USU Research Investigating How the Shape and Size of Greenspace Can Promote Urban Human Health

Assistant Professor Huaqing Wang in USU’s Department of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning is filling some of the gaps in our knowledge of greenspace with a study published in Lancet Planet Health.

It’s common knowledge that time spent outdoors among trees and other plants is good for our health, and science backs that up. Exposure to greenspace, as scientists call it, is linked to reduced stress and anxiety, lower rates of allergies and diabetes, better pregnancy outcomes, and even shortened recovery times from surgery, among other benefits. However, this relationship brings up important questions about how to invest in urban greenspaces to maximize health benefits. Is it more effective to create one large park, or can multiple smaller pocket parks provide the same advantages?

With projects like Salt Lake City’s Green Loop poised to transform urban areas, understanding how the design and morphology of greenspace affect our health is more important than ever.

Wang, along with doctoral students Simin Gholami and Amirhossein Samavatekbatan, Postdoctoral Fellow Wenyan Xu, Associate Professor Ole Sleipness, and colleagues from outside Utah State University, screened over 300,000 research articles and identified 29 studies to understand how the size, shape, connectivity and diversity of greenspaces affect our health. The results of the team’s work, “Where and how to invest in greenspace for optimal health benefits,” were recently published in Lancet Planet Health.

Wang has always been drawn to the intersection between landscape ecology and public health — and for that matter, she observed, so has humanity.

“It’s remarkable how ancient philosophies like feng shui recognized the importance of spatial arrangement for well-being, something we are only now confirming with modern science,” she said. “Historically, people understood that space influences not just physical, but also mental health. Over time, as urbanization intensified, this connection faded. Today, as we use metrics from landscape ecology to measure the shape, size, and connectivity of greenspaces, we’re rediscovering that design elements deeply influence ecological services like air quality and cooling effects, and they can even influence human behavior, which in turn impacts our health.”

The difference now, Wang said, is that we can quantify these relationships and provide scientific evidence to back up what was once largely philosophical.

What Wang and her colleagues found when they looked at the scientific literature was that the shape, size and location of greenspaces can make a difference in how they affect our health. Larger and more connected greenspaces with a greater variety of plants provide more benefit than smaller, scattered patches of vegetation. For instance, a small plot of green with a tree might provide residents with some benefit, but parks connected by green corridors can do a better job of reducing air pollution and urban heat while also encouraging physical activity.

However, there are also nuances for city planners to consider beyond just thinking bigger is better.

“Integrating greenspaces along roadways provides passive exposure to nature, which can still yield health benefits, especially for busy individuals,” Wang said. “Planners might also want to pay attention to scale. Large parks may offer more recreational opportunities, but smaller, linear parks could be more accessible and encourage daily use.”

By exploring how the shape and size of greenspace can affect human health, Wang’s team also opened up new areas of research into how greenspace affects us.

“One key area is understanding how different types of vegetation — whether dense forests, open meadows, or urban lawns — uniquely contribute to physical and mental well-being,” she said. “But beyond the ecological aspects, there’s a growing need to explore how greenspaces intersect with social concerns. How might strategic greenspace planning help address health disparities, especially across different income neighborhoods? Can we design urban greenspaces that not only improve environmental quality but also foster greater community resilience and social cohesion?”

As technologies like remote sensing and machine learning offer scientists ever more detailed looks into the world around us, Wang expects them to develop further insights into urban design, public health and environmental justice that will lead to not only greater efficiency in urban planning but also holistic well-being for the inhabitants of cities.

The same approach of incorporating research across fields used by Wang and her coauthors can make that a reality.

“I think one aspect worth emphasizing is the interdisciplinary nature of this research,” she said. “It’s not just about urban planning, but rather integrating public health and landscape ecology. By bringing these fields together, we can approach urban greenspaces from a more comprehensive standpoint, ensuring that they serve as catalysts for both ecological sustainability and human well-being. The ultimate goal is to create cities where greenspaces are more than just aesthetic additions — they’re active, functional elements of a healthy urban fabric.”