Introducing the S20 Wildlife Corridor An alternative proposal for Owlthorpe fields: Towards a heathier South East

Owlthorpe Fields Action Group & Dr Patrick Harrison (Department of Biological and Marine Sciences, University of Hull)

About the Authors

Owlthorpe Fields Action Group (OAG) is a not-for-profit, non-political community group set up to stop the destruction of the green space known locally as Owlthorpe Fields. It was formed to protect Owlthorpe Fields from any housing development. Several residents who have lived in the vicinity of Owlthorpe Fields for decades and use it regularly for exercise and relaxation have been involved in the development of this alternative vision, these are: Claire Baker, Christine & Alan Rippon, Sandra Fretwell-Smith & Howard Smith and Gary Monaghan. More information can be found on their website (https://www.owlthorpefields- actiongroup.org.uk) or Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/Owlthorpe-Fields-Action- Group-476779306142625). They can be contacted at [email protected] Patrick Harrison is lecturer of biochemistry at the University of Hull’s Department of Biology and Marine Sciences. He has a close connection to the area having been born and brought up in Waterthorpe. He is currently involved in the development of Waterthorpe Park in conjunction with Friends of Waterthorpe Park to develop an outdoor classroom for Waterthorpe Nursery & Infants School along with the adjoined Emmanuel School, both of which he attended as a child. Patrick can be contacted at [email protected] Executive Summary

This document presents a vision for a wildlife corridor in South East Sheffield for the health and wellbeing of the communities in the , and wards by joining up local wildlife sites and, importantly, incorporating Owlthorpe Fields which has been rewilding for 20 years. This document therefore represents an alternative vision to the development of the site for housing by Avant homes (or any other developer) which we believe would be destructive to the biodiversity / wildlife that currently exists on the site and be detrimental to the health & wellbeing of the current and future local residents. Instead we envision a 2-mile long community asset that links health, education and ecology together. This document lays out the evidence supporting our rationale from the perspective of health and education to provide a route to a healthier South East Sheffield before moving on to detail some of the things we would like to see. Finally, we discuss the S20 corridor in the context of reducing health inequalities that exist within Sheffield. Document Audience

This document is aimed at a diverse audience and has been written from that perspective. This audience includes but is not limited to:

 Sheffield City Council (SCC) councillors for the local wards and those involved in planning and development,  SCC departments including Parks and Countryside and Planning,  Clive Betts MP for South East Sheffield,  Residents who wish to know more about this alternative vision,  Local interest groups such as history, ecology, exercise groups who may wish to develop ideas based on the corridor,  Potential partners such as The Sheffield and Wildlife Trust (SRWT), The People Keeping Well (PKW) Network and GP’s interested in developing ecology based social prescriptions with SE Sheffield,  Other potential partners such as academics at our regional Universities who may be interested in developing ideas linked to the corridor. Aims and Outcomes

The aim of the S20 wildlife corridor is to link up and enhance sites of ecological interest forming a 2-mile long wildlife corridor within the Beighton and Mosborough wards of South East Sheffield. The corridor would be for the benefit of the local communities in these wards, but also the adjacent Birley ward. We believe the incorporation of Owlthorpe Fields (including the Local Wildlife Sites) into the wildlife corridor and linking it to Westfield Plantation, Waterthorpe Park, Waterthorpe Meadows and Beighton Ponds (Fig. 1), is a far more positive vision than the destruction of this ecologically rich, rewilded location for housing, especially considering the area already has substantial housing with its associated congestion. By taking such an interdisciplinary approach and linking ecology, community health and school attainment together, we believe we can have a positive impact on the lives of local people. The wildlife corridor has four aims: 1. To become a space for the benefit of the local community, on their doorstep, where people can engage with nature and which can provide relaxation and exercise to benefit both physical and mental health; 2. At the local level, enhance and link several wildlife habitats such as meadows and wetlands to increase the biodiversity of flora and fauna in the area; 3. Work with local schools, the SRWT, along with our regional Universities to develop outdoor classrooms for local schools in all aspects and at every level of the curriculum; 4. Work with SCC’s social prescribing ‘People Keeping Well’ network and SRWT to develop nature prescriptions to improve the health of the local community. By meeting these aims, we believe the following seven outcomes can be realised: 1. Increased school attainment (Aim 3) 2. A positive change in child physical health (Aim 1, 3) 3. A positive change in child mental health (Aim 1, 3) 4. Increased local cohesion / participation in community schemes (Aim 2, 4) 5. A positive change in wider community mental health (Aim 1, 4) 6. A positive change in wider community physical health (Aim 1, 4) 7. Increased biodiversity in the area (Aim 2) Figure 1: Promotional poster emphasising the areas to be linked together to form the S20 wildlife corridor with a selection of interventions that could be made to enhance each area and provide better linkage A Route to a Healthier South East Sheffield? Evidence for nature-based health and education interventions

