Urban Blue Spaces as Therapeutic Landscapes: “A Slice of Nature in the City”

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

Urban blue spaces are defined as all natural and manmade surface water in urban environments. This paper draws on how the concepts of experienced, symbolic, social, and activity space combine to position urban blue spaces as therapeutic landscapes. We conducted 203 intercept interviews between 12 October 2019 and 10 November 2019. Although safety concerns had health-limiting impacts, interacting with the Glasgow Canal and surrounding landscape was predominantly perceived as health-enhancing. Our findings build on current evidence, which has suggested that urban blue spaces, particularly canals, may foster therapeutic properties, contributing to healthier city environments. Further research is required to understand better the interconnectedness of urban blue spaces and health and how such spaces can be best developed and managed to improve the health outcomes of local populations.

Related collections

Most cited references 73

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Using thematic analysis in psychology

Virginia Braun, Victoria Clarke (2014)

0 comments Cited 17241 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups.

A Tong, P SAINSBURY, J. Craig (2007)

Qualitative research explores complex phenomena encountered by clinicians, health care providers, policy makers and consumers. Although partial checklists are available, no consolidated reporting framework exists for any type of qualitative design. To develop a checklist for explicit and comprehensive reporting of qualitative studies (in depth interviews and focus groups). We performed a comprehensive search in Cochrane and Campbell Protocols, Medline, CINAHL, systematic reviews of qualitative studies, author or reviewer guidelines of major medical journals and reference lists of relevant publications for existing checklists used to assess qualitative studies. Seventy-six items from 22 checklists were compiled into a comprehensive list. All items were grouped into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. Duplicate items and those that were ambiguous, too broadly defined and impractical to assess were removed. Items most frequently included in the checklists related to sampling method, setting for data collection, method of data collection, respondent validation of findings, method of recording data, description of the derivation of themes and inclusion of supporting quotations. We grouped all items into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. The criteria included in COREQ, a 32-item checklist, can help researchers to report important aspects of the research team, study methods, context of the study, findings, analysis and interpretations.

0 comments Cited 7858 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization

Benjamin Saunders, Julius Sim, Tom Kingstone … (2017)

Saturation has attained widespread acceptance as a methodological principle in qualitative research. It is commonly taken to indicate that, on the basis of the data that have been collected or analysed hitherto, further data collection and/or analysis are unnecessary. However, there appears to be uncertainty as to how saturation should be conceptualized, and inconsistencies in its use. In this paper, we look to clarify the nature, purposes and uses of saturation, and in doing so add to theoretical debate on the role of saturation across different methodologies. We identify four distinct approaches to saturation, which differ in terms of the extent to which an inductive or a deductive logic is adopted, and the relative emphasis on data collection, data analysis, and theorizing. We explore the purposes saturation might serve in relation to these different approaches, and the implications for how and when saturation will be sought. In examining these issues, we highlight the uncertain logic underlying saturation—as essentially a predictive statement about the unobserved based on the observed, a judgement that, we argue, results in equivocation, and may in part explain the confusion surrounding its use. We conclude that saturation should be operationalized in a way that is consistent with the research question(s), and the theoretical position and analytic framework adopted, but also that there should be some limit to its scope, so as not to risk saturation losing its coherence and potency if its conceptualization and uses are stretched too widely.