Onsite restorative effect of a rural ecological farm versus an urban public greenery space

Abstract

Accessible urban greenery allows short breaks and leisure activities while experiencing nature. Studies have shown that contact with nature elicits psychological and physical health benefits. However, the immediate impact and influence of exposure to artificial versus rural ecological nature have yet to be examined. This study investigates their psychophysiological restorative effects onsite, specifically when individuals view a ubiquitous urban public greenery space or a more indigenous ecological forest-like nature area, to compare levels of restorativeness and relaxation. Participants were asked to sit and view a scene onsite for 6 min while their facial muscle tension was recorded. The data were used to evaluate the degree of facial relaxation for both scenes. In addition, participant self-reports measured perceived restorativeness after the 6-min period. The self-reported data showed that the ecological farm scene was rated significantly higher for perceived restorativeness (t [49.136] = 9.094, p < .001) after 6 min of viewing. The muscle tension analysis showed that facial tension significantly declined when participants viewed the farm scene compared to the urban greenery space. These results, especially those on the farm, show that nature with more forest-like and rural elements elicited more powerful restorative effects and significantly lowered facial muscle tension (t [65] =  − 2.785, p < .05), thus verifying that a more ecological nature landscape provides immediate, significant health benefits through attention recovery and reduced facial muscle stress.

Background

Contact with the natural environment has both physical and psychological health benefits, lowering the risk of depression, anxiety, and fatigue and affecting cerebral and autonomic nervous activity (Berman et al. 2008; Bratman et al. 2019; Horiuchi et al. 2014; Ji et al. 2012; Lee et al. 2011; Li and Sullivan 2016; Roe et al. 2013; Suppakittpaisarn et al. 2020). This highlights the importance of urban planning strategies to create greener spaces in public areas (Bogar and Beyer 2016; Kondo et al. 2018). Public green spaces between streets or buildings can be lawns, gardens, or greenbelts. These spaces are usually between blocks or arcades, are roadside green spaces, or are located in courtyards between buildings. They are generally small in scale and can be in shade or surrounded by buildings. These green spaces provide places for urban residents to rest and relax and increase the greening rate of a city. While they are among the most frequently accessible recreation spaces for city dwellers, their restorative effect compared to that of a more ecological natural environment is less discussed.

This study discusses the onsite restorative effect of contact with nature by comparing an urban greenery area in a city with the rural nature of an ecological farm. The restorative capacity and recovery power of artificial greenery versus that of a more ecologically natural rural area were investigated.

Health effects of visiting nature

The literature has suggested that viewing nature helps improve mental health to cope with psychological distress, which helps reduce stress and promote positive cognitive effects (Meuwese et al. 2021a, b). Research evidence on visiting nature supports attention restorative theory (ART) (Kaplan and Kaplan 1989), specifying that forest-like landscapes constitute a restorative environment for human well-being. According to Kaplan’s (Kaplan 1995) theoretical model and empirical studies, natural environments provide attention recovery and demonstrate these effects through four properties: being away, fascination, compatibility, and extent. Compared to urban environments, the environmental characteristics of greenery further support cognitive improvements leading to restorative experiences and are associated with better decision-making and self-control (Hare et al. 2009; Hartig et al. 1997, 1991; Herzog et al. 2003). ART focuses on restoring mental fatigue, which is regarded as an aftereffect of stress (Berto 2014). Scientific evidence also confirms that exposure to nature provides attention-restoration effects (Berman et al. 2008; Bratman et al. 2015a; Kaplan and Kaplan 1989; Kaplan 1995; Meredith et al. 2020).

Stress is related to mental illness, cardiovascular diseases, cancer, obesity, and immune system disorders (Russell and Lightman 2019). Stress reduction theory (SRT) illustrates the relationship between human reactions and environmental connections and indicates the importance of stress mediation by regulating the parasympathetic nervous system, thus reducing stress levels and balancing out emotions (Bratman et al. 2015b; Ulrich 1984; Ulrich et al. 1991). Positive effects are initiated by experiences of the forest environment and natural elements, such as vegetation and water (Brown and Schwartz 1980; Morita et al. 2007; Purcell et al. 2001; Ulrich 1983; Van den Berg et al. 2014). A recent systematic review also found evidence for associations between nature exposure and improved cognitive function, brain activity, blood pressure, mental health, physical activity, and sleep (Jimenez et al. 2021).