As many will attest, the Covid-19 crisis has highlighted the importance of engaging with the natural world for our wellbeing. These are not new ideas; the necessity to escape our built environment for greener surroundings is the driving force behind the creation of our National Parks and can be best summed up in the adage ‘A good walk is the perfect way to clear your head’. However, adages aside, there is now an emerging body of evidence to indicate that contact with nature provides benefits for both our physical and mental health. In this section we will discuss some of the research investigating these links, as evidence has emerged from around the world demonstrating correlations between different indices of health and wellbeing and exposure to nature. In a meta-analysis of 103 observational and 40 interventional studies investigating approx. 100 health outcomes, increased exposure to greenspace was associated with a decrease in the stress hormone cortisol, heart rate, blood pressure (diastolic), cholesterol (HDL), and low frequency heart rate variability (HRV) (people with higher HRV may have greater cardiovascular fitness and be more resilient to stress). Additionally, it increased high frequency HRV, as well as a decreased risk of preterm births, type II diabetes, all-cause mortality, small size for gestational age, cardiovascular mortality and an increased incidence of good self-reported health. Incidence of stroke, hypertension, dyslipidaemia (abnormal blood profile), asthma and coronary heart disease were also reduced. For several non-pooled health outcomes, between 66.7% and 100% of studies showed health-denoting associations with increased greenspace exposure including neurological, cancer-related outcomes and respiratory mortality 1. Further, another meta-analysis of 68 studies 2 found a consistent, negative association between urban green space exposure and mortality, heart rate and violence, and positive association with attention, mood and physical activity. Another study showed a 21.3 % / hour cortisol (stress hormone) decrease upon exposure to nature with the rate of fall greatest being between 20-30 minutes 3. This suggests projects like the S20 wildlife corridor, developed essentially on peoples’ doorsteps, thereby allowing short, regular visits to nature, could be very beneficial in reducing stress and anxiety at the community level. As highlighted in The Wildlife Trust’s 2015 report written by The University of Essex entitled ‘Wellbeing Benefits from Natural Environments Rich in Wildlife’, the published evidence shows convincing links between contact with natural environments and human health and wellbeing. Wellbeing is acknowledged to be a multifaceted concept and so the promotion of wellbeing is therefore also multidimensional, with many of the studies in question encompassing activities that fit with the ‘Five Ways to Wellbeing’: Connect, Be Active, Take Notice, Keep Learning & Give 4. These studies focus on the role of nature and green space on adult physical and mental health, but what about on children’s health, particularly mental health? A 2011 UNICEF report on child wellbeing 5 showed that being outdoors listed in the top three things that make children happy. There is evidence supporting the concept that being in nature decreases symptoms of inattention in children with attention deficit disorder / attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADD / ADHD) 6 and that access to nature provided a buffer to the psychological stress of major life events 7 with this effect more prominent in disadvantaged children 6. As the 2019 indices of multiple deprivation data (IMD) shows, several areas along the proposed corridor rank within the bottom 30% in ; we believe the S20 wildlife corridor has real potential to have a positive effect on child mental health. Importantly, there is clear evidence of increased school achievement with increasing engagement with the natural world, particularly in the outdoor classroom setting as summarised in Natural England’s 2016 report entitled ‘Links between natural environments and learning’; 21 several key studies were highlighted:

 School students engaged in learning within natural environments were found to have higher achievement (in comparison to their peers or projected attainment) in reading, mathematics, science and social studies, exhibiting enhanced progress in physical education and drama, and a greater motivation for studying science. 8, 9, 20 Longer term and ‘progressive’ experiences appear to result in the greatest benefits and children with below average achievement tended to make progress in learning outcomes to the greatest degree. 9  In both adults and children there is evidence that learning in natural environments is associated with the accumulation of social capital and the fostering of pride, belonging and involvement in the community. 9, 10 A review of evidence relating to structured, sustainable education taking place in the natural environment, found it resulted in the promotion of a sense of community within and beyond the school. 11  A schools-based learning programme taking place in the natural environment was associated with some improvements in attendance rates. 12 Further studies have found improved behaviour amongst children at a special needs school, sustained over two months, following learning in the natural environment. 9  Greener school environments (such as the presence of natural features in the playground) have been linked with better motor skills, 13 psychological restoration, 14, and rates of physical activity. 15  There is some evidence of an association between high levels of ‘connectedness to nature’ in children aged 10-11 years and higher achievement in English examinations. 16  A review found that the specific use of woods or forests as settings for teaching, was associated with the acquisition of academic, social and personal skills, increases in confidence and self-esteem and improvements in physical skills. 10  A review found evidence of the potential for school-based learning in natural environments to support the delivery of the curriculum, for wider personal, social and health education, and the development of social skills and wellbeing amongst autistic children. 8 The mounting body of evidence led to the UK Government's’ 2018 report entitled ‘A Green Future: Our 25 Year Plan to Improve the Environment’. 17 The report envisages a greater role for the natural World in the nation’s health, by connecting people with the environment to improve health and wellbeing (a major theme in the report). Quoting directly; “Spending time in the natural environment as a resident or a visitor – improves our mental health and feelings of wellbeing. It can reduce stress, fatigue, anxiety and depression. It can help boost immune systems, encourage physical activity and may reduce the risk of chronic diseases such as asthma. It can combat loneliness and bind communities together”. “Playing and learning outside is a fundamental part of childhood, and helps children grow up healthy. Some children are lucky enough to have a family garden; others not, and it is important that we find other ways to give them better access to the great outdoors. We know that regular contact with green spaces, such as the local park, lake, or playground, can have a beneficial impact on children’s physical and mental health.”

Health and Education Statistics for Communities Surrounding the Proposed S20 Wildlife Corridor

The health and education statistics from the wards surrounding the S20 corridor indicate this initiative could have a real benefit to our communities. Some areas along the proposed corridor (Fig. 2a) rank within the bottom 30% in England in terms of multiple deprivation indicators, with some in the top 10%. As deprivation is a key determinant in our health and wellbeing, it is unsurprising that these areas are suffering with a large percentage of people in poor health. Data from Public Heath England (PHE) (2018) shows for the Mosborough and Beighton Wards (in which the proposed corridor sits), those defined as having a limiting long-term illness or disability is statistically, significantly worse than the national average (19.6% compared with 17.6%), with no key measure for serious illnesses such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease and cancer, better than the national average. A 2016 report by the Director of Public Health for Sheffield18 showed healthy life expectancy in the Beighton ward was between 55-65 years, with 40% of people over the age of 50 and 17% under the age of 17 this represents a pressing issue. Further health statistics from the Sheffield Joint Strategic Needs Assessment 19 show 35.5% suffer from some form of cardiac or respiratory related illness, 20.2% have high blood pressure, 30.6% are obese, 2.2% have had a stroke and 6.5% suffer from diabetes, with death from all causes (all ages) (Fig. 2c). Whilst these indicators of coronary heart disease are high, weight loss, physical activity and stress reduction are all measures than can be taken at the individual and population level to reduce hypertension and high blood pressure. Similarly, obesity is linked to 1 in 20 cancers with the prevalence high in these wards - lifestyle interventions will be a key strategy in increasing the health of the local community.

Figure 2: (A) location of the wildlife corridor imposed over the 2019 indices of multiple deprivation map clearly showing areas of high deprivation within the vicinity of the corridor (B) colour indicators of the IMD mapping data with dark blue being high in deprivation and cream areas of low multiple deprivation (C) health and education statistics for Beighton, Birley and Mosborough wards of South East Sheffield Healthy communities mean less intervention by the healthcare sector and the Local Authority which could lead to significant financial savings. As an example, approximately 3.5 million people in England suffer from Type 2 diabetes (T2D) which is a leading cause of life limiting conditions such as sight loss, lower limb amputation, kidney failure, heart attack and stroke. The PHE Diabetes Prevalence Model estimates there are 37,600 people suffering from T2D in Sheffield (8.1% of the 16 and over population, costing approximately £65 million in Sheffield, set to rise to 8.8% in the next 15 years). For GP surgeries within the vicinity of the proposed corridor, there is an average of 7%. However, in 9 out of 10 cases, there is strong evidence that T2D onset can be prevented or delayed in those at high risk, through interventions such as increased physical activity and weight loss. Physical activity and weight loss also have positive effects on cardiovascular disease and cancer risk. In terms of Coronary Heart Disease (CHD), high blood pressure is the single most important factor, which is high within the wards (Fig, 2c). The 2011 census indicates the population within the wards is aging. Unfortunately, there is a clear link between healthy life expectancy (HLE) and deprivation. As an example in Sheffield, whilst the HLE mirrors the national average (60 years), there is extreme disparity between the least and most deprived areas. An individual born and raised in the area of Sheffield can expect to live until 50 in good health whilst in Fulwood it is 70 years of age; the inequality in health outcomes is also intrinsically linked to inequality in economic outcomes. From a wider economic perspective, HLE is an economic issue with the average person working 6 / 7 years in poorer health. This has an impact on the local economy. It is estimated that illness costs the Sheffield economy £1bn (NHS spend = £1.1bn) with around 100,000 working days lost a year to mental illness alone. 18 With an aging population in a deprived area, there is a clear need to instigate health initiatives that extend HLE and we believe the S20 wildlife corridor can have a beneficial effect on the areas’ HLE. It is clear there are substantial physical medical conditions in the wards surrounding the proposed corridor. There are also substantial challenges surrounding mental wellbeing (Fig. 2c), with the evidence presented above supporting a role for nature in alleviating both physical and mental health conditions. The S20 wildlife corridor could make a real difference to the people of South East Sheffield. Unfortunately, it is not just the HLE of the surrounding population that is suffering as the Indices of Multiple Deprivation Data (IMD) reveals areas along the corridor (Waterthorpe) is in the bottom 20% for education, skills and training. Similarly, data for the Mosborough ward shows a statistically significant worse outcome for GCSE Achievement (5A*-C including Maths and English) compared to the national average. As lower levels of education and training lead to higher levels of deprivation in future years, there is also a clear need to develop education- based initiatives than can mitigate and improve this downward cycle. S20 Wildlife Corridor: What We Would Like to See

As stated above, the aim of the corridor is to utilise the ecology and biodiversity of the area to increase the physical and mental wellbeing of the local communities, as well as enhancing the attainment of school children in the surrounding area. This section will focus on what we would like to see and how it could be monitored - it will be split into 3 sections: (i) ecology, (ii) health and (iii) education.

Ecological Changes

Primarily, the proposal will require the five ecologically distinct areas to be preserved with the largest of these individual sites, Owlthorpe Fields, to be saved from development by SCC. We believe it would be a dereliction of duty by SCC not to save this land; it has been rewilding for over 20 years from farmland and makes for an important ecological, biodiverse site. Secondly, along with Owlthorpe Fields, full professional ecological assessments should be carried out at Westfield Plantation, Waterthorpe Park, Waterthorpe Meadows and Beighton Ponds to ascertain a fuller picture. It is likely that a wealth of ecological data already exists at these sites, held by a number of stakeholders including SCC and SRWT (this data should be combined along with any data collected by the community based citizen science project run by the SRWT, Data for Nature (D4N)). Both Owlthorpe Fields Action Group and Friends of Waterthorpe Park have been invited to join the National Lottery funded D4N which will use the Adaptive Ecological Monitoring Framework (AEMF) along with local people to gather ecological and biodiversity information. Once each area has been assessed, by engaging with SCC ecologists, SRWT along with specialist experts in our regional universities, we can enhance the biodiversity of these areas by undertaking site specific interventions. These would include for example, introducing wetlands, meadows, native hedging or managing land differently, such as coppicing woodland. Several community orchards could also be planted along the corridor in keeping with the 60- apple tree orchard planted at Waterthorpe Park in February 2020 in conjunction with Waterthorpe Nursery & Infants and Emmanuel Junior schools and the small community orchard on Owlthorpe Fields (part of the Owlthorpe Heritage and Nature Trail). Running throughout the corridor is Ochre Dyke (a small brook), which generally runs for 11 months of the year. It is currently poorly managed (if at all) and suffers from fly tipping. As part of the project, the intention would be for this to be cleaned periodically with trees and shrubs being coppiced to allow in light for marginal wildflowers to establish themselves along the banks, which will be more beneficial for wildlife; this will then be used as an education resource. Log piles will be placed at a number of locations along the corridor for the benefit of small mammals and fungi, whilst bug hotels and bird / bat boxes will be built with the children of local schools and positioned along the corridor. In terms of the link areas (i.e. the areas between the sites), ecological assessments will guide evidence-based interventions that will allow the sites to blend in succession into each other. How will they be monitored? Changes in biodiversity and species numbers will be monitored continuously by the SRWT D4N project along with iNaturalist that individual groups (Owlthorpe Fields Action Group and Friends of Waterthorpe Park) have already set-up. These community-based citizen science projects will also feed into the health aims of the corridor in terms of developing social / nature prescriptions. Further, internet-linked camera traps will be placed around the sites to monitor the frequency of small mammal visits, which will be available to view online by the wider community and which will also be streamed to local schools to use as a learning resource in the classroom.

There is also an opportunity to develop an ‘outdoor lab’ for Undergraduate / Masters level project students (ecology, health, education) with local universities (Sheffield Hallam University, and University of Hull). Dr Harrison would connect our communities to these local higher education institutions.

Education Focused Aims How will they be met? Along with SRWT, Dr Harrison and Friends of Waterthorpe Park (FoWP) are already working with two adjoined local schools, Waterthorpe Infants and Emmanuel Juniors, who are within close proximity to the Waterthorpe Park site (500m). Collectively, the schools have 368 students (aged 5-11) enrolled in the 2019 / 20 academic year, with the vast majority from the local area. Dr Harrison and FoWP are currently writing a proposal for a Grant from Biffa, to develop an outdoor classroom whereby the children can explore the park and its developing and varied natural ecology (woodland, meadows, wetlands) along with a living willow reading room & weaving loom for expressive play and learning. The project is in conjunction with SRWT with training to be provided by SRWT for teachers to take children out safely and get the most out of the classroom, by linking the curriculum to outdoor learning. Additionally, extra science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) activities will be led by experts from our regional universities (answering questions like “how do plants grow?” “what is soil?”) as well as addressing air and pollution, the weather, why water is important, wildlife (trophic levels), temperature and humidity along with active learning events such as bug and butterfly counts, worm counting and rocket building to explain physical concepts and motion. Further, local and natural history can be enhanced by developing resources with local history groups (Mosborough History Group & Shirebrook History Group) along with local experts such as Professor Ian Rotherham at Sheffield Hallam University. The plan would be to build a series of outdoor classrooms along the corridor (refer to Fig 1 for examples of what these could look like) so a larger number of schools can benefit from outdoor learning – there would also be more connectivity between local schools, promoting better community cohesion in future years. Finally, the wildlife corridor can be promoted for active travel to and from school thus fostering healthier travel choices at an early age. How will they be monitored? Initial success will be measured via qualitative and quantitative methods;

 Qualitative methods will focus on holding opinion sessions with both teachers and parents / guardians to assess any changes in attitude towards learning and any behavioural changes.  Quantitative methods will focus on attainment in schools, incidence rates of disruptive behaviour and changes in exam results.  By taking such an approach, we can continually co-develop the outdoor learning experience with the schools, children and parents to create a community-based approach. Health Focused Aims How will they be met? Community healthcare initiatives will all have one or more elements of the following: sociability, cognition or exercise (light and heavy) as this will align with the ‘5 ways to wellbeing’ report produced by the New Economics Foundation (2008) and commissioned by the Government’s Foresight project on Mental Capital and Wellbeing, and allows wider community participation based on ability and wants. We would aim to collaborate with the People Keeping Well (PKW) network (the social prescribing community organisation network led by SCC) to develop numerous mental and physical healthcare initiatives within or connected to the corridor. These initiatives could be co-developed with the local community, the PKW network, along with the SRWT ‘Wild at Heart’ project as this approach has been shown to be more beneficial in terms of community engagement than a passive design and implementation strategy. Initiatives that could be envisaged include:

 Active educational initiatives such as bird walks, mushroom identification, wildflower walks, bat & owl walks, butterfly and moth walks, foraging tours (to be held in conjunction with SRWT which already run such activities);  Passive educational activities such as ‘Pint of Science’ style talks;  Natural history meetings and the digital monitoring of wildlife (via the internet-linked camera traps);  Group activities such as social events, wildlife photography / painting along with fostering generational links through activity supervision.  Active group initiatives such as outdoor Yoga, Zumba and Park Runs. The upkeep and development of the corridor provides opportunities for numerous healthcare initiatives such as passively contributing in the form of IT support and website maintenance or more active contribution through litter picking, assisting SCC rangers, pond clearance and meadow cutting. There is also a good opportunity to engage people in citizen science-based projects as discussed above and this could be particularly useful for those who feel marginalised by wider society as they will be contributing to societal knowledge. Finally, tasks that involve generating income for the corridor such as apple harvesting and the coppicing of woodland for charcoal production and timber sales are envisaged (by linking up with Woods). In terms of the latter, such an initiative as the Bolsover Woodlands Enterprise (BWE) project could be developed. The BWE is a social enterprise that manages and protects woodlands in nearby . All staff are adults who have a learning disability and who would otherwise find it difficult to get work in the wider economy. They aim to give people with learning disabilities opportunities to develop new skills, confidence and make a real difference in their communities. The primary focus is the sustainable management of woodlands and is managed by an enterprise board comprising of volunteers made up staff, parents & carers and local councillors. From an economic standpoint, the employment of local people would bring capital into the local economy whilst ecologically, the coppicing of native woodland for charcoal production is beneficial to wildlife and reduces the carbon footprint of charcoal which in the UK is generally imported.

Figure 3: Potential social prescribing activities that could be developed connected to the S20 wildlife corridor all contain elements of the ‘five ways to wellbeing’ directive How will they be monitored? The success of healthcare initiatives can be measured via qualitative and quantitative methods. In collaboration with such projects as the PKW network, workshops with volunteers and participants could take place at regular intervals to assess the impact on people lives in a qualitative manner. This will be useful for several reasons: (i) It could feed into the wider Sheffield PKW network to determine what has been successful and what has not; (ii) It will feed into the national social prescribing conversation as a case study of a multidisciplinary community-based healthcare / ecology project; (iii) Through a process of co-development, it will allow the refinement of socially prescribed healthcare initiatives to enhance community engagement. Additionally, a proxy measurement of enhanced community cohesion / engagement could be measured via the engagement of the wider community with other initiatives offered by the PKW network and / or other local organisations. In terms of quantitative measurement, data on prescription rates of anti-depressants, metabolic disorder drugs (e.g. metformin, angiotensin-2 receptor or calcium channel blockers) along with obesity levels in children and adults is already collected. Additionally, liaising the incidence rates of disruptive behaviour as a proxy could also be measured.

The S20 Wildlife Corridor: A Route to Mitigating Health Inequalities?

