Jorgensen (2011) also considers how the whole idea of ‘landscape design’ is fundamentally predicated upon the implicit prioritising of visual experience.3 3 In this regard, many of my geography colleagues are naturally suspicious of some of the arguments presented earlier in this chapter. In their thinking, the problem with many of the psychological studies that attempt to explore how ‘humans’ experience greenspace is that they don’t properly engage with context, namely with variation between groups and places and change over time. This reticence is understandable in view of the different purposes of these two disciplines (one often hoping to understand what is believed to be an essential human response; the other more interested in exploring how things work out differently in different situations). However, as I see it, it is a shame to ignore the findings of relevant studies because they do not share the same starting assumptions. After all, whilst we may be arguing about the best ways of defining the problem, things could be changing fast in wider society (and finding the most effective responses to these changes will surely come from consulting studies undertaken under a variety of disciplinary banners). An alternative way of characterising the benefits of a geographical approach is about being willing to combine different insights in pursuit of a fuller understanding of the issue at hand. That is a much nicer fit with how I like to think about the approach being taken by this book.
References
1 Asah, S., Bengston, D., and Westphal, L. (2012). The influence of childhood: operational pathways to adulthood participation in nature-based activities. Environment and Behavior 44: 545–569.
2 Ballouard, J., Brischoux, F., and Bonnet, X. (2011). Children prioritize virtual exotic biodiversity over local biodiversity. PLoS ONE. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00613629 (accessed 26 January 2021).
3 Bamberg, J. Hitchings, R., Latham, A. (2018). Enriching green exercise research. Landscape and Urban Planning 178: 270–275.
4 Bear, C. (2011). Being Angelica? Exploring individual animal geographies. Area 43: 297–304.
5 Bell, S., Phoenix, C., Lovell, R. et al. (2014). Green space, health and wellbeing: making space for individual agency. Health and Place 30: 287–292.
6 Bell, S., Leyshon, C., Foley, R. et al. (2019). The ‘healthy dose’ of nature: a cautionary tale. Geography Compass 13: 1–14.
7 Bixler, R. and Floyd, M. (1997). Nature is scary, disgusting and uncomfortable. Environment and Behavior 29: 443–467.
8 Castree, N. (2014). Making Sense of Nature. Abingdon: Routledge.
9 Collins, R. and Hitchings, R. (2012). A tale of two teens: disciplinary boundaries and geographical opportunities in youth consumption and sustainability research. Area 44: 193–199.
10 Cox, D., Shanahan, D., Hudson, H., et al. (2017a). Doses of nearby nature simultaneously associated with multiple health benefits. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 14: 172–185.
11 Cox, D., Shanahan, D., Hudson, H., et al. (2017b). The rarity of direct experiences of nature in an urban population. Landscape and Urban Planning 160: 79–84.
12 Day, R. (2008). Local environments and older people’s health: dimensions from a comparative qualitative study in Scotland. Health and Place 14: 299–312.
13 Depledge, M., Stone, R., and Bird, W. (2011). Can natural and virtual environments be used to promote improved human health and wellbeing? Environmental Science and Technology 45: 4660–4665.
14 Dorwood, L., Mittermeier, J., Sandbrook, C., and Spooner, F. (2017). Pokemon GO: benefits, costs, and lessons for the conservation movement. Conservation Letters 10: 160–165.
15 Duvall, J. and Sullivan, W. (2016). How to get more out of the green exercise experience. In: Green Exercise: Linking Nature, Health and Wellbeing (ed. J. Barton, R. Bragg,C. Woods et al.), 37–45. New York: Routledge.
16 Fuller, R. and Gaston, K. (2009). The scaling of green space coverage in European cities. Biology Letters 5 (3): 352–355.
17 Gatersleben, B. and Andrews, M. (2013). When walking in nature is not restorative – the role of prospect and refuge. Health and Place 20: 91–101.
18 Gentin, S. (2011). Outdoor recreation and ethnicity in Europe – a review. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening 10: 153–161.
19 Gibbs, L. (2019). Animal geographies I: hearing the cry and extending beyond. Progress in Human Geography. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132519863483</DOI (accessed 26 January 2021).
20 Gibbs, L. and Warren, A. (2015). Transforming shark hazard policy: learning from ocean-users and shark encounter in Western Australia. Marine Policy 58: 116–124.
21 Gibson-Graham, J.-K., Cameron, J., and Healy, S. (2019). Roepke lecture in economic geography – economic geography, manufacturing, and ethical action in the Anthropocene. Economic Geography 95: 1–21.
22 Giddens, A. (1986). The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
23 Ginn, F. and Demeritt, D. (2009). Nature. In: Key Concepts in Geography (ed. N. Clifford, S. Holloway, S. Rice et al.), 300–311. London: Sage.
24 Gladwell, V., Brown, D., and Wood, C. (2013). The great outdoors: how a green exercise environment can benefit all. Extreme Physiology and Medicine 2: 3.
25 Gram-Hanssen, K. (2010). Residential heat comfort practices: understanding users. Building Research and Information 38: 175–186.
26 Grinde, B. and Grindal Patil, G. (2009). Biophilia: does visual contact with nature impact on health and well-being? International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 6: 2332–2343.
27 Hamilton, S. (2017). Securing ourselves from ourselves? The paradox of ‘entanglement’ in the Anthropocene. Crime, Law and Social Change 68: 579–595.
28 Han, K.-T. (2009). Influence of limitedly visible leafy indoor plants on the psychology, behaviour, and health of students at a junior high school in Taiwan. Environment and Behavior 41: 658–692.
29 Harrison, S., Pile, S., and Thrift, N. (eds) (2004). Patterned Ground: Entanglements of Nature and Culture. London: Reaktion Books.
30 Hartig, T. (1993). Nature experience in transactional perspective. Landscape and Urban Planning 25: 17–36.
31 Hartig, T., Mitchell, R., de Vries, S. et al. (2014). Nature and health. Annual Review of Public Health 35: 207–228.
32 Head, L., Atchison, J., Phillips, C. et al. (2017). Vegetal Politics: Belonging, Practices and Places. London: Routledge.
33 Hinchliffe, S. (2007). Geographies of Nature: Societies, Environments, Ecologies. London: Sage.
34 Hoyle, H. Hitchmough, J., and Jorgensen, A. (2017). All about the ‘wow factor’? The relationships between aesthetics, restorative effect and perceived biodiversity in designed urban planting. Landscape and Urban Planning 164: 109–123.
35 Huang, Q., Yang, M., Jane, H.-A. et al. (2020). Trees, grass, or concrete? The effects of different types of environments on stress reduction. Landscape and Urban Planning 193: 103654.
36 Hui,
