30 Days Wild: who benefits most?

Miles Richardson (Human Sciences Research Centre, University of Derby, Derby, UK)
Kirsten McEwan (Human Sciences Research Centre, University of Derby, Derby, UK)
Gulcan Garip (Human Sciences Research Centre, University of Derby, Derby, UK)

Journal of Public Mental Health

ISSN: 1746-5729

Publication date: 17 September 2018

Abstract

Purpose

There is a need to provide interventions to improve well-being that are accessible and cost-effective. Interventions to increase engagement with nature are coming to the fore. The Wildlife Trusts 30 Days Wild campaign shows promise as a large-scale intervention for improving public engagement with nature for well-being. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

Design/methodology/approach

In total, 273 people fully participated in a repeated measures evaluation comparing baseline measures of nature connection, health, happiness and conservation behaviours with measures post-30 days and 3 months.

Findings

There were sustained and significant increases for scores in nature connection, health, happiness and conservation behaviours. Those with lower scores at baseline in nature connection, conservation behaviours and happiness showed the most benefit. Older participants and those with higher baseline scores in conservation behaviours were the most likely to sustain their engagement with the campaign.

Research limitations/implications

Although the design and defined outcomes meet criteria for public health interventions, the self-reported measures, self-selecting sample and attrition are limitations.

Originality/value

The significant and sustained effects of the campaign on health, happiness and nature connection and conservation make this a promising intervention for improving human’s and nature’s well-being. The large community sample and naturalistic setting for the intervention make these data relevant to future interventions and policy.

Keywords

Citation

Richardson, M., McEwan, K. and Garip, G. (2018), "30 Days Wild: who benefits most?", Journal of Public Mental Health, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 95-104. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPMH-02-2018-0018

Download as .RIS

Publisher

:

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2018, Emerald Publishing Limited

Please note you might not have access to this content

You may be able to access this content by login via Shibboleth, Open Athens or with your Emerald account.
If you would like to contact us about accessing this content, click the button and fill out the form.
To rent this content from Deepdyve, please click the button.