Engaging with nature relates to psychosocial well-being; however, some people encounter barriers to experiencing nature. Nature-focused livestreams (NFLs) offer a relatively new pathway for engagement with the natural world, yet little is known about their association with individual well-being. This scoping review seeks to describe the state of the knowledge regarding NFLs and the well-being of adults. Searching 12 databases and one search engine in April 2022 and again in May 2023 and screening 1,645 unique potentially relevant evidence sources, the research team identified 10 articles that met inclusion criteria for population (adults over 18 years of age), concept (subjective well-being), and context (NFLs). Findings demonstrate emerging empirical support for the connection between viewing NFLs and subjective well-being. The most commonly reported outcome related to well-being was positive affect or uplifted mood (n = 7, 70%). Potential mechanisms that were identified indicated well-being was enhanced through connecting with nature or with other people. NFLs should be considered as a possible way to extend the well-being benefits of engagement with nature to individuals who are unable to leave their homes or who live in urban areas with limited access to nature.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonK. A. (2019). The virtual care farm: A preliminary evaluation of an innovative approach to addressing loneliness and building community through nature and technology. Activities, Adaptation & Aging, 43(4), 334–344; doi: 10.1080/01924788.2019.1581024
BermanM. G., KrossE., KrpanK. M., AskrenM. K., BursonA., DeldinP. J., KaplanS., SherdellL., GotlibI. H., & JonidesJ. (2012). Interacting with nature improves cognition and affect for individuals with depression. Journal of Affective Disorders, 140(3), 300–305; doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2012.03.012
4.
BertoR. (2005). Exposure to restorative environments helps restore attentional capacity. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(3), 249–259; doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2005.07.001
5.
BlaerM. (2023). Interactive webcam travel: Supporting wildlife tourism and conservation during COVID-19 lockdowns. Information Technology & Tourism, 25(1), 47–69; doi: 10.1007/s40558-023-00242-3
6.
BlankG. (2013). Who creates content? Stratification and content creation on the Internet. Information, Communication & Society, 16(4), 590–612; doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2013.777758
7.
BratmanG. N., AndersonC. B., BermanM. G., CochranB., de VriesS., FlandersJ., FolkeC., FrumkinH., GrossJ. J., HartigT., KahnP. H., KuoM., LawlerJ. J., LevinP. S., LindahlT., Meyer-LindenbergA., MitchellR., OuyangZ., RoeJ., ScarlettL., SmithJ. R., van den BoschM., WheelerB. W., WhiteM. P., ZhengH., & DailyG. C. (2019). Nature and mental health: An ecosystem service perspective. Science Advances, 5(7), eaax0903; doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aax0903
8.
BratmanG. N., DailyG. C., LevyB. J., & GrossJ. J. (2015). The benefits of nature experience: Improved affect and cognition. Landscape and Urban Planning, 138, 41–50; doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.02.005
9.
CapaldiC. A., DopkoR. L., & ZelenskiJ. M. (2014). The relationship between nature connectedness and happiness: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 976; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00976
10.
ChenC.-C., & LinY.-C. (2018). What drives live-stream usage intention? The perspectives of flow, entertainment, social interaction, and endorsement. Telematics and Informatics, 35(1), 293–303; doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2017.12.003
11.
ClarkJ., GlasziouP., Del MarC., Bannach-BrownA., StehlikP., & ScottA. M. (2020). A full systematic review was completed in 2 weeks using automation tools: A case study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 121, 81–90; doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.01.008
12.
ClarkJ. M., SandersS., CarterM., HoneymanD., CleoG., AuldY., BoothD., CondronP., DalaisC., BateupS., LinthwaiteB., MayN., MunnJ., RamsayL., RickettK., RutterC., SmithA., SondergeldP., WallinM., JonesM., & BellerE. (2020). Improving the translation of search strategies using the Polyglot Search Translator: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 108(2), 195–207; doi: 10.5195/jmla.2020.834
ColquhounH. L., LevacD., O’BrienK. K., StrausS., TriccoA. C., PerrierL., KastnerM., & MoherD. (2014). Scoping reviews: Time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67(12), 1291–1294; doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.03.013
15.
