Abstract If equitable greenspace interventions are to be designed and delivered to motivate wider urban publics to experience the life‐enhancing benefits of physical activity, it is essential to understand what motivates people to practise physical activity in nature, the perceived benefits and which greenspace characteristics are most preferred by whom, including deprived, inactive populations. These gaps were investigated in collaboration with parkrun , a not‐for‐profit organisation offering free, weekly, timed 5‐km runs or walks in public settings. Post parkrun questionnaires ( n = 246) were conducted with participants at three UK events across a range of park settings with contrasting public health profiles: (i) Urban new town (Stevenage: socio‐cultural and health profiles close to England benchmark); (ii) Inner London (Barking: ethnically diverse, economically deprived, inactive); and (iii) Rural Lakeland (Fell Foot: low ethnic diversity, income deprivation, healthier than benchmark). Overall, physical fitness was the dominant initial motivator for parkrun participation ( n = 93%). Fresh air and scenery (+28%, p < 0.001); Social reasons (+25%, p < 0.001); Volunteering (+21%, p < 0.001) and Stress relief (+13%, p = 0.004) all increased significantly from initial to ongoing motivating factors. These increases were all greater for women than men. ‘ Social reasons’ increased from initial to ongoing motivator in all settings including the deprived inner London setting (+30%, p < 0.001) where participants valued parkrun for its inclusivity. Participants expressed strong preferences for natural over built settings for physical activity, with greenspace and alongside water most preferred. Microscale preferences for lakesides and views, related birds and wildlife and woodland settings were identified. Synthesis and applications . These findings indicate that women and people in deprived, ethnically diverse settings might have most to gain from the holistic health benefits of exercising in nature, and parkrun as an active green health intervention. This has potentially transformative implications for addressing health inequalities in the United Kingdom and more widely. Public health professionals might develop further active green interventions, increasing equitable access to outdoor natural settings among populations most in need. Governments and green infrastructure planners might prioritise funding and delivering parks and greenspaces. Landscape designers might incorporate waterside and woodland settings to optimise their active benefits. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
Helen Hoyle (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: