
Living Near Trees, Not Just Green Space, Improves Wellbeing - Osiris30
https://www.citylab.com/environment/2019/07/urban-tree-canopy-green-space-wellbeing-research/595060/
======
outworlder
Unsurprising result.

I was so sad (figuratively speaking) when we moved from an older office - but
one which had trees all around and even running water - to a very modern, but
boring open floor glass paned antfarm-like building.

After some time I got literally depressed. Walking around the concreted block
did nothing for me anymore. No trees, no water, no birds, no squirrels. Just
cars and a lot of heat in the summer - and a lot of wind during the winter.

~~~
enlyth
I work in central London and feel the same way. Coworkers are often surprised
that when I moved to London, I chose to go quite a bit north and have to take
the tube for 45 minutes to get to work.

But I live on a one way street with no traffic, and when I look outside my
window, there is a giant field of grass with lots of huge trees.

I can go outside, lie down in the grass, enjoy the peace and quiet. I will
watch the squirrels outside on my days working from home, trying to fight the
crows for food. The crows outsmart them every time, without hesitation. It's
part of what keeps me sane in this big city.

~~~
lonelappde
Why do people say London density is so bad when there are homes with trees
only 45min away?

~~~
9HZZRfNlpR
Because 1.5 hours is a lot of time out if only 24? Unless you live to work.

~~~
romwell
Hahahahahahaha.

(Hello from the Bay Area)

------
jnurmine
Living near trees implies living in an area where space usage is prioritized
for nature instead of the stacked concrete boxes most people (have to?) live
in. It is likely a less stressful environment overall than places filled with
just concrete walls, asphalt and, at best, some grass.

Personally I find tree tops swaying in the wind oddly hypnotic and relaxing.
I've thought of why... One reason could be that babies around here are (like I
was) put into baby trolleys to sleep outside, summer and winter. If living
near trees, chances are that tree tops are the last thing one sees before
sleep and the first thing when one wakes up.

~~~
mdgrech23
It's evolution. The windows XP homescreen w/ the rolling green hills was
chosen b/c it puts us humans at ease. Our monkey brains like wide open
pastures b/c we can easily see any incoming predators making us feel safe.

~~~
tropdrop
In the article, wide open pastures with no trees were "associated with higher
odds of psychological distress." Don't our distant (monkey) cousins live in
and amongst trees, usually?

Open pastures with no tree cover just mean easy pickings for an incoming
predator, so maybe that hints at why it causes us "distress."

~~~
rlonn
The protection-from-predators theory is interesting, and sounds plausible.
I've always disliked nature that was too much groomed also, like perfect
lawns, shaped bushes, parks with only two types of trees in them, or whatnot.
Sterile, human-made nature. It always lacks diversity - there are few insects,
fewer birds, and no larger animals in such environments. I always thought I
disliked it because I love nature and wasn't stimulated enough by such barren
wastelands, but I guess ut could actually be my monkey brain complaining about
a lack of food/foraging opportunities there.

------
6gvONxR4sf7o
Can we get a title change from "Improves" to "Associated With?" The causal
affect is mentioned nowhere but the (incorrect) title. All of the content and
quotes from the authors use "associated with."

~~~
cookingrobot
Interesting.. it doesn't seem likely that wellbeing causes trees. So what are
the other possible arrows of causation? Maybe healthy people choose to live
near trees?

~~~
tunesmith
Or something else causes both healthy people and living near trees.

~~~
Symmetry
The obvious one being

    
    
      wealthy people   ->   wealthy community
           |                      |
           v                      v
      good health               trees

~~~
learc83
The article says they controlled for income.

~~~
jdietrich
That's not the same as controlling for socio-economic status. A millennial
living in a city-center apartment and a boomer living in a paid-up house in
the suburbs might have the same income, but they have very different life
circumstances and experience very different levels of stress.

~~~
learc83
They also controlled for "age, sex, annual household income, economic status
(eg, employed, retired, or unemployed), highest educational qualification, and
couple status".

Taken together those are likely to capture socio-economic status in all but a
few edge cases. With a very large study size, and a huge result (30%
difference) it's unlikely that it can be explained by socioeconomic status.

The study discusses this by the way.

~~~
jdietrich
_> Taken together those are likely to capture socio-economic status in all but
a few edge cases._

Socio-economic status is notoriously difficult to control for.

[https://academic.oup.com/bmb/article/81-82/1/21/282643](https://academic.oup.com/bmb/article/81-82/1/21/282643)

~~~
learc83
If this were a small study or found a small result, then edge cases like lower
income millennials with no degree who live in inherited houses in wealthy
areas with trees might skew the results.

If you disagree with the studies methodology fine, but I'm satisfied that
authors have done their due diligence with respect to socio-economic status.