CorazonS. S., SideniusU., PoulsenD. V., GramkowM. C., & StigsdotterU. K. (2019). Psycho-physiological stress recovery in outdoor nature-based interventions: A systematic review of the past eight years of research. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(10); doi: 10.3390/ijerph16101711
16.
DanielsS., ClementeD. B. P., DesartS., SaenenN., SleursH., NawrotT. S., MalinaR., & PlusquinM. (2022). Introducing nature at the work floor: A nature-based intervention to reduce stress and improve cognitive performance. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 240, 113884; doi: 10.1016/j.ijheh.2021.113884
17.
DarcyP. M., TaylorJ., MackayL., EllisN. J., & GidlowC. J. (2022). Understanding the role of nature engagement in supporting health and well-being during COVID-19. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(7).
18.
DienerE., & SimJ. H. (2024). Happiness/Subjective well-being. In ScarantinoA (Ed.), Emotion theory: The Routledge comprehensive guide. Cambridge: Routledge.
19.
DonaldsonG. C., WilkinsonT. M. A., HurstJ. R., PereraW. R., & WedzichaJ. A. (2005). Exacerbations and time spent outdoors in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 171(5), 446–452; doi: 10.1164/rccm.200408-1054OC
20.
FarrowM. R., & WashburnK. (2019). A review of field experiments on the effect of forest bathing on anxiety and heart rate variability. Global Advances in Health and Medicine, 8, 2164956119848654–2164956119848657; doi: 10.1177/2164956119848654
21.
FrumkinH., BratmanG. N., BreslowS. J., CochranB., KahnP. H.Jr, LawlerJ. J., LevinP. S., TandonP. S., VaranasiU., WolfK. L., & WoodS. A. (2017). Nature contact and human health: A research agenda. Environmental Health Perspectives, 125(7), 075001; doi: 10.1289/EHP1663
GrayE. S., & WikleJ. S. (2021). Using webcam video feed to measure and evaluate national park recreation patterns. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 39(1); doi: 10.18666/JPRA-2020-10496
24.
HansenM. M., JonesR., & TocchiniK. (2017). Shinrin-Yoku (forest bathing) and nature therapy: A state-of-the-art review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(8); doi: 10.3390/ijerph14080851
25.
HighfillM. C., MauldinR. L., AndersonK. A., SchumanD. L., & HendersonS. M. (2022). Nature-focused livecam viewing and well-being in adults: A scoping review protocol. https://osf.io/wb74k
26.
JarrattD. (2021). An exploration of webcam-travel: Connecting to place and nature through webcams during the COVID-19 lockdown of 2020. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 21(2), 156–168; doi: 10.1177/1467358420963370
27.
Johnson-PynnJ. S., & CarletonR. (2019). Webcams and websites inspire conservation of the American bald eagle. Ecopsychology, 11(4), 236–242; doi: 10.1089/eco.2019.0021
28.
KahnP. H., SeversonR. L., & RuckertJ. H. (2009). Technological nature – and the problem when good enough becomes good. In DrenthenM, KeulartzJ, & ProctorJ (Eds.), New visions of nature: Complexity and authenticity (pp. 21–41). Springer.
29.
KjellgrenA., & BuhrkallH. (2010). A comparison of the restorative effect of a natural environment with that of a simulated natural environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(4), 464–472; doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.01.011
30.
LanghansK. E., EcheverriA., DawsS. C., MossS. N., AndersonC. B., Chaplin-KramerR., HendershotJ. N., LiuL., MandleL., NguyenO., OuS. X., RemmeR. P., SchmittR. J. P., VoglA., & DailyG. C. (2023). Centring justice in conceptualizing and improving access to urban nature. People and Nature, 5(3), 897–910; doi: 10.1002/pan3.10470
31.
