Hostname: page-component-5b777bbd6c-v47t2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-21T16:15:01.758Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Global Forestry Areas, Deforestation and Mental Health: A Worldwide Ecological Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 June 2025

Alice Bolton*
Affiliation:
Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, London, United Kingdom
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Aims: Forests are important for planetary and human health, but deforestation is increasing. Poor mental health is increasingly affecting the world’s population. This study aims to investigate the association between forestry area, deforestation and mental health, at country level, worldwide.

Methods: Forestry area in each country was sampled in 2006 and 2016; the country prevalence of mental health disorders or substance abuse was sampled in 2006 and 2016; and the relative disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in 2010 and 2016. Crude and multivariate linear regression analyses were run, adjusting for peace index, wealth and inequalities, and urbanisation at country level. A sensitivity analysis including sanitation and food security was run. Interaction with country gross domestic product per capita was assessed.

Results: Based on data for 230 countries, country forestry area is negatively associated with the prevalence of mental health disorders in 2016 (β −0.02 (195% C.I. −0.04/−0.01). This association was maintained in sensitivity analyses, and found mainly in lower- and upper-middle income countries. Change in forestry area is not associated with mental health prevalence nor estimated DALYs due to mental health.

Conclusion: This is the first study showing that forestry area at country level is associated with a lower prevalence of mental health disorders. If these results are replicated at individual level, this would suggest that public health implications should play a strong role in weighting ecological decisions, such as optimising forestry area coverage.

Type
Research
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal College of Psychiatrists

Footnotes

Abstracts were reviewed by the RCPsych Academic Faculty rather than by the standard BJPsych Open peer review process and should not be quoted as peer-reviewed by BJPsych Open in any subsequent publication.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.