Engagement with nature is an important part of many people’s lives, and the health and wellbeing benefits of nature–based activities are becoming increasingly recognised across disciplines from city planning to medicine. Despite this, urbanisation, challenges of modern life and environmental degradation are leading to a reduction in both the quantity and the quality of nature experiences. Nature–based health interventions (NBIs) can facilitate behavioural change through a somewhat structured promotion of nature–based experiences and, in doing so, promote improved physical, mental and social health and wellbeing. We conducted a Delphi expert elicitation process with 19 experts from seven countries (all named authors on this paper) to identify the different forms that such interventions take, the potential health outcomes and the target beneficiaries. In total, 27 NBIs were identified, aiming to prevent illness, promote wellbeing and treat specific physical, mental or social health and wellbeing conditions. These interventions were broadly categorized into those that change the environment in which people live, work, learn, recreate or heal (for example, the provision of gardens in hospitals or parks in cities) and those that change behaviour (for example, engaging people through organized programmes or other activities). We also noted the range of factors (such as socioeconomic variation) that will inevitably influence the extent to which these interventions succeed. We conclude with a call for research to identify the drivers influencing the effectiveness of NBIs in enhancing health and wellbeing.

Private gardens collectively comprise the largest green space in most cities and the greatest potential for increasing the extent of wildlife-friendly and native-dominated habitat, improving the quality of ecosystem services, and providing opportunities for urban dwellers to reconnect with nature. Because attitudes and values driving landscape preferences in gardens are complex and often not conducive to biodiversity, and a gap exists between the possession of knowledge or values and the expression of pro-environmental behavior, facilitating change in gardening behavior is challenging. We attempted to improve knowledge and influence values, attitudes, and gardening behavior of 55 householders in favor of native biodiversity and environmentally friendly practices, through a two-way communication process, or interactive dialog, during a process of biodiversity documentation of their gardens. Informative feedback on their garden with a normative component was also provided. Despite being well educated and knowledgeable about common species at the start of the study, an increase in knowledge and shift in attitude was detected in 64% of householders: 40% reported a greater understanding of wildlife, and 26% made changes in their gardens, 13% to support native biodiversity. The normative component of our feedback information was of particular interest to 20% of householders. Because neighborhood norms influence gardening practices, changes adopted by a proportion of householders should be perpetuated across neighborhoods. The process of biodiversity assessment, dialog, and feedback was effective in improving knowledge of wildlife and native species, and stimulated a shift in attitude that resulted in native-friendly gardening practices. These changes were detected primarily through open self-report questions, rather than quantitative measures

Context: Animals carrying tracking and logging devices are subject to a range of instrument effects that negatively affect survival, reproduction and behaviour. The common recommendation is that device weight should not exceed 5% body mass (BM) for terrestrial species; however, this rule-of-thumb has little empirical basis. Modelling indicates that devices weighing less than 3% BM may still have impacts. Several studies have used telemetry and data loggers on domestic cats (Felis catus) with instruments ranging in weight from 30 g to 125 g, but there has been no quantitative evaluation of instrument effects. In addition, inexpensive GPS tags such as iGotU are increasingly being used to track domestic cats, but often with little acknowledgement of habitat-related location error. Aims: We evaluated the impact of wearing devices of different weights on domestic cat movements, and quantified location error across typical suburban habitats. Methods: We recorded movements of cats wearing three different GPS collar weights for a week at a time: light, 30 g (<1% BM); medium, 80 g (~2% BM); and heavy, 130 g (~3% BM). Location error (LE) and fix success rates (FSR) were compared between backyard habitats and up- or downward orientation of the GPS tags on collars. Key results: Home-range size and distance travelled from home were smaller when cats wore the heaviest collar. LE was lower and FSR higher for GPS tags with direct-line-of-sight to satellites (e.g. on lawns), but there was no difference between tags placed in dense vegetation (hedges) or more open vegetation (trees), or tags oriented up or down. Conclusions: Collars carrying instruments on cats should be no more than 2% BM (medium-weight collar). LE was large relative to typical urban habitat size, indicating that misclassification of locations into habitats could easily occur in habitat-selection studies. Implications: Some published accounts of cat home-range sizes may be underestimates, resulting in underestimates of the extent of impacts on prey species. Habitat-use studies should acknowledge the error associated with GPS tags and incorporate it into analyses using techniques such as Brownian Bridges.