Page - 265 - in Biodiversity and Health in the Face of Climate Change

265 Fig. 11.3 Model of the interactions between level of engagement with nature, level of public health targeting (combining the models of Pretty et  al. 2005; Haubenhofer et  al. 2010; Annerstedt and Währborg 2011; Bragg and Leck 2017) with the additions of potential benefits due to enhanced biodiversity. Green care (shaded area) covers a range of targeted activities that overlap those devel- oped through health promotion as well as specific health therapies exposure to biodiversity varies depending on activity, and is likely to be higher when the participation is more active. For example, conservation volunteering may involve handling plant-life and soil, which brings people intimately in touch with biodiver- sity (soils can be extremely biodiverse even if they  are  not always perceived that way). Therapeutic gardens could be biodiverse, for example, through the variety in species required in the creation of a sensory garden. As per the Bragg and Leck (2017) extension to the existing models, well- being and the promotion of health are not static, and individuals often move across and within the nature, health and well- being sector (i.e. horizontally between health promotion and health therapy, and diagonally between different activities and therapies). Box 11.1 is a case study that illustrates the variety of activities that can be sup- ported in a community forest. This suggests multiple beneficial opportunities to access, engage with and, where prescribed, undertake as a therapy. Active participa- tion probably has greater health benefits (Collins and O’Callaghan 2008), and more biodiverse environments can increase the therapeutic effects on humans (Annerstedt and Währborg 2011). Interventions that encourage people to support biodiversity, for example through choice of species when gardening, have the potential to simul- 11 Biodiversity and  Health in  the  Face of  Climate Change: Implications for  Public…