~~~
6gvONxR4sf7o
The authors, at least in OP, use "associated with" language.

------
Causality1
Not surprising. As someone who grew up in rural and suburban environments, big
cities feel intensely depressing. I go there and nothing I look at makes me
feel happy. I'm sure people who grew up there feel differently and see things
I don't see, but for me Manhattan feels as dead as the surface of Mars.

~~~
Pxtl
Manhattan has Central Park, which is a forest. Compare vs the suburban sprawl
of modern design where it's an ocean of tract housing with stunted little
fresh-planted trees and I'd say the reverse is generally true. I can see the
argument for rural living, but not for modern suburbia.

~~~
_delirium
Manhattan feels like really one of the best cases for trees outside of rural
areas. A large percentage of the residential neighborhoods are in walking
distance of a big forest... even other boroughs of NYC are mostly worse for
that. Some other cities have better weekend access to forests, e.g. in L.A.
you can drive to the mountains, but there aren't many with better large
forests actually in the city. Maybe DC with Rock Creek Park.

~~~
tomjakubowski
Griffith Park (4,217 acres) isn't a forest exactly, but pretty close to it,
and right in the heart of Los Angeles city.

~~~
_delirium
Ah that's a good point! I even used to live in the LA area years ago, but I
lived far enough east of there that the Angeles National Forest was much
closer, so I forgot that Griffith Park exists.

------
ineedasername
This is another study that makes me wonder what the real cause may be. Areas
with trees, in an urban setting, tend to be more expensive locations. So, is
it the the trees, or the higher socio-economic status?

In suburban and rural areas where trees are more common, even if the cost of
living is low, everything is less dense, people tend to have larger dwellings
at lower prices, etc. So, again, is it the trees or the other covarying
factors?

Are there any studies like this that transform an area into a green space
(with trees, I suppose) and show pre/post outcomes? Ones that weren't driven
by the community? (Where that could indicate it was simply a nicer more
cohesive community, with that as the cause instead of the green stuff)

That said, this is the sort of result that _feels_ like it should be true, but
then those are the results we should most be thorough about our methods to
avoid confirmation bias. Research is hard!

~~~
lonelappde
It certainly would be strange if wealth-independent happiness caused people to
live near trees but trees didn't make them happy.

~~~
ineedasername
Except whether or not happiness is independent of wealth is an open question
that, it seems, may lean more heavily towards "no, not completely
independent". Here's one example [0] where they concluded non wealth factors
were dominant, but wealth still ayed a part.

[0][https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5535462/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5535462/)

------
Rothnargoth
"Exposure to grass was, surprisingly, associated with higher odds of
psychological distress."

I'm guessing it's the constant maintenance of a lawn that stresses people, and
in this case, other people's lawns. That or you're a youtuber or streamer, and
the constant sound of lawn equipment is driving you nuts.

~~~
core-questions
Surprisingly, I find my lawn maintenance to be supremely de-stressing. I get
to slap on headphones and listen to podcasts or music while doing mild
physical labour that results in something becoming more aesthetically pleasing
than it had been previously.

------
Feuilles_Mortes
There is a tree directly outside of the window right next to my bed. In the
morning, I watch the variety of birds (changing with the seasons) flit around
the branches, socializing with each other. It's simple, but a highlight of my
day. I'm moving in a few weeks and this tree will be one of the things I miss
most about my apartment.

------
thom
I live in Sheffield, which is about as green as cities get in the UK. I try
and walk every day - you can walk from my front door through woods all the way
into the Peak District and stand a good chance of not seeing more than a
couple of souls. Lately my son has started joining me and honestly, it’s just
the most nourishing part of my life at the moment. I am not sure I could
survive on the huddled trees and pruned green rectangles disbursed throughout
somewhere like London, and even the more extensive parks just don’t feel real
to me.

~~~
mattlondon
Try somewhere like Hampstead Heath in London. It's basically a large (Google
maps reckons 50 mins to walk from one end to the other) wild heathland with
woods and lakes but with very little 'manicuring' but only 10 mins from the
centre by tube.

