Photo: Ford, Brad
New research strongly suggests policymakers should view outdoor recreation spaces not as luxuries but as essential public health infrastructure.
Led by scientists at Oregon State University, the study analyzed behavior and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic and found that outdoor recreation’s mental health benefits were significant and measurable.
The research, published in PLOS One, is part of the Play2Cope project led by OSU’s HEAL research lab, which has been investigating leisure engagement patterns among U.S. adults during the pandemic.
Xiangyou (Sharon) Shen directs the lab, which collected data through an online survey from a sample representative of the adult population by age, sex and race in early 2021, a period characterized by the peak of the second wave of COVID-19 cases and an early stage of vaccination rollout.
“The new study, along with another from our group published six months earlier in SAGE Open, provides a comprehensive picture of how Americans engaged in and adapted their outdoor recreation behaviors during one of the most challenging periods in recent history,” said Shen, an assistant professor in the OSU College of Forestry.
The latest paper documents observations of prevalent engagement in near-home outdoor activities, widespread reductions in outdoor engagement relative to before the pandemic, and marked differences in engagement patterns related to age, racial background and financial situation.
The researchers learned that reduced outdoor recreation was directly associated with higher levels of perceived stress and depressive symptoms, while more frequent outdoor activities predicted better well-being.
“Even after controlling for numerous COVID-specific risk and protective factors, outdoor recreation emerged as an important protective factor for mental health during the crisis,” Shen said. “The study provides compelling evidence that the mental health benefits were significant and measurable. This evidence supports treating outdoor recreation as behavioral medicine and classifying outdoor recreation spaces alongside facilities such as hospitals and pharmacies.”
The public policy implications are huge, she notes, especially given that global public health experts think it likely that other pandemics are on the horizon. Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, many managers of recreation locations enacted highly restrictive policies that closed vast outdoor spaces or prohibited small groups from using expansive areas like parks and schoolyards.
“Our research provides new evidence about the mental health costs that should be considered when developing outdoor space policies during health emergencies,” Shen said. “For future similar crises, we recommend protocols that prioritize keeping outdoor recreation spaces open with appropriate safety modifications, recognizing their role as essential mental health infrastructure.”
The research found that 68% of survey respondents said near-home activities like walking and gardening were their most frequent outdoor recreation, compared to just 32% engaging in traditional outdoor sports or nature-based activities. Walking accounted for 57% of all reported outdoor recreational activities.
“That’s a remarkable percentage that speaks to how people adapted when traditional recreation options were constrained,” Shen said.
It also, she added, highlights the importance of neighborhood-level greenness: Parks, greenways and even tree-lined streets in residential areas became the foundation of public mental health.
“The 3-30-300 rule – three trees visible from every dwelling, 30% neighborhood tree canopy and 300 meters or less to the nearest greenspace – takes on new urgency when viewed through this lens,” Shen said.
The component of the findings that the researchers found most disconcerting was a general reduction in outdoor recreation among U.S. adults during the pandemic, particularly among racial minorities and people perceiving that their financial situation was worsening.
The pattern likely contributed to the disproportionate mental health impacts experienced by communities of color during the pandemic, according to Shen.
“This raises concerns about the persisting effect of structural inequity in people’s ability to engage in outdoor recreation as a health behavior,” she said. “It is crucial to maintain or even increase access to outdoor recreation spaces during future crises like the COVID-19 pandemic, especially in park-poor areas or communities where vulnerable groups concentrate.”
Conversely, one of the most hopeful aspects of the findings was that individual adaptive engagement, like adjusting timing or finding new locations for outdoor activities, was a strong predictor of maintained or increased outdoor recreation, stronger even than structural factors like park access.
That suggests policy support for recreational adaptation and access can make a real difference, Shen said. Developing public education campaigns about outdoor recreation options during crises is one possibility; creating flexible use policies for public spaces is another.
“Our research shows that outdoor recreation isn’t some kind of bonus, it’s a public health necessity,” she said. “During the COVID-19 pandemic, when traditional mental health services were strained and social connections were limited, outdoor recreation served as a critical buffer against psychological distress. Policymakers who want to improve population mental health and advance health equity should prioritize outdoor recreation access with the same urgency they apply to other essential health services.”
Colby Parkinson, now a doctoral student at Penn State, helped lead the research while finishing his studies at Oregon State. The project also included Oregon State’s Megan MacDonald, Sam Logan and Lydia Gorrell and Kreg Lindberg of OSU-Cascades.
Source: Oregon State University