Cited by 521Urban Green Space and HealthUrban Arborization and Environmental StudiesLand Use and Ecosystem Services

Biodiversity and human health: mechanisms and evidence of the positive health effects of diversity in nature and green spaces

Open access
Aerts, Raf, Honnay, Olivier, Van Nieuwenhuyse, An·2018·British Medical Bulletin

Abstract

Introduction: Natural environments and green spaces provide ecosystem services that enhance human health and well-being. They improve mental health, mitigate allergies and reduce all-cause, respiratory, cardiovascular and cancer mortality. The presence, accessibility, proximity and greenness of green spaces determine the magnitude of their positive health effects, but the role of biodiversity (including species and ecosystem diversity) within green spaces remains underexplored. This review describes mechanisms and evidence of effects of biodiversity in nature and green spaces on human health. Sources of data: We identified studies listed in PubMed and Web of Science using combinations of keywords including 'biodiversity', 'diversity', 'species richness', 'human health', 'mental health' and 'well-being' with no restrictions on the year of publication. Papers were considered for detailed evaluation if they were written in English and reported data on levels of biodiversity and health outcomes. Areas of agreement: There is evidence for positive associations between species diversity and well-being (psychological and physical) and between ecosystem diversity and immune system regulation. Areas of concern: There is a very limited number of studies that relate measured biodiversity to human health. There is more evidence for self-reported psychological well-being than for well-defined clinical outcomes. High species diversity has been associated with both reduced and increased vector-borne disease risk. Growing points: Biodiversity supports ecosystem services mitigating heat, noise and air pollution, which all mediate the positive health effects of green spaces, but direct and long-term health outcomes of species diversity have been insufficiently studied so far. Areas timely for research: Additional research and newly developed methods are needed to quantify short- and long-term health effects of exposure to perceived and objectively measured species diversity, including health effects of nature-based solutions and exposure to microbiota.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/bmb/ldy021

Cites

141 of 141 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Part of this paper’s reference list could not be split into single entries.

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. *Studies included in the systematic review.
  2. WHO Regional Office for Europe. Urban Green Spaces and Health. A Review of Evidence. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2016.
  3. McMichael A, Scholes R, Hefny M, et al. Linking eco- system services and human well-being. In: Capistrano D, Samper K, Cristián L, Marcus J, Raudsepp-Hearne C (eds). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Multi- scale Assessments. Millenium Ecosystem Assessment Series, 4. Washington DC: Island Press, 2005;43-60.
  4. Bragg R, Wood C, Barton J, et al. Wellbeing Benefits from Natural Environments Rich in Wildlife: a Literature Review for The Wildlife Trusts. Colchester: University of Essex, 2015.
  5. Wilson EO. Biophilia, the Human Bond with Other Species. Cambridge MA: Harvard University, 1984.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Aerts, R., Honnay, O., & Van Nieuwenhuyse, A.
Affiliations
  • Sciensano (Belgium) (BE)
  • KU Leuven (BE)
  • Department of Chemical and Physical Health Risks, Unit Health Impact Assessment, Sciensano (Belgian Institute of Health), Brussels, Belgium
Corresponding author
Aerts, Raf
Venue
British Medical Bulletin
Published
2018-07-10
Volume
127
Issue
1
Pages
5-22
ISSN
  • 0007-1420 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-8391
OpenAlex
W2814367405
Cited by
521
References
141
Citations by year
2026: 55 · 2025: 67 · 2024: 89 · 2023: 76 · 2022: 76 · 2021: 67 · 2020: 59 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 3
FWCI
4.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Medical Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (KU Leuven) (acceptedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Urban Green Space and Health
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Urban Arborization and Environmental Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Land Use and Ecosystem Services
Keywords
biodiversity, green spaces, human health, species diversity, ecosystem diversity, mental health, well-being, ecosystem services, immune regulation, vector-borne diseases, air pollution mitigation, noise pollution mitigation, heat mitigation, nature-based solutions, microbiota, mortality
MeSH terms
Parks, Recreational, City Planning, Conservation of Natural Resources, Humans, Models, Theoretical, Public Health, Biodiversity, Adaptive Immunity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review