Effect of environmental conditions on perceived psychological restorativeness of coastal parks

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2011.08.008Get rights and content

Abstract

We investigated the hypothesis that perception of psychological restorativeness during visits to coastal parks is modified by objective and perceived environmental conditions. Visitors (n = 1153) to California beaches completed a survey on perceived weather, environmental quality, and perceived restorativeness. We used generalized ordinal logistic models to estimate the association between environmental parameters and odds of perceiving higher levels of restorativeness. Visitors perceived greater restorativeness at beaches when ambient temperatures were at or below mean monthly temperatures and during low tides. The odds of perceiving the environment as more psychologically restorative were three times greater when visiting on days defined by government policy as having good air quality (OR = 3.25; CI: 1.69–6.28). Visitors’ perception of air (OR = 1.56; CI: 1.14–2.18) and water quality (OR = 1.78; CI: 1.28–2.49) also affected perceived restorativeness; with perceived healthy days more restorative. Warmer temperatures with less space due to sea level rise and poor environmental quality will restrict restorative experiences in recreational facilities designed for urban populations.

Highlights

► Visitor experience within coastal parks is associated with weather and environmental parameters. ► The perceived psychological and attention restoration provided by a coastal park is influenced by air and water quality. ► Perceived restorativeness is significantly constrained on days with temperatures above the monthly average. ► Perceived restorativeness is significantly constrained during high tides, a proxy for sea living rise and beach crowding. ► Constraints in visitor experience to urban parks and recreational infrastructure could exacerbate psychological maladies.

Introduction

The World Health Organization’s (WHO) landmark assessment of the global burden of disease highlighted the growing impacts of mental health disorders on societies worldwide, with neuropsychiatric conditions accounting for approximately 13% of all Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs), and accounting for 45% of the total number of years lived with disability (YLD) in those between the ages of 10 and 24 years (Collins et al., 2011, Gore et al., 2011). The knowledge gaps existing in preventive strategies against the development of mental health problems are alarming, and there is an increasing need to show that investment of societal resources into services and infrastructures that aid mental health are justifiably essential.

Public open spaces and natural parklands are increasingly receiving attention as salutogenic resources for psychological health (Bell et al., 2008, van den Berg et al., 2007, Morris, 2003). Psychologically restorative natural environments reduce stress (Velarde, Fry, & Tveit, 2007); elicit improvements in mood and concentration (van den Berg et al., 2003, Karmanov and Hamel, 2008); reduce heart rate (Chang, Hammitt, Chen, Machnik, & Su, 2008); correlate with self-reported health and quality of life (Ogunseitan, 2005, de Vries et al., 2003); and outpace entertainment, built urban environments, and gymnasiums in perceived psychological and attention restoration quality (Bodin and Hartig, 2003, Herzog et al., 1997, Hug et al., 2009). To date, studies in environmental health psychology have not typically incorporated gradients of physical environmental parameters as factors associated with public utilization and experiences of urban infrastructures and associated health outcomes (Hartig et al., 2007, Lafortezza et al., 2009). Few studies have examined the consequences of environmental change, i.e., changes in water/air quality and changes in climate, for the public utilization of psychologically restorative parks in heavily populated settlements (Cox, 2005, Scott et al., 2007).

Restorative environments are defined as places that afford visitors the opportunity to recover from stress and otherwise renew personal adaptive resources needed to meet the demands of everyday life, such as the ability to focus attention (Kaplan & Kaplan, 1989). Habitation of densely populated urban centers exerts stress on human psychological and physical resources, and the cumulative effects of exertion demands psychological restoration opportunities to avoid adverse health impacts (Hartig & Staats, 2006).

Natural environments have been demonstrated to support psychological restoration (Hartig et al., 2003, Herzog et al., 2003, Kaplan, 1995), especially ‘blue spaces’ such as riversides and the seashore (Laumann et al., 2001, White et al., 2010). These natural environments are vulnerable to local and/or global environmental changes, including changes in air quality (e.g., photochemical smog), water quality (e.g., pollution of beaches with urban runoff or sewage), increases in ambient temperatures, extreme weather events, and in the case of coastal parks, sea level rise. Few urban parks have investigated or planned for vulnerabilities to potential climate change on existing infrastructures, much less the associated health effects to visitors (NPS, 2007).

