Search

Purpose The point of departure for this viewpoint paper is the current development in which landscape architects are working towards achieving the United Nations sustainable development goals and the associated cross-cutting pledge “Leave No One Behind”. The sustainable development goals 3 and 11 can be achieved through landscape projects that are inclusive and health promoting, and the authors argue that an evidence-based design process is needed to ensure that project designs deliver what they promise. However, most landscape architects are not trained in evidence-based design and are therefore unsure of what can be used as evidence. A further challenge is the lack of relevant and applicable research evidence for design processes. Design/methodology/approach The authors present a process model for evidence-based health design in landscape architecture as an overall framework on which the authors base their arguments. The model includes four topics of evidence: target group, human health, environment and use of nature. For each topic, the authors present their view on what may be considered as evidence and where it can be found or generated. The study view is supported by a detailed presentation of where and how evidence was found and generated in a design project for an accessible and health-promoting forest trail for people with mobility disabilities. Findings The authors suggest a broad definition of evidence, and that the design process should draw on evidence from relevant research and practice disciplines. Evidence can be found in multiple sources, for example, scientific articles, theoretical works and design guidelines. It can also be generated by landscape architects themselves, for example, through landscape analyses and stakeholder workshops. The evidence should guide and support the landscape architect and not dictate the design process. Practical implications The authors hope that the knowledge provided on the evidence-based

Introduction: Nature-based therapy (NBT) has shown positive effects on different health-related outcomes and is becoming a more frequent approach in various rehabilitative interventions. Economic evaluations are widely used to inform decision makers of cost-effective interventions. However, economic evaluations of NBT have not yet been reviewed. The aim of this review was to uncover existing types and characteristics of economic evaluations in the field of nature-based therapeutic interventions. Methods: In this scoping review available knowledge about the topic was mapped. A comprehensive search of selected databases (MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; Scopus; Cochrane; PSYCinfo; Web of Science) and grey literature was conducted in November 2021. Data was synthesised in a thematic presentation. Results: Three papers met the inclusion criteria, containing differences in design, types and dose of nature-based therapeutic interventions, outcome measures and target groups (n = 648). The papers showed tendencies toward a good treatment effect and positive economic effect in favour of NBT. Conclusions: Three different cohort studies have tried calculating the economic impact of NBT indicating a good effect of the NBT. The evidence on the economic benefits of NBT is still sparse though promising, bearing the limitations of the studies in mind. Economic evaluation of NBT is a new area needing more research, including high-quality research studies where the economic evaluation model is included/incorporated from the beginning of the study design. This will enhance the credibility and usefulness to policy makers and clinicians.

Work-related stress is an increasing problem among healthcare workers all over the world. The overall hypothesis of this study is that green outdoor environments (GOE) at hospitals may contribute to a less stressful working environment by offering psychological restoration. This study investigates GOE at five acute-care hospitals located in the capital region of Denmark. It aims to identify how the GOE are used by the employees and their potential for restoration. Data was collected through a survey where 183 employees completed an on-site questionnaire which included the perceived restorativeness scale (PRS). The main results indicate that the GOE are mostly used for a short while by the employees; the main activity is to have lunch, but they are also used actively to get away from the stressful working environment. The results from this study contribute to the international research on GOE at hospitals, and may be of inspiration for designers as well as for hospital staff and administrators.