Research on restorative environments has expanded rapidly, with increasing evidence that natural settings promote psychological restoration, physiological recovery, and physical activity adherence compared to urban or indoor contexts. Studies on "green exercise" consistently report benefits for affective states, perceived restorativeness, and stress reduction, alongside favorable physiological responses such as lower cortisol levels and improved autonomic regulation.
Despite these findings, the field faces notable methodological and measurement challenges. Many studies rely on short-term interventions, small convenience samples, and cross-sectional or acute experimental designs, limiting conclusions about causal pathways and long-term effects. Measurement practices are equally heterogeneous: while validated psychological scales such as the Perceived Restorativeness Scale (PRS) and Restoration Outcome Scale (ROS) are frequently applied, their use varies across studies, and physiological indices often lack the sensitivity or statistical power to capture nuanced environmental effects.
Theoretical frameworks such as Attention Restoration Theory and Stress Reduction Theory have guided much of this work but have been critiqued for overlooking the dynamic interplay between individual, environmental, and social processes. Recent perspectives from ecological-dynamics and social identity theory point to the importance of environmental connectedness and social cohesion in shaping restorative outcomes.
To advance the field, greater harmonization of measures, use of multi-method and longitudinal designs, and theoretical integration across psychological, physiological, and social domains are needed to strengthen the Green Exercise's evidence base and its application in health promotion and urban planning.