Aside from mental states, physical instruments are available to monitor an individual’s stress level. Skeletomuscular (muscle) tension, or electromyography (EMG), is usually used to measure physiological (e.g., facial) reaction to an emotional response. Human muscle activity generates a small electrical current, which reflects the signal characteristics and intensity caused by the potential difference created when a muscle is contracted or relaxed. Hence, the prefrontal EMG value (i.e., muscle contraction) can represent an individual’s emotions through a slight signal change (Benedek and Kaernbach 2010). Researchers have used EMG to record subjects’ stress responses while viewing various landscapes (Chang et al. 2008).

ART, SRT, and physical records have provided evidence suggesting that viewing nature has a mental and physical impact on calming and de-stressing, which helps reduce mental fatigue and improve our ability to restore attention. Studies investigating nature’s health effects by using displays such as photos, videos, 3D images, or virtual reality have found that images of natural scenery are rated as more relaxing than those of urban scenery (Grassini et al. 2019; Jo et al. 2019). The onsite effect and its dynamic with the authentic atmosphere of the conditions in the environment are less considered.

Benefits of contact with rural nature

While contact with nature is known to mediate attention fatigue, stress, and cognition, the natural environments that people visit most frequently can be various, including beaches, mountains, and forests. When comparing other types of landscapes versus urban landscapes, the results show that recreational forest landscapes yield better health benefits across different psychological and physiological factors (Antonelli et al. 2019; Park et al. 2010; Sandifer et al. 2015; Thomsen et al. 2018; Zulyniak et al. 2020).

Viewing a forest landscape may have better attention restorative and relaxation effects on increased “comfortable,” “relaxed,” and “natural” feelings, as well as physiological relaxation as indicated by a higher high-frequency component of heart rate variability and lower heart rate (Bielinis et al. 2021; Song et al. 2017). One study on oxyhemoglobin (oxy-Hb) found that viewing “real” forest landscapes, which are more natural and ecological, was associated with a significantly lower oxy-Hb concentration in the right brain area of the prefrontal cortex than when viewing urban areas, linking to relaxation (Song et al. 2020). The specific characteristics of “real nature” environments promote feelings and experiences of “connectedness,” thus contributing positively to emotional and mental health (Jackson et al. 2011).

When compared to an urban area, a rural landscape is associated with a greater sense of connectedness, such as emotional or cognitive and psychological restoration (Wyles et al. 2019). However, greenery is increasingly developed in urban environments, and there is little evidence showing that this artificial greenery could provide physical and conceptual restorative experiences comparable to those with a real natural environment. This indicates that studies comparing the restorativeness of urban greenery with that of a natural ecological space should be considered.

Benefits of contact with urban nature

With most people living in urban areas, “nearby nature” is considered critical to a healthier city in urban planning. Existing literature has discussed different types of natural settings in the urban space as an essential index of living quality (Arnberger and Eder 2015; Hansen et al. 2017). Urban public places such as parks, vertical greenery, and street trees could provide a certain degree of restoration, yielding health effects that lower the risk of depression and negative emotion (Beute and de Kort 2018; Bressane et al. 2022), stress level (Hunter et al. 2019; Largo-Wight et al. 2011), and the overall well-being of the population regardless of gender, culture, or community (Hedblom et al. 2019; Lee and Maheswaran 2011; Liu et al. 2021; Mennis et al. 2018; Richardson and Mitchell 2010; Wolch et al. 2014). Urban residents participating in nearby outdoor recreation also report higher well-being and psychological resilience (Buchecker and Degenhardt 2015).

However, it is essential to note that the specific effects of urban greenery on attention restoration may depend on the characteristics of the greenery and the context in which it is viewed. For example, studies have found that the benefits of urban greenery on attention restoration are more pronounced when the greenery is more naturalistic, rather than highly manicured or designed (Wood et al. 2018), while one showed that nearby outdoor recreation has a small but positive effect on mental health (Buchecker and Degenhardt 2015).