Pics:
[https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=Hampstead%20heath&t...](https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=Hampstead%20heath&tbs=imgo:1)

~~~
thom
Yeah I have been there. First, kudos if you live within walking distance.
Second, it’s busy and still doesn’t feel very wild to me.

------
jefftk
The article is:
[https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle...](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2739050)

As a correlational study, and as with any study like this I'm worried that
something they're not controlling for, or not sufficiently controlling for, is
the actual cause. They say:

 _> Self-rated health, depression, anxiety, and risk of psychological distress
have been previously shown to be associated with green space in some cross-
sectional and longitudinal studies. A range of socioeconomic and demographic
factors are likely to confound these associations by contributing to mental
health outcomes and to neighborhood selection. Previous research suggests that
these factors are likely to include personal socioeconomic circumstances, such
as how much money people have, whether they are employed, and their level of
education, and other factors, such as age, sex, and relationship status.
Accordingly, in this study, we adjusted for baseline measures of age, sex,
annual household income, economic status (eg, employed, retired, or
unemployed), highest educational qualification, and couple status._

There are a lot of measures that affect human wellbeing that this doesn't take
into account, however. For example, wealth and class aren't present. I
understand why it would be hard for them to adjust for everything, but that
also makes the study much less predictive.

I wonder if there are any natural experiments we could look at where blights
or storms that caused sudden reductions in tree cover in a mostly independent
fashion?

------
miles
A well-known refrain, I know, but correlation does not imply causation[0].

Spurious Correlations[1] has been posted here many times[2], but a few
representative examples may be worth sharing just the same:

 _Per capita cheese consumption_ correlates with _Number of people who died by
becoming tangled in their bedsheets_

 _Total revenue generated by arcades_ correlates with _Computer science
doctorates awarded in the US_

 _Japanese passenger cars sold in the US_ correlates with _Suicides by
crashing of motor vehicle_

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_cau...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation)

[1] [https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-
correlations](https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations)

[2]
[https://hn.algolia.com/?query=spurious%20correlations&sort=b...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=spurious%20correlations&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story)

~~~
gdubs
Sure, but this article cites a large study that seems to correct for a lot of
variables. Might be more productive to discuss specific aspects of the study
you think are flawed.

------
mpweiher
One of the reasons I love Berlin. City. With LOTS and LOTS of trees.

~~~
akurilin
Same with the area around Golden Gate Park in SF, being close to so much well-
maintained and curated nature is delightful. The place is a real treasure.

~~~
rlonn
The words "well-maintained" and "curated" don't usually rhyme very well with
"nature", IMO. Real nature is by definition unmaintained. When it's maintained
it becomes a park/garden, and loses more or less all its diversity. Fine, if
you just want to look at some green leaves (which is great in a city) but we
shouldn't call it nature just because something is alive there.

------
muizelaar
Actual study:
[https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle...](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2739050?resultClick=3)

------
tjridesbikes
We specifically moved to a part of Boston with lots of trees. All the benefits
of public transit, nightlife, and resources, but as I look out my home-office
window right now, I see a big tree, a dog park, and very small forest of trees
right behind that. I can't see another building, and its wonderful.

------
czechdeveloper
I moved to place with trees. Paid extra for that. After a year in, the forest
died due to drought (and bugs). Now I'm looking at forest being cut down and
removed. It's quite miserable feeling.

~~~
bluGill
Make sure you look for native trees. They are much more likely to survive
drought. Hard to say what to do about bugs which are likely non-native
invasive species though. Other than plant a variety of different trees so bugs
don't get them all at once.

------
JoeAltmaier
I think its something to do with the complex, fractal imagery provided by
trees etc. The simple planar surfaces of built spaces are profoundly
unstimulating.

~~~
sudosteph
I feel the opposite. I'm way more prone to feeling overstimulated in urban
environments. Though it's nearly impossible to say if that's from the
environment, the people, or both.

Forests and beaches are both very calming to me though. I think it's the
consistent, but non-threatening landscape and background noises and smells.
I'm not over-stimulated by those natural environments, so I have peace to
introspect. In cities I'm always watching my surroundings and trying to figure
out where I am based on the buildings and roads around me, so I definitely
feel like I notice and am stimulated by the city. I'm just kind of exhausted
afterward and not able to relax because it demands so much attention.

------
evancox100
"Exposure to grass was, surprisingly, associated with higher odds of
psychological distress."

Anyone who has had to maintain a lawn will likely find this unsurprising.

~~~
ilikehurdles
I wonder how much of that association is precisely because of this
pressure/requirement in a lot of communities to maintain grassy lawns, rather
than anything innate about grassy landscapes themselves.

~~~
alot
I think you are on to something. I grew up in west Texas and while there was
no canopy there were/are vast untouched lands of native grasses. I still get
the benefits described when I go out there.

