Nature In

Benefits of Nature

Schertz et al., 2021:

The is a plethora of evidence demonstrating exposure to nature to create a more positive affective state (Schertz et al., 2021).

Schertz et al. (2021) unpack the different effects of nature based upon the mode in which it is delivered. For instance walking in nature, natural imagery and videos, or virtual reality. This aspect of the work is highly beneficial to my project, as these are methods I have and will utilise in the future. They identify aesthetic preferences for natural environments to be particularly important in impacting affective states.

The work of Schertz et al. (2021) also unpacks the use of nature in treating mood disorders, which again highlights the astonishing benefits and impacts nature-based experiences can have upon emotional states.

It is stated that people spend a disproportionate amount of time away from nature, by being indoors (Kahn et al. 2010).

Schertz et al. (2021) found that longer, more immersive natural experiences had the largest effects on mood, however, these interactions are not always possible. This also sits in line with my findings from my Herb Intervention, as participants left the interactions with nature needed to be longer to be improved, but the circumstances of the event didn’t allow for this.

It was also discovered that people often underestimate the benefits to their mood they will feel after interacting with nature (Nisbet and Zelenski, 2011). This further demonstrates the necessity for a community to share knowledge on the power and value of nature in spaces.

Another fascinating idea highlighted in the work of Schertz et al. (2021) comes from the work of Openlands who created ‘Get Outside’. This is an interactive map showcasing natural locations around Chicago, encouraging people to visit them. This is a riveting concept and one I will look to apply within my community as a starting activity, perhaps in the form of a map of natural spaces around London using Jauntly. Keep a lookout for future blog posts expanding and implementing this idea.

Houlden et al., 2018:

Houlden et al. (2018) state that nature improving mental wellbeing is undeniable and well researched. They go on to explore the evidence of greenspaces in association with mental health through quantitative research. They discovered greenspaces to have positive associations to mental wellbeing, this being strongest for hedonic wellbeing (see blog post: ‘Defining the measures to utilise in my project’).

(Critique)- The work of Houlden et al. (2018) looks at the power of green space on mental health through the lens of planning to look to including increased green spaces in planning development. Although this is very interesting to read, especially with my past work in urban planning for my geography degree, the planning framework isn’t relevant to my current project. The results showcasing the power of nature do however support my case for why nature needs to be brought into city spaces.

Kasap et al., 2021:

Kasap et al. (2021) explore the social and mental benefits of interacting with nature. They note nature to provide peaceful, supportive, and emotional pockets of solace.

They state that having connections with nature extends cognitive abilities through recharging attention learning capacities, memory, executive functioning, and improving creativity (Kasap et al., 2021).

Nature is also found to create a positive mood, boost psychological well-being and relaxation by reducing anxiety and stress (Kasap et al., 2021).

In social contexts, nature can aid social cohesion via improving behavior, perspective taking and creating social value orientation (Kasap et al., 2021).

Well-being can be improved through reduced stress, negative moods, depression, and anxiety via building connections to nature (Kasap et al., 2021).

It is shown that virtual reality experiences of nature are effective in aiding mental health (Scates et al., 2020; Reese et al., 2021; Yin et al., 2020)

Subsequently, utilising nature in spaces to promote and develop connections to nature can instill improved learning and cognition, mental health benefits and even aid the construction of more cohesive societies or neighborhoods (Kasap et al., 2021).

Shanahan et al., 2015:

Shanahan et al. (2015) explore the type and quantity of nature that is required to provide health benefits.

(Critique) – This research is again conducted under a city planning framework and so its conclusions around the dosage of nature aren’t suitable for the context of my work,as they relate to time spent in nature to the amount of green space/ nature that needs to be included in urban planning. However, my work focuses upon how to bring nature into city spaces through addressing existing spaces and structures.

Dosage of nature was defined by Barton and Pretty (2010) as a measure of time spent exercising in green environments. However other measures of dosage of nature have been utilised in ecological and health studies (Shanahan et al., 2015).

They discovered that urban nature can be utilsied to provide an impactful and cost-effective tool to reduce health risks. However, in order to activate this change, further research into the specific types and amount of nature required for each possible health outcome is required (Shanahan et al., 2015).