Attention restoration theory (ART) posits that as one’s attention becomes fatigued their functioning declines to a point that restoration is necessary (Kaplan & Kaplan, 1989). Restorative environments must offer four factors to best facilitate restoration of attention fatigue; being away, fascination, compatibility, and coherence (Hartig et al., 1996, Kaplan et al., 1989a). Being away refers to a geographical or psychological distance from demanding tasks and the associated ability to escape from distractions. Fascination refers to a soft, or effortless, intrigue into one’s surroundings that allow a person to redirect attention from stressful demands. Compatibility is the factor that associates an individual’s needs and desires with what the environment offers. Finally, extent indicates the ability to make sense of the structure, connectedness, and scope of the environment. Natural, park environments have been shown to consistently support human health (Kuo, 2010), including preference for restorative environments (Staats, Van Gemerden, & Hartig, 2010). Because changes in environmental quality and climate conditions have been shown to affect psychological health, it is hypothesized here that day-to-day changes will also affect the perceived restorativeness of coastal parks (Bullinger, 1989, Doherty and Clayton, 2011, Hartig et al., 2007, Stokols et al., 2009). Changes in environmental quality and climate may increase distractions, decrease fascination, and reduce perceived compatibility and coherence when visiting a natural environment.

Approximately one-third of the world’s population lives in coastal regions, defined as within 100 km of the sea and an elevation of less than 50 m (UNEP, 2006). In the United States (incorporating Great Lakes region), 53% of the population lives within coastal zones. This includes ten of the largest 15 urban areas (NOAA, 2004). The site of the present study in Orange County, CA, lies within the second largest US Census-defined urban area of Los Angeles–Long Beach–Santa Ana, CA (11.8 million residents), and borders the 15th largest, San Diego, CA (2.7 million). Highly urbanized populaces have been a keen focus of environmental psychology due to everyday stressors in crowded, urban environments and constraints on access to nature (van den Berg et al., 2007). Coastal cities offer access to linear parks along the seashore; outdoor, natural settings that can be used for restoration and exercise (Giles-Corti and Donovan, 2002, Hug et al., 2009). Coastal cities have been an understudied urban environment, though they are the most visited ecosystems in the world (Pendleton, Kildow, & Rote, 2006) and among the most vulnerable to natural disasters and climate change (Adger et al., 2005, Heberger et al., 2009).

In 2008, there were 13 million visitors to the seven state beaches and parks within the Orange Coast District of California State Parks (Fig. 1). These beaches face a variety of physical environment gradients including diurnal tides, variations in air and water temperature, fog via marine layer inversions, onshore and offshore winds, and qualitative variations in local water and air resources. The 17 miles of state beach coastline has a history of water quality problems. Between January 1999 and March 2009, at least some portion of beach within one of the seven state beaches was closed, for a cumulative total of 283 days (representing 7.6% of available days). Beyond natural variations, climate change projections of rising sea levels and temperatures could have devastating consequences for these coastal parks.

A 2006 report by the California Climate Change Center (CCCC) concluded that under a Lower Warming Range (3–5.5 °F/1.9–2.8 °C) scenario, California is projected to experience 6–14 inches (15.2–35.6 cm) of sea level rise, 2–2.5 times as many heat wave days, 1.5 times more critically dry years, 25–35% increase in days conducive to ground-level ozone formation, and a 10–35% increase in large wildfire risk by 2070–2099, compared to 1961–1990 (Luers, Cayan, Franco, Hanemann, & Croes, 2006, pp. 16).

In this study we aimed to investigate the hypothesis that perceptions of psychological restorativeness are affected by gradients in measured environmental parameters and perceived quality of environmental conditions. We sought to determine if parameters associated with climate change projections will negatively affect the role these parks play in providing psychological restoration for urban populations. Through this work, we expect to contribute to a deeper understanding of the potential consequences of global climate change projections and variations in local environmental quality for mental health.

Section snippets

Location of infrastructures selected for the study

The beaches of the Orange Coast District component of the California State Parks system were selected as the study site in part because they are located in a densely populated urban region, and are described by reliable historical records of physical environmental parameters and public accessibility (Fig. 1). The average number of visitors to the beaches exceeds 1 million per month, although this is variable by season. The beaches represent a publically funded recreational resource for local

Demographic information on surveyed population

The summary of the descriptive statistics of the surveyed population is presented in Table 1. All surveys were completed between 8:15am and 7:15pm, between January 16th, 2008 and December 15th, 2008. The survey methodology provided an even distribution of participants across the three parks, weekdays/weekends, and high/low tide. Overall, the response rate was 71.8%. Of those who refused to participate, 43.7% were female, 54.1% lived in Orange County, and their average age was 42.9 years.

Discussion

Through this study, we investigated whether changes in objective and perceived environmental conditions constrained or accentuated the perceived restorativeness of coastal park environments. The gradation of climate and environmental parameters across the 75 survey dates provided a rich ecological context within the framework of localized scenarios of global climate change. Approximately one in five survey dates had ambient temperatures at least 1.6 °C above monthly average. This result allowed

Conclusions

Our results provide evidence for the psychological effects of climate change with respect to mental restoration. The results also provide a strong rationale for proactive accommodation of the projected impact of global climate change through the design of urban parks to maintain benefits to the public and prevent possible impacts on mental health.

