Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Understanding the pathways between the use of urban green spaces and self-rated health: A case study in Mexico City

  • Carolina Mayen Huerta

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    cmayenh@ed.ac.uk

    Affiliation School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

    ⨯

Abstract

In recent decades, extensive research has demonstrated the positive impact of urban green spaces (UGS) on public health through several pathways. However, in the context of Latin America, particularly Mexico City, there remains a notable scarcity of evidence linking UGS use to health outcomes and an insufficient understanding of the pathways or factors underlying these associations. Therefore, this study employs Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to investigate the intricate pathways between UGS use and residents’ perceived health in Mexico City, a densely populated urban center. The SEM integrates three key mediators: sentiments towards UGS, UGS quality, and time spent within these spaces. Survey data was collected through an online survey distributed via social media in May 2020 (n = 1,707). The findings indicate a minor yet significant direct link between UGS use and self-reported health (0.0427, p < 0.1). Conversely, the indirect pathways through sentiments towards UGS, UGS quality, and time spent in UGS were highly significant (0.1950, p < 0.01), underscoring their substantial role as mediators in the UGS use-health association. While a comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms linking perceived health to UGS use in Mexico City requires further research, this study proposes that fostering positive sentiments towards UGS, enhancing UGS quality, and encouraging extended visits to green areas could potentially amplify the perceived health benefits associated with UGS use among residents. These insights offer valuable inputs for policymaking, emphasizing the importance of integrating public perspectives to optimize nature-based solutions and broaden their positive impact within Mexico City.

Citation: Mayen Huerta C (2023) Understanding the pathways between the use of urban green spaces and self-rated health: A case study in Mexico City. PLoS ONE 18(12): e0295013. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0295013

Editor: Giulia Squillacioti, University of Turin: Universita degli Studi di Torino, ITALY

Received: July 26, 2023; Accepted: November 13, 2023; Published: December 7, 2023

Copyright: © 2023 Carolina Mayen Huerta. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: Data cannot be shared publicly because the Ethics Approval of this project explicitly states that answers would not be shared, given that the questionnaire asked for sensitive information, including questions on mental health and overall health. Data are available from the University of Melbourne’s Psychology Health and Applied Sciences Human Ethics Sub-Committee (2056618) for researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data +61 3 8344 1376, research-integrity@unimelb.edu.au https://gateway.research.unimelb.edu.au/funding-contracts-and-ethics/ethics-and-integrity/human-ethics.

Funding: This work was supported by the David Lachlan Hay Memorial Fund. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The author has declared that no competing interests exist.

1. Introduction

Since the early 19th century, researchers have increasingly recognized the beneficial effects of nature on human health and well-being [1, 2]. This acknowledgment has grown in recent decades, with green spaces’ positive impact progressively underscored in the public health literature [3–8]. From public parks and woodlands to gardens in hospitals and care homes, individuals and institutions have used green spaces recreationally and formally to improve physical and mental health outcomes, such as stress reduction, mood improvements, and lower rates of cardiovascular disease [9, 10]. In particular, in fast-growing cities, urban green spaces (UGS) are deemed an effective policy tool to reduce health inequalities, promoting well-being and a better quality of life, and thus counteracting some of the negative impacts of rapid urbanization [11–14].

However, specific evidence on the mechanisms linking green space use to improvements in health outcomes in Latin American megacities is lacking, and only a few studies have examined in-depth the pathways or factors mediating some type of relationship between green spaces and health or well-being and evidence has not been conclusive in all cases [15]. For instance, Bonilla-Bedoya et al. (2020) [16] delved into the pathways connecting urban green areas and perceived restoration in Quito. However, their study did not find conclusive evidence linking green spaces to subjective well-being. In a similar vein, Ordóñez Barona et al. (2023) [17] investigated the pathways involving collectively made decisions on green spaces and satisfaction, a well-being indicator, across 10 Latin American cities. They discovered significant indirect pathways involving contact with green spaces, trust, and effective management. Finally, Aldana-Domínguez et al. (2022) [18] explored the contributions the contributions of distinct ecosystem types to human well-being in Barranquilla, Colombia. The authors established a significant and positive connection between ecosystem services and well-being, particularly through factors such as freedom of action, access to basic materials, and social relationships.

To date, little attention has been paid to the effect of using UGS to enhance health outcomes in the densely populated cities of Latin America, where wealth inequalities are vast, and the availability of green spaces is often scarce [19–26]. Moreover, there remains a lack of understanding or appreciation regarding UGS as health-promoting environments that can help mitigate urban inequalities, and the significance of UGS in reducing social vulnerability is often downplayed [27–29]. In addition, studies analyzing the relationship between green spaces and health rarely consider more than one mediator at a time [30, 31], and there is a lingering question regarding the transferability of findings from high-income countries to Latin American settings [32]. Although studies in high-income countries have examined various mechanisms linking green space use to health, including physical activity and air pollution, evidence supporting these hypotheses in the global South remains limited, with contextual differences possibly accounting for [33, 34].

Accordingly, the present study aims to address these gaps by examining the pathways between the use of UGS and the self-reported health of residents of Mexico City, accounting for multiple mediators through Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). In the context of hypothesis testing and theory development, this approach is suitable as it helps in understanding how variables directly and indirectly affect one another. Mexico City was chosen as a case study because it presents patterns of spatial segregation, extreme social inequality, and a dense population of 8,400 people per square kilometer [35, 36]. In recent decades, the Latin American megacity of 1,479 km2 has experienced accelerated growth rates, exacerbating spatial inequalities that have contributed to increasing public health risk factors [36]. Furthermore, urban planning strategies have largely ignored green spaces and their potential health benefits as an important consideration in urban improvement policies [37–39].

As such, this study will seek to determine how the use of green spaces is directly or indirectly associated with Mexico City’s residents’ perceived health through multiple mediators, namely sentiments toward green spaces, UGS quality, and time spent in UGS. The evidence generated will assist the decision-making process regarding the most effective underlying mechanisms to support health through UGS use in the city. The consideration of mediating factors is indispensable in contexts such as Mexico City, where both spatial and social inequalities may influence the perception and use of health-promoting urban environments, as well as the benefits derived from them [40]. The study findings hold the potential to guide strategies that enhance public health outcomes and improve Mexico City’s livability.

1.1 Pathways between UGS use and self-reported health

In this study, UGS refers to built environments supporting healthy behaviors, physical activity, recreation, social contact, and overall well-being in cities [41–44]. The category encompasses various public green areas like parks, playgrounds, gardens, reserves, sports grounds, green squares, community gardens, urban forests, and vegetated plazas, whether maintained or neglected, with unrestricted public access [37, 45–47]. Exposure to green spaces can take three forms: direct contact, indirect contact (window views), and incidental contact (transitory exposure on the way to another destination [48]. This research primarily focuses on direct contact with UGS, involving individuals’ use of these spaces and their frequency of use, which is strongly associated with improved health outcomes [49–51].

Although several studies have linked simple exposure to green spaces, which includes indirect and transitory contact, as a contributor to health [52–54], this association is not universally established, particularly in Latin American countries [55]. On the other hand, frequent UGS use is consistently linked to improved health outcomes in various contexts. For instance, the relationship between frequent UGS use and improved health has been confirmed by Coombes et al. (2010) [56] in their study of parks in Bristol, England, with participants who used UGS more frequently reporting better health outcomes. Similarly, based on data from Italy and the UK, Lafortezza et al. (2009) [57] found that frequent visits to UGS generated significant improvements in perceived well-being. In Mexico, a recent investigation found a significant relationship between the frequent use of UGS, one or more times per week, and improved health outcomes [58]. Thus, this study considers the frequency of direct UGS use as a variable of interest rather than simple UGS use or exposure.

To date, several pathways have been suggested between health and UGS use [33, 59]. Since social and spatial inequalities affect UGS perceptions and behaviors within the study area, this analysis will examine three primary mediators: sentiments toward green spaces, UGS quality, and time spent in UGS. These mediators, in turn, generate different pathways that intervene in the association between the frequency of UGS use and respondents’ self-reported health.

The first pathway examined in this study is the one mediated through sentiments toward UGS, which were incorporated into the model following Wan and Shen’s (2015) [31] framework on the mediating effects of attitudinal measures on health. The authors argue that individuals’ sentiments or attitudes predict their behavior as they influence their dispositions, including the intention to use UGS. Several authors have also contended that the perceptions acquired thanks to space can often mediate the relationship between its use and its perceived benefits since negative perceptions, feelings, and attitudes may inhibit use [55, 60–63]. Therefore, strengthening the relationship between UGS use and improved health may involve interventions aimed at changing individuals’ sentiments or attitudes, which do not suggest modifying the urban environment per se but altering the predispositions of users to maximize the benefits UGS provide [31, 64].

The second pathway between UGS use and health explored in this analysis is the one mediated through UGS quality, given its role in affecting green spaces’ type of use and enjoyment [65–69]. Multiple studies have shown that quality features influence UGS use and, therefore, the subsequent benefits individuals obtain from them [70, 71]. For example, a lack of maintenance or poor lighting in parks can lower the perception of safety, reducing the frequency of use or the time spent in such spaces [72]. Similarly, including aesthetic and visual appeal elements, which individuals associate with a space’s quality, such as flowers or fountains, can encourage positive feelings and increase the frequency with which people access these areas [73].

In a study conducted in the city of Carmona, Italy, the authors found that the presence of playgrounds, pleasant views, drinking fountains, and recreational areas, all of which are linked to UGS quality, contributed to greater feelings of comfort and better perceptions of green spaces [74]. Likewise, in a nationwide study conducted in Norway by Fongar et al. (2019) [75], researchers observed that higher perceptions of quality positively influenced UGS visits and time spent there. In contexts where the understanding and quality of green spaces are similar, the pathway between UGS use and health through UGS quality may not be significant. However, in Latin American megacities where UGS quality exhibits high heterogeneity, this element can play a pivotal role, either enhancing or inhibiting the relationship [37].

Lastly, another critical pathway explored in this study links UGS use to health via time spent in UGS. Time spent in UGS also acts as a mediator between UGS quality and health and sentiments toward UGS and health, thus adding two additional pathways between UGS use and self-reported health. Despite some studies indicating that a higher frequency of UGS use is conducive to better health outcomes irrespective of the time people spend in UGS [76], evidence suggests that the extent of the benefits perceived is determined by the time that individuals spend in the green space [77–80]. For instance, it has been widely documented that the possibility of restoration in green spaces is expanded as the time spent there increases [81]. Further, time can influence the sentiments toward, or perceptions of a given space, affecting its use [33]. Consequently, the model introduced in this analysis includes time, as it is hypothesized that time partially mediates the relationship between UGS use and health.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Materials

The study’s analytical approach relied on an online survey distributed through social media in May 2020. The decision to collect the data via this method was made because of the high risk of COVID-19 contagion through face-to-face data-gathering methods in 2020 [82]. For the survey design, ten in-depth interviews with experts on urbanism in Latin America were first conducted to identify critical questions and better understand the mediators influencing the pathways between urban green spaces and health in megacities of low- and middle-income countries. These semi-structured interviews took place in March and April 2020 via Zoom, each lasting between 60 and 90 minutes.

The final questionnaire was then uploaded to Qualtrics for two pilot tests, each involving five volunteers. Following the pilots, the survey was launched on Facebook in May 2020 using targeted advertisements directed at adults (18+) whose profiles indicated that they lived in one of the 16 municipalities of Mexico City. The participants’ location at the time of survey completion was verified through Qualtrics. Individuals outside the study area were excluded from the sample. Furthermore, the ad explicitly sought individuals who had been living in Mexico City for a minimum of 14 months. Facebook was selected as a distribution channel due to its status as the most popular social platform in Mexico, with over 81 million registered users [83]. The final questionnaire was translated into Spanish and included four sections: (i) UGS use, (ii) UGS quality and sentiments toward UGS, (iii) self-rated health, and (iv) sociodemographic characteristics.

For the purposes of this analysis, only surveys in which respondents completed all the questions were considered (n = 1,707, 51% completion rate). In order to encourage a higher level of participation, more detailed information like respondents’ specific income was not requested. Instead, respondents were prompted to select their income bracket. This approach aligns with standard practices in online data collection, acknowledging the common reluctance of individuals to provide precise personal information [84]. Additionally, this procedure was incorporated due to the documented mistrust that Mexicans have toward institutions and online data collection methods [85]. The ethical standards of this study were approved by the University of Melbourne’s Psychology Health and Applied Sciences Human Ethics Sub-Committee (2056618) on May 8, 2020.

2.2. Methods

Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was chosen as the primary analytical method due to its capability to accommodate multiple dependent variables and account for mediating effects among interrelated variables [30, 86]. This approach has emerged as a quasi-standard in research, particularly for unraveling complex relationships among multiple variables and discerning both their direct and indirect impacts. In studies characterized by intricate research questions, where numerous factors influence outcomes, SEM proves exceptionally valuable. Notably, all variables incorporated in this model are manifest variables, and there are no latent variables present. In the following section, a detailed overview of the variables integrated into the model is shown and a graphical conceptualization of the study is presented for better clarity.

2.2.1.Variables.

2.2.1.1. UGS use. To assess UGS use and reduce the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions on respondents’ answers (enforced in Mexico City from March 23, 2020, to September 2021), participants were requested to select the option that most accurately represented their usage patterns of green spaces between March 2019 and March 2020 (spanning 12 months). The survey clarified that "use" specifically referred to direct engagement with these spaces. In other words, respondents were asked about their specific intention to visit green spaces, ensuring that they were not merely passing through them while traveling to another destination. Responses were classified as (i) no use (none), (ii) once every two-three months (rare), (iii) once or twice per month (occasional), and (iv) once or more than once a week (frequent). The survey differentiated the frequency of use based on prior research indicating that frequent use of UGS rather than sporadic use is significantly associated with improved health outcomes [81]. For example, a study conducted in the German city of Maihem highlighted that mere exposure to UGS is insufficient to benefit from them; consistent and regular use is necessary [87].

2.2.1.2. Health. To assess health outcomes, participants were asked to assess their perceived health status utilizing a 5-point Likert scale (1 = poor; 5 = excellent). This measure of self-reported health was employed as a proxy for health status, aligning with the approach outlined by Jylhä (2009) [88]. Jylhä’s research comprehensively discusses the advantages and limitations of self-rated health as a measure of health. It emphasizes that self-rated health stands as a valid measure of health status. Furthermore, several additional studies have validated self-reported health as a measure of health status, highlighting its predictive power for various health outcomes such as subsequent medical care utilization and mortality [89, 90].

In Mexico, researchers frequently use self-perceived health as a well-established proxy to study overall health. For example, Valle (2009) [91] investigated the relationship between social inequality and health, employing self-assessed health and reported morbidity as proxies for overall health. Similarly, in examining the factors contributing to poor health in Mexico, Gallegos-Carrillo et al. (2006) [92] used self-perception of health status as the main dependent variable. Moreover, a study by Flores et al. (2015) [93] in Cuernavaca, Mexico, revealed that self-perceived health serves as a reliable predictor of heightened cardiometabolic risk, an objective health indicator commonly used to establish patients’ health.

2.2.1.3. Mediators. As previously highlighted, this study incorporated three essential mediators: sentiments toward UGS, UGS quality, and time spent in UGS. To assess sentiments toward UGS, participants were requested to evaluate the significance of UGS to their overall quality of life and urban experience using a 4-point Likert scale (1 = not important at all; 4 = extremely important). Understanding individuals’ sentiments toward spaces is crucial, as this factor significantly influences their inclination to utilize these spaces, subsequently shaping their actual behavior [31]. Likewise, UGS quality was measured using a 5-point Likert scale, wherein respondents assessed the quality of green spaces in their neighborhood (1 = poor; 5 = excellent). Past research on Latin American cities, including Mexico City, suggests a strong correlation between UGS quality and improved health outcomes, as residents tend to favor clean, well-maintained green spaces abundant in vegetation, playgrounds, or sports facilities [94, 95]. Lastly, to define time spent in UGS, respondents were inquired about the average duration they typically spend during each visit to a green space. This variable was defined as a categorical variable in which the groupings included (i) 0 to 15 minutes, (ii) 16 to 30 minutes, (iii) 31 to 60 minutes, and (iv) more than 60 minutes.

2.2.1.4. Additional exogenous variables. Two fundamental sociodemographic attributes at the individual level were considered as exogenous variables in the model: age and socioeconomic status. It is well established that an individual’s health and well-being are significantly impacted by their age and socioeconomic circumstances [96, 97]. For instance, research conducted in Australia, focusing on health needs and beliefs, highlighted the association between age and health-related behaviors, emphasizing that a higher percentage of older individuals engage in health prevention strategies and undergo health checks [98]. Similarly, an online survey in Spain, exploring the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on health, demonstrated that older individuals exhibited better mental health outcomes, characterized by lower levels of stress and anxiety compared to their younger counterparts during the turmoil [99] (Gonzalez-Sanguino et al., 2020).The work by House et al. (1990) [100] delved into the interconnection among age, socioeconomic status, and health, ultimately affirming that age and socioeconomic status are pivotal determinants of health outcomes. Respondents were asked to provide their age and socioeconomic status within defined ranges. Socioeconomic status was categorized into quintiles as per the definition by Mexico’s National Council of Evaluation (CONEVAL). Concurrently, age was grouped into six categories: (i) 18–25, (ii) 25–34, (iii) 35–44, (iv) 45–54, (v) 55–64, and (vi) 65 or more.

2.2.2. Pathways in the SEM.

The Structural Equation Model, illustrated in Fig 1, serves as the foundation for the subsequent analysis. It draws upon a body of literature delving into the intricate relationship between green spaces use and perceived health, employing solely manifest variables [31, 101]. Three primary mediators were accounted for in the analysis, namely sentiments toward UGS, UGS quality, and time spent in UGS. Furthermore, the analysis investigates two additional mediating routes within the relationship between UGS use and perceived health, including those where the time spent in UGS is mediated by UGS quality or the sentiments toward UGS. Consequently, the SEM reveals and elucidates five distinct indirect pathways connecting UGS use to perceived health:

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 1. Conceptual model of the pathways between UGS use and perceived health.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0295013.g001

Path 1: UGS use -> sentiments toward UGS -> self-reported health

Path 2: UGS use -> UGS quality -> self-reported health

Path 3: UGS use -> time spent in UGS -> self-reported health

Path 4: UGS use -> sentiments toward UGS -> time spent in UGS -> self-reported health

Path 5: UGS use -> UGS quality -> time spent in UGS -> self-reported health

When examining the pathways, several sociodemographic attributes were initially considered as exogenous factors or controls. However, after rigorous analysis, it was found that only age and socioeconomic status bore significant results. Consequently, these two variables were retained and integrated into the final model.

3. Results

Summary statistics of the study population are presented in Table 1. The data indicates a diverse range of respondents in terms of age, with the highest percentage (24.4%) falling into the youngest age group (18–24 years). This age distribution aligns with the 2020 Population and Housing Census in Mexico, highlighting the prevalence of this age group among legal adults in Mexico City [102]. Furthermore, the survey encompassed individuals from all income quintiles. The income quintile with the highest representation reflects the economic landscape of Mexico City, known for its highest per capita income in the country. Notably, a significant majority of respondents (69%) reported frequent use of UGS, underscoring their substantial utilization. However, only 13% rated their health as excellent, while the majority (35%) positioned their health in the middle of the scale (good).

thumbnail
Download:
Table 1. Summary statistics of the study population (n = 1,707, online survey, May 2020).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0295013.t001

In terms of sentiments toward UGS, a significant portion of respondents (66%) emphasized the paramount importance of UGS for both city life and their overall quality of life. However, a notable percentage held contrasting views: 7.1% regarded UGS as unimportant, and 13% considered them only slightly important. This finding underscores that approximately one-fifth of the surveyed individuals did not perceive green spaces as crucial to urban quality of life. Concerning the quality of green spaces in people’s neighborhoods, most individuals felt that this was poor (28%). Intriguingly, the highest rating—excellent quality—garnered the fewest responses, accounting for merely 12% of the participants. This disparity in perceptions sheds light on varying assessments of the local green space quality. Regarding the duration of visits to UGS, a significant majority (69%) reported spending between 16 and 60 minutes per visit. Remarkably, one-fifth of respondents allocated more than 60 minutes during each visit, highlighting the substantial investment of time in utilizing these green spaces.

3.1. Structural equation modeling

Fig 2 shows the final SEM model, delineating the direct and indirect pathways between UGS use and self-perceived health. A comprehensive evaluation of the model’s goodness-of-fit was performed using various indicators. The chi-square goodness-of-fit test yielded a p-value of 0.261. Additionally, crucial fit indices were scrutinized, namely the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA = 0.012), the comparative fit index (CFI = 1.000), the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI = 0.992), and the standardized root mean squared residual (SRMR = 0.005). All of these metrics affirmed that the model exhibited a strong and favorable fit.

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 2. Final SEM model describing the direct and indirect effects of UGS use on self-rated health.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0295013.g002

To test the total indirect effects of UGS use on perceived health, a bootstrapping method was applied. Many scholars recommend the bootstrapping method over a normal theory approach when testing indirect effects due to its robustness and accuracy [103]. This method has demonstrated effectiveness in estimating both standardized and unstandardized indirect effects. It involves resampling the raw data and generating an empirical distribution of indirect effect point estimates, allowing for the establishment of a confidence interval [104]. In this study, 2,000 bootstrap samples were utilized to construct percentile confidence intervals.

The results obtained through the bootstrapping method indicated a weakly significant direct path from UGS use to self-perceived health (coeff = 0.0427, p<0.10). Notably, the five indirect pathways explored in the model were highly significant (coeff = 0.1950, p<0.010), as outlined in Table 2. These findings provide substantial evidence that sentiments toward UGS, UGS quality, and the time spent during UGS visits significantly mediate the relationship between UGS use and health.

thumbnail
Download:
Table 2. Standardized direct, indirect, and total effects of green space use on self-reported health.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0295013.t002

Among the introduced exogenous variables used as controls, age was found to be significantly associated with respondents’ perceived health both through UGS quality (coeff = 0.0126, p <0.01), as well as time spent in UGS (coeff = 0.0030, p < 0.01), as outlined in Table 3. Similarly, income was found to indirectly influence perceived health through the same mediating factors, exhibiting strong significance for UGS quality (coeff = 0.0153, p <0.01) and moderate significance for time spent in UGS (coeff = 0.0061, p <0.05). Interestingly, sentiments toward UGS were not identified as mediators between age or income and perceived health.

thumbnail
Download:
Table 3. Standardized direct, indirect, and total effect of additional exogenous variables on perceived health.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0295013.t003

In terms of direct effects, income demonstrated a robust association with better-perceived health (coeff = 0.0832, p <0.01), albeit with a modest effect. Conversely, the direct effect of age on health was moderately significant (coeff = 0.040, p <0.05). Both age (coeff = 0.0455, p <0.01) and income (coeff = 0.1045, p <0.01) exhibited more substantial direct effects on self-reported health than UGS use (coeff = 0.0427, p <0.10), with their total effects being highly significant.

4. Discussion

The findings of this study underscore the significant but modest indirect effect of mediating factors—namely, sentiments toward UGS, UGS quality, and time spent in UGS—interceding in the pathway between the frequency of UGS use and self-reported health of residents of Mexico City. In terms of sentiments toward UGS, these results resonate with studies from the United States, Canada, and England, suggesting that an individual’s inclination to rate spaces favorably or unfavorably (the sentiments toward the space) significantly influences the degree to which the space’s use is associated with health outcomes [70, 105, 106].

In addition, this study unveils that the time spent in UGS acts as a mediator between sentiments toward UGS and health. In other words, spending more time in UGS is associated with individuals’ positive sentiments toward them. This finding aligns with the results of a study conducted in Turkey by Akpinar (2016) [80], which established that increased time in green spaces led to favorable perceptions of the spaces, including their features, which were associated with improved physical health outcomes. Similarly, a study conducted in Oslo, Norway, during the COVID-19 pandemic indicated that individuals with a favorable attitude towards green spaces tended to spend increased durations in these areas, resulting in enhanced well-being [107].

In order to enhance sentiments toward UGS, public health campaigns to promote a positive perception of UGS and reinforcing their importance for urban quality of life could prove to be a significant contributor to intensifying the relationship between UGS use and perceived [108, 109]. For instance, in Australia, Sugiyama et al. (2018) [110] have shown that public campaigns to modify existing sentiments can encourage healthier behaviors. Moreover, a systematic literature review by Hunter et al. (2015) [111] on the use of UGS, highlighted how interventions like the introduction of physical activity programs in urban parks can incentivize the use of these spaces, positively altering the perception or sentiment toward parks, leading to improved health outcomes. Beyond physical activity programs, apps and public messaging can also become effective inducements to modify sentiments or attitudes [112]. For example, in George County, Mississippi, the Department of Parks and Recreation introduced a tool to encourage and track park and trail usage, highlighting the importance of these spaces in improving people’s well-being, which yielded positive results for UGS use [113].

The SEM findings also suggest that the quality of UGS acts as a significant mediator in the pathway between UGS use and self-perceived health, with a higher perceived quality of UGS strengthening this relationship. Veitch et al. (2012) [114], who studied park use in Victoria, Australia, found that a sense of enhancement in the aesthetics—essentially, an improvement in the quality of the space—substantially boosted park use. Similarly, in a photo-journal study conducted in Mexico City, researchers found that residents who perceived the UGS in their neighborhood as high quality were more inclined to use them, with some residents even investing their own resources to improve the green spaces in their area [115]. The latter underscores the possibility to engage residents in the design, upgrading, or preservation of environmental settings to tentatively enhance the utilization and public perception of UGS. The engagement process could encompass employing tools such as surveys, checklists, meetings, focus groups, or consultations to discern the preferred types of facilities, activities, or operating hours for the relevant space [116].

Building upon analogous studies that employed quality as a mediating factor between UGS use and health [117], it is important to note that the survey utilized for this analysis did not precisely define the concept of "quality" concerning UGS. In this regard, attaining a more comprehensive understanding of the specific attributes constituting quality can inform more insightful analyses [115, 118]. Therefore, conducting additional research on the features, amenities, or activities that align with the community’s preferences and needs, thus defining the quality of UGS, is essential to understand how to strengthen the association between UGS use and health. In countries like Canada, Italy, Australia, and Indonesia, methods for defining and evaluating UGS quality, like community participation processes, have been integrated into park management to incorporate community needs into the planning and development of these spaces [119–121].

Buono et al. (2012) [122] have highlighted the necessity of establishing quality standards to ensure the effectiveness of green space upgrading practices. Therefore, creating a guide or setting essential principles to define the quality of UGS in Mexico City would be valuable. This approach would enable the inclusion of objective measures in the analysis, complementing the subjective perceptions of the space [118]. Moreover, having a clearly defined concept of quality might be beneficial for understanding the intrinsic connection between quality and safety. Several studies propose that, especially for women, quality and safety are intertwined and inseparable [123, 124], particularly in the Latin American in context [55, 125].

Finally, the findings also suggest that time spent in UGS acts as an additional mediator between UGS use and self-rated health. While some researchers have argued that visiting green spaces is sufficient to benefit from them, others have claimed that spending a certain amount of time in UGS is essential to reaping their benefits [126–128]. For instance, a study conducted in four European cities (Barcelona, Doetinchem, Kaunas, Stoke-on-Trent) by van den Berg et al. (2016) [129], which investigated the association between the time spent visiting green spaces and mental health using multilevel analyses, revealed a positive and significant association. Furthermore, a comprehensive meta-analysis encompassing 103 observational and 40 interventional studies found evidence to support the argument that individuals who spend more time being in green spaces experience significantly diminished risks of various chronic illnesses [4].

The SEM used in this analysis also revealed that the time spent in UGS serves as a mediating pathway between sentiments toward UGS or UGS quality and self-reported health. These findings align with the existing literature, indicating that the quality of UGS is linked to the time individuals spend in these spaces, consequently impacting the health outcomes of the users [130]. Similarly, these results align with recent studies in the UK, indicating that as the sentiments toward UGS became more positive due to the changes brought about by COVID-19, individuals expressed an increased eagerness to spend more time in these spaces, subsequently reporting positive health benefits [128, 131].

In this vein, introducing activities that encourage people to spend more time in UGS could prove to be an effective strategy to increase both the frequency and duration of UGS visits [132]. This, in turn, could enhance the positive association between UGS use and perceived health. Given the extensive evidence highlighting parks as ideal spaces for social interactions, integrating activities and programs in parks could be an effective approach to potentially extend the time people spend in UGS during each visit [133–135]. Nevertheless, further studies analyzing the mechanisms that foster increased interest and time spent in UGS within the context of Mexico are necessary for a comprehensive understanding of how to enhance this aspect.

5. Strengths and limitations

Although UGS research has gained traction in recent decades, substantial knowledge gaps persist. Particularly in Latin America, research in this domain has been [33, 37]. This study applied Structural Equation Modeling to explore various mediating pathways between UGS use and self-perceived health within one of Latin America’s megacities, Mexico City. Consequently, it stands as one of the few studies in this region delving into intervening factors affecting the relationship between green spaces and health. The findings of this study offer valuable insights to the government of Mexico City, suggesting strategies to strengthen the relationship between of UGS use and health in the city. These strategies include enhancing positive sentiments and attitudes towards these spaces, improving UGS quality, and introducing initiatives to encourage increased time spent in these areas. Studies akin to the current one play a crucial role in advancing our comprehension of the mechanisms linking UGS use and health in this region.