The work also provides the highly interesting and relevant fact that in 30 years’ time, 70% of the global population will live in cities  (World Health Organization, 2013). I found a slightly more updated statistic form the United Nations (2018) stating it is predicted that 68% of the global population will live in cities by 2050.

(Critique)- Shanahan et al. (2015) are unable to provide precise answers in their work as to the quantities or types of nature needed to initiative certain health benefits, making it very difficult to action their work without further studies on this topic being completed.

What I Learned:

• Achieving aesthetics of natural environment is particularly important to impacting affective states and imporving emotional wellbeing (Schertz et al., 2021).
• Longer, more immerisve natural experiences had the largest effects on mood, however these intercations are not always possible (Schertz et al., 2021).
• Greenspaces have proven beenfits to mental wellbeing, especially hedonic wellbeing (Houlden et al., 2018)
• 70% of the worlds population will live in cities in 22 years time (accurate figure taking the date the statistic was created into account) (World Health Organization, 2013).
• People often underestaimate the benefits to their mood they will feel after interacting with nature (Nisbet and Zelenski, 2011)
• People spend a disproportionate amount of time away from nature, by being indoors (Kahn et al. 2010).
• Having connections with nature extends cognitive abilities through recharging attention learning capacities, memory, executive functioning, and improving creativity.Nature is also found to create a positive mood, boost psychological well-being and relaxation by reducing anxiety and stress (Kasap et al., 2021).
• Nature can aid social cohesion via improving behavior, perspective taking and creating social value orientation (Kasap et al., 2021).
• Well-being can be improved through reduced stress, negative moods, depression, and anxiety via building connections to nature (Kasap et al., 2021).
• Utilising nature in spaces to promote and develop connections to nature can instill improved learning and cognition, mental health benefits and even aid the construction of more cohesive societies or neighborhoods (Kasap et al., 2021).
• It is shown that virtual reality experiences of nature are effective in aiding mental health (Scates et al., 2020; Reese et al., 2021; Yin et al., 2020).

Reflections

Through this lit review around the benefits of nature, I have uncovered some incredibly compelling and intriguing information that I am going to implement in creating content for my community to inform around the power of biophilic design. For example, that 70% of the world’s population will soon live in cities, or that people underestimate the power nature can have upon their mood, or how Openlands was utilised to create interactive maps of nature.

Bibliography

Houlden, V., Weich, S., Porto de Albuquerque, J., Jarvis, S. and Rees, K., (2018). ‘The relationship between greenspace and the mental wellbeing of adults: A systematic review.’ PloS one, 13(9), p.e0203000.

Kahn Jr, P.H., Ruckert, J.H., Severson, R.L., Reichert, A.L. and Fowler, E., (2010) ‘A nature language: An agenda to catalog, save, and recover patterns of human–nature interaction.’ Ecopsychology, 2(2), pp.59-66.

Kasap, E.Z., Ağzıtemiz, F. and Ünal, G., (2021). ‘Cognitive, mental and social benefits of interacting with nature: A systematic review.’ Journal of Happiness and Health, 1(1), pp.16-27.

Nisbet, E.K., Zelenski, J.M. and Murphy, S.A., (2011). ‘Happiness is in our nature: Exploring nature relatedness as a contributor to subjective well-being.’ Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(2), pp.303-322.

Reese, G., Kohler, E., & Menzel, C. (2021). Restore or get restored: The effect of control on stress reduction and restoration in virtual nature settings. Sustainability, 13(4), 1995.

Scates, D., Dickinson, J. I., Sullivan, K., Cline, H., & Balaraman, R. (2020). Using nature-inspired virtual reality as a distraction to reduce stress and pain among cancer patients. Environment and Behavior, 52(8), 895–918.

Schertz, K.E., Meidenbauer, K.L. and Berman, M.G., (2021). ‘Understanding the Affective Benefits of Interacting with Nature.’ In Nature and Health (pp. 7-22). Routledge.

Shanahan, D.F., Fuller, R.A., Bush, R., Lin, B.B. and Gaston, K.J., (2015). ‘The health benefits of urban nature: how much do we need?.’ BioScience, 65(5), pp.476-485.

