20
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Participation in local food projects is associated with better psychological well-being: evidence from the East of England

      1 , 2 , 3 , 4
      Journal of Public Health
      Oxford University Press (OUP)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Studies suggest that local food may contribute to well-being, but do not use standardized measures, or control groups.

          Methods

          An online survey compared participants of local food initiatives (n = 302) with members of the general population (n = 157) in terms of scores on standardized measures of well-being and distress. Using hierarchical ordinary least squares regression models, we explored the relationship between participation and well-being via four mediators—nature connectedness, psychological need satisfaction, diet and physical activity.

          Results

          Participants scored higher than non-participants on life satisfaction (t(346) = 2.30, P = 0.02, ρr = 0.12) and the WEMWBS scale (t(335) = 2.12, P = 0.04, ρr = 0.10), but differences in psychological distress were insignificant. More actively engaged participants scored higher on positive well-being and longer duration participation was associated with higher life satisfaction and less psychological distress. Finally, we found that participation contributes to psychological need satisfaction, better diet and connection to nature, three known drivers of well-being.

          Conclusions

          Well-being may be a co-benefit of local food initiatives beyond the physical and psychological benefits of growing food. Further research is needed to explore the mediators driving these effects, quantify benefits, and track impacts over time and across different social groups.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Multicollinearity in Regression Analysis: The Problem Revisited

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Assessing the validity of single-item life satisfaction measures: results from three large samples.

            The present paper assessed the validity of single-item life satisfaction measures by comparing single-item measures to the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS)-a more psychometrically established measure.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Is volunteering a public health intervention? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the health and survival of volunteers

              Background Volunteering has been advocated by the United Nations, and American and European governments as a way to engage people in their local communities and improve social capital, with the potential for public health benefits such as improving wellbeing and decreasing health inequalities. Furthermore, the US Corporation for National and Community Service Strategic Plan for 2011–2015 focused on increasing the impact of national service on community needs, supporting volunteers’ wellbeing, and prioritising recruitment and engagement of underrepresented populations. The aims of this review were to examine the effect of formal volunteering on volunteers’ physical and mental health and survival, and to explore the influence of volunteering type and intensity on health outcomes. Methods Experimental and cohort studies comparing the physical and mental health outcomes and mortality of a volunteering group to a non-volunteering group were identified from twelve electronic databases (Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL, ERIC, HMIC, SSCI, ASSIA, Social Care Online, Social Policy and Practice) and citation tracking in January 2013. No language, country or date restrictions were applied. Data synthesis was based on vote counting and random effects meta-analysis of mortality risk ratios. Results Forty papers were selected: five randomised controlled trials (RCTs, seven papers); four non-RCTs; and 17 cohort studies (29 papers). Cohort studies showed volunteering had favourable effects on depression, life satisfaction, wellbeing but not on physical health. These findings were not confirmed by experimental studies. Meta-analysis of five cohort studies found volunteers to be at lower risk of mortality (risk ratio: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.66, 0.90). There was insufficient evidence to demonstrate a consistent influence of volunteering type or intensity on outcomes. Conclusion Observational evidence suggested that volunteering may benefit mental health and survival although the causal mechanisms remain unclear. Consequently, there was limited robustly designed research to guide the development of volunteering as a public health promotion intervention. Future studies should explicitly map intervention design to clear health outcomes as well as use pragmatic RCT methodology to test effects.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Public Health
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                1741-3842
                1741-3850
                July 08 2019
                July 08 2019
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Global Sustainability Institute, Anglia Ruskin University, 183 East Road, Cambridge, UK
                [2 ]School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Tower Building, 70 Park Place, Cardiff, UK
                [3 ]Norwich Business School, University of East Anglia, Earlham Road, Norwich, UK
                [4 ]University of Exeter Business School, Penryn Campus, Penryn, Cornwall, UK
                Article
                10.1093/pubmed/fdz057
                3c67dae2-586b-4c88-9840-63e177346d4e
                © 2019

                https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article