top of page

Everyday nature and its benefits for us!



Nature is typically defined as the nonhuman elements of a landscape that exist away from human activity (Hartig et al., 2014). Conversely, everyday nature situates nature within areas where people live, work, and play (Miller & Hobbs, 2002), purposefully integrating it into the urban environment so that it becomes a part of daily life for city residents, offering both environmental and human health benefits.


The definitions of everyday nature, urban nature, green infrastructure, nature-based solutions, and urban green space often overlap, encompassing humans, various landscapes, and cultures. What sets everyday nature apart is its emphasis on providing city dwellers with frequent and incidental access to biodiverse environments. Additionally, everyday nature is designed for diverse and open-ended use by urban residents, allowing for observation, engagement, or immersion. More than half of the world's population now resides in cities (Ritchie & Roser, 2018). Urban green spaces and green infrastructure are crucial for connecting city dwellers with nature, providing significant benefits. This need for access to nature was underscored during the COVID-19 pandemic, as global lockdowns led to a surge in recreational use of urban greenspaces (e.g., Venter et al., 2020). Before the pandemic, many urban residents struggled to regularly engage with nature due to lengthy commutes (Nicholls et al., 2015). Therefore, integrating nature into the urban environment through everyday nature experiences is essential, rather than relying solely on large, distant natural areas that may be unevenly distributed within cities.




Figure 1 Main principles of biodiversity-sensitive urban design aimed at providing everyday nature (i.e., locating nature where people live, work, and play to provide environmental and human health benefits): (1) manage threats (e.g., pet containment, safe road and rail crossing, wildlife-friendly lighting, bird-friendly glazing); (2) provide ecological connectivity (e.g., continuous vegetated linear pathways, elevated ropes and bridges, underpasses); (3) promote human–nature interactions (e.g., interpretive signage, citizen science programs, active transport, nature play); (4) provide resources (e.g., rooftop gardens, living walls, nesting cavities, habitat walls, flowering plants, diverse plantings); and (5) facilitate ecological processes (e.g., pollination, seed dispersal, resilient populations).

(Taken from: Visintin, C., Garrard, G. E., Weisser, W. W., Baracco, M., Hobbs, R. J., & Bekessy, S. A. (2024). Designing cities for everyday nature. Conservation Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14328 )


Urban nature offers numerous health and well-being benefits, such as lower asthma rates in children, improved cognitive development, reduced ADHD, and fewer allergies (Lovasi et al., 2008; Dadvand et al., 2015; Faber Taylor & Kuo, 2011; Hanski et al., 2012). Adults exposed to nature experience less hypertension, depression, stress, and improved sleep, with reduced risks of heart disease, diabetes, and cancer (Shanahan et al., 2016). Urban vegetation helps mitigate climate change by cooling cities and reducing flood impacts (Ferreira et al., 2021). Cities support diverse species and significantly contribute to biodiversity, hosting numerous threatened species (Spotswood et al., 2021). Addressing the "extinction of experience" by integrating everyday nature into urban design can enhance biodiversity conservation, foster a sense of place, and connect people to Indigenous cultures.


Planning for everyday nature requires moving away from biodiversity offsetting, which often relocates cleared vegetation far from the impact site, failing to benefit urban residents and yielding questionable ecological outcomes (Kalliolevo et al., 2021). Instead, strategies that restore and nurture urban nature can enhance human health and well-being while supporting native species and ecosystems. Biodiversity-sensitive urban design (BSUD; Garrard et al., 2018) and animal-aided design (AAD; Weisser & Hauck, 2017) incorporate ecological principles to mitigate urban development impacts, protect habitats, enable species dispersal, and promote human-nature interactions. Unlike traditional urban greening, everyday nature focuses on species-specific goals and integrates nature into the urban fabric, providing residents with ready access to natural experiences. BSUD, as a guiding tool, aligns ecosystem services with biodiversity goals and can be integrated into frameworks like water-sensitive urban design to maximize co-benefits.




