natural landscape, psychological well‐being and mental health

6
This article was downloaded by: [Moskow State Univ Bibliote] On: 17 December 2013, At: 04:51 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Landscape Research Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/clar20 Natural landscape, psychological wellbeing and mental health William LI. ParryJones a a Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry , University of Glasgow, Royal Hospital for Sick Children , Yorkhill, Glasgow, G3 8SJ Published online: 24 Feb 2007. To cite this article: William LI. ParryJones (1990) Natural landscape, psychological wellbeing and mental health, Landscape Research, 15:2, 7-11, DOI: 10.1080/01426399008706309 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01426399008706309 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Upload: william-li

Post on 20-Dec-2016

213 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

This article was downloaded by: [Moskow State Univ Bibliote]On: 17 December 2013, At: 04:51Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: MortimerHouse, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Landscape ResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/clar20

Natural landscape, psychological well‐being andmental healthWilliam LI. Parry‐Jones a

a Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry , University of Glasgow, Royal Hospitalfor Sick Children , Yorkhill, Glasgow, G3 8SJPublished online: 24 Feb 2007.

To cite this article: William LI. Parry‐Jones (1990) Natural landscape, psychological well‐being and mental health,Landscape Research, 15:2, 7-11, DOI: 10.1080/01426399008706309

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01426399008706309

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose ofthe Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be reliedupon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shallnot be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and otherliabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Natural landscape, psychological well-beingand mental health

William LI. Parry-Jones

There is a deeply founded notion inwestern society that contact withnature affords humans a range ofpersonal, social and health-givingbenefits, and reference is frequentlymade to the restorative qualities ofnatural settings in which people can"recover their capacity to fend offdistraction and coercion" (S.Kaplan, 1983). There is also apopular assumption that urban lifeis abnormal, unnatural andinherently more stressful than ruralexistence, inevitably generatingproblems for city dwellers,especially children and families.The relationship between peopleand the natural environment isextremely complex and face-valueconnections about the impact ofnature on psychological well-beingmay be misleading and easilyoverestimated. Nevertheless, theactivities of large sections of thepopulation make it clear that thenatural environment does matter,that people appreciate it, and that,in various ways, the environmentcan contribute to enhanced well-being.

The current acceleration of interestin the development andconservation of natural settings isconcerned closely with the lives ofurban dwellers. This is notsurprising in view of the rapid shiftthat has taken place from rural tourban life, during the twentiethcentury, throughout the world. Allthe pointers are towards an urbanfuture, in cities that will beincreasingly unfamiliar to westerneyes, because they have no clearurban-rural boundaries and noidentifiable centre. In manyrespects, the concept of an "innercity" is already outmoded.

In psychiatry, there is a substantialbody of evidence that thecausation, exacerbation andperpetuation of certain mentaldisorders can be influenced byenvironmental factors. In thiscontext, the term "environment" isused to refer to a range of factors,including the structure andrelationships of the family, thehome situation, the work place, theneighbourhood setting and featuresof the wider culture. Much of the

research in this field has beenconcerned with the impact ofurbanization and the man-madeenvironment, with the possibility ofidentifying a discrete urban riskfactor for mental health. Thenatural landscape, however, hasreceived minimal attention and israrely referred to in psychiatricresearch literature or textbooks, aseither a pathogenic or anameliorating factor.

A wide range of environmentalagents can affect human healthincluding personal and occupationalfactors as well as the globalenvironment, land, water and air.For the purposes of this review, theterm "natural" environment is usedto delineate as' clearly as possiblethe boundaries of the study. Theprincipal focus of attention is on thenatural or soft landscape whichincludes designed landscapes, suchas gardens and parks, cemeteries,amenity planning, residentiallandscapes and transport corridors,agricultural land, and wildernessareas such as moorland andmountainside.