------
moron4hire
In 2008, I was living in Central Pennsylvania, taking many a weekend hike
along a short section of the Appalachian trail that ran within a short drive
from my home. Then I got assigned to a project in Bloomington, Illinois. I
spent a month out there, this strange land completely devoid of trees. I never
thought of myself as an "outdoors" person before that, I just liked hanging
out with some friends and getting a little exercise. After Bloomington, I
realized just how important trees were to my mental health.

~~~
sudosteph
I feel you. I've done road trips accross the country, and every time I go
through those midwest states I get this low-key dread that I barely notice at
first. But then, once I get to a place with rolling hills and trees on the
horizon, I immediately notice how relieved I feel. I always attributed it to
just wanting familiarity in the landscape, but maybe trees are a bigger part
of that than I realized. The smell of forests is also much more pleasant than
fields, so perhaps it's a combination of visuals and odors being "off" that
makes me feel uncomfortable.

------
jerryalex
What are some great cities with surrounding nature for software engineers?

I was looking at Atlanta, GA which I heard has the most trees for a city.

According to Wikipedia, it has 47.9% tree coverage

~~~
sudosteph
Raleigh NC is called "City of Oaks" for a reason. I feel like it probably has
more tree coverage than Atlanta, but it's much smaller too. Still, great place
to live and a pretty solid tech scene between downtown offices (RedHat,
Salesforce, Citrix) and RTP + Durham jobs a short drive away (SAS, NetApp,
Cisco, Epic Games).

We also are working on a new 300 acre park project that's only about a mile
from downtown, so I'm really excited to spend time there when Fall comes
around.

~~~
jerryalex
Thanks, Raleigh is definitely in my top 10. I'm currently living in Texas so
my nature options are pretty limited. I do appreciate not having an income tax
though.

------
PorterDuff
I think of high contrast areas as having the strongest mood boosting. By that
I mean river fronts, visible mountain ranges, the beach, the edges of forests.
No doubt trees in cities are visually pleasing, living in the middle of dark
dense forest not so much.

'round these parts, trees seem to perform two useful functions. They fall on
houses during storms (quite common) or they burn down whole towns. Be careful
what you wish for.

~~~
davidjnelson
Right, Paradise CA is a great example of how dangerous that can be. Sure was a
beautiful place though!

------
Razengan
It's a bizarre, comical state when obvious things such as this (and similar
posts like "Climate change will cause a financial crisis!") have to be
explicitly spelled out and backed with "data."

That said, modern civilization, technology and "nature" don't have to be
mutually exclusive.

See Japan, Switzerland, Singapore and similar places where there is plenty of
unspoiled/augmented nature right next to some of the most modern/luxurious
human habitats in the world.

The ideal balance would be something like the sci-fi'ish concept of arcologies
[0]; monolithic, self-sufficient, clean megastructures surrounded by natural
wildernesses for people to escape to at their leisure.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arcology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arcology)

~~~
thfuran
>It's a bizarre, comical state when obvious things [...] have to be explicitly
spelled out and backed with "data."

Throughout history there have been many "obvious" things that were widely
believed and wildly inaccurate.

------
0_gravitas
I wonder if green space and trees still improve well being if someone is
allergic to them (not deathly so, just enough to be a nuisance). I myself am
especially allergic to the flora around me, and I always dream of moving
somewhere cold where everything is nice and dead and can't hurt me.

~~~
neop1x
there are lots of species and often you are not allergic to all of them +
there are some antihistamine pills ;)

~~~
0_gravitas
The way that it seems to work judging by blood tests I've gotten over my life
is that the more I'm around something, the more allergic I become, all of the
things around me, the trees, the animals, the food I eat, etc. I've become
extremely allergic to. If I go somewhere with completely new plant life I
should be ok in theory, I have done this once and my allergens were pretty
much gone, but I dont have reason to assume that they wouldn't come back. I've
got some fucky gene stuff going on in general, and there are other reasons why
the cold would be nice in general.. and i can guarantee that i have an
extensive morning/night drug regimen, and have tried about every allergy med i
could get my hands on, they can take the edge off, but it will never go away.

------
ga-vu
I moved to another city because the mayor of the previous city I lived in had
some crusade against trees in that town.

Living near trees is the best. I have a cherry tree growing outside my window
right now. Still miss the three poplars I used to have at my old apartment.

------
pacomerh
We recently moved to an apartment that is front facing the street with trees
that you can see through the windows, and might be obvious but we're usually
in much better mood than before, I think it's important to consider these
things. The vibe of having a bit of nature and natural light changes things
completely, might even inspire you to create more things. We used to live in
apartments that were mostly surrounded by concrete and it was honestly a bit
depressing. I suggest that if you have the opportunity, even if you have to
pay a bit more, try to go for it, the quality of life improves tremendously.

------
majinuub
Could this be caused by a deeply ingrained instinct from our hominid ancestors
that associates trees with safety? Like Miles stated, correlation doesn't
imply causation. It makes you think though!

------
hsitz
It's not necessarily related to why living near trees improves well being, but
I like the idea of Shinrin Yoku, or "forest bathing":
[https://www.webmd.com/balance/news/20190611/forest-
bathing-n...](https://www.webmd.com/balance/news/20190611/forest-bathing-
nature-time-hot-health-advice)

Nice youtube mini-documentary:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jPNll1Ccn0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jPNll1Ccn0)

------
rgrieselhuber
I’ve noticed that there is always a lack of trees in impoverished areas. It
almost seems like the trees are deliberately cut down in favor of concrete in
areas designated.

