Impact of residential green spaces on health inequalities in the UK: A systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis

IF 6.7 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Urban Forestry & Urban Greening Pub Date : 2026-04-01 Epub Date: 2026-01-16 DOI:10.1016/j.ufug.2026.129304
Dillon Newton, Mariam Zarjoo, John Stephenson, Philip Brown
{"title":"Impact of residential green spaces on health inequalities in the UK: A systematic review and exploratory meta-analysis","authors":"Dillon Newton,&nbsp;Mariam Zarjoo,&nbsp;John Stephenson,&nbsp;Philip Brown","doi":"10.1016/j.ufug.2026.129304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Residential green spaces - defined here as public or private green environments located within or immediately surrounding places of residence - are recognised as important social determinants of health, yet their potential to reduce health inequalities remains underexplored. This systematic review synthesised evidence on whether access to residential green spaces is associated with health outcomes across socioeconomic groups in the United Kingdom. A total of 20 studies were included that covered mental health, physical health, child development and mortality outcomes. Across studies, green space was generally associated with improved mental wellbeing, lower chronic disease risk and greater child socio-emotional development. Importantly, several studies found stronger health benefits among socioeconomically disadvantaged groups which suggests equigenic effects, although lower-quality or inaccessible green spaces could entrench inequalities. Three studies were included in a pre-specified exploratory random-effects meta-analysis focussed on mental wellbeing outcomes. The pooled odds ratio indicated a modest but non-significant protective association between green space exposure and mental wellbeing (OR 0.91, 95 % CI 0.77–1.07), with very high heterogeneity (I²=99.8 %) and sensitivity analysis showed no single study unduly influenced the results. Although the pooled effect was non-significant, the consistent direction across studies supports the view that more and better residential green space may promote mental health. Findings from the broader review show that equity impacts vary across green space typologies: public parks, neighbourhood vegetation and community spaces tend to deliver more equitable benefits than private gardens, which are unevenly distributed and can reinforce environmental privilege. By embedding a focus on health inequalities, this review provides actionable evidence to enable the provision of green space as a core public health infrastructure.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49394,"journal":{"name":"Urban Forestry & Urban Greening","volume":"118 ","pages":"Article 129304"},"PeriodicalIF":6.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urban Forestry & Urban Greening","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1618866726000440","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Residential green spaces - defined here as public or private green environments located within or immediately surrounding places of residence - are recognised as important social determinants of health, yet their potential to reduce health inequalities remains underexplored. This systematic review synthesised evidence on whether access to residential green spaces is associated with health outcomes across socioeconomic groups in the United Kingdom. A total of 20 studies were included that covered mental health, physical health, child development and mortality outcomes. Across studies, green space was generally associated with improved mental wellbeing, lower chronic disease risk and greater child socio-emotional development. Importantly, several studies found stronger health benefits among socioeconomically disadvantaged groups which suggests equigenic effects, although lower-quality or inaccessible green spaces could entrench inequalities. Three studies were included in a pre-specified exploratory random-effects meta-analysis focussed on mental wellbeing outcomes. The pooled odds ratio indicated a modest but non-significant protective association between green space exposure and mental wellbeing (OR 0.91, 95 % CI 0.77–1.07), with very high heterogeneity (I²=99.8 %) and sensitivity analysis showed no single study unduly influenced the results. Although the pooled effect was non-significant, the consistent direction across studies supports the view that more and better residential green space may promote mental health. Findings from the broader review show that equity impacts vary across green space typologies: public parks, neighbourhood vegetation and community spaces tend to deliver more equitable benefits than private gardens, which are unevenly distributed and can reinforce environmental privilege. By embedding a focus on health inequalities, this review provides actionable evidence to enable the provision of green space as a core public health infrastructure.
英国住宅绿地对健康不平等的影响:系统回顾和探索性荟萃分析
居住绿色空间——这里定义为位于居住地内部或周围的公共或私人绿色环境——被认为是健康的重要社会决定因素,但其减少健康不平等的潜力仍未得到充分探索。这一系统综述综合了英国各社会经济群体获得住宅绿地是否与健康结果相关的证据。总共纳入了20项研究,涉及心理健康、身体健康、儿童发育和死亡率结果。在所有研究中,绿地通常与改善心理健康、降低慢性疾病风险和促进儿童社会情感发展有关。重要的是,几项研究发现,在社会经济上处于不利地位的群体中,健康益处更强,这表明存在均衡效应,尽管质量较低或难以进入的绿地可能会加剧不平等。三项研究被纳入预先指定的探索性随机效应荟萃分析,重点关注心理健康结果。综合优势比显示,绿地暴露与心理健康之间存在适度但不显著的保护性关联(OR 0.91, 95 % CI 0.77-1.07),异质性非常高(I²=99.8 %),敏感性分析显示,没有单一研究过度影响结果。虽然综合效应不显著,但各研究的一致方向支持了更多更好的居住绿地可能促进心理健康的观点。更广泛的研究结果表明,不同类型的绿地对公平性的影响各不相同:公共公园、邻里植被和社区空间往往比私人花园提供更公平的效益,而私人花园分布不均,可以强化环境特权。通过将重点放在卫生不平等问题上,本审查提供了可操作的证据,以使提供绿色空间成为一项核心公共卫生基础设施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.70
自引率
12.50%
发文量
289
审稿时长
70 days
期刊介绍: Urban Forestry and Urban Greening is a refereed, international journal aimed at presenting high-quality research with urban and peri-urban woody and non-woody vegetation and its use, planning, design, establishment and management as its main topics. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening concentrates on all tree-dominated (as joint together in the urban forest) as well as other green resources in and around urban areas, such as woodlands, public and private urban parks and gardens, urban nature areas, street tree and square plantations, botanical gardens and cemeteries. The journal welcomes basic and applied research papers, as well as review papers and short communications. Contributions should focus on one or more of the following aspects: -Form and functions of urban forests and other vegetation, including aspects of urban ecology. -Policy-making, planning and design related to urban forests and other vegetation. -Selection and establishment of tree resources and other vegetation for urban environments. -Management of urban forests and other vegetation. Original contributions of a high academic standard are invited from a wide range of disciplines and fields, including forestry, biology, horticulture, arboriculture, landscape ecology, pathology, soil science, hydrology, landscape architecture, landscape planning, urban planning and design, economics, sociology, environmental psychology, public health, and education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书