The concept of mental health, likethat of health itself, is notoriouslydifficult to define precisely(Hanslukwa, 1985). There tendsto be confusion between definitionsthat are based on the absence ofidentifiable psychiatric disorder andthose concerned with positivemental health. The latter approachis preferable and on this basismental health may be defined as"Psychologic well-being oradequate adjustment, particularlyas such adjustment conforms to thecommunity-accepted standards ofhuman relations" (Campbell,1989). This particular definitionincludes the followingcharacteristics of mental health,"reasonable independence; self-reliance; self-direction; ability to doa job; ability to take responsibilityand make needed efforts; reliability;persistence; ability to get along withothers and work with others; co-operation; ability to work underauthority, rules and difficulties;ability to show friendliness andlove; ability to give and take;tolerance of others and of

frustrations; ability to contribute asense of humour; a devotionbeyond oneself; ability to find arecreation, as in hobbies".Although this list of qualitiesappears comprehensive, itsemphasis on conformity withcultural requirements is at theexpense of intrapsychic processesconcerned, for example, withemotional and sexual adjustment.In this respect, however, normsbecome almost impossible todefine. The term "psychologicalwell-being" itself has no precisemedical or psychological meaning,but it is used in this review becauseit is referred to so frequently in thelandscape literature. The conceptis vague, multidimensional anddifficult to operationalise, but whenattempts are made to measure it,reliance is placed on indices ofbehavioural competence (health,contact with friends, neighboursand family and activityparticipation) and perceived qualityof life (including, for example,satisfaction with family, friends andwith the use of time). A largenumber of scales and indices ofmental health status and quality oflife have been constructed (Brooks,1986) and are widely used,especially in health economicevaluation.

The aims of this review are; toassemble and review systematicallythe literature concerned withpeople's relationship with natureand natural settings; to give specialconsideration to the effects of theexperience of the natural landscapeon psychological well-being andmental health; to consider thetherapeutic use of the naturallandscape; to identify gaps incurrent understanding and tosuggest promising lines for futurelandscape and mental healthrelated research.

The importance of thenatural landscapeEvidence concerning the valuesattached to the natural landscapeby the public is mainly indirect,with a small but growing body ofempirically based data. The

AbstractThe design, development,conservation and main-tenance of urban and ruralpublic open spaces presentsan increasingly difficultchallenge, in terms ofdecisions about their mosteffective use. If thepsychological and mentalhealth-related aspects of theproperties of the naturallandscape are to be takeninto consideration, there is aneed for more reliable,scientifically based,information, which is readilyavailable. This paperprovides a brief multi-disciplinary review ofresearch and theory.

Note on theAuthorWilliam LJ. Parry-Jones isProfessor of Child andAdolescent Psychiatry in theUniversity of Glasgow. Hehas had a longstandinginterest in the historicaldimension of the sub-specialty and, more recently,attention has been given tothe problems of urban and"inner city" Hfe. A n interestin the importance oflandscaping has beenenhanced by the particularhousing and environmentalproblems presented inGlasgow. Department ofChild and AdolescentPsychiatry, University ofGlasgow, Royal Hospital forSick Children, Yorkhill,Glasgow, G3 8SJ.

Landscape Research 15(2) 1990 7-11 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

04:

51 1

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

history of the creation and use ofnatural parklands, open spaces andrecreational areas, from thenineteenth century onwards,provides the most tangible evidenceof the importance of the naturalenvironment in the lives of manypeople. In recent years this hasbeen confirmed by a revival ofinterest in the natural features ofthe urban landscape, by widespreadtree-planting programmes and bythe growing commitment to natureconservation. This "back to naturemovement" reflects world-wideconcern for the natural landscapeas well as for recreational activities,aesthetic purposes, the educationaland inspirational values of wildlife,and because it has been thoughtthat, in a more general sense,urban nature was vital for the well-being of individuals and the generalpublic. Numerous studies haveindicated that nature in the city ishighly valued (Herzog 1984) andthat there is growing pressure forthe "greening" of the city and forurban nature conservation (Laurie,1979). Further evidence is provedby the widespread interest ingardening, expenditure onrecreation-related and outdoorequipment and the growth of theoutdoor leisure industry. For aneconomic viewpoint there is clearevidence that higher values areattached to well-landscapedproperties (Gold, 1977).Nevertheless, there has been limitedresearch into the benefits andpsychological functions of parksand other open spaces in cities andthe behaviours associated withthem. The urban environment andthe needs of urban dwellers providea recurring theme, but it isimportant not to overlook the needsand problems of rural inhabitants.Whilst it is evident that theagricultural countryside is widelyappreciated, even by infrequentvisitors (Harrison et al., 1986 and1987), there appears to be acomplete dearth of informationabout the relationship betweencountry dwellers and the naturalenvironment.

There is increasing empiricalevidence that natural settings arewidely seen as a desirable resource,to be used and enjoyed, eitheractively or passively. The relevantliterature has been reviewedcomprehensively by Knopf (1987).Numerous studies of visualpreference have shown that naturalscenes are preferred over builtscenes (R. Kaplan, 1983;

Wohlwill, 1976) and that, in urbanareas, vegetation is highlydesirable. Research on landscapepreferences and the values implicitin choices indicate that preferredenvironments are those whichpermit "involvement" and thoseseen as "making sense" (R.Kaplan, 1983).

Psychological aspects ofthe people-naturerelationshipRelatively little is known about thepsychological determinants ofaesthetic preferences for landscapesand the other attributes of thenatural environment that appeal topeople. There is, however, aslowly developing body of research,generating interesting theories. Themost important contributions areemerging from the discipline ofenvironmental psychology, whichbegan to be established in the1950s. This branch ofpsychology is concerned with theinter-relationship between behaviourand both the built and naturalenvironments (Craik, 1986;Williams, 1987). The scope ofrecent developments in this field iscovered comprehensively in the •Handbook of EnvironmentalPsychology (Slokols and Altman,1987). In addition, researchactivities in other disciplines arerelevant, including environmentalsociology, geography, economicsand the expanding field of theleisure-recreation sciences.Contributions from medicine,especially mental health disciplines,have been very limited.

Substantial research attention hasbeen given to landscapepreferences and their determinants.In this context, there is a broaddivide of opinion between thoseresearchers who adopt a culturalperspective and those who take anevolutionary view. The formerregard preference as a learnedresponse to natural stimuli,influenced by previous personalexperience and by cultural effects.Although there has been progressin understanding the social anddemographic components oflandscape preference (Lyons,1983), and it is clear that age, sexand personality can influencechoices, some aspects are stillrelatively unexplored, particularlychildren's landscape preferences(Zube et al., 1983). The opposingevolutionary perspective is basedon the view that preference for

nature is an innate, biologicallyheritable response and thatattributes that appeal to humansresemble features of natural settingswhich had an evolutionarysignificance, such as the provisionof a vantage point or refuge (S.Kaplan, 1987).

Whilst the content of natural scenesmay appear to be highly significantin shaping preference, morefundamental perceptual differencesbetween natural and man-madeenvironments may be in operation.Wohlwill (1983) has suggested, forexample, that natural environmentis characterized by irregular lines,curvilinear and not rectilinearedges, gradations of shape andcolour and'by irregular, roughtextures. These are interestingspeculations, but there are obviouscontradictions to the theory in, forexample, the importance attachedto the stark outlines of trees andthe smoothness of lawns (R.Kaplan 1984). An influential•alternative view is based on thetheory that the values attached tonature are the product of attributesthat elicit particular psychologicalprocesses. Kaplan and Talbot(1983) have drawn attention tothe way in which natural scenesattract what they term "effortlessattention" and "fascination", andencourage contemplation. Theyhave also emphasized theimportance of the extent to whichscenes are recognizably coherent,giving a sense of order andrelatedness at both perceptual andconceptual levels. Not only is itimportant to be able to "put piecestogether into a meaningful whole,"but there is also the process of"encompassing the imagined aswell as the scene", giving the senseof being in another world. Thisextension of the idea of coherenceraises the concept of mystery, asanother determinant ofenvironmental preference (S.Kaplan, 1987), drawing the viewerdeeper into the scene, by, forexample, curving pathways, andcreating a desire to find out more.

Benefits of the naturalenvironmentIn a review of the purported valuesof nature, Knopf (1987) concludedthat four themes emerge in theliterature concerning the potentialbenefits of the natural environment,namely, nature restores, itfacilitates competence building, itcarries symbols that affirm the

8 Landscape Research 15(2) 1990

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

04:

51 1

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

culture or the self, and, finally, itoffers a pleasing diversion. Thesethemes provide a valuableframework for the consideration ofwork in this field.

Restoration. The concept ofrestoration, when used in thiscontext, is vague, and almostimpossible to operationalise.Further, the factors that can lead toa restorative experience are still illunderstood and a variety oftheories are put forward. Thefirmest conclusion is probably thefact that, although not contingentexclusively on a natural setting,restorative effects are enhanced bythe presence of natural features.The form and degree ofinvolvement with the environmentis thought to be important (R.Kaplan, 1973), three types beingidentified, namely, i) activeinvolvement, such as gardeningand walking in a park; ii) observinginvolvement, such as viewing fromthe window; and iii) conceptualinvolvement, such as planningoutings or activities in the garden.'Even the knowledge that there isopportunity for contact with naturemay be important (R. Kaplan,1980). The thrust of thisargument, therefore, is that peoplemay derive benefit from outdooractivities in both anticipation andrecollection, as well as from itsvicarious experience.

There is no shortage of evidence ofthe links between emotionalexperience and the environment.Seamon (1982 and 1984) hasdrawn attention to the powerfulemotional ties people have withenvironments, particular places andlandscapes and the way in whichthese can amount to a profoundsense of attachment. Landscapescan generate both negative andpositive affects and Ulrich (1979)has investigated the influence ofvisual landscapes on emotionalstates. This study showed thatstressed individuals feel significantlybetter after exposure to naturalscenes, but, in a later study, Ulrich(1981) demonstrated that theemotional benefits of natural scenescould be evoked also in unstressedindividuals. Hull and Harvey(1989) have taken this further,arguing that one of the reasonspeople visit natural parks is toexperience an emotion not found inother environments. They showedthat pleasure increased as treedensity increased and understoreyvegetation density decreased,

suggesting that the physicalcharacteristics of a park areimportant in determining affectiveresponse. Although significantbenefits of parks are concernedwith recreational and socialactivities, Ulrich and Addoms(1981) showed that people couldderive considerable psychologicalbenefit from passive involvementwith nature, relying on the visualamenity rather than on more activeaspects.

Competence building. In additionto physical health benefits, outdoorrecreational activities of all kindscan enhance a person's sense ofself-reliance and self-esteem(Gibson, 1979). These areimportant indices of psychologicalwell-being and positive mentalhealth. The beneficial effects areproduced by mastering newchallenges without negativefeedback, and having theopportunity to develop a positiveself-appreciation. Although onenormally thinks of activities such ashiking, backpacking, mountainclimbing and windsurfing inassociation with such benefits, it iscrucial not to overlook less heroicactivities, such as gardening, whichprovide a particularly effectivevehicle for self-expression (R.Kaplan, 1973). In the field ofleisure activity there is widevariation in preferences, influencedprobably by personality andprevious experience, although thisneeds further investigation.Recreation management practicesneed to be responsive to thediversity of choices sought by thepublic (Virden and Schreyer,1988). Some of the competencebuilding processes are based onsocial and group experiences,generated by the outdoor activitiesand the majority of visitors tooutdoor areas are members ofgroups (Lee, 1977). For somepeople, social transactions are moreimportant than the natural settingand can be an end in themselves.

Symbolic meaning. Here Knopf(1987) referred to the capacity ofnature to carry meanings thatconfirm people's basic values. Forexample, it can symbolize the basicvitality of life, a reassuring sense ofcontinuity, the presence of a forcegreater than human action, mysteryand spirituality.

Means of diversion. Many authorshave suggested that people turn tonature for increased diversity ofexperience. Discussion groups held

by Harrison et al (1987) haveconfirmed the intrinsic appeal ofnature and wildlife and also thequest for a variety of environmentalfeatures.

The scope for psychologicallybeneficial experience, therefore, isconsiderable and, presumably,preferences for particular types oftransaction are determined by awide range of personal, social andcultural factors. As yet, nosystematic investigation has beenundertaken into the correlationbetween preferences in the naturalenvironment in people withidentifiable psychiatric disorders orpersonality abnormalities. Theclosest approximation to such worklies in the selection and utilizationof outward-bound type activities foryoung people with antisocialconduct disorder.

Mental illness and theenvironmentThe significance of environmentalfactors in mental health has beenrecognized increasingly inpsychiatry (Esser and Deutsch,1975; Freeman, 1984a) and theconcept of "ecopsychiatry" hasbeen proposed, to describe person-environment interaction, based on asystematic model derived originallyfrom biological ecology (Wilkinsonand O'Connor, 1982). Moststudies have focused on the impactof urbanization and on spatialpatterns in urban areas of disorderssuch as schizophrenia, whichoccurs in highly mobile, low-statusareas. The view has been heldwidely that city life is associatedwith increased susceptibility to arange of social and psychologicalproblems and evidence is putforward of a clustering of socialpathology in cities. In generalterms, the stress-inducing potentialof urban environments has beenthought to be greater than that inrural settings, but there are dangersof accepting face value connectionsas if they are true and ofconstructing simplistic causativetheories. There is no firm evidencefor the direct connection betweenan inevitable urban risk factor andpsychiatric illness.

