title: Proximity to urban parks and mental health.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Urban parks have received attention in recent years as a possible environmental factor that could encourage physical activity, prevent obesity, and reduce the incidence of chronic conditions. Despite long hypothesized benefits of parks for mental health, few park studies incorporate mental health measures.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To test the association between proximity to urban parks and psychological distress.
  
  
  METHODS
  Cross-sectional analysis of individual health survey responses. Data were collected for a study of capital improvements of neighborhood parks in Los Angeles. A survey was fielded on a sample of residential addresses, stratified by distance from the park (within 400m, 800m, 1.6 km, and 3.2km; N=1070). We used multiple regression to estimate the relationship between the psychological distress as measured by the MHI-5 (outcome variable) and distance to parks (main explanatory variable), controlling for observed individual characteristics.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Mental health is significantly related to residential distance from parks, with the highest MHI-5 scores among residents within short walking distance from the park (400m) and decreasing significantly over the next distances. The number of visits and physical activity minutes are significantly and independently related to distance, although controlling for them does not reduce the association between distance and mental health.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  This paper provides a new data point for an arguably very old question, but for which empirical data are sparse for the US. A nearby urban park is associated with the same mental health benefits as decreasing local unemployment rates by 2 percentage points, suggesting at least the potential of environmental interventions to improve mental health. The analysis is cross-sectional, making it impossible to control for important confounders, including residential selection.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Mental health policy has traditionally focused on individual-centered interventions. Just as health policy for preventable chronic illnesses has shifted attention to modifiable environmental determinants, population mental health may benefit substantially from environmental interventions.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Policy evaluations should incorporate mental health measures when assessing neighborhood improvement programs and physical environments. Many recent and ongoing studies have excluded mental health measure in the belief that they are too burdensome for respondents or irrelevant. If a causal relationship is confirmed, then ameliorating neighborhood conditions and physical environments could represent a scalable way to improve mental health issues for large populations.
authors.affiliation: RAND, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401, USA, sturm@rand.org.
authors.forename: Roland
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Sturm
authors.forename: Deborah
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Cohen
mesh_terms: D000367:Age Factors; D015992:Body Mass Index; D004777:Environment; D015444:Exercise; D006291:Health Policy; D006304:Health Status; D006801:Humans; D015141:Los Angeles; D008603:Mental Health; D011633:Public Facilities; D011998:Recreation / Q000523:psychology; D012737:Sex Factors; D012959:Socioeconomic Factors; D013315:Stress, Psychological / Q000453:epidemiology* / Q000523:psychology; D014505:Urban Population