IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v14y2025i1p203-d1570939.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tool Used to Assess Co-Benefits of Nature-Based Solutions in Urban Ecosystems for Human Wellbeing: Second Validation via Measurement Application

Author

Listed:
  • Karmele Herranz-Pascual

    (TECNALIA-Basque Research and Technology Alliance, Parque Científico y Tecnológico de Bizkaia, Astondo Bidea, Edificio 700, 48160 Derio, Spain
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Paula Anchustegui

    (Faculty of Psychology, University of Barcelona, Pg. de la Vall d’Hebron, 171, Horta-Guinardó, 08035 Barcelona, Spain
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Carolina Cantergiani

    (TECNALIA-Basque Research and Technology Alliance, Parque Científico y Tecnológico de Bizkaia, Astondo Bidea, Edificio 700, 48160 Derio, Spain)

  • Ioseba Iraurgi

    (Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Deusto, 48007 Bilbao, Spain)

Abstract

In recent years, nature-based solutions have been used in urban regeneration interventions to improve the adaptation and resilience of these places, contributing to improved environmental quality and cultural ecosystem functions, including people’s physiological, social, and mental health and wellbeing. However, when it comes to the assessment of psychological wellbeing and social benefits (psychosocial co-benefits), the existing evidence is still limited. To contribute to the advancement of knowledge on nature’s contribution to people in relation to this type of benefit, it is necessary for us to develop and test assessment tools to contribute to the development of a robust nature-based solutions monitoring framework. In this paper, the second phase of the validation of a psychosocial co-benefit assessment tool for nature-based urban interventions is presented. This tool is structured around two dimensions: the perceived health and wellbeing and social co-benefits. The first validation was carried out with experts using the Delphi method. The second validation presented in this paper was based on a sample of users, evaluating a set of eight urban spaces at different levels of naturalisation and openness. The results indicate that the tool is sensitive to the differences in naturalisation and openness in the public urban places analysed. The most relevant contextual variables to explain the psychosocial co-benefits are openness, the surfaces covered by tree branches, the water surface area, and naturalisation.

