Cross-sectional survey reveals cultural ecosystem services associate with lower loneliness among urban youth, highlighting the mental health value of socially supportive public green spaces.
Loneliness among young people has become a growing public health concern, particularly in urban environments where increasing population density often coincides with weakened social connections. Urban parks provide a range of Cultural Ecosystem Services (CES) that may support social well-being and emotional health; however, the relative importance of these services can vary across different urban contexts. This study investigates the associations between multiple dimensions of CES and reported loneliness among youth, based on a case study of two Iranian cities (Tabriz and Sanandaj). A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 1,000 park-visiting young people aged 15–24 years. Six CES dimensions (aesthetic, cultural and heritage, educational and knowledge, recreational, spiritual and religious, and sense of place and social value) were assessed using a five-point Likert scale, while loneliness was measured using an adapted UCLA Loneliness Scale. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) was applied to examine the relationships between CES dimensions and loneliness across both urban settings. The results indicate that all CES dimensions are significantly associated with lower reported loneliness ( p < 0.01), with sense of place and social value showing the strongest associations in both cities. The structural models demonstrate strong explanatory power, with R² values exceeding 0.85 in both urban contexts. Comparative results further suggest that the relative importance of CES dimensions varies according to urban scale and socio-cultural conditions. These findings suggest that urban parks may be associated with reduced loneliness by providing culturally meaningful and socially supportive environments, although the strength of these associations differs across contexts. Given the cross-sectional design, the results should be interpreted as statistical associations rather than causal relationships.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Samadi-Todar et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: