Accessible urban green spaces could save the NHS up to £2.1 billion each year, but current policy fails to ensure parks are truly accessible research shows.
A new policy brief published by the University’s Institute for Policy Research (IPR) sets out how a different approach could boost public health, reduce inequalities and deliver better value from existing green space.
While most people in England live within walking distance of a park, many feel unable to use them. Safety concerns, poor maintenance, limited facilities and feelings of exclusion mean proximity does not equal genuine access.
A three-tier model for inclusive access
Based on research with communities in Bristol and engagement with policymakers, the brief shows these barriers disproportionately affect deprived communities, ethnic minority groups, disabled people, carers, older adults, and women and girls.
The authors propose a new three-tier framework to redefine green space accessibility and help policymakers move beyond proximity-based standards.
The first tier reflects current policy and focuses on whether a park exists, is free and is within walking distance. A second moves beyond this threshold, covering the basic needs to make people feel safe and welcome, such as safety, cleanliness, access to facilities, lighting and maintenance. The third addresses social and cultural inclusion, ensuring parks reflect the communities they serve, with seating and spaces for groups, activities for teenagers and girls, and community-led events.
Turning evidence into action
Zina Abdulla, the lead author on the policy brief and PhD researcher in the Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, said: “Parks are often treated as a ‘nice to have’, but the evidence shows they are essential public infrastructure. They support mental and physical health, reduce inequalities and help communities adapt to climate change.
“What we found is that being close to a park is not enough. If people do not feel safe or welcome, they will not use it. Our framework helps decision-makers close that gap.”
Fragmented systems holding back investment
The brief also highlights structural barriers that prevent change, including fragmented funding systems, no clear statutory responsibility for parks, and a disconnect between who benefits from green spaces and who pays for them.
Despite strong evidence of their role in preventative health, there is no systematic link between investment in green spaces and NHS funding.
Zina continued: “There is a clear economic case for investing in green spaces as part of the health system, but policy is not aligned to deliver it. This is not about evidence, but coordination, governance and funding.”
Recommendations for change
The policy brief calls on Government to update planning standards to incorporate the three-tier framework, align health and green space funding, and require long-term maintenance funding alongside capital investment.
It also encourages a needs-based approach to prioritising investment, so funding reaches communities facing the greatest barriers.
Commenting on the findings, Afzal Khan MP, Chair of the Parks and Green Spaces All-Party Parliamentary Group, said: “This research is vital, highlighting the unwelcome reality that some groups in society do not feel as welcome as others in our parks. These carefully developed and evidence-based policy recommendations would help ensure that our green spaces are open, welcoming, and accessible to all.”
Improving access to parks does not require creating more green space. With better planning, funding and governance, existing parks can work for everyone.
This work was supported with significant input from the University of Bath’s Public Engagement Team, who provided a participate grant that covered the costs of the knowledge exchange event.