With a decrease in HLE correlating with higher levels of deprivation, can positive changes to our physical surroundings based on nature-based interventions help mitigate health inequalities? As the Director of Public Health’s 2016 18 report stated, ‘The single biggest cause of ill health, early death and health inequalities are socio-economic factors such as unemployment, lack of income, low educational attainment and poor quality housing contributing up to 40% of causes of poor health and wellbeing with the other 60% lifestyles (such as smoking, lack of physical exercise, poor diet and alcohol consumption); communicable and infectious diseases (such as HIV / AIDS or Tuberculosis); the quality and availability of health care (particularly primary, preventative and early intervention health services such as GP practices); and environmental threats to health (including excess winter deaths from living in a cold home and death and ill health due to pollution from traffic)’. It goes on to state ‘Action on just one or two of these factors won’t be enough to achieve the improvements in health and wellbeing outcomes or sustainability of our health and social care services that we need to see in Sheffield’ As the IMD map shows (Fig 2a), several areas along the proposed corridor are areas of high deprivation with the PHE data highlighting the health inequalities that exist within these areas. In an influential study published in the highly respected medical journal The Lancet in 2008 22, researchers from the University of Glasgow’s Centre for Sustainable, Healthy and Learning Cities and Neighbourhoods showed communities that have increased green environmental exposure have lower levels of health issues related to income deprivation, with the authors concluding physical environments that promote good health might be important to reduce socioeconomic health inequalities. Further, a study of 66 European cities 23, found that differences in land use correlated with life satisfaction, including the amount of a city which was residential, isolated structures, roads, pastures and herbaceous vegetation. It was observed that a more even distribution of land cover / use was associated with lower inequality in life satisfaction. Importantly, these findings suggest the physical geography of a city, including equal access to quality green space, could be equigenic in that it creates the conditions for a more equal society. The inequalities in Sheffield were starkly highlighted in the 2013 Sheffield Fairness Commission report ‘Making Sheffield Fairer’ 24 with clear differences between the East and West of Sheffield (Fig. 4). Additionally, in South-West / West Sheffield, residents have access to Parks such as Graves, , Endcliffe and along with having Ecclesall Woods, Mayfield and Rivelin Valley in close proximity and being on the edge of the Peak National Park. It is therefore evident that there is a clear disparity between provisions of green spaces in the East and West of Sheffield. We believe projects such as the S20 Wildlife Corridor will help to address this imbalance.

Figure 4: 2013 Sheffield Fairness Commission Report entitled ‘Making Sheffield Fairer’ highlighted the divide between East and West in Sheffield in terms of deprivation compared with other English cities

What is the mechanism by which an increase to nature reduces healthcare inequalities? As the authors hypothesise, several mechanisms may be at play linked to the health benefits described previously: (i) It is known that the more deprived areas are less likely to exercise than those in less deprived areas 25, which is partly due to the surrounding physical environment being less conducive to exercise 26. However, whilst deprived populations might be less likely to have access to green space, either through their surrounding location or lack of transport, socioeconomic position itself does not independently affect use of green space if it is readily available 27. It can therefore be concluded that populations in higher deprived areas that do have access to green space may gain health benefits from using it, and thus enjoy better health than those living in comparable deprivation but without access to green space. (ii) Living in higher deprived areas is associated with increased stress, with stress inequality implicated in increased risk of several diseases including heart disease 28, 29, 30, 31.

As described previously, engagement with nature has been shown to reduce stress, blood pressure, and increase the rate of physiological healing. Therefore, with nature on their doorstep people are offered some protection against the physiological effects of deprivation- related stress. We accept that the wildlife corridor will not provide a silver bullet to healthcare inequalities in SE Sheffield, however we do believe that by acting upon the multiple determinants of health (exercise, education and air quality through active travel routes to anchor institutions and increased planting) (Fig. 5) the corridor will play an important role in mitigating healthcare inequalities in the area.

Figure 5: The social determinants of health with the determinants (red star) that the proposed wildlife corridor can have a positive effect on

Conclusion

We believe our vision of a two-mile long wildlife corridor will address climate change issues assisting SCC to reach zero net carbon targets. It will also, very importantly, create a space not just for nature to flourish but for the community to improve its physical and mental health, along with providing a space for children to engage with the natural world. The S20 Wildlife Corridor could generate its own income streams, create employment opportunities for the local community and adults with learning difficulties, and grant funding could be obtained. We believe community based ecological focused initiatives such as the S20 Wildlife Corridor fit well with a number of national funding schemes including the National Lottery Communities Fund, the recently announced £40m ‘Green Recovery Fund' and tree planting schemes run by The Woodland Trust. This vision is bold and will require collaboration across a range of stakeholders, but most of all it will require political will from SCC to see this vision realised. This will require SCC to realise that Owlthorpe Fields are too important a community asset to be built on and instead should be saved for the benefit of future generations.

