IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i2p422-d476290.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Perceived Restorativeness of Differently Managed Forests and Its Association with Forest Qualities and Individual Variables: A Field Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Jenni Simkin

    (Natural Resources Institute Finland, Latokartanonkaari 9, 00790 Helsinki, Finland
    Department of Forest Sciences, University of Helsinki, Latokartanonkaari 7, 000790 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Ann Ojala

    (Natural Resources Institute Finland, Latokartanonkaari 9, 00790 Helsinki, Finland)

  • Liisa Tyrväinen

    (Natural Resources Institute Finland, Latokartanonkaari 9, 00790 Helsinki, Finland)

Abstract

Despite increasing research knowledge about the positive well-being effects forests have on citizens, it is still unclear how the quality of forests and individual variables effect the well-being. This research investigated (1) the differences in restorative experiences (components being away, fascination, compatibility and extent, measured by perceived restorativeness (PRS)), and (2) how people evaluate forest qualities in four differently managed forests. Furthermore, this research studied (3) which individual variables (4) as well as forest qualities, explain the overall restorative experience (PRS-score from all components). Altogether, 66 volunteers were taken in small groups to each of the four forest sites once, after their day at work. The participants viewed the forests for 15 min and then walked inside the forests for 30 min. Their perceived restorativeness and perceptions about forest qualities were measured on-site after each visit. Most of the components of PRS differed between the three older forests compared to the young forest. The three older forests also had more preferred qualities, compared to the young commercial forest. From the individual variables, the nature relatedness positively explained the restorative experiences (PRS-score) in old-growth forest and in mature commercial forest. Beauty was the most important quality that explained PRS-score in all forests. Biodiversity positively explained the PRS-score, except in urban recreation forest. However, not all forest qualities need to be present in order to reach high perceived restorativeness and both a pristine or managed old forest can have high restorative values. Also, decaying wood does not seem to diminish forests’ restorative values, but there may be individual differences in its acceptance. Therefore, a greater attention to the overall versatility is needed when managing the forest used for outdooring.