Figure 2 Biodiversity-sensitive design features for a typical residential building: (1) rooftop gardens with diverse range of species; (2) eave cavities for birds and bats; (3) bird-friendly window treatments; (4) brick cavities for birds, bats, and pollinating insects; (5) wildlife-friendly lighting; (6) living walls with diverse range of species; (7) planters with diverse range of species to connect building to landscape; (8) diverse habitat structure with trees, shrubs, and small plants; (9) raised areas of building to provide shelter and movement; (10) pet enclosures for outdoor access with safe separation from wildlife; and (11) nesting boxes in trees.

(Taken from Visintin, C., Garrard, G. E., Weisser, W. W., Baracco, M., Hobbs, R. J., & Bekessy, S. A. (2024). Designing cities for everyday nature. Conservation Biology. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14328 )


Urban development often fails to provide everyday nature because it is not considered early in the planning and design stages. Collaboration between designers and ecologists during research and planning ensures that ecological data is collected and human-nature interactions are prioritized from the beginning. This approach differs from traditional site investigations by design professionals, which typically focus on factors like wind, solar exposure, topography, and soil condition. Ecologists can identify rare or engaging species that inhabit or once inhabited the area, allowing for potential reintroduction. By integrating ecological considerations into urban design, designers can regenerate biodiversity and create everyday nature experiences. Early identification of nature goals alongside other design objectives ensures a cohesive and integrated approach. Focusing on specific species, preferably native, simplifies the design process and helps enhance or attract species to the site. 


Everyday nature poses challenges as it transcends traditional urban nature management boundaries. The design industry often undervalues ecological knowledge, while ecological sciences may overlook design constraints due to theoretical divides. Successful integration of everyday nature into urban environments requires collaboration between ecologists, planners, and design professionals. Design professionals can strategically coordinate expert teams to incorporate ecological conditions into urban planning. However, designing for everyday nature may encounter issues such as safety concerns, zoonotic diseases, and incompatible land uses. Biodiverse systems can potentially reduce virus shedding by lowering stress in organisms. Urban environments are novel ecosystems, and traditional restoration approaches may not always apply. Collaborations between local ecologists and design professionals can help address these challenges, considering the specific ecological and social criteria of each site. Contextual differences between cities in the Global North and South also necessitate tailored approaches (Cilliers et al., 2021). Tools like certification processes and urban biodiversity indicators can aid in embedding everyday nature into urban design, although further research is needed to develop effective measures and understand the mechanisms behind nature's benefits.


Urban nature integration is vital for human well-being, climate adaptation, and biodiversity conservation. Nature in cities lowers asthma rates, improves mental health, and mitigates heat and flood impacts, while supporting diverse species (Lovasi et al., 2008; Shanahan et al., 2016; Doick & Hutchings, 2013; Aronson et al., 2014). Moving beyond biodiversity offsetting to strategies like BSUD and AAD fosters everyday nature, enhancing human-nature interactions and ecological resilience (Garrard et al., 2018; Weisser & Hauck, 2017). Collaboration among ecologists, planners, and designers is crucial for addressing challenges and ensuring successful urban nature integration. Contextual differences between cities necessitate tailored approaches, and tools like certification processes and biodiversity indicators can aid in this effort. Embracing everyday nature through thoughtful urban planning and innovative design will create healthier, more sustainable cities for all residents.


 

Article prepared by: Nur Anis Elias, MBIOS R&D Associate 23/24


If you enjoyed this article, do sign up to become a part of our MBIOS family and receive our monthly newsletter along with many more resources in the link below.


 

References

  1. Cilliers, S. S., Breed, C. A., Cilliers, E. J., & Lategan, L. G. (2021). Urban ecological planning and design in the Global South. In C. M. Shackleton, S. S. Cilliers, E. Davoren, & M. J. du Toit (Eds.), Urban ecology in the Global South (pp. 365–401). Springer.