References

1. Bennett CT & Jones A. (2018). The Health Benefits of the Great Outdoors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Greenspace Exposure and Health Outcomes. Environ Res. 166:628-637. 2. Kondo MC., et al. (2018). Urban Green Space and Its Impact on Human Health. Int. J. of Environ Res and Public Health. 15: 45. 3. Hunter MR., et al. (2019). Urban Nature Experiences Reduce Stress in the Context of Daily Life Based on Salivary Biomarkers. Front. Psychol. 10:722. 4. Bragg R., et al. (2015). Wellbeing benefits from natural environments rich in wildlife: A literature review for The Wildlife Trusts. 5. Ipsos Mori & Nairn A. (2011). Children’s Well-being in UK, Sweden and Spain: The Role of Inequality and Materialism. UNICEF report. 6. Jones L. (2020). Losing Eden: Why Our Minds Need the Wild. Allen Lane. p 53-71. 7. Wells NM & Evans GW. (2003). Nearby Nature: a buffer of life stress among rural children. Environ and Behaviour. 35: p 311-30. 8. Blakesley, D., et al. (2013) Engaging children on the autistic spectrum with the natural environment: Teacher insight study and evidence review. 9. Fiennes, C., et al., (2015). The Existing Evidence Base about the Effectiveness of Outdoor Learning. Institute of Outdoor Learning, Blagrave Trust, UCL & Giving Evidence Report. 10. Lovell, R., et al. (2010). Review of the research evidence in relation to the role of trees and woods in formal education and learning. Forest Research. 11. Dillon, J. and I. Dickie. (2012). Learning in the Natural Environment: Review of social and economic benefits and barriers. Natural England Commissioned Reports (092). 12. Price, A., et al. (2015). Improving school attendance: can participation in outdoor learning influence attendance for young people with social, emotional and behavioural difficulties? Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning.15 (2): p. 110-122. 13. Fjørtoft, I., et al. (2004). Landscape as Playscape: The Effects of Natural Environments on Children’s Play and Motor Development. Children, Youth and Environments. 14(2): p. 21- 44. 14. Bagot, K.L., et al. (2015). Perceived restorativeness of children's school playground environments: Nature, playground features and play period experiences. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 41: p. 1-9. 15. Fjørtoft, I., et al. (2009). Children in schoolyards: Tracking movement patterns and physical activity in schoolyards using global positioning system and heart rate monitoring. Landscape and Urban Planning. 93(3–4): p. 210-217. 16. Richardson, M., et al. (2015). The Impact of Children’s Connection to Nature: A Report for the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. University of for RSPB. 17. HM Government. (2018). A Green Future: Our 25 Year Plan to Improve the Environment 18. Fell G. (2016). A Matter of Life and Healthy Life Director of Public Health Report for Sheffield 2016. 19. Sheffield Joint Strategic Needs Assessment Acron Ward Profiles. Available at: https://sheffieldcc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/Cascade/index.html?appid=fa439d499a804e79 99094a6dfb705d5f Last accessed 27-07-2020. 20. Rickinson, M., et al. (2004). A review of research on outdoor learning. London: National Foundation for Educational Research and King's College London. 21. Natural England Access to Evidence Information Note EIN017. (2016). Links between natural environments and learning: evidence briefing. 22. Mitchell R & Popham F. (2008). Effect of exposure to natural environment on health inequalities: an observational population study. 372 (9650) p 1655-1660. 23. Olsen J.R., et al. (2019). Inequalities in life satisfaction at the city level? A cross-sectional study of 66 European cities. Social Science & Medicine. 226 p 263-74. 24. Sheffield Fairness Commission. (2013). Making Sheffield Fairer. 25. Popham F & Mitchell R. (2007). Relation of employment status to socioeconomic position and physical activity types. Prev Med. 45: 182-188. 26. Saelens B E., et al. (2003). Environmental correlates of walking and cycling: findings from the transportation, urban design, and planning literatures. Ann Behav Med. 25: 80-91. 27. Kaczynski AT., & Henderson KA. (2007). Environmental correlates of physical activity: a review of evidence about parks and recreation. Leisure Sci. 29: 315-354. 28. Brunner E. (1997). Stress and the biology of inequality. BMJ. 314 (7092):1472-6. 29. Wilkinson RG. (2001). Mind the Gap: Hierarchies, Health and Human Evolution. London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson. 30. Kiecolt-Glaser J K., et al. (1995). Slowing of wound healing by psychological stress. Lancet. 346(8984):1194-6. 31. Davey Smith G., et al., (2005). Testosterone, and Coronary Heart Disease: Prospective Evidence from the Caerphilly Study. Circulation. 112 (3):332-40.