Department of Hygiene and Ecomedicine, Faculty of Public Health, Medical University of Plovdiv, Plovdiv, Bulgaria.
Institute and Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany; Institute of Epidemiology, Helmholtz Zentrum München - German Research Center for Environmental Health, Neuherberg, Germany.
Environ Res. 2018 Oct;166:223-233. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2018.06.004. Epub 2018 Jun 8.
A growing body of scientific literature indicates that urban green- and bluespace support mental health; however, little research has attempted to address the complexities in likely interrelations among the pathways through which benefits plausibly are realized.
The present study examines how different plausible pathways between green/bluespace and mental health can work together. Both objective and perceived measures of green- and bluespace are used in these models.
We sampled 720 students from the city of Plovdiv, Bulgaria. Residential greenspace was measured in terms of the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), tree cover density, percentage of green areas, and Euclidean distance to the nearest green space. Bluespace was measured in terms of its presence in the neighborhood and the Euclidean distance to the nearest bluespace. Mental health was measured with the 12-item form of the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). The following mediators were considered: perceived neighborhood green/bluespace, restorative quality of the neighborhood, social cohesion, physical activity, noise and air pollution, and environmental annoyance. Structural equation modelling techniques were used to analyze the data.
Higher NDVI within a 300 m buffer around the residence was associated with better mental health through higher perceived greenspace; through higher perceived greenspace, leading to increased restorative quality, and subsequently to increased physical activity (i.e., serial mediation); through lower noise exposure, which in turn was associated with lower annoyance; and through higher perceived greenspace, which was associated with lower annoyance. Presence of bluespace within a 300 m buffer did not have a straightforward association with mental health owing to competitive indirect paths: one supporting mental health through higher perceived bluespace, restorative quality, and physical activity; and another engendering mental ill-health through higher noise exposure and annoyance.
We found evidence that having more greenspace near the residence supported mental health through several indirect pathways with serial components. Conversely, bluespace was not clearly associated with mental health.
越来越多的科学文献表明，城市的绿色和蓝色空间有助于促进心理健康；然而，很少有研究试图解决这些益处可能实现的途径之间复杂的相互关系。
本研究检验了绿色/蓝色空间和心理健康之间不同的可能途径如何共同发挥作用。这些模型同时使用了客观和感知的绿色和蓝色空间测量方法。
我们从保加利亚普罗夫迪夫市抽取了 720 名学生作为样本。住宅绿色空间用归一化植被指数（NDVI）、树冠密度、绿地面积百分比和到最近绿地的欧式距离来衡量。蓝色空间用其在社区中的存在和到最近蓝色空间的欧式距离来衡量。心理健康用 12 项一般健康问卷（GHQ-12）来衡量。考虑了以下中介因素：感知邻里的绿色/蓝色空间、邻里的恢复质量、社会凝聚力、身体活动、噪声和空气污染以及环境烦恼。采用结构方程模型技术对数据进行分析。
住宅周围 300 米缓冲区内较高的 NDVI 通过更高的感知绿地与更好的心理健康相关；通过更高的感知绿地，导致恢复质量提高，进而导致身体活动增加（即序列中介）；通过降低噪声暴露，进而与较低的烦恼相关；通过更高的感知绿地，与较低的烦恼相关。在 300 米缓冲区内存在蓝色空间与心理健康没有直接的关联，这是由于存在竞争的间接路径：一条通过更高的感知蓝色空间、恢复质量和身体活动来支持心理健康；另一条通过更高的噪声暴露和烦恼来导致心理健康不佳。
我们发现，在住宅附近拥有更多的绿色空间可以通过几个具有串联成分的间接途径来支持心理健康。相反，蓝色空间与心理健康没有明显的关联。