LeeS. M. F., FilepS., VadaS., & KingB. (2022). Webcam travel: A preliminary examination of psychological well-being. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 24, 329–337; doi: 10.1177/14673584221145818
32.
McKenzieJ. E., BrennanS. E., RyanR. E., ThomsonH. J., & JohnstonR. V. (2022). Chapter 9: Summarizing study characteristics and preparing for synthesis. In HigginsT. J, ChandlerJ, CumpstonM, LiT, PageM. J, & WelchV (Eds.), Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 6.3. Cochrane. https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current/chapter-09
33.
McMahanE. A., & EstesD. (2015). The effect of contact with natural environments on positive and negative affect: A meta-analysis. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 10(6), 507–519; doi: 10.1080/17439760.2014.994224
34.
MunarA. M., & JacobsenJ. K. S. (2014). Motivations for sharing tourism experiences through social media. Tourism Management, 43, 46–54; doi: 10.1016/j.tourman.2014.01.012
35.
MunnZ., AromatarisE., TufanaruC., SternC., PorrittK., FarrowJ., LockwoodC., StephensonM., MoolaS., LizarondoL., McArthurA., PetersM., PearsonA., & JordanZ. (2019). The development of software to support multiple systematic review types: The Joanna Briggs Institute System for the Unified Management, Assessment and Review of Information (JBI SUMARI). International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, 17(1), 36–43; doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000152
36.
MunnZ., PollockD., KhalilH., AlexanderL., MclnerneyP., GodfreyC., PetersM., & TriccoA. (2022). What are scoping reviews? Providing a formal definition of scoping reviews as a type of evidence synthesis. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 20(4), 950–952; doi: 10.11124/jbies-21-00483
37.
NavarroJ. L., & TudgeJ. R. H. (2022). Technologizing Bronfenbrenner: Neo-ecological Theory. Current Psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.), 1–17; doi: 10.1007/s12144-022-02738-3
38.
PageM. J, McKenzieJ. E, BossuytP. M, BoutronI, HoffmannT. C, MulrowC. D, ShamseerL, TetzlaffJ. M, AklE. A, BrennanS. E, ChouR, GlanvilleJ, GrimshawJ. M, HróbjartssonA, LaluM. M, LiT, LoderE. W, Mayo-WilsonE, McDonaldS, McGuinnessL. A, StewartL. A, ThomasJ, TriccoA. C, WelchV. A, WhitingP, & MoherD. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ (Clinical Research ed.), 372, n71; doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71
39.
PergamsO. R. W., & ZaradicP. A. (2008). Evidence for a fundamental and pervasive shift away from nature-based recreation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(7), 2295–2300; doi: 10.1073/pnas.0709893105
40.
PetersM. D., GodfreyC., McInerneyP., MunnZ., TriccoA. C., & KhalilH. (2020). Chapter 11: Scoping reviews (2020 version). In AromatarisE & MunnZ (Eds.), JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI. 10.46658/JBIMES-20-12
41.
PhillipsT. B., WellsN. M., BrownA. H., TralinsJ. R., & BonterD. N. (2023). Nature and well‐being: The association of nature engagement and well‐being during the SARS‐CoV‐2 pandemic. People and Nature, 5(2), 607–620; doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10433
42.
QiuQ., ZuoY., & ZhangM. (2021). Can live streaming save the tourism industry from a pandemic? A study of social media. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 10(9), 595. https://www.mdpi.com/2220-9964/10/9/595
SearleA., TurnbullJ., & AdamsW. M. (2023). The digital peregrine: A technonatural history of a cosmopolitan raptor. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 48(1), 195–212; doi: 10.1111/tran.12566
SilkM., CorreiaR., VeríssimoD., VermaA., & CrowleyS. L. (2021). The implications of digital visual media for human–nature relationships. People and Nature, 3(6), 1130–1137; doi: 10.1002/pan3.10284
47.
