Search

Background: Several studies have evaluated whether the distribution of natural environments differs between marginalized and privileged neighborhoods. However, most studies restricted their analyses to a single or handful of cities and used different natural environment measures. Objectives: We evaluated whether natural environments are inequitably distributed based on socioeconomic status (SES) and race/ethnicity in the contiguous United States. Methods: We obtained SES and race/ethnicity data (2015-2019) for all U.S. Census tracts. For each tract, we calculated the Normalized Different Vegetation Index (NDVI) for 2020, NatureScore (a proprietary measure of the quantity and quality of natural elements) for 2019, park cover for 2020, and blue space for 1984-2018. We used generalized additive models with adjustment for potential confounders and spatial autocorrelation to evaluate associations of SES and race/ethnicity with NDVI, NatureScore, park cover, and odds of containing blue space in all tracts (n = 71,532) and in urban tracts (n = 45,338). To compare effect estimates, we standardized NDVI, NatureScore, and park cover so that beta coefficients presented a percentage increase or decrease of the standard deviation (SD). Results: Tracts with higher SES had higher NDVI, NatureScore, park cover, and odds of containing blue space. For example, urban tracts in the highest median household income quintile had higher NDVI [44.8% of the SD (95% CI: 42.8, 46.8)] and park cover [16.2% of the SD (95% CI: 13.5, 19.0)] compared with urban tracts in the lowest median household income quintile. Across all tracts, a lower percentage of non- Hispanic White individuals and a higher percentage of Hispanic individuals were associated with lower NDVI and NatureScore. In urban tracts, we observed weak positive associations between percentage non-Hispanic Black and NDVI, NatureScore, and park cover; we did not find any clear associations for percentage Hispanics. Discussion: Multiple facets of the natural environment are inequitably distributed in the contiguous United States. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP11164, Introduction Of all high- and middle-income countries, the United States has among the highest income-related disparities in self-reported health and health care measures. (1) Health disparities have been attributed to [...]

This article explores the importance of nature exposure in the modern era and the potential health benefits associated with it. It acknowledges the shift from a natural, outdoor lifestyle to one dominated by urban environments, which has limited access to nature, particularly for certain socioeconomic and racial/ethnic groups. The article emphasizes the negative consequences of reduced nature exposure on mental and physical health. It introduces two new technologies, NatureScoreTM and NatureDoseTM, which aim to quantify and promote nature exposure for health promotion purposes. NatureScoreTM is a dataset and tool that estimates the amount and quality of nature at any location, while NatureDoseTM is a mobile app that tracks an individual's daily or weekly exposure to nature. These technologies provide convenient and accurate ways to measure nature exposure and may help researchers understand the benefits of nature exposure and promote its use for health promotion. NatureDoseTM is a smartphone app that passively monitors a person's time spent indoors, outdoors, and outdoors in nature. The app uses the smartphone's sensors, geolocation, and a dataset called NatureScoreTM to determine the user's location and the amount of nature within a 1-km buffer. It assigns full nature exposure time credit when a user is outdoors in a designated natural area, and partial credit when they are outdoors but not in a natural area. The app also allows users to set a weekly goal for time spent outdoors in nature and tracks their progress. It has potential uses for clinicians, researchers, and policymakers, such as setting [Extracted from the article]