Scholarlink

Background <p>Interventions that use nature contact to promote health and well-being exist at the societal/infrastructural level (incl. nature-based solutions) and the individual/group level (incl. nature-based therapies). One way nature-based therapies promote health is by fostering resilience to manage stressors. Nature-based biopsychosocial resilience theory (NBRT) provides a framework to explain how nature plays a role in how resilience-related adaptive resources are built and maintained but this has yet to be tested.</p> Methods <p>The current paper outlines a four-year multi-country (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, the UK) research programme that tests the NBRT framework and explores how nature-based therapies can build and maintain individual and community resilience. As well as reviewing and mapping existing interventions globally, nine case studies across Europe are exploring how nature promotes resilience across: (1) whole populations (three case studies); (2) individuals at-risk of metabolic syndrome (three case studies); and (3) individuals with existing issues such as chronic stress, mobility challenges, or cognitive impairments (three case studies). Three case studies use longitudinal cohorts, five use randomised controlled trials, and one a practitioner shared-experience approach. The determinants and impacts of nature-based therapies are also considered beyond effects on individual participants, by assessing distributional issues (e.g., health equity), environmental impacts, financial implications, broader societal acceptability and engagement, as well as the barriers and enablers to successful implementation. In three specific case studies (Barcelona, Padua and Salzburg), this is done through multi-sectoral social innovation actions we refer to as ‘Resilience Hubs’. Results will be summarised in academic publications, a series of sector-specific guides, and an overall ‘What works’ guide for practitioners, policy makers, and the public.</p> Discussion <p>We use a novel theoretical framework to structure a research and innovation programme to inform the implementation of nature-based therapies across Europe and globally. Challenges include the integration of terminology and research practices from multiple disciplinary perspectives, participant recruitment and attrition, especially among marginalised groups, a potential lack of local stakeholder time and interest, potentially small effect sizes of time-limited interventions, and difficulties in identifying distinct causal mechanisms. Mitigation strategies are discussed.</p> Trial registration <p>Of nine case studies (CSs), five are intervention trials and have been registered:</p> <p>a) CS4 doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN74582097 (22.07.2024); </p> <p>b) CS5 doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN14169596 (10.06.2024); </p> <p>c) CS6 clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06622629 (30.09.2024); </p> <p>d) CS7 doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN93192592 (29.05.2024); </p> <p>e) CS8 clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06205940 (15.05.2024). </p> <p>All nine case studies have received ethical approval (see Declarations section).</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Testing nature-based biopsychosocial resilience theory: a research programme protocol

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月24日

查看全文
  • Mathew P. White,
  • Julia A. M. Egger,
  • Giulia Amato,
  • Thomas Astell-Burt,
  • Stine Bekke-Hansen,
  • Angel Borja,
  • Angel Burov,
  • Svea Busse,
  • Caroline Costongs,
  • Donka Dimitrova,
  • Ilaria Doimo,
  • Angel M. Dzhambov,
  • Lewis R. Elliott,
  • Alba Godfrey,
  • James Grellier,
  • Terry Hartig,
  • Arnulf Hartl,
  • Patrik Karlsson Nyed,
  • Cecil Konijnendijk,
  • Melissa Lem,
  • Jill S. Litt,
  • Rebecca Lovell,
  • Freddie Lymeus,
  • Aynur Mammadova,
  • Leanne Martin,
  • Angelica Moè,
  • Sarah Morgan Trimmer,
  • Colm O’Driscoll,
  • Johan Östberg,
  • Sabine Pahl,
  • Francesca Pazzaglia,
  • Christina Pichler,
  • Alexandria Poole,
  • Sarai Pouso,
  • Nooshin Razani,
  • Todora Rogelja,
  • Laura Secco,
  • Ulrika K. Stigsdotter,
  • Sus Sola Corazon,
  • Georgina Sowman,
  • Maria C. Uyarra,
  • Agnes E. van den Berg,
  • Thomas van Rompay,
  • Martin Voracek,
  • Nancy M. Wells,
  • Benedict W. Wheeler,
  • Matilda van den Bosch

摘要

Background

Interventions that use nature contact to promote health and well-being exist at the societal/infrastructural level (incl. nature-based solutions) and the individual/group level (incl. nature-based therapies). One way nature-based therapies promote health is by fostering resilience to manage stressors. Nature-based biopsychosocial resilience theory (NBRT) provides a framework to explain how nature plays a role in how resilience-related adaptive resources are built and maintained but this has yet to be tested.

Methods

The current paper outlines a four-year multi-country (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, the UK) research programme that tests the NBRT framework and explores how nature-based therapies can build and maintain individual and community resilience. As well as reviewing and mapping existing interventions globally, nine case studies across Europe are exploring how nature promotes resilience across: (1) whole populations (three case studies); (2) individuals at-risk of metabolic syndrome (three case studies); and (3) individuals with existing issues such as chronic stress, mobility challenges, or cognitive impairments (three case studies). Three case studies use longitudinal cohorts, five use randomised controlled trials, and one a practitioner shared-experience approach. The determinants and impacts of nature-based therapies are also considered beyond effects on individual participants, by assessing distributional issues (e.g., health equity), environmental impacts, financial implications, broader societal acceptability and engagement, as well as the barriers and enablers to successful implementation. In three specific case studies (Barcelona, Padua and Salzburg), this is done through multi-sectoral social innovation actions we refer to as ‘Resilience Hubs’. Results will be summarised in academic publications, a series of sector-specific guides, and an overall ‘What works’ guide for practitioners, policy makers, and the public.

Discussion

We use a novel theoretical framework to structure a research and innovation programme to inform the implementation of nature-based therapies across Europe and globally. Challenges include the integration of terminology and research practices from multiple disciplinary perspectives, participant recruitment and attrition, especially among marginalised groups, a potential lack of local stakeholder time and interest, potentially small effect sizes of time-limited interventions, and difficulties in identifying distinct causal mechanisms. Mitigation strategies are discussed.

Trial registration

Of nine case studies (CSs), five are intervention trials and have been registered:

a) CS4 doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN74582097 (22.07.2024);

b) CS5 doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN14169596 (10.06.2024);

c) CS6 clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06622629 (30.09.2024);

d) CS7 doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN93192592 (29.05.2024);

e) CS8 clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06205940 (15.05.2024).

All nine case studies have received ethical approval (see Declarations section).