SkibinsJ. C., DasB. M., & SchulerG. (2022). Digital modalities, nature, and quality of life: Mental health and conservation benefits of watching bear cams. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 28, 218–232; doi: 10.1080/10871209.2021.2024629
48.
SnellT. L., Graetz SimmondsJ., & GreenwayA. P. (2015). Ecopsychology and evolutionary psychology: Implications and limitations of habitat selection theory. Ecopsychology, 7(2), 96–103; doi: 10.1089/eco.2014.0053
49.
SnellT. L., McLeanL. A., McAseyF., ZhangM., & MaggsD. (2019). Nature streaming: Contrasting the effectiveness of perceived live and recorded videos of nature for restoration. Environment and Behavior, 51(9–10), 1082–1105; doi: 10.1177/0013916518787318
50.
The EndNote Team. (2013). EndNote [computer program]. Clarivate: Philadelphia.
51.
TriccoA. C., LillieE., ZarinW., O’BrienK. K., ColquhounH., LevacD., MoherD., PetersM. D. J., HorsleyT., WeeksL., HempelS., AklE. A., ChangC., McGowanJ., StewartL., HartlingL., AldcroftA., WilsonM. G., GarrittyC., LewinS., GodfreyC. M., MacdonaldM. T., LangloisE. V., Soares-WeiserK., MoriartyJ., CliffordT., TunçalpÖ., & StrausS. E. (2018). PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467–473; doi: 10.7326/m18-0850%m 30178033
52.
TurnbullJ., SearleA., & AdamsW. M. (2020). Quarantine encounters with digital animals: More-than-human geographies of lockdown life. Journal of Environmental Media, 1(1), 6.1–6.10; doi: 10.1386/jem_00027_1
53.
Twohig-BennettC., & JonesA. (2018). The health benefits of the great outdoors: A systematic review and meta-analysis of greenspace exposure and health outcomes. Environmental Research, 166, 628–637; doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2018.06.030
54.
ValtchanovD., & EllardC. (2010). Physiological and affective responses to immersion in virtual reality: Effects of nature and urban settings. Journal of CyberTherapy & Rehabilitation, 3(4), 359–373.
55.
van Houwelingen-SnippeJ., van RompayT. J. L., & Ben AllouchS. (2020). Feeling connected after experiencing digital nature: A survey study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(18); doi: 10.3390/ijerph17186879
56.
van Houwelingen-SnippeJ., van RompayT. J. L., de JongM. D. T., & Ben AllouchS. (2020). Does digital nature enhance social aspirations? An experimental study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(4); doi: 10.3390/ijerph17041454
57.
WakeE., AtkinsH., WillockA., HawkesA., DawberJ., & WeirK. (2020). Telehealth in trauma: A scoping review. Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, 28(6), 412–422; doi: 10.1177/1357633x20940868
58.
WenY., YanQ., PanY., GuX., & LiuY. (2019). Medical empirical research on forest bathing (Shinrin-yoku): A systematic review. Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine, 24(1), 70; doi: 10.1186/s12199-019-0822-8
59.
YaoW., ZhangX., & GongQ. (2021). The effect of exposure to the natural environment on stress reduction: A meta-analysis. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 57, 126932; doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126932
60.
ZabiniF., AlbaneseL., BecheriF. R., GavazziG., GigantiF., GiovanelliF., GronchiG., GuazziniA., LaurinoM., LiQ., MarziT., MastorciF., MeneguzzoF., RighiS., & ViggianoM. P. (2020). Comparative study of the restorative effects of forest and urban videos during COVID-19 lockdown: Intrinsic and benchmark values. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(21), 8011. https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/21/8011
61.
ZhangA., & XiaoH. (2023). Psychological well-being in tourism live streaming: A grounded theory. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 0, 109634802211495; doi: 10.1177/10963480221149595
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