In terms of limitations, it’s vital to stress that SEM, while providing opportunities to examine direct and indirect effects, does not imply causality. Accordingly, causal relationships between variables cannot be inferred from the analyses conducted. Nonetheless, while this study is cross-sectional in nature, it is crucial to emphasize that the findings open intriguing avenues for future research, particularly in terms of UGS quality and sentiments toward green spaces. In addition, the model delves into individual-level variations, acknowledging that external factors, such as high crime rates, could inhibit the utilization of green spaces. Given the structural equation modeling framework of this study, exogenous factors were not specifically investigated.

Moreover, it is important to note that certain latent variables that have been shown to significantly mediate the relationship between UGS use and health in diverse studies, such as social cohesion [30], were not included in this study’s SEM. For instance, in a study conducted in 124 neighborhoods across four European cities, social cohesion was identified as a mediator for the frequency of green space visits and health [79]. Similarly, in a study on Dutch cities, researchers found that the positive health effects of greenery may be amplified by social cohesion [136]. Another study conducted by Cradock et al. (2009) [137] demonstrated that increases in physical activity in parks in Chicago, U.S., were associated with high levels of social cohesion. Nevertheless, social cohesion is not strictly an observable variable, and existing instruments or indicators to measure social cohesion have not been tested in the Latin American context, with definitions varying considerably [138].

Another limitation was the use of an online survey, which might have constrained the engagement of marginalized groups. Research has demonstrated that data collection tools relying on the Internet can inadvertently discriminate against underprivileged populations, as individuals without access to the internet at home are automatically excluded [139]. Nevertheless, given the prevailing risks and restrictions during the data collection period of this study (May 2020), an online survey was considered the least risky and most efficient method to gather insights into participants’ UGS usage patterns and their perceptions of green spaces. In addition, this data collection approach might have disproportionately excluded older adults due to potential challenges with technology, as they are typically less technologically adept, resulting in their underrepresentation among the respondents. Nonetheless, the survey managed to gather responses from all age groups. Lastly, there might be a selection bias towards individuals highly interested in the subject of UGS. This bias could also manifest in other data collection methods, such as phone surveys or mail questionnaires, as those less engaged with the subject might choose not to participate.

6. Conclusions

This study provided valuable insights into the relationship between the use of urban green spaces and the self-reported health among residents of Mexico City. Employing Structural Equation Modeling, the research effectively addressed notable gaps in existing literature by analyzing the multifaceted connections between UGS use and health outcomes, considering three critical mediators: sentiments toward UGS, UGS quality, and time spent in UGS.

The findings shed light on the nuanced relationship between UGS use and perceived health. They emphasize the importance of considering mediating factors to understand the intricate mechanisms through which UGS use influences self-perceived outcomes. While UGS use exhibited a weak and minor direct impact on self-reported health, the indirect pathways were notably robust, collectively bearing more substantive weight. Thus, in Mexico City, enhancing aspects such as quality of UGS, time spent in UGS, and sentiments toward UGS can potentially bolster the positive association between UGS use and self-reported health.

Furthermore, the study underscored the need for targeted interventions and thoughtful policy formulation to cultivate favorable perceptions of UGS, elevate UGS quality, and encourage extended periods spent in these spaces. Public health campaigns, engagement initiatives, and activity programs within UGS might be effective tools to achieve these objectives and enhance the public health outcomes associated with UGS use. Nonetheless, additional research on these instruments is needed.

Finally, this study is important in its contribution to the discussion on the impact of nature-based solutions on public health in Latin America, where studies are still scarce. As research in this field continues to grow, more evidence is expected to emerge regarding the association between UGS use on health and well-being in Latin American urban settings, and the pathways to strengthen this association. Researchers, policymakers, and urban planners are increasingly recognizing the importance of green spaces in creating healthier and more livable cities in the region. In this regard, this study provides a solid foundation for future studies and policy interventions aimed at optimizing the health benefits derived from UGS and enhancing the overall livability of urban environments, not only in Mexico City but also in similar settings globally.

References

  1. 1. Hickman C., ‘To brighten the aspect of our streets and increase the health and enjoyment of our city’: The National Health Society and urban green space in late-nineteenth century London. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2013. 118: p. 112–119.
  2. 2. Swanwick C., Dunnett N., and Woolley H., Nature, role and value of green space in towns and cities: An overview. J Built Environment, 2003: p. 94–106.
  3. 3. van den Berg A.E. and van den Berg M.M.H.E.. Health benefits of plants and green space: Establishing the evidence base. 2015. International Society for Horticultural Science (ISHS), Leuven, Belgium.
  4. 4. Twohig-Bennett C. and Jones A., The health benefits of the great outdoors: A systematic review and meta-analysis of greenspace exposure and health outcomes. Environ Res, 2018. 166: p. 628–637. pmid:29982151
  5. 5. Tost H., Champagne F.A., and Meyer-Lindenberg A., Environmental influence in the brain, human welfare and mental health. Nat Neurosci, 2015. 18(10): p. 1421–31. pmid:26404717
  6. 6. Wood L., et al., Public green spaces and positive mental health—investigating the relationship between access, quantity and types of parks and mental wellbeing. Health Place, 2017. 48: p. 63–71. pmid:28942343
  7. 7. Wolch J.R., Byrne J., and Newell J.P., Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: The challenge of making cities ‘just green enough’. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2014. 125: p. 234–244.
  8. 8. Chen C., et al., Impact of Perception of Green Space for Health Promotion on Willingness to Use Parks and Actual Use among Young Urban Residents. 2020. 17(15): p. 5560.
  9. 9. Robinson J.M., et al., Let Nature Be Thy Medicine: A Socioecological Exploration of Green Prescribing in the UK. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2020. 17(10): p. 3460. pmid:32429198
  10. 10. Ward Thompson C., et al., More green space is linked to less stress in deprived communities: Evidence from salivary cortisol patterns. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2012. 105(3): p. 221–229.
  11. 11. Mayen Huerta C., Rethinking the distribution of urban green spaces in Mexico City: Lessons from the COVID-19 outbreak. Urban For Urban Green, 2022. 70: p. 127525. pmid:35228844
  12. 12. Ugolini F., et al., Usage of urban green space and related feelings of deprivation during the COVID-19 lockdown: Lessons learned from an Italian case study. Land use policy, 2021. 105: p. 105437. pmid:35431392
  13. 13. van Dillen S.M., et al., Greenspace in urban neighbourhoods and residents’ health: adding quality to quantity. J Epidemiol Community Health, 2012. 66(6): p. e8. pmid:21715445
  14. 14. Houlden V., et al., The relationship between greenspace and the mental wellbeing of adults: A systematic review. PLoS One, 2018. 13(9): p. e0203000. pmid:30208073
  15. 15. Hong A., et al., Neighbourhood green space and health disparities in the global South: Evidence from Cali, Colombia. Health Place, 2021. 72: p. 102690. pmid:34700062
  16. 16. Bonilla-Bedoya S., et al., Forests and urban green areas as tools to address the challenges of sustainability in Latin American urban socio-ecological systems. Applied Geography, 2020. 125: p. 102343.
  17. 17. Ordóñez Barona C., et al., Views of government and non-government actors on urban forest management and governance in ten Latin-American capital cities. Land Use Policy, 2023. 129: p. 106635.
  18. 18. Aldana-Domínguez J., et al., Unpacking the complexity of nature´s contributions to human well-being: lessons to transform the Barranquilla Metropolitan Area into a BiodiverCity. Ecosystems and People, 2022. 18(1): p. 430–446.
  19. 19. Nath T.K., Zhe Han S.S., and Lechner A.M., Urban green space and well-being in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2018. 36: p. 34–41.
  20. 20. Sakip S.R.M., Akhir N.M., and Omar S.S., Determinant Factors of Successful Public Parks in Malaysia. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2015. 170: p. 422–432.
  21. 21. You H., Characterizing the inequalities in urban public green space provision in Shenzhen, China. Habitat International, 2016. 56: p. 176–180.
  22. 22. Boone C.G., et al., Parks and People: An Environmental Justice Inquiry in Baltimore, Maryland. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 2009. 99(4): p. 767–787.
  23. 23. Ferguson M., et al., Contrasting distributions of urban green infrastructure across social and ethno-racial groups. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2018. 175: p. 136–148.
  24. 24. Viezzer J. and Biondi D., The influence of urban, socio-economic, and eco-environmental aspects on COVID-19 cases, deaths and mortality: A multi-city case in the Atlantic Forest, Brazil. Sustain Cities Soc, 2021. 69: p. 102859. pmid:33758745
  25. 25. Spano G., et al., Association between indoor-outdoor green features and psychological health during the COVID-19 lockdown in Italy: A cross-sectional nationwide study. Urban For Urban Green, 2021. 62: p. 127156. pmid:33911997
  26. 26. Marconi P.L., Perelman P.E., and Salgado V.G., Green in times of COVID-19: urban green space relevance during the COVID-19 pandemic in Buenos Aires City. Urban Ecosyst, 2022. 25(3): p. 941–953. pmid:35095260
  27. 27. Kronenberg J., et al., Environmental justice in the context of urban green space availability, accessibility, and attractiveness in postsocialist cities. Cities, 2020. 106: p. 102862.
  28. 28. Braubach M., et al., Effects of Urban Green Space on Environmental Health, Equity and Resilience, in Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas. 2017, Springer, Cham. p. 187–205.
  29. 29. Rodríguez M.C.M., Nájera A.L.C., and Martínez M.V., Green spaces resume their importancein cities after the COVID-19 pandemicA case of study from Mexico City, in Environmental Resilience and Transformation in Times of COVID-19, A.L. Ramanathan, et al., Editors. 2021, Elsevier. p. 299–310.
  30. 30. Yang M., et al., Using structural equation modeling to examine pathways between perceived residential green space and mental health among internal migrants in China. Environ Res, 2020. 183: p. 109121. pmid:32006771
  31. 31. Wan C. and Shen G.Q., Encouraging the use of urban green space: The mediating role of attitude, perceived usefulness and perceived behavioural control. Habitat International, 2015. 50: p. 130–139.
  32. 32. Schipperijn J., et al., Influences on the use of urban green space–A case study in Odense, Denmark. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2010. 9(1): p. 25–32.
  33. 33. Markevych I., et al., Exploring pathways linking greenspace to health: Theoretical and methodological guidance. Environ Res, 2017. 158: p. 301–317. pmid:28672128
  34. 34. Wang D., et al., A comparison of perceived and geographic access to predict urban park use. Cities, 2015. 42: p. 85–96.
  35. 35. Fay M. and Ruggeri Laderchi C., Urban Poverty in Latin America and the Caribbean, in The Urban Poor in Latin America, Fay M., Editor. 2005, The World Bank: Washington. p. 19–46.
    • 36. Messina J. and Silva J., Wage Inequality in Latin America: Understanding the Past to Prepare for the Future. 2018, The World Bank Group: Washington.
      • 37. Rigolon A., et al., Access to Urban Green Space in Cities of the Global South: A Systematic Literature Review. Urban Science, 2018. 2(3): p. 67.
      • 38. Fernández-Álvarez R., Inequitable distribution of green public space in Mexico City: an environmental injustice case. Economía, sociedad y territorio, 2017. 17(54): p. 399–428.
      • 39. Núñez J.M., Spatial analysis of urban green spaces in Mexico City. Economía, sociedad y territorio, 2021. 21(67): p. 803–833.
      • 40. Rigolon A., et al., Green Space and Health Equity: A Systematic Review on the Potential of Green Space to Reduce Health Disparities. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2021. 18(5): p. 2563. pmid:33806546
      • 41. van den Berg M., et al., Health benefits of green spaces in the living environment: A systematic review of epidemiological studies. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2015. 14(4): p. 806–816.
      • 42. Florida R. and McLean J.W., What Inclusive Urban Development Can Look Like, Review H.B., Editor. 2017.
      • 43. Kim D. and Jin J., Does happiness data say urban parks are worth it? Landscape and Urban Planning, 2018. 178: p. 1–11.
      • 44. Aerts R., Honnay O., and Van Nieuwenhuyse A., Biodiversity and human health: mechanisms and evidence of the positive health effects of diversity in nature and green spaces. Br Med Bull, 2018. 127(1): p. 5–22. pmid:30007287
      • 45. Comber A., Brunsdon C., and Green E., Using a GIS-based network analysis to determine urban greenspace accessibility for different ethnic and religious groups. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2008. 86(1): p. 103–114.
      • 46. Edwards N., et al., Development of a Public Open Space Desktop Auditing Tool (POSDAT): A remote sensing approach. Applied Geography, 2013. 38: p. 22–30.
      • 47. Taylor A.F., et al., Growing Up in the Inner City. Environment and Behavior, 2016. 30(1): p. 3–27.
      • 48. Keniger L.E., et al., What are the benefits of interacting with nature? Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2013. 10(3): p. 913–35. pmid:23466828
      • 49. Lee A.C. and Maheswaran R., The health benefits of urban green spaces: a review of the evidence. J Public Health (Oxf), 2011. 33(2): p. 212–22. pmid:20833671
      • 50. Talen E. and Anselin L., Assessing Spatial Equity: An Evaluation of Measures of Accessibility to Public Playgrounds. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 2016. 30(4): p. 595–613.
      • 51. Zhang L., et al., Assessment of mediators in the associations between urban green spaces and self-reported health. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2022. 226: p. 104503.
      • 52. Vanaken G.-J. and Danckaerts M., Impact of Green Space Exposure on Children’s and Adolescents’ Mental Health: A Systematic Review. 2018. 15(12): p. 2668.
      • 53. Beyer K.M., et al., Exposure to neighborhood green space and mental health: evidence from the survey of the health of Wisconsin. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2014. 11(3): p. 3453–72. pmid:24662966
      • 54. Dadvand P., et al., Lifelong Residential Exposure to Green Space and Attention: A Population-based Prospective Study. Environ Health Perspect, 2017. 125(9): p. 097016. pmid:28934095
      • 55. Wright Wendel H.E., Zarger R.K., and Mihelcic J.R., Accessibility and usability: Green space preferences, perceptions, and barriers in a rapidly urbanizing city in Latin America. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2012. 107(3): p. 272–282.
      • 56. Coombes E., Jones A.P., and Hillsdon M., The relationship of physical activity and overweight to objectively measured green space accessibility and use. Soc Sci Med, 2010. 70(6): p. 816–22. pmid:20060635
      • 57. Lafortezza R., et al., Benefits and well-being perceived by people visiting green spaces in periods of heat stress. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2009. 8(2): p. 97–108.
      • 58. Mayen Huerta C. and Utomo A., Evaluating the association between urban green spaces and subjective well-being in Mexico city during the COVID-19 pandemic. Health Place, 2021. 70: p. 102606. pmid:34139612
      • 59. Hartig T., et al., Nature and health. Annu Rev Public Health, 2014. 35(1): p. 207–28. pmid:24387090
      • 60. Mazumder R., Experiential equity: an environmental neuroscientific lens for disparities in urban stress. Global Reflections on COVID-19 Urban Inequalities, 2021. 1: p. 187–194.
      • 61. Valentine G., The Geography of Women’s Fear. Area, 1989. 21(4): p. 385–390.
      • 62. Viswanath K. and Mehrotra S.T., ’Shall we go out?’ Women’s safety in public spaces in Delhi. Economic Political Weekly, 2007: p. 1542–1548.
      • 63. Talal M.L. and Santelmann M.V., Visitor access, use, and desired improvements in urban parks. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2021. 63: p. 127216.
      • 64. Gunnarsson B., et al., Effects of biodiversity and environment-related attitude on perception of urban green space. Urban Ecosystems, 2016. 20(1): p. 37–49.
      • 65. Xie B., et al., Healthy aging with parks: Association between park accessibility and the health status of older adults in urban China. Sustainable Cities and Society, 2018. 43: p. 476–486.
      • 66. Rigolon A., A complex landscape of inequity in access to urban parks: A literature review. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2016. 153: p. 160–169.
      • 67. McCormack G.R., et al., Characteristics of urban parks associated with park use and physical activity: a review of qualitative research. Health Place, 2010. 16(4): p. 712–26. pmid:20356780
      • 68. Zhang S. and Zhou W., Recreational visits to urban parks and factors affecting park visits: Evidence from geotagged social media data. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2018. 180: p. 27–35.
      • 69. Van Herzele A. and Wiedemann T., A monitoring tool for the provision of accessible and attractive urban green spaces. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2003. 63(2): p. 109–126.
      • 70. Balram S. and Dragievi S., Attitudes toward urban green spaces: integrating questionnaire survey and collaborative GIS techniques to improve attitude measurements. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2005. 71(2–4): p. 147–162.
      • 71. Knobel P., Dadvand P., and Maneja-Zaragoza R., A systematic review of multi-dimensional quality assessment tools for urban green spaces. Health & Place, 2019. 59: p. 102198. pmid:31525616
      • 72. Sreetheran M. and van den Bosch C.C.K., A socio-ecological exploration of fear of crime in urban green spaces–A systematic review. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2014. 13(1): p. 1–18.
      • 73. Ma B., Hauer R.J., and Xu C., Effects of Design Proportion and Distribution of Color in Urban and Suburban Green Space Planning to Visual Aesthetics Quality. 2020. 11(3): p. 278.
      • 74. Braçe O., Garrido‐Cumbrera M., and Correa‐Fernández J., Gender differences in the perceptions of green spaces characteristics. Social Science Quarterly, 2021. 102(6): p. 2640–2648.
      • 75. Fongar C., et al., Does Perceived Green Space Quality Matter? Linking Norwegian Adult Perspectives on Perceived Quality to Motivation and Frequency of Visits. 2019. 16(13): p. 2327.
      • 76. Krellenberg K., Welz J., and Reyes-Päcke S., Urban green areas and their potential for social interaction–A case study of a socio-economically mixed neighbourhood in Santiago de Chile. Habitat International, 2014. 44: p. 11–21.
      • 77. Musterd S., Galster G., and Andersson R., Temporal Dimensions and Measurement of Neighbourhood Effects. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 2012. 44(3): p. 605–627.
      • 78. Miralles-Guasch C., et al., Natural Landscape, Infrastructure, and Health: The Physical Activity Implications of Urban Green Space Composition among the Elderly. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2019. 16(20): p. 3986. pmid:31635362
      • 79. van den Berg M.M., et al., Do Physical Activity, Social Cohesion, and Loneliness Mediate the Association Between Time Spent Visiting Green Space and Mental Health? Environ Behav, 2019. 51(2): p. 144–166. pmid:30662076
      • 80. Akpinar A., How is quality of urban green spaces associated with physical activity and health? Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2016. 16: p. 76–83.
      • 81. Hansmann R., Hug S.-M., and Seeland K., Restoration and stress relief through physical activities in forests and parks. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2007. 6(4): p. 213–225.
      • 82. Hensen B., et al., Remote data collection for public health research in a COVID-19 era: ethical implications, challenges and opportunities. Health Policy Plan, 2021. 36(3): p. 360–368. pmid:33881138
      • 83. Statista, Internet usage in Mexico—Statistics & Facts. 2019.
        • 84. Barrios M., et al., Response Rates and Data Quality in Web and Mail Surveys Administered to PhD Holders. Social Science Computer Review, 2010. 29(2): p. 208–220.
        • 85. Vargas-Hernández J.G. and Estrada Zamora C., Citizen Perception of Open Data and Innovation in Mexico. European Public & Social Innovation Review, 2018. 3(2): p. 37–46.
        • 86. Hair J.F., et al., Mirror, mirror on the wall: a comparative evaluation of composite-based structural equation modeling methods. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2017. 45(5): p. 616–632.
        • 87. Tost H., et al., Neural correlates of individual differences in affective benefit of real-life urban green space exposure. Nat Neurosci, 2019. 22(9): p. 1389–1393. pmid:31358990
        • 88. Jylhä M., What is self-rated health and why does it predict mortality? Towards a unified conceptual model. Social Science & Medicine, 2009. 69(3): p. 307–316.
        • 89. Brener N.D., Billy J.O., and Grady W.R., Assessment of factors affecting the validity of self-reported health-risk behavior among adolescents: evidence from the scientific literature. J Adolesc Health, 2003. 33(6): p. 436–57. pmid:14642706
        • 90. van Doorslaer E. and Jones A.M., Inequalities in self-reported health: validation of a new approach to measurement. J Health Econ, 2003. 22(1): p. 61–87. pmid:12564718
        • 91. Valle A.M., Social class, marginality and self-assessed health: a cross-sectional analysis of the health gradient in Mexico. International Journal for Equity in Health, 2009. 8(1): p. 3.
        • 92. Gallegos-Carrillo K., et al., [Self-perceived health status: an approach of the elderly in Mexico]. Rev Saude Publica, 2006. 40(5): p. 792–801.
        • 93. Flores Y.N., et al., Perceived health status and cardiometabolic risk among a sample of youth in Mexico. Quality of Life Research, 2015. 24(8): p. 1887–1897. pmid:25648756