Although research findings have suggested that contact with urban green spaces does affect our stress levels, less is known about smaller-scale urban greenery, which are public spaces or recreational areas near buildings, roads, traffic, and pedestrians. These urban public greenery spaces provide a more complex and dynamic condition that differs from the typical metropolitan green area. They combine tree-lined streets, buildings, and many more functions. However, what onsite health affects this urban public greenery space has is less discussed.

Both urban public greenery spaces and rural ecological farm areas have a similar function of recreation, and the potential of restoring attention and reducing physical stress should be tested onsite to better understand how connecting with nearby artificial nature in an urban area versus an ecological forest-like farm in a rural area impacts mental and physical health.

Aims and scope of research

This study explores the extent to which contact with nature in an urban public greenery space provides an attention-restoration effect compared to that of the ecological nature of a farm in a rural area. The study compares onsite settings of urban public green spaces that people often see to remote rural ecological nature (mostly mountain and forest) rarely seen by city dwellers to investigate the perceived restorativeness of the environments and the physical effect of onsite viewing of short duration.

We investigated whether viewing urban greenery in a small-scale public space elicits a restorative effect. Further, we wanted to compare any restorative impact with that of a more natural, forest-like rural area, namely an ecological farm.

Materials and methods

An urban public greenery space and a natural ecological farm were compared. Participants’ instant physical reactions (i.e., muscle tension) were empirically evaluated while they viewed the environments onsite to determine whether the urban greenery and farm yielded different restorative and stress recovery effects. To monitor stress levels, we recorded muscle tension through brow EMG, which is considered the muscle tension stress index when experiencing the environment. A perceived restorativeness scale (PRS) implemented through an environmental questionnaire was used to measure the perceived restorativeness of the landscapes.

Considering the duration of exposure to nature during prior research has been critical in recent studies (Jiang et al. 2014; Shanahan et al. 2015, 2016). Researchers have found that short-term visits to urban nature environments positively affect perceived stress relief compared to built environments (Tyrväinen et al. 2014). Studies have used timeframes such as 40 s (Lee et al. 2015), 10 min (Li and Sullivan 2016), 20–30 min (Hunter et al. 2019), and even 45 min (Berman et al. 2008). In our onsite experiment, we assumed that a short 5-min “break” in viewing the environment would be sufficient for participants to perceive, experience, and respond to the environment and for physical examination.

Measurements

The psychological responses to the environments were measured with a PRS questionnaire administered at the end of the experiment. A short version of the PRS (Berto 2005) was translated into Chinese in response to ART to measure the restorative index, with five items: “This is a place that is away from everyday demands and where I am able to relax and think about what interests me (being away)”; “This place is fascinating; it is large enough for me to discover and be curious about things (fascination)”; “This is a place where activities and items are ordered and organized (coherence)”; “This is a place that is very large, with no restrictions to movements; it is a world of its own (scope)”; and “In this place, it is easy to orient and move around so that I can do what I like (compatibility).” The five items were rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 = very much disagree to 5 = very much agree (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.86).

Physical stress/tension measurement was conducted using a non-invasive biofeedback device. This device was attached to the forehead of each participant during the investigation to determine muscle tension data. The muscle activity of the forehead is related to visual stimuli and directly shows the physiological response under conditions reflecting the relaxation of facial muscle activity (Korpela et al. 2002). By amplifying the current signal of muscle activity, a numerical value (μV) is generated. The model used in the experiment was a Thought Technology Ltd. ProComp Infiniti System with BioGraph Infiniti Software—T7500M. Three electrodes were placed on the forehead. Two electrode sensors collected the activity, while the third in the middle provided the baseline reference to eliminate possible noise of the two sides. The EMG collected physiological data constantly; increased EMG amplitude indicated heightened muscle tension and higher muscle activity. Guidelines for head electrode use were developed by Cacioppo et al. (2000).

Experimental procedure

The experimenter randomly solicited voluntary participants for the experiment on the spot and explained the time required. Each participant signed a consent form before the experiment and verbally confirmed that they were not currently receiving medical treatment.

After assembling the equipment for the electromyogram, the researchers collected baseline data within the first minutes in which the participant arrived at the sites and measured brow muscle tension. At each of the sites, the participants were asked to sit at a specific, predetermined spot and view the environment for 6 min in total. The experiment had three stages following a previous procedure (Hung et al. 2022). The participants were first asked to close their eyes for 1 min to provide a muscle tension baseline as a reference. Then, to ensure that the subjects understood the contents of the environment, they were asked to describe its characteristics and everything they saw for 2 min. This stage was not included in the analysis of physiological data to avoid or control for the effects of facial expression. The subjects were then asked to view the environment in the final stage. In this stage, to ensure that the muscle tension value was collected under the response to the environment rather than individual differences.

Site selection

The experiment was conducted in two places in Taiwan. For the urban public greenery space, Xinyuetai Square was chosen because it is located in front of a building hidden among eucalyptus and street trees as part of a campus recreational area of National Taiwan University (see Fig. 1). The view is open and surrounded by greenery and infrastructure with urban elements such as pedestrians, buildings, and traffic (n = 31) (see Fig. 1). The forest-like ecological farm is set at the Highland Experimental Farm of National Taiwan University, located on Meifung Mountain. The farm is at an altitude of 2100 m, making the landscape entirely different from that of the city. With natural resources, the experimental farm pays attention to forest conservation, natural ecological development, and the collection and preservation of native plants. The farm focuses on biodiversity protection, research, horticultural crops, environmental education, and recreational use. It also has an intact and unique natural mountain environment featuring biodiversity resources (n = 36) (see Fig. 2).

Fig. 1.

The Xinyuetai Square is located in Taipei city as part of the recreational area at National Taiwan University. It is a public recreational open space with greenery, infrastructure, and urban elements

Fig. 2.

Meifung Mountain is located in Nantou city at an altitude of 2100 m with a temperate climate and only basic infrastructure, making it entirely different from the city. The Meifung Mountain also has a temperate forest physiognomy

Participants and ethics

A random sample of 67 subjects aged 20–60 years volunteered to participate in this study. They were rewarded with 100 New Taiwan dollars (approximately 4 U.S. dollars). Approval was obtained from the Research Ethics Office of National Taiwan University, Taiwan (No: 201703HS024). Participants were issued a consent form before any data were collected.

Results

The experiment obtained subjects (N = 67) with a mean age of 38 (standard deviation [SD] = 14) years, including 39 females; no statistically significant differences in demographic variables (age and gender) between the groups were shown. An independent samples t test was used to compare the ecological farm and urban public greenery space viewings; the PRS scores reported when viewing the farm scene were significantly higher. As shown in Table 1, the PRS results revealed a significant difference (t [49.136] = 9.094, p < 0.001), indicating that viewing the farm scene elicited a higher level of attention-restoration benefits for all five restorativeness characteristics. These results support our hypothesis that the perceived restorative benefits of viewing a forest-like ecological farm scene affect an individual’s psychological state more positively than viewing an urban public greenery space.

Table 1.

A comparison of the self-reported data from the PRS for farm and urban green spaces showed that all of the characteristics were significantly different between the two environments

	Mean (SD)a		Df	t	p value
	Farm (36)a	Urban (31)a
Being away	4.53 (0.56)	2.81 (1.28)	39.835	6.957	0.000***
Fascination	4.5 (0.51)	2.35 (0.95)	44.234	11.262	0.000***
Coherence	4.14 (0.68)	3.61 (1.23)	45.3	2.117	0.04*
Scope	4.39 (0.73)	2.77 (0.99)	65	7.671	0.000***
Compatibility	4.34 (0.76)	3.16 (0.97)	64	5.527	0.000***
PRS total	21.78 (0.85)	14.71 (3.73)	49.136	9.094	0.000***

The subjects viewing farm landscapes perceived greater attention restorative effect

^aMeans based on a 5-point scale of agreement, where 1 = very much agree, and 5 = very much disagree

***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05

As indicated in Table 2, we examined the EMG values in response to the two environments with an independent samples t test. Specifically, we compared the baseline stress levels between the two scenes (the initial viewing of the scenes). The baseline EMG values between the farm and urban environments showed no significant differences. Participant forehead muscle tension in the two conditions was comparable.

Table 2.

Comparison of the EMG baseline values (first minute) with independent samples t tests to determine the difference between ecological farm and urban greenery space groups at the baseline and rest stages of the viewing environments

Sites	N	M	SD	Levene	t test
				Sig	t	df	Sig
Farm	36	4.06	2.25	.701	− .0836	65	0.406
Urban	31	4.55	2.57

As viewing time increased for approximately 6 min, we compared the brow muscle tension level for the two scenes, with the results showing a significant difference for the farm landscape condition (see Table 3). Although muscle activity numbers rose as time increased, those for the ecological farm condition were significantly lower than those for the urban greenery condition (t [65] = − 2.785, p < 0.05).

Table 3.

Comparison of the EMG viewing data values (last minute) using independent samples t tests to determine the difference between viewing ecological farm and urban greenery spaces

Sites	n	M	SD	Levene	t test
				Sig	t	df	Sig
Farm	36	6.54	3.32	.399	− 2.785	65	0.007**
Urban	31	9.26	4.64

**p < 0.01

Looking at the duration of viewing, we assessed changes in muscle activity. The results showed a disparity in values between the baseline (first minute) and after viewing (sixth minute). The results consistently showed lower muscle tension values after viewing the farm landscape representing a greater level of relaxation in the subjects (t [65] =  − 2.623, p < 0.05; see Table 4).

Table 4.

Comparison of the EMG data values with an independent samples t test to determine the disparity in the results between farm and urban environments

Sites	n	M	SD	Levene	t test
				Sig	t	df	Sig
Farm	36	2.48	2.75	.124	− 2.623	65	.011*
Urban	31	4.71	4.15

^*p < 0.05

The psychological and physiological examinations demonstrated that the onsite viewing of the forest-like ecological farm landscape was considered more restorative (and less stressful) despite the viewing being only for a short duration.

In our experimental results, viewing the ecological farm scene elicited significantly more positive mental states than those for urban public greenery. Our records for muscle tension in both scenes over time showed that viewing the ecological farm was correlated to a lower muscle tension level than that in viewing the urban public greenery. These results provide a starting point for onsite experiments looking for possible causes of the effects. Thus, even though urban greening is an essential part of improving quality of life, “real” nature (here, an ecological farm in a rural area) still has an irreplaceable position for not only the protection of wild habitats but also its health impact for people.

Our purpose was to identify and compare the onsite impact of a short viewing of urban greenery versus a rural ecological scene. With this in mind, the data and results may have arisen from a combination of factors related to restorative characteristics or dynamic conditions, such as weather change and environmental interference, which are discussed in the next section.

Discussion

We examined the brief viewing of a public greenery space and a rural ecological natural scene to measure the restorative and muscle relaxation effects of each. We selected two very different types of “nature”: a public greenery space in an urban area (a smaller scale recreational area) representing the greenery people routinely come into contact with, and a rural ecological farm indicative of a forest-like, mountain recreational area rich in ecological resources. By comparing the onsite experiences of the participants and actual (instant) data in their responses to the scenes, we quantified the psychophysiological restorative effects of each.

The onsite psychophysiological effects of the ecological farm landscape support and extend previous evidence on ART and SRT characteristics in a more ecological natural environment. The rural ecological farm landscape experience was rated as making viewers feel more distant from daily life and interested in exploring the environment and its compatibility. Conversely, all the PRS factors for urban public greenery showed lower scores, with the lowest for the characteristic of fascination, which may indicate that the viewing experience was less satisfying and restorative to the viewers. Furthermore, the results suggest that the ecological farm landscape had significant relaxation benefits compared to those for the urban greenery space, which is consistent with other studies on the health benefits of natural environments.