Suggested Citation

  • Karmele Herranz-Pascual & Paula Anchustegui & Carolina Cantergiani & Ioseba Iraurgi, 2025. "Tool Used to Assess Co-Benefits of Nature-Based Solutions in Urban Ecosystems for Human Wellbeing: Second Validation via Measurement Application," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-18, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:1:p:203-:d:1570939
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/1/203/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/1/203/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ling Qiu & Anders Busse Nielsen, 2015. "Are Perceived Sensory Dimensions a Reliable Tool for Urban Green Space Assessment and Planning?," Landscape Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(7), pages 834-854, October.
    2. Karmele Herranz-Pascual & Igone Garcia-Pérez & Saioa Zorita & Carolina García-Madruga & Carolina Cantergiani & Julita Skodra & Ioseba Iraurgi, 2023. "A Proposal of a Tool to Assess Psychosocial Benefits of Nature-Based Interventions for Sustainable Built Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-14, May.
    3. J. Pretty & J. Peacock & R. Hine & M. Sellens & N. South & M. Griffin, 2007. "Green exercise in the UK countryside: Effects on health and psychological well-being, and implications for policy and planning," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(2), pages 211-231.
    4. Kirsten McEwan & Miles Richardson & David Sheffield & Fiona J. Ferguson & Paul Brindley, 2019. "A Smartphone App for Improving Mental Health through Connecting with Urban Nature," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-15, September.
    5. Matteo Giusti & Karl Samuelsson, 2020. "The regenerative compatibility: A synergy between healthy ecosystems, environmental attitudes, and restorative experiences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Johannes Machiel Dreyer & Noor Azlin Yahya & Nik Azyyati Abd Kadir, 2019. "Visitor’s perceptions of the Forest Research Institute of Malaysia (FRIM) as an urban open space for environmental learning: results of a qualitative study," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1933-1945, August.
    2. Jiang, Wenhao & Stickley, Andrew & Ueda, Michiko, 2021. "Green space and suicide mortality in Japan: An ecological study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 282(C).
    3. Holli-Anne Passmore & Ying Yang & Sarena Sabine, 2022. "An Extended Replication Study of the Well-Being Intervention, the Noticing Nature Intervention (NNI)," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 23(6), pages 2663-2683, August.
    4. Somajita Paul & Harini Nagendra, 2017. "Factors Influencing Perceptions and Use of Urban Nature: Surveys of Park Visitors in Delhi," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-23, April.
    5. Dennis, Matthew & James, Philip, 2017. "Ecosystem services of collectively managed urban gardens: Exploring factors affecting synergies and trade-offs at the site level," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 17-26.
    6. Siqi Lai & Brian Deal, 2022. "Parks, Green Space, and Happiness: A Spatially Specific Sentiment Analysis Using Microblogs in Shanghai, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-18, December.
    7. Gina Sands & Holly Blake & Tim Carter & Helen Spiby, 2023. "Nature-Based Interventions in the UK: A Mixed Methods Study Exploring Green Prescribing for Promoting the Mental Wellbeing of Young Pregnant Women," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(20), pages 1-14, October.
    8. Mehran, Javaneh & Olya, Hossein GT., 2020. "Canal boat tourism: Application of complexity theory," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    9. Elizabeth A. Richards & Stephanie Woodcox, 2021. "Barriers and Motivators to Physical Activity Prior to Starting a Community-Based Walking Program," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-11, October.
    10. Tian Gao & Rui Song & Ling Zhu & Ling Qiu, 2019. "What Characteristics of Urban Green Spaces and Recreational Activities Do Self-Reported Stressed Individuals Like? A Case Study of Baoji, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-16, April.
    11. Liz O’Brien, 2018. "Engaging with and Shaping Nature: A Nature-Based Intervention for Those with Mental Health and Behavioural Problems at the Westonbirt Arboretum in England," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-19, October.
    12. Kenny, Daniel C. & Costanza, Robert & Dowsley, Tom & Jackson, Nichelle & Josol, Jairus & Kubiszewski, Ida & Narulla, Harkiran & Sese, Saioa & Sutanto, Anna & Thompson, Jonathan, 2019. "Australia's Genuine Progress Indicator Revisited (1962–2013)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 1-10.
    13. Jia Tao & Meng Yang & Jing Wu, 2022. "Coupling Coordination Evaluation of Lakefront Landscape Spatial Quality and Public Sentiment," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-29, June.
    14. Elizabeth P.D. Koselka & Lucy C. Weidner & Arseniy Minasov & Marc G. Berman & William R. Leonard & Marianne V. Santoso & Junia N. de Brito & Zachary C. Pope & Mark A. Pereira & Teresa H. Horton, 2019. "Walking Green: Developing an Evidence Base for Nature Prescriptions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-18, November.
    15. Nuno Loureiro & Luís Calmeiro & Adilson Marques & Diego Gomez-Baya & Margarida Gaspar de Matos, 2021. "The Role of Blue and Green Exercise in Planetary Health and Well-Being," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-12, September.
    16. Junia N. de Brito & Zachary C. Pope & Nathan R. Mitchell & Ingrid E. Schneider & Jean M. Larson & Teresa H. Horton & Mark A. Pereira, 2019. "Changes in Psychological and Cognitive Outcomes after Green versus Suburban Walking: A Pilot Crossover Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-12, August.
    17. 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.
    18. Christopher Tirri & Hunter Swanson & Mahbubur Meenar, 2021. "Finding the “Heart” in the Green: Conducting a Bibliometric Analysis to Emphasize the Need for Connecting Emotions with Biophilic Urban Planning," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-19, September.
    19. Stella Apostolaki & Ebun Akinsete & Phoebe Koundouri & Panagiotis Samartzis, 2019. "Freshwater: The importance of freshwater for providing ecosystem services," DEOS Working Papers 1905, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    20. Jongwook Tae & Daeyoung Jeong & Jinhyung Chon, 2022. "How Can Apartment-Complex Landscaping Space Improve Residents’ Psychological Well-Being?: The Case of the Capital Region in South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-15, August.

    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:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:1:p:203-:d:1570939. 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.