Research studies have considered awide range of social, cultural andenvironmental factors, that mayhave a bearing on people's livingand working conditions and couldbe related to mental health. Theadverse effects of high-rise

ReferencesBrogan, D. R. & James, L. D.(1980) Physical environmentcorrelates of psychosocial healthamong urban residents. AmericanJournal of CommunityPsychology, 8, 507-522.Brooks, R. G. (1986) Thedevelopment and construction oihealth status measures. Anoverview of the literature. Lund:Institute for Health Economics.Campbell, R. J. (1989)Psychiatric dictionary, 6th edition.New York: Oxford UniversityPress.

Canter, D. & Canter, S. (1979)Designing for therapeuticenvironments. A review ofresearch, Chichester: John Wiley.Craik, K. H. (1986) Psycho-logical reflections on landscape.In Landscape meanings andvalues (eds. E. C. Penning-Rowsell & D. Lowenthal), 48-64.London: Allen & Unwin.Esser, A. H. & Deutsch, R. D.(1975) Environment and mentalhealth. Man EnvironmentSystems, 5, 333-348.Freeman, H.(ed.)(1984a)Mentalhealth and the environmentLondon: Churchill Livingstone.Freeman, H. L. (1984b)Housing. In Mental health andthe-environment (ed. H. L.Freeman), 197-225. London:Churchill Livingstone.Gibson, P.M. (1979)Therapeuticaspects of wilderness programs: Acomprehensive literature review.Therapeutic Recreation Journal,13, 21-33.Gold, S. M. (1977) Socialbenefits of trees in urban environ-ments. International Journal ofEnvironmental Studies, 10, 85-90.

Hanslukwa, H. E. (1985)Measuring the health ofpopulations, indicators and inter-pretations. Social Science andMedicine, 20, 1207-1224.Hare, E. H. & Shaw, G. K.(1965) Mental health on a newhousing estate: A comparativestudy of two districts of Croydon.London: Oxford University Press.Harrison, C., Limb, M. & Burgess,J. (1986) Recreation 2000: viewsof the country from the city.Landscape Research, 11, 19-24.Harrison, C., Limb, M. & Burgess,J. (1987) Nature in the city —popular values for a living world.Journal of EnvironmentalManagement, 25, 347-362.Herzog,T.R. (1984) A cognitiveanalysis of preference for field-and-forest environments. LandscapeResearch, 9, 10-16.Hounsome, M. (1979) Bird lifein the city. In Nature in cities (ed.I. C. Laurie), 179-201.Chichester: Wiley.Hull, R. B. & Harvey, A. (1989)Exploring the emotion peopleexperience in suburban parks.Environment and Behaviour, 21,323-345.

Hunter, R. & MacAIpine, I.(1974) Psychiatry for the poor.London: Dawsons.Kaplan, R. (1973) Somepsychological benefits ofgardening. Environment andBehaviour, 5, 145-162.Kaplan, R. (1983) The role ofnature in the urban context InBehaviour and the natural

Landscape Research 15(2) 1990 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

04:

51 1

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

environment (eds. I. Altaian & J.F. Wohlwill). 127-161. NewYork: Plenum Press.Kaplan, R. (1980) Citizenparticipation in the design andevaluation of a park. Environmentand Behaviour, 5, 145-162.

Kaplan, R. (1984) Impact ofurban nature: a theoreticalanalysis. Urban Ecology, 8,189-197.

Kaplan, S. (1983) A model ofperson-environment compat-ability. Environment andBehaviour, 15, 311-332.Kaplan, S. (1987) Aesthetics,affect, and cognition: Environ-mental preference from anevolutionary perspective.Environment and Behaviour, 19,3-32.

Kaplan, S. & Talbot, J. F. (1983)Psychological benefits of awilderness experience. In Humanbehaviour and environment (Vol.6) (eds. I Altaian & J. F. Wohlwill)New York:. Plenum.Knopf, R. C. (1987) Humanbehaviour, cognition, and affect inthe natural environment. InHandbook of environmentalpsychology (eds. D. Stokols & I.Altaian), 783-825. New York:John Wiley.Laurie, I. C. (1979) Nature incities. Chichester: Wiley.Lee, R. G. (1977) Alone withothers: The paradox of privacy inwilderness. Leisure sciences, 1,3-19.Lyons, E. (1983) Demographiccorrelates of landscape preference.Environment and Behaviour, 15,487-511.Moore, E. O. (1981) A prisonenvironment's effect on health careservice demands. Journal ofEnvironmental Systems, 11, 17-34.

Parry-Jones, W. Ll. (1972) Thetrade in lunacy. London:Routledge & Kegan Paul.Parry-Jones, W. Ll. (inpreparation) Mental health ofchildren and adolescents in cities.In Menial health and deviance ininner cities (eds. W. Ll. Parry-Jones and N. Queloz). Geneva:World Health Organization.Quinton, D. (1988) Urbanismand child mental health. Journalof Child Psychology andPsychiatry, 29, 11-20.Rutter, M. (1981). The city andthe child. American Journal ofOrthopsychiatry, 51 , 610-625.Seamon, D. (1982). The pheno-menological contribution toenvironmental psychology.Journal of EnvironmentalPsychology, 2, 119-140.Seamon, D. (1984) Emotionalexperience of the environment.American Behavioural Scientist,27(6), 757-770.

Spivack, M. (1984) Institutionalsettings. An environmental designapproach. New York: HumanSciences Press.Stokols, D. & Altaian, 1. (eds.)(1987) Handbook of environ-mental psychology, 2 Vols. NewYork: John Wiley.Ulrich, R. S. (1979) Visuallandscapes and psychologicalwell-being. Landscape Research,4(1), 17-23.

Ulrich, R. S. (1981) Naturalversus urban scenes: Somepsychophysiological effects.

residential housing, for certainsections of the population,especially young families and thedisabled, has been well documented(Freeman, 1984b), but there is noevidence that moving from poorurban conditions to new housingestates reduces the rates of neurosis(Hare and Shaw, 1965).Environmental indices such aslandscaping and nearby land usehave been included rarely (Broganand James, 1980). Overall, theevidence points to the fact thaturban environmental characteristicsdo not have a primary effect onrates of psychosodal problems,although they may contribute togeneral levels of stress from whichpeople seek rest and recovery.

The mental health and deviance ofchildren in cities is an issue ofmajor importance (Rutter, 1981;Quinton, 1988; Parry-Jones, inpreparation). Life in inner cityareas does seem to increase therate of emotional and behaviouralproblems, delinquent behaviour andeducational problems in childrenand adolescents as well as theirparents, compared with that insmall towns in rural areas. Thereasons for this connection arehighly complex and appear toinvolve both environmental andindividual factors. Childhooddisorder is related to familyadversity whether the families livein rural or urban areas, but itappears that family adversities aregreater in cities.

Although most studies suggest thatthere is increased illness and stressin urban areas, severalinvestigations point to the contraryand some isolated rural areas havebeen shown to have high rates ofpsychiatric disorder (Wagenfield,1982). Rural dwellers also can bestressed by their environment, inthat, for example, there may be alack of control over natural eventslike weather and the adverse effectsof isolation. Loneliness, limitedrecreational resources and socialmonotony can be powerfulprecipitants nf disorder.

Therapeutic use of thenatural landscapeThere is a long history of the useof the natural setting for essentiallytherapeutic purposes in relation towhat may be broadly termedmental health or psychological well-being. The therapeutic claims arelargely unverified, however, and

often simply take the form ofintuitive assumptions. Forexample, in an article on bird life,Hounsome (1979) states that"Apart from their value asindicators of environmental quality,birds have a therapeutic value tothe psychological health of urbanman. More and more people arediscovering the restorative value ofa few minutes spent just watchingtheir activities and contemplatingtheir significance." Undoubtedly,for large numbers of people, natureand wild life hold an intrinsicappeal. However, the claim for arestorative effect is not supportedby any research evidence of thespecific psychiatric benefits of bird-watching.

Considerable attention has beengiven to the understanding andevaluation of therapeuticenvironments for patients inhospitals, especially for childrenand those in psychiatric hospitals(Canter and Canter, 1979). It issignificant that the emphasis hasbeen very largely on the builtenvironment and reviews of thistopic, have made little or noreference to the significance of thenatural environment The historicalpicture, however, was very differentbecause careful landscaping ofgardens and the provision ofpleasure grounds was characteristicof nineteenth century asylums(Parry-Jones, 1972; Hunter andMacalpine, 1974). Whilst therehas been continuing interest in theinternal living environment ofpsychiatric hospitals and wards(Winkel and Holahan, 1985), thereappear to have been no recentstudies of the therapeutic value topatients of natural settings.

The environment of generalhospitals has continued to receivesome attention, although recentliterature concerned with hospitalarchitecture has revealeddisappointingly little interest inlandscaping beyond the need toprovide a pleasing appearance andlow maintenance costs. Thisapplies particularly to newstructures and when publicacceptability of buildings needs tobe enhanced (Spivack, 1984).There has been a small number ofstudies indicating the impact onpatients of window views of theexternal world, particularly naturalsettings. Wilson (1972) describedthe effects of outside deprivation ona windowless intensive care unitMore recently, a study of recovery

in hospital (Ulrich, 1984) hasindicated that patients whosewindows looked out on a smallgroup of deciduous trees hadbetter post-operative recovery, withshorter stay, than a matchedcontrol group of patients, whosewindows looked out on to buildings.Also, there has been analogouswork on prison environments(Moore, 1981). Such studies givetantalizing glimpses of the potentialbenefits that might be demonstratedwith more systematic enquiry andthey have major implications forhospital planning and design(Verderber, 1986).

Directions for futureresearchResearch into the people-naturerelationship needs to proceed inmany directions but, for thepurposes of this review, only thoseconcerned broadly withpsychological well-being and mentalhealth are considered. Referencehas been made many times to thedearth of research activity and thisis particularly the case from themedical and psychiatricstandpoints. Although this may belamented, it has to be recalled thatresearch is being pursued by arange of disciplines, particularlyenvironmental psychology,economics, sociology and in theleisure sciences, althoughcommunication has been poor.This highlights the benefits inlandscape research, forinvestigations, reviews of theresearch literature and conferencesall to be interdisciplinary.

Directions for future research canbe grouped along three main lines,i) individual variation in theformation of landscape preferenceand in transaction with the naturalenvironment; ii) the influence ofdifferent landscapes on emotionalstates; and iii) the plannedtherapeutic use of the naturallandscape.

Whilst there has been considerableprogress in understanding individualdifferences in landscape preference,it has not yet extended to thesystematic exploration of theimpact of prior psychological andsocial experiences and ofpersonality features as determinantsof choice. There is scope forfurther detailed study of the valueplaced on natural environments,psychologically as well as sociallyand physically, by both healthy and

10 Landscape Research 15(2) 1990

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

04:

51 1

7 D

ecem

ber

2013

psychologically disordered people.Understanding of the kinds ofenvironment people actually seekfor relief from tension andconstraints needs to be enhanced.Although there is some empiricalevidence of the influence ofdifferent landscapes on emotionalstates, in addition to the mass ofindirect evidence that pervades theliterature, the scope for extendingthis work is considerable. Ulrich(1979) drew attention to some ofthe issues that still needconsideration, including theinfluence of age, culture andeducation, the effects of seasonalvariation and the significance ofdifferent landscape elements.

Methodology developed recently(Harrison et al., 1986) using in-depth discussion groups, based ongroup-analytic techniques, toexplore peoples attitudes andvalues, provides a promising wayof utilizing citizen participation withregard to the physical environment.

The therapeutic implications ofeven the currently limitedunderstanding of restorativeenvironments have received scantresearch interest. There issubstantial scope for majorresearch initiatives in the designand evaluation of the naturallandscape of hospitals and othertypes of residential and health carefacilities. There is an urgent needfor studies of psychiatric hospitalenvironments and, particularly newresidential developments forchronically mentally ill patients andother handicapped people in thecommunity. From the clinicalpsychiatric viewpoint, there arequestions about the extent to whichspecific psychiatric disorders, suchas anxiety, depression orschizophrenia, can be ameliorated

by exposure to particular naturalsettings and, alternatively, whetherbeneficial effects can be achievedusing man-made landscapes.