Natural environments are visually complex and dynamic and differ from the typical built environments of cities and suburbs. Their diversity of plants, ecosystems, and natural features may provide a particularly effective means of attention restoration because these provide viewers a break from the sensory overload and cognitive demands of modern life. This can be especially important in today’s fast-paced, technology-filled world, where we are constantly bombarded with information and demands on our attention. To provide better restorativeness quality, noise, artificial scenes and better quality of air (which an ecological farm provides) are essential.

Contributions

The value of examining public greenery spaces and nature scenes lies in their ability to promote mental and physical well-being and provide a sense of relaxation and restoration. Previous studies have suggested that humans do not prefer downright primitive nature because there may be many risk factors in dark, shaded places that trigger a sense of fear and reduce preference (Balling and Falk 1982; Kuo and Sullivan 2001). In our case, the ecological farm landscape tested had a small number of recreational facilities to ensure a sense of safety, which may be considered another reason for people to feel relaxed and restored. That said, even though our urban public greenery space showed lower perceptions of restorativeness, it still holds restorative value.

Contact with the ecological farm seemed more effective and impactful in our experiment. To determine how viewing the site would make such a difference in its health effects, we should consider visual stimulus factors. Future studies could also look into which visual elements in the scene may be critical components explaining how the farm elicits its restorative effect.

This research suggests that nature recreation provides restorative health benefits. Time spent in rural nature supports mental well-being in various ways and could restore health. The biophilic draw to natural places became especially apparent during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the restorative effects of forests are inevitable. However, more research is needed to understand how management decisions affect the restorative effects of nature recreation. Additionally, research on what elements are important and why nature provides better health effects is urgent and necessary for landscape designers and urban planners to build more natural cities that contribute to human sustainability.

Limitations

According to these results, spending a short time in a farm landscape can lower stress levels and increase attention through restorative effects. However, one limitation is access to this type of environment. Not everyone has easy access to or lives in a rural area, and some people may live in areas with few natural environments to visit. As a result, nearby public greenery spaces still hold importance in their accessibility and availability for the public to come into contact with nature even if it has a less restorative effect.

Another potential area for improvement is the time and resources required to visit these environments. For example, the rural ecological farm is far from urban areas, requiring transportation to visit. However, our initial thought was to examine how effectively the nearby greenery spaces people see in everyday life benefit human health. While our experiment did not examine an urban park, the public greenery area had fewer restorative characteristics. Further research could consider comparing the onsite effect with a control group, such as an urban landscape without greenery, to assess the restorative impact of urban greenery.

Another limitation, one affecting most onsite experiments, is the dynamic and uncontrollable factors in the actual environment. Rather than providing only specific visual stimuli, which are often well controlled, the onsite experience of viewing different landscapes has inevitable limitations, such as air quality, sunlight, wind, and altitude differences. These factors could be further considered in longitudinal studies. Meanwhile, minimizing the human interference factor caused by the influence of the venue is necessary.

Finally, individual differences should be addressed, and it is worth noting that the benefits of nature are not necessarily universal. Some may not find nature particularly restorative or relaxing and may not experience the same positive effects as others. The attention-restoration effect may vary from person to person, and many factors can influence the extent to which an environment promotes attention-restoration. For example, individual preferences and characteristics, as well as the specific features of the environment or activity, can play a role in determining the attention-restoration effect. Individual differences, such as age, personality, and cultural background, may influence the attention-restoration effect of urban and other greenery.

Suggestions for future research

Future experiments might also consider extending and improving the validity of onsite experiments and the measurement index for a more comprehensive understanding of other health benefits of urban versus farm landscapes. Studies might also consider comparing more types of urban green spaces that focus on urban ecology and planting design, considering vegetation density, to create socioeconomic health benefits for residents and communities, thus enhancing well-being in terms of body, mind, and behavior.

Data availability

Due to ethical concerns, data cannot be made openly available. Further information about the data and conditions for access will be made available on request.

Declarations

Conflicting of interest

The authors contributed equally to the work. Neither author has a conflict of interest to disclose.