Contrasting urban and rural pathways linking green areas to mental health

Contact with green areas is widely recognized as a contributor to improved mental well-being, yet the pathways through which these benefits emerge may differ substantially across urban and rural contexts. These benefits can depend on multiple factors, including the extent to which people feel emotionally connected to nature, that is, their nature relatedness . To explore these relationships, we conducted a cross-sectional study using a nationwide online survey of 5,072 adults in Brazil (4,250 urban; 822 rural). Mental health was assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12), and emotional connection to nature via the Nature Relatedness Scale. Environmental exposure was measured through self-reported visitation patterns and objective land-cover data within a 1-km residential buffer. Data were analyzed using Generalized Linear Models (GLMs) stratified by residential context. We found that the overall proportion of participants with psychological distress did not differ significantly between urban and rural residents (∼51%). However, the ways in which green areas and nature relatedness influenced mental health varied markedly. Among urban participants, frequent visits to diverse green areas correlated with fewer mental health issues. Conversely, higher nature relatedness (specifically the self and perspective dimensions) was associated with greater anxiety, suggesting a potential psychological burden tied to environmental sensitivity. In rural settings, abundant green cover was not protective; herbaceous cover correlated with higher depression, and forest cover was negatively associated with nature relatedness , reflecting a possible utilitarian perception of the landscape. However, blue areas emerged as the primary environments associated with emotional connection in rural areas, and visiting green areas even once a week was linked to lower depression. Across both contexts, environmental barriers were linked to poorer mental health outcomes, including safety concerns in urban areas and a lack of adequate infrastructure in rural settings. Ultimately, our findings underscore that the association between nature and mental well-being extends beyond mere green area availability. Rather, this relationship is closely intertwined with the individual's affective connection to nature, active engagement, and the specific socio-environmental barriers of urban and rural landscapes.