ConclusionsThe relationship between people,nature and the landscape isextremely complex and there hasbeen a lack of systematic andcomprehensive reviews of researchin this field and of its implications.There is a huge, diverse body ofliterature, comprising philosophical,literary and scientific material ofboth scholarly and popularvarieties. Some of the landscape-orientated literature tends to bediscursive and to be based onintuitive conclusions, which lackscientific validation. There oftenappears to be an uncomfortablejuxtaposition of "arts" and"science" types of research and thismay have had a restricting effecton the landscape research agenda.This review calls for participationfrom psychology, sociology,economics, geography, the leisuresciences and medicine, as well asthose disciplines usually concernedwith the environment.

A recurring theme throughout theliterature is the predicament of theurban environment and the needsof urban dwellers. These arecrucial issues which will assumeincreasing importance in the future.However, the needs and specificproblems of rural inhabitants mustnot be overlooked. In addition tothe directions for future research,which have been outlinedseparately, many implications forenvironmental planning and designemerge from this review. It isnecessary to make maximumeffective use of urban public open

space, at a time when the benefitsof the natural setting to individualsare becoming increasingly clear,despite the opposing economic andutilitarian pressures. There appearsto be a need to reappraise parkdesign and management to providemore naturalistic features andvariety. The scope for carefullyplanned landscaping of hospitalsand other places of residential careis considerable. Perhaps the mostimportant emergent theme concernsthe need for a balanced, butdiscriminating view of therestorative or therapeutic values ofnature and the natural landscape.Whatever theoretical model isemployed to explain people'srelationship with nature, there isoverwhelming empirical andindirect evidence of itspsychological importance to largesections of the population. Thereis, however, no uniformity ofbenefit, since preferences for thetype of interaction with nature varywidely according to age, sex, priorenvironmental experience, homebackground, work, culturalinfluences and personality. Naturecan have beneficial influence on theindividual, but it appears to be the.case that it is the individual's priorexperience that shapes thecharacter and impact of thatinfluence. This makes it impossibleto refer to nature's therapeuticeffects or to consider the fitbetween an individual's intrapsychicneeds and restorativeenvironmental experiences inanything but the broadest terms.For the time being, therefore, thelandscape architect is left withlimited help in making decisionsthat shape the landscape and canhave far-reaching effects on thosewho live in the environmentscreated.

Environment and Behaviour, 13,523-556.Ulrich, R.S. (1984) Viewthrougha window may influence recoveryfrom surgery. Science, 224, 420-421.Ulrich, R. S. & Addoms, D. L.(1981) Psychological andrecreational benefits of aresidential park. Journal ofLeisure Research, 13, 43-65.

Verderber, S. (1986) Dimensionsof person-window transactions inthe hospital environment.Environment and Behaviour, 18,450-466.

Virden, R. J. & Schreyer, R.(1988) Recreation specializationas an indicator of environmentalpreference. Environment andBehaviour, 20, 721-739.Wagenfield, M. O. (1982)Psychopathology in rural areas:issues and evidence. In Handbookof rural community mental health(eds. P. Keller & J. D. Murray)New York: Human SciencesPress.

Williams, S. M. (1987) Meta-psychology of the environmentJournal of EnvironmentalManagement, 24, 359-363.

Wilkinson, C. B. & O'Connor, W.A. (1982) Human ecology andmental illness. American Journalof Psychiatry. 139, 985-990.Wilson, L. M. (1972) Intensivecare delirium. The effect of outsidedeprivation in a windowless unit.Archives of Internal Medicine,130, 225-226.

Winkel, G. H. & Holahan, C. J.(1985) The environmentalpsychology of the hospital: Is thecure worse than the illness?Prevention in Human Services, 4,11-33.

Wohlwill, J. F. (1976) Environ-mental aesthetics: the environmentas a source of affect. In Humanbehaviour and the environment(vol. 1) (eds. I. Altaian & J. F.Wohlwill), 37-86. New York:Plenum.

Wohlwill, J. F. (1983) Theconcept of nature: A psychologist'sview. In Human behaviour andthe environment (Vol. 6) (eds. I.Altaian & J. F. Wohlwill), 1-34.New York: Plenum.

Zube, E. H., Pitt, D. G. & Evans,J.W. (1983) A lifespan develop-mental study of landscapeassessment Journal of Environ-mental Psychology, 3, 115-128.

Landscape Research 15(2) 1990 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mos

kow

Sta

te U

niv

Bib

liote

] at

04:

51 1

7 D

ecem

ber

2013