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, Mariam Zarjoo, John Stephenson, 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.
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.