roberts H, van Lissa C, Hagedoorn P, Kellar I, Helbich M (2019) The effect of short-term exposure to the natural environment on depressive mood: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Environmental Research 177, 108606.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Samuelsson K, Barthel S, Colding J, Macassa G, Giusti M (2020) Urban nature as a source of resilience during social distancing amidst the coronavirus pandemic. Landscape and Urban Planning
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Scopelliti M, Carrus G, Adinolfi C, Suarez G, Colangelo G, Lafortezza R, Panno A, Sanesi G (2016) Staying in touch with nature and well-being in different income groups: the experience of urban parks in Bogotá. Landscape and Urban Planning 148, 139-148.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Shanahan DF, Lin BB, Bush R, Gaston KJ, Dean JH, Barber E, Fuller RA (2015) Toward improved public health outcomes from urban nature. American Journal of Public Health 105, 470-477.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Shanahan DF, Bush R, Gaston KJ, Lin BB, Dean J, Barber E, Fuller RA (2016) Health benefits from nature experiences depend on dose. Scientific Reports 6, 28551.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Shoesmith E, Shahab L, Kale D, Mills DS, Reeve C, Toner P, Santos de Assis L, Ratschen E (2021) The influence of human–animal interactions on mental and physical health during the first COVID-19 lockdown phase in the U.K.: a qualitative exploration. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, 976.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Skibins JC, Das BM, Schuler G (2022) Digital modalities, nature, and quality of life: mental health and conservation benefits of watching bear cams. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 1-15.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Smith KJ, Victor C (2019) Typologies of loneliness, living alone and social isolation, and their associations with physical and mental health. Ageing & Society 39, 1709-1730.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Sofo A, Sofo A (2020) Converting home spaces into food gardens at the time of Covid-19 quarantine: all the benefits of plants in this difficult and unprecedented period. Human Ecology 48(2), 131-139.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Soga M, Evans MJ, Cox DTC, Gaston KJ (2021) Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on human–nature interactions: pathways, evidence and implications. People and Nature 3, 518-527.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Swanwick C (2009) Society’s attitudes to and preferences for land and landscape. Land Use Policy 26, S62-S75.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Taggart F, Friede T, Weich S, Clarke A, Johnson M, Stewart-Brown S (2013) Cross cultural evaluation of the Warwick-Edinburgh mental well-being scale (WEMWBS) – a mixed methods study. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 11, 27.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Venter ZS, Barton DN, Gundersen V, Figari H, Nowell M (2020) Urban nature in a time of crisis: recreational use of green space increases during the COVID-19 outbreak in Oslo, Norway. Environmental Research Letters 15, 104075.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Westgarth C, Christley RM, Jewell C, German AJ, Boddy LM, Christian HE (2019) Dog owners are more likely to meet physical activity guidelines than people without a dog: an investigation of the association between dog ownership and physical activity levels in a UK community. Scientific Reports 9, 5704.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Xie J, Luo S, Furuya K, Sun D (2020) Urban parks as green buffers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability 12, 6751.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Yan Y, Bayham J, Richter A, Fenichel EP (2021) Risk compensation and face mask mandates during the COVID-19 pandemic. Scientific Reports 11, 3174.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Yang Y, Wang L, Passmore H-A, Zhang J, Zhu L, Cai H (2021) Viewing nature scenes reduces the pain of social ostracism. The Journal of Social Psychology 161, 197-215.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Young J, Pritchard R, Nottle C, Banwell H (2020) Pets, touch, and covid-19: health benefits from non-human touch through times of stress. Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy 4, 25-33.
| Google Scholar |
