4.7 Article

Life satisfaction linked to the diversity of nature experiences and nature views from the window

Journal

LANDSCAPE AND URBAN PLANNING
Volume 202, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103874

Keywords

Life satisfaction; Human-nature interaction; Nature relatedness; Environmental psychology; Tropical Asia; Happiness

Funding

  1. National Parks Board
  2. Ministry of National Development of Singapore
  3. Commonwealth Government of Australia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The effects of nature interactions on multiple aspects of human subjective wellbeing are increasingly well understood. Although nature experience has been shown to be positively associated with life satisfaction, it remains unknown whether the diversity of nature experiences contributes to increased life satisfaction and whether the relationship is mediated by a person's strength of connection with nature. We conducted a national survey in Singapore through online questionnaires (n = 1, 262), where we measured frequency, duration, diversity of nature experiences, and presence or absence of nature views from windows at home and at the workplace. We also measured participants' strength of connection with nature (how strongly a person identifies with nature). We found that people who visited more diverse types of natural spaces (ranging from wild nature, managed parks, and beaches) had higher life satisfaction. The presence of nature views from windows at the home and/or at the workplace was also linked with higher life satisfaction. We also found that people with a stronger connection with nature had higher life satisfaction when they spent more than one hour in natural spaces per week, while this relationship was weak for people without a strong connection with nature. Our results suggest that urban planning should aim to provide a diversity of natural spaces to increase life satisfaction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available