  2. Dadvand, P., Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J., Esnaola, M., Forns, J., Basagaña, X., Alvarez-Pedrerol, M., Rivas, I., López-Vicente, M., de Castro Pascual, M., Su, J., Jerrett, M., Querol, X., & Sunyer, J. (2015). Green spaces and cognitive development in primary schoolchildren. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112(26), 7937–7942.

  3. Faber Taylor, A., & Kuo, F. E. (2011). Could exposure to everyday green spaces help treat ADHD? Evidence from children's play settings. Applied Psychology: Health and Well Being, 3, 281–303.

  4. Ferreira, C. S. S., Potočki, K., Kapović-Solomun, M., & Kalantari, Z. (2021). Nature-Based solutions for flood mitigation and resilience in urban areas. In C. S. S. Ferreira, Z. Kalantari, T. Hartmann, & P. Pereira (Eds.), Nature-based solutions for flood mitigation. The handbook of environmental chemistry (Vol. 107, pp. 59–78). Springer.

  5. Garrard, G. E., Williams, N. S. G., Mata, L., Thomas, J., & Bekessy, S. A. (2018). Biodiversity sensitive urban design. Conservation Letters, 11(2), e12411.

  6. Hanski, I., von Hertzen, L., Fyhrquist, N., Koskinen, K., Torppa, K., Laatikainen, T., Karisola, P., Auvinen, P., Paulin, L., Mäkelä, M. J., Vartiainen, E., Kosunen, T. U., Alenius, H., & Haahtela, T. (2012). Environmental biodiversity, human microbiota, and allergy are interrelated. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109, 8334–8339.

  7. Hartig, T., Mitchell, R., de Vries, S., & Frumkin, H. (2014). Nature and health. Annual Review of Public Health, 45, 207–228.

  8. Kalliolevo, H., Gordon, A., Sharma, R., Bull, J. W., & Bekessy, S. A. (2021). Biodiversity offsetting can relocate nature away from people: An empirical case study in Western Australia. Conservation Science and Practice, 3(10), e512.

  9. Lovasi, G. S., Quinn, J. W., Neckerman, K. M., Perzanowski, S., & Rundle, A. (2008). Children living in areas with more street trees have lower prevalence of asthma. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 62, 647–649.

  10. Miller, J. R., & Hobbs, R. J. (2002). Conservation where people live and work. Conservation Biology, 16, 330–337.

  11. Nicholls, L., Phelan, K., & Maller, C. (2015). Time poor, health poor? Travel-related time poverty and resident health in a greenfield master-planned estate. State of Australian Cities Conference 2015: Refereed Proceedings, 1–10.

  12. Ritchie, H., & Roser, M. (2018). Urbanization. https://ourworldindata.org/urbanization 

  13. Shanahan, D., Bush, R., Gaston, K., Lin, B. B., Dean, J., Barber, E., & Fuller, R. (2016). Health benefits from nature experiences depend on dose. Scientific Reports, 6, 28551.

  14. Spotswood, E. N., Beller, E. E., Grossinger, R., Grenier, J. L., Heller, N. E., & Aronson, M. F. (2021). The biological deserts fallacy: Cities in their landscapes contribute more than we think to regional biodiversity. Bioscience, 71(2), 148–160.

  15. Venter, Z. S., Barton, D. N., Gundersen, V., Figari, H., & Nowell, M. (2020). Urban nature in a time of crisis: Recreational use of green space increases during the COVID-19 outbreak in Oslo, Norway. Environmental Research Letters, 15, 104075. 

  16. Weisser, W. W., & Hauck, T. E. (2017). ANIMAL-AIDED DESIGN – Using a species’ life-cycle to improve open space planning and conservation in cities and elsewhere. Preprint. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/150359 

Comments

Stay Up-To-Date with New Posts

Search By Tags

bottom of page