        • 94. Reyes Päcke S. and Figueroa Aldunce I.M., Distribución, superficie y accesibilidad de las áreas verdes en Santiago de Chile. EURE, 2010. 36(109): p. 89–110.
        • 95. Ayala-Azcárraga C., Diaz D., and Zambrano L., Characteristics of urban parks and their relation to user well-being. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2019. 189: p. 27–35.
        • 96. Diener E. and Chan M.Y., Happy people live longer: Subjective well‐being contributes to health and longevity. J Applied Psychology: Health and Well‐Being, 2011. 3(1): p. 1–43.
        • 97. Kothencz G., et al., Urban Green Space Perception and Its Contribution to Well-Being. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2017. 14(7): p. 766. pmid:28704969
        • 98. Deeks A., et al., The effects of gender and age on health related behaviors. BMC Public Health, 2009. 9(1): p. 213. pmid:19563685
        • 99. Gonzalez-Sanguino C., et al., Mental health consequences during the initial stage of the 2020 Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) in Spain. Brain Behav Immun, 2020. 87: p. 172–176. pmid:32405150
        • 100. House J.S., Kessler R.C., and Herzog A.R., Age, socioeconomic status, and health. Milbank Q, 1990. 68(3): p. 383–411. pmid:2266924
        • 101. Rodriguez-Loureiro L., et al., Social inequalities in the associations between urban green spaces, self-perceived health and mortality in Brussels: Results from a census-based cohort study. Health Place, 2021. 70: p. 102603. pmid:34166885
        • 102. SEDECO, Population and Housing Census Mexico City. 2020: Mexico City.
          • 103. Cheung M.W.L., Comparison of methods for constructing confidence intervals of standardized indirect effects. Behavior Research Methods, 2009. 41(2): p. 425–438. pmid:19363183
          • 104. Pesigan I.J.A. and Cheung S.F., SEM-Based Methods to Form Confidence Intervals for Indirect Effect: Still Applicable Given Nonnormality, Under Certain Conditions. Front Psychol, 2020. 11: p. 571928. pmid:33391086
          • 105. Erickson D.L., Ryan R.L., and De Young R., Woodlots in the rural landscape: landowner motivations and management attitudes in a Michigan (USA) case study. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2002. 58(2–4): p. 101–112.
          • 106. Southon G.E., et al., Perceived species-richness in urban green spaces: Cues, accuracy and well-being impacts. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2018. 172: p. 1–10.
          • 107. Venter Z.S., et al., Urban nature in a time of crisis: recreational use of green space increases during the COVID-19 outbreak in Oslo, Norway. Environmental Research Letters, 2020. 15(10): p. 104075.
          • 108. Slater S.J., Christiana R.W., and Gustat J., Recommendations for Keeping Parks and Green Space Accessible for Mental and Physical Health During COVID-19 and Other Pandemics. Prev Chronic Dis, 2020. 17: p. E59. pmid:32644919
          • 109. Buchner D.M. and Gobster P.H., Promoting active visits to parks: models and strategies for transdisciplinary collaboration. J Phys Act Health, 2007. 4 Suppl 1(s1): p. S36–49. pmid:17672222
          • 110. Sugiyama T., et al., Advantages of public green spaces in enhancing population health. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2018. 178: p. 12–17.
          • 111. Hunter R.F., et al., The impact of interventions to promote physical activity in urban green space: a systematic review and recommendations for future research. Soc Sci Med, 2015. 124: p. 246–56. pmid:25462429
          • 112. Guan H., et al., Promoting healthy movement behaviours among children during the COVID-19 pandemic. Lancet Child Adolesc Health, 2020. 4(6): p. 416–418. pmid:32458805
          • 113. Baker D., et al., Healthy Parks, Healthy Person App. 2021, Partnership for Action Learning in Sustainability (PALS).
          • 114. Veitch J., et al., Park improvements and park activity: a natural experiment. Am J Prev Med, 2012. 42(6): p. 616–9. pmid:22608379
          • 115. Mayen Huerta C. and Cafagna G., Snapshot of the Use of Urban Green Spaces in Mexico City during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2021. 18(8): p. 4304. pmid:33919654
          • 116. Shuib K.B., Hashim H., and Nasir N.A.M., Community Participation Strategies in Planning for Urban Parks. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2015. 168: p. 311–320.
          • 117. Carrus G., et al., Go greener, feel better? The positive effects of biodiversity on the well-being of individuals visiting urban and peri-urban green areas. Landscape and Urban Planning, 2015. 134: p. 221–228.
          • 118. Maas J., et al., Social contacts as a possible mechanism behind the relation between green space and health. Health & Place, 2009. 15(2): p. 586–595. pmid:19022699
          • 119. Gina Elliott B.M.B., Community Participation in Marine Protected Area Management: Wakatobi National Park, Sulawesi, Indonesia. Coastal Management, 2001. 29(4): p. 295–316.
          • 120. Chen S., Sun X., and Su S., A Study of the Mechanism of Community Participation in Resilient Governance of National Parks: With Wuyishan National Park as a Case. Sustainability, 2021. 13(18): p. 10090.
          • 121. Rock M.J., et al., Public engagement and community participation in governing urban parks: a case study in changing and implementing a policy addressing off-leash dogs. Critical Public Health, 2016. 26(5): p. 588–601.
          • 122. Buono F., Pediaditi K., and Carsjens G.J., Local Community Participation in Italian National Parks Management: Theory versus Practice. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 2012. 14(2): p. 189–208.
          • 123. Gidlow C.J. and Ellis N.J., Neighbourhood green space in deprived urban communities: issues and barriers to use. Local Environment, 2011. 16(10): p. 989–1002.
          • 124. Pérez-Tejera F., et al., Examining perceived safety and park use in public open spaces: The case of Barcelona. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2022. 81: p. 101823.
          • 125. Mayen Huerta C. and Utomo A., Barriers Affecting Women’s Access to Urban Green Spaces during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Land, 2022. 11(4): p. 560.
          • 126. Hong S.-K., et al., Impact of Frequency of Visits and Time Spent in Urban Green Space on Subjective Well-Being. Sustainability, 2019. 11(15): p. 4189.
          • 127. McCormick R., Does Access to Green Space Impact the Mental Well-being of Children: A Systematic Review. J Pediatr Nurs, 2017. 37: p. 3–7. pmid:28882650
          • 128. Hannah B., et al., Change in time spent visiting and experiences of green space following restrictions on movement during the COVID-19 pandemic: a nationally representative cross-sectional study of UK adults. BMJ Open, 2021. 11(3): p. e044067. pmid:34006030
          • 129. van den Berg M., et al., Visiting green space is associated with mental health and vitality: A cross-sectional study in four european cities. Health & Place, 2016. 38: p. 8–15. pmid:26796323
          • 130. Knobel P., et al., Quality of urban green spaces influences residents’ use of these spaces, physical activity, and overweight/obesity. Environmental Pollution, 2021. 271: p. 116393. pmid:33388678
          • 131. Crossley A.J. and A. Russo Has the Pandemic Altered Public Perception of How Local Green Spaces Affect Quality of Life in the United Kingdom? Sustainability, 2022. 14, DOI:
          • 132. Yessoufou K., Sithole M., and Elansary H.O., Effects of urban green spaces on human perceived health improvements: Provision of green spaces is not enough but how people use them matters. PLoS One, 2020. 15(9): p. e0239314. pmid:32966324
          • 133. Jennings V. and Bamkole O., The Relationship between Social Cohesion and Urban Green Space: An Avenue for Health Promotion. 2019. 16(3): p. 452.
          • 134. Peters K., Elands B., and Buijs A., Social interactions in urban parks: Stimulating social cohesion? Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 2010. 9(2): p. 93–100.
          • 135. Koonce K.A., Social Cohesion as the Goal: Can Social Cohesion Be Directly Pursued? Peabody Journal of Education, 2011. 86(2): p. 144–154.
          • 136. de Vries S., et al., Streetscape greenery and health: stress, social cohesion and physical activity as mediators. Soc Sci Med, 2013. 94: p. 26–33. pmid:23931942
          • 137. Cradock A.L., et al., Neighborhood social cohesion and youth participation in physical activity in Chicago. Soc Sci Med, 2009. 68(3): p. 427–35. pmid:19036490
          • 138. Liu Y., et al., Exploring the linkage between greenness exposure and depression among Chinese people: Mediating roles of physical activity, stress and social cohesion and moderating role of urbanicity. Health Place, 2019. 58: p. 102168. pmid:31325813
          • 139. Bonevski B., et al., Reaching the hard-to-reach: a systematic review of strategies for improving health and medical research with socially disadvantaged groups. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2014. 14(1): p. 42. pmid:24669751