~~~
underwater
I've always assumed thats because trees can be time consuming, take a lot of
space and can be expensive to maintain. Essentially, in a city, they are a
luxury.

------
johnchristopher
Years ago, I went to a photography exhibition. Theme was the city. The
artist's motivation was the idea that we - humans - live in a mineral world
(cement, concrete, glass and bricks) now. But we evolved to live and prosper
in high grass and trees, in an organic world.

Also, long ago I read that humans liked to sit on benches in park because it
feels like we are hiding in the edge of the forests, looking for things from a
safe distant place.

------
deepGem
Reminds me of a public library in Hillsboro. Surrounded by trees, the place
was a heaven of peace to work. It also had a coffee shop.

[https://www.hillsboro-oregon.gov/departments/library](https://www.hillsboro-
oregon.gov/departments/library)

------
vba
Interested if places with evergreen trees (e.g. PNW) fair better than areas
with mostly deciduous trees?

------
gravy
Do Bonsai trees count?

~~~
ceejayoz
No, at least not for the purposes of this particular study.

> The researchers report that living in areas where 30 percent or more of the
> outdoor space is dominated by tree canopy was associated with 31 percent
> lower odds of psychological distress, compared to people living in areas
> with 0 to 9 percent tree canopy.

------
squirrelicus
My favorite part is the anti-NIMBY culture that usually dominates here is
experiencing cognitive dissonance right now and they don't even know it.

Bring up housing in SF and the people complaining about no trees right now are
suddenly shuffling everyone into tiny uniform boxes.

~~~
vpontis
Could you expand on this? I'm anti-NIMBY but I don't understand your comment.

I don't think anti-NIMBY's are necessarily anti-trees or anti-parks?

------
cheeko1234
The article mentions Overstory by Richard Powers

It's an amazing book.

[https://www.amazon.com/Overstory-Novel-Richard-
Powers/dp/039...](https://www.amazon.com/Overstory-Novel-Richard-
Powers/dp/039363552X#customerReviews)

------
Waterluvian
I moved earlier this summer. My home office is situated in front of huge bay
windows looking out into the canopy of a forest of 120 foot maple trees that
my house is in. It has made a huge difference, especially when I'm doing
tedious programming work.

------
simonebrunozzi
Possibly related to the Biophilia Hypothesis [0].

[0]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biophilia_hypothesis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biophilia_hypothesis)

------
mobilefriendly
This finding fits in with other research that trees absorb fine particulate
matter (PM 2.5). PM 2.5 is a hazardous air pollution from burning coal and
many other sources.

------
rland
So living in a desert should be correlated with psychological distress, right?
Is that the case?

------
m0zg
I bet living outside the city would improve wellbeing even more. At least it
did for me.

------
kazinator
> _New research finds that, when a neighborhood’s green space leads to better
> health outcomes, tree canopy provides most of the benefits._

Is it the trees? Or is it the higher income status of the people who can
afford to live in the nicer neighborhood?

Complete lack of control for irrelevant variables here.

------
bamin
"Tolkien was an unabashed partisan of trees". Hear hear

------
smnplk
I wish I could go live in Bhutan.

------
loopback_device
yeah, no shit... who would'e thought. like homo sapiens ain't an animal.

------
evan_
Until a massive ice storm causes one of those trees to fall on your house.

------
ryandev3
yeah, it feels good

------
c3534l
I hate when journalists confuse correlation with causation. It's one of the
most basic things you have to know to be be capable of writing about science
and the fact that they failed the first step tells me they shouldn't be
journalists.