Through this research, we tested the hypothesis that the level of perceived psychological restorativeness of coastal parks is sensitive to gradients

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the undergraduate research assistants who assisted this project: O. Ahumibe, S. Contreras, C. Gutierrez, E. Margallo, A. Sahakian, A. Seeba, A. Suh, P. Trivedi, M. Wong, J. Yea. We also thank D. Stokols, S. Reich, R. Raghavan, and the three reviewers for helpful comments on an earlier draft.

References (70)

  • I. van Kamp et al.

    Urban environmental quality and human well-being: Towards a conceptual framework and demarcation of concepts; a literature study

    Landscape and Urban Planning

    (2003)
  • S. Kaplan

    The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework

    Journal of Environmental Psychology

    (1995)
  • D. Karmanov et al.

    Assessing the restorative potential of contemporary urban environment(s): Beyond the nature versus urban dichotomy

    Landscape and Urban Planning

    (2008)
  • R. Lafortezza et al.

    Benefits and well-being perceived by people visiting green spaces in periods of heat stress

    Urban Forestry & Urban Greening

    (2009)
  • K. Laumann et al.

    Rating scale measures of restorative components of environments

    Journal of Environmental Psychology

    (2001)
  • E. Leslie et al.

    Perceived and objectively measured greenness of neighbourhoods: Are they measuring the same thing?

    Landscape and Urban Planning

    (2010)
  • B.-J. Park et al.

    Relationship between psychological responses and physical environments in forest settings

    Landscape and Urban Planning

    (2011)
  • D. Scott et al.

    Implications of climate and environmental change for nature-based tourism in the Canadian Rocky Mountains: A case study of Waterton Lakes National Park

    Tourism Management

    (2007)
  • A. Steinwender et al.

    Objective versus subjective assessments of environmental quality of standing and running waters in a large city

    Landscape and Urban Planning

    (2008)
  • M.D. Velarde et al.

    Health effects of viewing landscapes – Landscape types in environmental psychology

    Urban Forestry & Urban Greening

    (2007)
  • M. White et al.

    Blue space: The importance of water for preference, affect and restorativeness ratings of natural and built scenes

    Journal of Environmental Psychology

    (2010)
  • G. Winkel et al.

    An ecological perspective on theory, methods, and analysis in environmental psychology: Advances and challenges

    Journal of Environmental Psychology

    (2009)
  • W.N. Adger et al.

    Social-ecological resilience to coastal disasters

    Science

    (2005)
  • AIRNOW
  • S. Bell et al.

    Greenspace and quality of life: A critical review

  • A.E. van den Berg et al.

    Preference for nature in urbanized societies: Stress, restoration, and the pursuit of sustainability

    Journal of Social Issues

    (2007)
  • A.B. Boehm et al.

    Decadal and shorter period variability of surf zone water quality at Huntington Beach, California

    Environmental Science & Technology

    (2002)
  • J. Briere et al.

    Summer in the city: Urban weather conditions and psychiatric emergency-room visits

    Journal of Abnormal Psychology

    (1983)
  • CDPH
  • S. Cohen et al.

    A global measure of perceived stress

    Journal of Health and Social Behavior

    (1983)
  • P.Y. Collins et al.

    Grand challenges in global mental health

    Nature

    (2011)
  • M. Cox

    Modelling the impacts of coastal condition on social and health aspects of human wellbeing: Implications for coastal management

  • T.J. Doherty et al.

    The psychological impacts of global climate change

    American Psychologist

    (2011)
  • R.H. Dwight et al.

    Association of urban runoff with coastal water quality in Orange County, California

    Water Environment Research

    (2002)
  • T. Hartig et al.
  • Cited by (79)

    • Contact with marine blue spaces for human health and well-being

      2023, Oceans and Human Health: Opportunities and Impacts
    • ‘Blue’ coasts: Unravelling the perceived restorativeness of coastal environments and the influence of their components

      2022, Landscape and Urban Planning
      Citation Excerpt :

      More specifically, additional insights should be gathered about how multi-sensorial and immersive experiences (e.g. virtual or real) impact on psycho-physiological measures of restoration (e.g. cognitive task performance or psycho-physiological measurements), and how the effects may differ among populations with a different demographic and socio-economic background and state mental health (Browning et al., 2021; Wooller et al., 2016). Additionally, spatiotemporal risk factors should be identified, including those related to climate and weather (e.g. time of the year), crowding and desertedness, and litter (Hipp & Ogunseitan, 2011; White et al., 2014; Wyles et al., 2016). Architectural designs already incorporate many preferred natural and urban components (e.g. street greenery), but it seems that more research is necessary to reveal their actual psychological benefits (e.g. Bell et al., 2020; van den Bogerd et al., 2021).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    1

    Tel.: +1 949 824 2056.

    View full text