Wellbeing During Blue Space Visits: The Role of Activity and Environment Type in a National Population Sample of 95,790 English Adults
- 1Psychobiology, Stress and Wellbeing Research Group, School of Psychology Northumbria University Newcastle upon Tyne UK
- 2School of Architecture and Built Environment Northumbria University Newcastle upon Tyne UK
Abstract
Background and Aims Interactions with natural environments are associated with benefits for health and wellbeing, yet it remains unclear whether different types of nature spaces confer distinct benefits. The present study investigated (i) whether visits to blue spaces, such as rivers, lakes, canals and coasts, are associated with greater perceived psychological and physical health benefits than visits to green spaces, and (ii) whether specific activities differentially influence wellbeing. Methods A secondary analysis of the People and Nature Surveys for England (PaNS), a cross‐sectional, nationally representative sample of English adults, was undertaken. Participants (N = 95,790) reported whether they visited a natural environment during the preceding 14 days. Those who did reported the main type of nature space visited, activities undertaken, and perceived mental and physical health in relation to the visit. All respondents reported their general wellbeing. Linear models were used to test pre‐registered hypotheses comparing wellbeing outcomes across nature types and activities. Results Higher levels of perceived mental and physical health were reported following visits to blue spaces compared with green spaces, although effect sizes were small. These associations were strongest for visits to coastal blue spaces. Walking and watching wildlife were consistently associated with wellbeing benefits across all types of nature spaces. Conclusions Visits to blue spaces, and coastal blue spaces in particular, were associated with modestly higher perceived wellbeing benefits relative to visits to green spaces. However, the small magnitude of these effects suggests that their practical significance may be minimal, and that wellbeing benefits may depend less on the type of nature space visited and more on engagement in accessible, everyday activities such as walking and wildlife watching. These findings have implications for the design of inclusive, activity‐focused nature‐based and social prescribing interventions.
Related
- How representative are responders to the english cancer patient experience survey of english breast cancer patients? A cohort study using linked national cancer patient experience survey and cancer registry data
- Normative modernization, social integration, and collective wellbeing: Evidence from a cross-national dynamic panel study
- Digital Sexual Practices, Consensual and Non‐Consensual Experiences and Wellbeing Consequences in the CSF‐2023 French National Survey
- Work environment, symptom burden, and job satisfaction among employed cancer survivors: a national cross-sectional study
- Incident Comorbid Diabetes and Outcomes in Multiple Sclerosis: An English Population-Based Cohort Study.
BibTeX
@article{smith2026wellbeing,
title = {{Wellbeing During Blue Space Visits: The Role of Activity and Environment Type in a National Population Sample of 95,790 English Adults}},
author = {Michael A. Smith and Stephanie Wilkie and Mark A. Wetherell},
journal = {Lifestyle Medicine},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1002/lim2.70073},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1002/lim2.70073},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Wellbeing During Blue Space Visits: The Role of Activity and Environment Type in a National Population Sample of 95,790 English Adults
AU - Michael A. Smith
AU - Stephanie Wilkie
AU - Mark A. Wetherell
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/26
JO - Lifestyle Medicine
DO - 10.1002/lim2.70073
UR - https://doi.org/10.1002/lim2.70073
AB - Background and Aims Interactions with natural environments are associated with benefits for health and wellbeing, yet it remains unclear whether different types of nature spaces confer distinct benefits. The present study investigated (i) whether visits to blue spaces, such as rivers, lakes, canals and coasts, are associated with greater perceived psychological and physical health benefits than visits to green spaces, and (ii) whether specific activities differentially influence wellbeing. Methods A secondary analysis of the People and Nature Surveys for England (PaNS), a cross‐sectional, nationally representative sample of English adults, was undertaken. Participants (N = 95,790) reported whether they visited a natural environment during the preceding 14 days. Those who did reported the main type of nature space visited, activities undertaken, and perceived mental and physical health in relation to the visit. All respondents reported their general wellbeing. Linear models were used to test pre‐registered hypotheses comparing wellbeing outcomes across nature types and activities. Results Higher levels of perceived mental and physical health were reported following visits to blue spaces compared with green spaces, although effect sizes were small. These associations were strongest for visits to coastal blue spaces. Walking and watching wildlife were consistently associated with wellbeing benefits across all types of nature spaces. Conclusions Visits to blue spaces, and coastal blue spaces in particular, were associated with modestly higher perceived wellbeing benefits relative to visits to green spaces. However, the small magnitude of these effects suggests that their practical significance may be minimal, and that wellbeing benefits may depend less on the type of nature space visited and more on engagement in accessible, everyday activities such as walking and wildlife watching. These findings have implications for the design of inclusive, activity‐focused nature‐based and social prescribing interventions.
SN - 2688-3740
ER -