MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3211060319 · doi:10.1002/fee.2416

COVID‐19 gardening could herald a greener, healthier future

2021· review· en· W3211060319 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brenda B. Lin, Monika Egerer, Jonathan Kingsley, Pauline Marsh, Lucy Diekmann, Alessandro Ossola

Notice bibliographique

RevueFrontiers in Ecology and the Environment · 2021
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiqueUrban Green Space and Health
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMarshLibrary scienceResearch centreSociologyEcologyBiology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The world is currently experiencing major public health and socioeconomic crises, as COVID-19 impacts the way we live, work, and interact (Lambert et al. 2020). Lockdowns and social distancing have largely disrupted our daily lives, in ways that might have adverse and unanticipated effects on physical and mental health (Alonzi et al. 2020). This pandemic comes at a time when people are already undergoing more subtle and yet substantial changes through the progressive and chronic deterioration of human–nature interactions due to urbanization and modern lifestyles (Soga and Gaston 2016; Truong and Clayton 2020). The loss of nature interactions can have severe physical and mental health impacts through the reduction of social and recreational opportunities, incidental or planned exercise, or relaxation activities (Hartig et al. 2014). Gardening has the potential to counteract these impacts, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Contemporary gardens are varied, and range from private yards to balconies to community gardens or common land, and even include roadside verges (plantings along road edges). Prior research on gardening has shown that in any of these spaces gardening can generate multiple benefits for physical, mental, social, and cognitive health (Soga et al. 2016; Howarth et al. 2020). Despite factors such as housing density and sociodemographic context – which can affect access to space for gardening – gardens may be the most accessible greenspace available during COVID-19 lockdowns (Schupp et al. 2016; Poortinga et al. 2021; Theodorou et al. 2021). Whether in a person’s own yard, on their windowsill, or within their neighborhood, these spaces provide a place where people can engage and physically interact with nature (Lin et al. 2018). This letter aims to explore if people have taken a renewed interest in gardening during the COVID-19 pandemic and to stimulate a conversation that fosters long-term and systemic interest in creating greener and healthier communities. Many media outlets reported spikes in gardening interest during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, showcasing images of empty shelves of sold-out seeds and plants in many gardening stores (Timmins 2020; Walljasper and Polansek 2020). To understand how widespread the global interest for gardening was during the initial infection waves of COVID-19, we examined the relationship between the date of first-wave infection peaks in 39 countries with the date when online interest for gardening peaked in each country (based on publicly available Google Trends data and compared to data from the previous years). These countries differ in not only population size but also socioeconomic background, and are located in various climatic regions. However, these countries represent approximately 81% of the global COVID-19 reported infections (on 22 Oct 2020) with clear initial COVID-19 infection peaks at different times of the year. We found that the pattern in gardening interest was strongly synchronized with the first-wave infection peaks of the COVID-19 pandemic (Figure 1; F = 64.29, R2 = 0.64; P < 0.001), showing strong cross-country interest in gardening as lockdowns became more widespread. These data provide a window into people’s interests during the early days of the pandemic. Yet, the reasons for the spikes in interest and motivation have so far received little scientific attention but are starting to be investigated in more detail (eg Poortinga et al. 2021; Theodorou et al. 2021; Ugolini et al. 2021). Given the generic search term, “gardening”, it may be that the online searches were returning experienced gardeners who took advantage of time at home to renew a previous interest. However, there may have been new gardeners who were interested in gaining knowledge about garden establishment and management, or locating equipment, plants, and soil. The motivations behind these investigations toward gardening deserve to be researched further to understand the various mechanisms associated with behavioral changes, especially in times of crisis like this pandemic (Geary et al. 2021), as well as to answer questions such as whether people gained a new or renewed interest in gardening during lockdowns, or desired more or less access to nature during this time of hardship (Marsh et al. 2021). There is a clear pattern in increased gardening interest during the COVID-19 pandemic. Will this surge in interest ultimately outlast this pandemic? Emerging research shows that during the pandemic, urban greenspaces provided multiple, meaningful benefits for solace, respite, and social interaction, as well as physical exercise (Home and Vieli 2020; Ugolini et al. 2020), and that people consider greenspaces to be more important for physical and mental health than ever before (Niala 2020). Research is still needed to understand the complexities and nuances of the patterns found. These worldwide patterns present ideal opportunities – through natural experiments – to study the long-term interest in and benefits of gardening. Different patterns in the spread of COVID-19, along with different countermeasures (eg duration and intensity of restrictions, access to shops and schools), offer a chance to examine how various lockdown experiences may affect the behaviors and long-term values of specific individuals and communities with respect to gardening and greenspace use. When compared across geographical and social contexts, these differences represent an additional topic for further study. Research on land development policies and collective decision-making processes is needed to understand how to maintain space for gardening in increasingly dense cities (Lopez et al. 2020; Niala 2020). What structural changes can be quickly enacted to ensure that this interest in gardening is capitalized on and translated into meaningful decision and policy making, as we enter a future with potentially more pandemics and other public health crises? What policies must we implement to support equitable access to gardening for human health and well-being, and to what extent can gardening be applied as a widespread public health strategy? A better understanding of the motivations for, enablers of, and barriers to gardening can inform policy mechanisms that provide not only equal and fair access and availability for those who are interested in gardening but also opportunities for others to learn about gardening and spend time in greenspaces. Despite its many challenges, the COVID-19 pandemic offers an important chance to investigate the capacity for additional human–nature interactions through the development and management of gardens, and to help reverse the decline in meaningful nature experience for contemporary societies. Our findings here demonstrate that gardening can increase opportunities to interact with nature close to home, and might systematically and simultaneously enhance global public health, well-being, and ecological outcomes long after the COVID-19 pandemic ends. Data and code are available at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14920365.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,797
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,018
Tête enseignante GPT0,273
Écart entre enseignants0,255 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations47
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueFrontiers in Ecology and the EnvironmentMême sujetUrban Green Space and HealthTravaux en français237 207