United Nations (2018) “68% of the world population projected to live in urban areas by 2050, says UN” United Nations [Online] https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/2018-revision-of-world-urbanization-prospects.html Accessed 25/10/21

World Health Organization. , Urban Population Growth, Global Health Observatory Database, (2013) World Health Organization, Accessed 25/10/21 www.who.int/gho/urban_health/situation_trends/urban_population_growth_text/en/index.html

Yin, J., Yuan, J., Arfaei, N., Catalano, P. J., Allen,J. G., & Spengler, J. D. (2020). Effects of biophilic indoor environment on stress and anxiety recovery: A between-subjects experiment in virtual reality. Environment International, 136, 105427.

Defining Online Community

For the purposes of my project, I am working largely from Preece’s (2000) definition of an online community, which denotes 4 components that an essential for a group to achieve the status of an online community.

These 4 components are as follows (Preece, 2000, p3):

• Socially interacting people striving to satisfy their own needs;
• A shared purpose like an interest or need that provides a reason to cooperate;
• Policies in the form of tacit assumptions, rituals, or rules that guide the community members’ behavior; and
• A technical system that works as a carrier that mediates social interaction.

The work of Dellarocas (2006) and Leidner et al. (2010) highlights that online communities also offer spaces for businesses, customers, and employees to collaborate.

Subsequently, my definition of an online community is: A space hosted on the internet, connecting people with common interests to serve a mutual goal.

I wish to note that the focus of the Nature In community to be online is predominately to allow the community to reach as many people from as many different countries, backgrounds, and ethnicities as possible. In future plans, there may be in-person community meetings, either through in-person talks and panel discussions or through natural events. However, such plans will fall beyond the scope of this master’s project.

Online Community Building

The work of Reheingold (2000) explores how online communities typically follow their own set of rules in terms of their growth patterns and building. Each community expands in its own organic way, which can be hard to predict.

Key principles can be applied to most online communities, but they require the application of interpersonal skills, intuition, and improvisation to be truly successful (Bowes, 2002). See the ‘building online communities for professionals’ section below to explore these principles more.

Building Member Attachment and Commitment in Online Communities

The works of Ren et al., (2012) offers a systematic breakdown of different attachment style to groups, as well as exploring possible design features that can help to increase attachment.

(Critique) – Although these works are informative, it is largely theoretical and conceptual rather than practical which isn’t helpful in looking at how to initially build and form the community. Perhaps this works may be of more use when the community is larger and beginning to be more established.

I found the book ‘Building Successful Online Communities’ (Kraut and Resnick, 2012) much more useful and informative in how to build committed community members, which can ultimately make the difference between a successful and an unsuccessful online community. Committed members are much more active within the groups, engaging more and drawing other members to get involved.

3 key types of commitment regarding online communities:

• Affective commitment – feelings of closeness to group members
• Normative commitment – feelings of obligations to the group
• Need-based/ Continuance commitment – centered around incentives in the group and the quality of alternatives avalaible to the group increasing the costs of leaving

These attachments together determine how long and how committed people are within a community group.

(Critique) – Kraut and Resnick (2012) offer evidence-based ideas and easily implemented ways in which to build and also increase attachment, which will be very useful when growing the Nature In Community. For instance, the book offers examples of emails/ messages sent out to communities and picks out the key aspects to replicate to build trust, attachment, and commitment between your community members.

Knowledge Exchange in Online Communities

Law and Chang (2008) unpack knowledge fostering in communities under a social capital building framework. They explore the role of technology to build social capital through their 4 pillars of identity profiling, sub-community building, feedback mechanism, and regulatory practice and this social capital is then thought to be utilised to drive the contribution of knowledge into the community

For the purpose of the Nature In the community, I am looking to foster new knowledge between community members through collaboration and discussion, as well as exchanging knowledge to increase understanding and intelligence on topics amongst the community.

Faraj et al. (2011) demonstrate the power and use of online communities, as they allow knowledge exchange between apparent strangers often even without direct conversation. They argue it is the fluidity of online communities that dictates the success of passing knowledge in and out of the community. Fluctuations in the fluidity of factors such as time, identity, and social disembodiment of ideas can allow for opportunities in knowledge collaborations in response to the change of these factors.

(Critique)- Faraj et al. (2011) offer a strong theory for how knowledge exchange can occur and why, alongside examples of this. But there is little scope for how to artificially create these exchanges within the community. The theory is based around the change in interaction factors offering the opportunity for collaboration; thus, suggesting one or more of the factors would have to be manipulated for the opportunities to be artificially manufactured and stimulate knowledge exchange, but there are no given ideas of how to do this.

Building Online Communities for Professionals

The work of Bowes (2002) is hugely informative on the topic of forming a professional online community, as I am aiming to do with the Nature In Community. However, in the instance of Bowes the focus is on creating a professional community for educational professionals and looks to provide support and development rather than knowledge sharing and collaboration.

It is suggested to employ welcome messages for newcomers to the group to make them feel welcomed and nurtured, alongside the offering of a weekly or monthly newsletter (Bowes and Williams, 2000).

A balance between Ad hoc and structured activity is recommended to ensure community members have the opportunity for flowing discussion but the motives of the group remain clear and structured. This concept alines with my plans for Nature In, to post stimuli for collaboration and conversations between members, as well as informative content (Bowes, 2002).

Structured activities such as online guest events are outlined to include external knowledge in the community. In regards to Nature In, this is already something I am employing through my Panel Discussions and so I am very pleased to discover this is academically proven to aid the progression of my community (Bowes, 2002).

Bowes (2002) suggests professional online communities benefit from occasional face-to-face encounters/ meetings. This is in keeping with some of my future plans for the Nature in community and so in discovering this academic base for the decision, which corroborates my intervention findings, I will be sure to action this.

Summary of Learning:

• My working definition of online community: A space hosted on the internet, connecting people with common interests to serve a mutual goal. Based on the work of Preece, (2000), Dellarocas (2006) and Leidner et al. (2010).
• Building committed members is crucial to a online communities sucess
• Committed and attached members are developed through: building commitment and trust between those wanting to stay in a group, encourgaing identity based attachemnet via a set of shared ideals, reducing forces that may undercut comittment such as feeling of disconnect in larger groups (Kraut and Resnick, 2012).
• Knowledge exchange can occur in online communities from the fluctuation of variables such as time, identity and social disembodiment of ideas provding the opportuntiy for collaboration (Faraj et al., 2011)
• Nuture members and new comers through welcome messages and monthly newsletters (Bowes, 2002)
• To encourage community interaction and growth through implement a balance of ad hoc and strcutured content posting, offering organised events within the group (Bowes, 2002)
• Host some in perosn events as well as online, so that community members can meet if tehy wish (Bowes, 2002)

Reflections

In conducting this literature review around community building I have formed a clear base of knowledge around communities to work from and a framework in which to begin building and growing the online community of Nature In.

Bibliography

Bowes, J., (2002). ‘Building online communities for professional networks.’ Global Summit of Online Knowledge Networks, Adelaide, Australia.

Bowes, J. and Williams, M. (2000), Building the VECO Online Community – a model for encouraging novices. National Journal of Teacher Education, Volume 25, number 1, Pp 60-72

Dellarocas, C., (2006). ‘Strategic manipulation of internet opinion forums: Implications for consumers and firms.’ Management science, 52(10), pp.1577-1593.

Faraj, S., Jarvenpaa, S.L. and Majchrzak, A., (2011). ‘Knowledge collaboration in online communities.’ Organization science, 22(5), pp.1224-1239.

Kraut, R.E. and Resnick, P., (2012). Building successful online communities: Evidence-based social design. Mit Press.

Law, S.P.M. and Chang, M.K., (2008). ‘Fostering knowledge exchange in online communities: a social capital building approach.’

Leidner, D., Koch, H. and Gonzalez, E., (2010). ‘Assimilating Generation Y IT New Hires into USAA’s Workforce: The Role of an Enterprise 2.0 System.’ MIS Quarterly Executive, 9(4).

Preece, J. (2000). ‘Online communities: Designing usability and supporting sociability.’ Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.

Ren, Y., Harper, F.M., Drenner, S., Terveen, L., Kiesler, S., Riedl, J. and Kraut, R.E., (2012.) ‘Building member attachment in online communities: Applying theories of group identity and interpersonal bonds.’ Mis Quarterly, pp.841-864.

Rheingold, H. (2000). ‘The virtual community: Homestead- ing on the electronic frontier’ (rev. ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.