Suggested Citation

  • Jenni Simkin & Ann Ojala & Liisa Tyrväinen, 2021. "The Perceived Restorativeness of Differently Managed Forests and Its Association with Forest Qualities and Individual Variables: A Field Experiment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-26, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:2:p:422-:d:476290
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/2/422/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/2/422/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Norimasa Takayama & Akio Fujiwara & Haruo Saito & Masahiro Horiuchi, 2017. "Management Effectiveness of a Secondary Coniferous Forest for Landscape Appreciation and Psychological Restoration," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-22, July.
    2. Melissa R. Marselle & Katherine N. Irvine & Altea Lorenzo-Arribas & Sara L. Warber, 2014. "Moving beyond Green: Exploring the Relationship of Environment Type and Indicators of Perceived Environmental Quality on Emotional Well-Being following Group Walks," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-25, December.
    3. Anna Adevi & Patrik Grahn, 2012. "Preferences for Landscapes: A Matter of Cultural Determinants or Innate Reflexes that Point to Our Evolutionary Background?," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 27-49.
    4. David Edwards & Marion Jay & Franck S Jensen & Beatriz Lucas & Mariella Marzano & Claire C. Montagné-Huck & Andrew Peace & Gerhard Weiss, 2012. "Public preferences across europe for different forest stand types as site for recreation," Post-Print hal-02647764, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fiona Nevzati & Martti Veldi & Mart Külvik & Simon Bell, 2023. "Analysis of Landscape Character Assessment and Cultural Ecosystem Services Evaluation Frameworks for Peri-Urban Landscape Planning: A Case Study of Harku Municipality, Estonia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-19, September.
    2. Congying An & Jinglan Liu & Qiaohui Liu & Yuqi Liu & Xiaoli Fan & Yishen Hu, 2022. "How Perceived Sensory Dimensions of Forest Park Are Associated with Stress Restoration in Beijing?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(2), pages 1-17, January.
    3. Sujin Park & Eunsoo Kim & Geonwoo Kim & Soojin Kim & Yeji Choi & Domyung Paek, 2022. "What Activities in Forests Are Beneficial for Human Health? A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-29, February.
    4. Don-Gak Lee & Jin-Gun Kim & Bum-Jin Park & Won Sop Shin, 2022. "Effect of Forest Users’ Stress on Perceived Restorativeness, Forest Recreation Motivation, and Mental Well-Being during COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-19, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Oksana Pelyukh & Alessandro Paletto & Lyudmyla Zahvoyska, 2019. "People's attitudes towards deadwood in forest: evidence from the Ukrainian Carpathians," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 65(5), pages 171-182.
    2. Phi-Yen Nguyen & Thomas Astell-Burt & Hania Rahimi-Ardabili & Xiaoqi Feng, 2021. "Green Space Quality and Health: A Systematic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-38, October.
    3. Qiaohui Liu & Xiaoping Wang & Jinglan Liu & Guolin Zhang & Congying An & Yuqi Liu & Xiaoli Fan & Yishen Hu & Heng Zhang, 2021. "The Relationship between the Restorative Perception of the Environment and the Physiological and Psychological Effects of Different Types of Forests on University Students," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-16, November.
    4. van Zanten, Boris T. & Zasada, Ingo & Koetse, Mark J. & Ungaro, Fabrizio & Häfner, Kati & Verburg, Peter H., 2016. "A comparative approach to assess the contribution of landscape features to aesthetic and recreational values in agricultural landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 87-98.
    5. Susanne Neuner & Thomas Knoke, 2017. "Economic consequences of altered survival of mixed or pure Norway spruce under a dryer and warmer climate," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 519-531, February.
    6. Agimass, Fitalew & Lundhede, Thomas & Panduro, Toke Emil & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2018. "The choice of forest site for recreation: A revealed preference analysis using spatial data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 445-454.
    7. Raymond, Christopher M. & Kenter, Jasper O. & Plieninger, Tobias & Turner, Nancy J. & Alexander, Karen A., 2014. "Comparing instrumental and deliberative paradigms underpinning the assessment of social values for cultural ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 145-156.
    8. Xiang Huang & Hao Jiang & Ming Lv, 2023. "Unconscious Processing of Greenery in the Tourism Context: A Breaking Continuous Flash Suppression Experiment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-12, January.
    9. Duesberg, Stefanie & Ní Dhubháin, Áine, 2019. "Forest intensification in Ireland: Developing an approximation of social acceptability," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 368-386.
    10. Pretzsch, Hans, 2022. "Facilitation and competition reduction in tree species mixtures in Central Europe: Consequences for growth modeling and forest management," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 464(C).
    11. Sanaz Memari & Mahdieh Pazhouhanfar & Patrik Grahn, 2021. "Perceived Sensory Dimensions of Green Areas: An Experimental Study on Stress Recovery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-19, May.
    12. Ernest Bielinis & Jenni Simkin & Pasi Puttonen & Liisa Tyrväinen, 2020. "Effect of Viewing Video Representation of the Urban Environment and Forest Environment on Mood and Level of Procrastination," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-23, July.
    13. Yonko Dodev & Miglena Zhiyanski & Maria Glushkova & Bilyana Borisova & Lidiya Semerdzhieva & Ivo Ihtimanski & Stelian Dimitrov & Stoyan Nedkov & Mariyana Nikolova & Won-Sop Shin, 2021. "An Integrated Approach to Assess the Potential of Forest Areas for Therapy Services," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-30, December.
    14. Thomas Beery & K. Ingemar Jönsson & Johan Elmberg, 2015. "From Environmental Connectedness to Sustainable Futures: Topophilia and Human Affiliation with Nature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-18, July.
    15. Adison Altamirano & Carolina Gonzalez-Suhr & Caroline Marien & Germán Catalán & Alejandro Miranda & Marco Prado & Laurent Tits & Lorena Vieli & Paula Meli, 2020. "Landscape Disturbance Gradients: The Importance of the Type of Scene When Evaluating Landscape Preferences and Perceptions," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-23, September.
    16. Terkenli Theano S. & Skowronek Ewa & Tucki Andrzej & Kounellis Nikolaos, 2019. "Toward understanding tourist landscape. a comparative study of locals’ and visitors’ perception in selected destinations in Poland and Greece," Quaestiones Geographicae, Sciendo, vol. 38(3), pages 81-93, September.
    17. Tanner, Michael K. & Moity, Nicolas & Costa, Matthew T. & Marin Jarrin, Jose R. & Aburto-Oropeza, Octavio & Salinas-de-León, Pelayo, 2019. "Mangroves in the Galapagos: Ecosystem services and their valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 12-24.
    18. Abbas Smiley & William Ramos & Layne Elliott & Stephen Wolter, 2020. "Comparing the Trail Users with Trail Non-Users on Physical Activity, Sleep, Mood and Well-Being Index," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-13, August.
    19. Ciesielski, Mariusz & Stereńczak, Krzysztof, 2021. "Using Flickr data and selected environmental characteristics to analyse the temporal and spatial distribution of activities in forest areas," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    20. Elizabeth W. Holt & Quinn K. Lombard & Noelle Best & Sara Smiley-Smith & John E. Quinn, 2019. "Active and Passive Use of Green Space, Health, and Well-Being amongst University Students," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-13, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:2:p:422-:d:476290. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.