Parks, greenspaces and other natural environments are increasingly recognised as important resources for our mental wellbeing. But simply having a park nearby does not necessarily mean that everyone experiences the same benefits from it.
As part of the Abundance Project, we wanted to explore this question in more detail. In particular, we were interested in whether people from different ethnic backgrounds perceive and experience their local environments differently, whether these differences are associated with mental wellbeing and whether people use greenspaces for different reasons.
To investigate this, we conducted a UK-wide survey with an ethnically diverse sample of adults. Participants answered questions about their mental wellbeing, how often they visited natural environments, their reasons for using greenspaces and how they viewed different aspects of their local environment. These included familiar environmental conditions such as air and water quality, greenspace availability, noise, waste and recycling, alongside less frequently measured issues such as access to environmental information, preparedness for environmental problems and confidence in local environmental responses.
How people experience their environment matters
One of the clearest findings was that people’s perceptions of their local environment were strongly and consistently associated with their wellbeing. Respondents who viewed their local environment more positively tended to report better mental wellbeing, life satisfaction, happiness and a stronger sense that the things they did in life were worthwhile. This was true both for perceptions of environmental quality and everyday living conditions and for perceptions of environmental governance and preparedness.
These relationships were considerably more consistent than those we found for area-level income or employment deprivation. Nature exposure was also positively associated with wellbeing, but how people evaluated their wider local environment explained substantially more variation in the statistical models.
This does not mean that deprivation or the physical provision of greenspace is unimportant. Instead, it suggests that standard indicators tell us only part of the story. Two neighbourhoods may contain apparently similar environmental resources, yet residents may experience them very differently depending on issues such as quality, safety, maintenance, accessibility, information and confidence in how environmental problems are dealt with.
We also found important differences between ethnic groups in these environmental perceptions. For example, White respondents tended to rate some environmental amenities, including greenspace availability, water quality and noise conditions, relatively positively. Black respondents showed comparatively stronger confidence in aspects of local environmental governance and responsiveness. East Asian and South Asian respondents showed different patterns again, reinforcing the importance of avoiding assumptions that all minoritised ethnic communities experience their environments in the same way.
Greenspaces do different jobs for different communities
A second important finding concerned why people use greenspaces.
Discussions about the health benefits of greenspace often emphasise individual activities such as walking, relaxation or spending quiet time in nature. Our results suggest a much broader range of functions. For example, compared with White respondents, Black respondents were more likely to report using greenspaces to meet new people, enjoy entertainment, participate in community activities and support other people. South Asian respondents were also more likely to report using greenspaces to meet new people. Relaxation and unwinding, meanwhile, was particularly strongly associated with White respondents.
This matters because it changes how we think about what a successful greenspace looks like. A space designed primarily around quiet recreation may work well for some users while providing fewer opportunities for people who value family activities, social interaction, community participation or collective events.
The implication is that there is unlikely to be a single pathway through which nature supports wellbeing. Greenspaces can provide places for restoration and contact with nature, but they can also provide important social infrastructure: somewhere to meet, gather, participate, celebrate and support others.
What does this mean for Abundance?
These findings reinforce one of the broader ideas emerging through the Abundance Project: access should not be understood simply as physical proximity.
Counting parks, measuring the distance to them or recording how frequently people visit remains useful. But these measures do not necessarily tell us whether people feel welcome there, whether the space supports the activities that matter to them or whether they regard their wider neighbourhood environment as healthy and supportive.
For organisations seeking to improve access to natural environments, this means thinking more broadly about environmental quality and inclusion. Practical issues such as seating, toilets, lighting, maintenance, accessible paths and spaces suitable for group activities can affect who is able to use a place and what they are able to do there. Safety, representation, cultural relevance and opportunities for social and community activities may be equally important.
It also underlines the value of working directly with communities. If the benefits of environmental resources depend partly on how people perceive and use them, then residents themselves need to have a meaningful role in defining what an accessible, welcoming and wellbeing-supporting environment looks like.
Where next?
The survey gives us a national picture, but it also raises questions that quantitative data alone cannot answer. Why do particular environmental features matter to different communities? What makes one space feel welcoming and another exclusionary? And how do experiences of environmental quality, social connection and local institutions combine to influence wellbeing?
These questions connect directly with the wider work of Abundance, including the community-led research and co-design taking place across the project. Bringing these different strands together will help us move from identifying inequalities towards understanding the practical changes that can make natural and cultural environments more useful, inclusive and meaningful to the communities they are intended to serve.
Kerry A Brown