The quantification of cognitive development cultural service supply in the primary schools of Hamedan city, Iran

Document Type : Original Article


1 Department of Environmental Sciences, Malayer University, Iran

2 Department of Rangelands and Watershed Management, Malayer University, Iran


Cities provide their residents and communities with specific services through urban green spaces. Cognitive development is an important service, which is the construction of thought processes such as remembering, problem-solving, and decision-making from childhood to adulthood. The present study aimed to evaluate and quantify the supply of the cognitive development services resulting from the exposure of green space for primary school students in Hamedan, Iran. In total, 179 schools were selected, and by applying a 50-meter buffer, the green space within the school area was classified into five categories based on field surveys and satellite imagery processing and weighted based on expert opinions. The final index value was obtained by summing the product of each polygon value in its area for each green infrastructure class, which was classified into five groups. According to the results, gardens and parks had the highest impact on cognitive development. Only 15 schools had a proper status in terms of the green cover standard (NDVI≥0.5) affecting the cognitive development of students. Considering the per capita standard of green space (0.5 m2) and standard area of ​​school infrastructure (1960 m2), only six schools met the triple standards, and four cases were added to the list by creating and expanding the green space. Since the design of schools is not focused on green spaces, its valuable capital remains a potential value. which should be recognized and activated to attain growth, academic progress, and improvement of students' learning.


  1. Hegetschweiler KT, Vries S, Arnberger A, Bell S, Brennan M, Siter N, et al. Linking demand and supply factors in identifying cultural ecosystem services of urban green infrastructures: A review of European studies. Urban for Urban Green 2017; 21:48-59.
  2. Daily G, Postel S, Bawa K, Kaufman L. Nature’s Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Island Press, Washington DC; 1997.
  3. Siavashpour B, Shadloo Jahromi M, Nodehi H. The role of green space children's educational environment to strengthen the sense of place attachment (Case study: Elementary schools in region 2 of Shiraz). Environ Sci 2017; 14(4): 105-19. [In Persian]
  4. Masoudi F, Sadeghi H, Rostami R. The impact of landscaping and school green space on the quality of learning and academic motivation of students from the perspective of environmental psychology. Fifth National Conference on Recent Achievements in Civil Engineering, Architecture and Urban Planning; 2019; 1-14. [In Persian]
  5. Akpinar A. How is high school greenness related to students’ restoration and health?. Urban for Urban Green 2016; 16: 1-8.
  6. Kuo FE, Taylor A F. A potential natural treatment for attention deficit/ hyperactivity disorder: Evidence from a national study. Am J Public Health Res 2004; 94(9): 1580-6.
  7. Vanaken GJ, Danckaerts M. Impact of green space exposure on children’s and adolescents’ mental health: A systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2018; 15(12): 2668.
  8. Dadvand P, Nieuwenhuijsen MJ, Esnaola M, Forns J, Basagana X, Alvarez-Pedrerol M, et al. Green Spaces and cognitive development in primary schoolchildren. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2015; 112(26): 7937-42.
  9. Ward JS, Duncan JS, Jarden A, Stewart T. The impact of children's exposure to greenspace on physical activity, cognitive development, emotional wellbeing, and ability to appraise risk. Health Place 2016; 40: 44-50.
  10. Tuen Veronica Leung W, Yee Tiffany Tam T, Pan W-C, Wu C-D, Candice Lung S-C, Spengler JD. How is environmental greenness related to students' academic performance in English and Mathematics. Landsc Urban Plan 2019; 181: 118-24.
  11. Kremer P, Hamstead ZA, McPhearson T. The value of urban ecosystem services in New York City: A spatially explicit multicriteria analysis of landscape scale valuation scenarios. Environ Sci Policy 2016; 62: 57-68.
  12. Kati V, Jari N. Bottom-up thinking–Identifying socio-cultural values of ecosystem services in local blue–green infrastructure planning in Helsinki, Finland. Land use policy 2016; 50: 537-47.
  13. Tallis H, Bratman GN, Samhouri JF, Fargione J. Are California elementary school test scores more strongly associated with urban trees than poverty?. Front Psychol 2018; 9: 2074
  14. Adelman J, Davis R. Green Schoolyards: A Growing Movement Supporting Health, Education and Connection with Nature. Organizational Culture, Physical Place. 2017; 70 pp.
  15. Kuo M, Browning MHEM, Sachdeva S, Lee K, Westphal L. Might school performance grow on trees? Examining the link between “greenness” and academic achievement in urban, high-poverty schools. Front Psychol 2018; 9(1669): 1-14.
  16. Baum-Snow N, Lutz BF. School desegregation, school choice, and changes in residential location patterns by race. Am Econ Rev 2011; 101(7): 3019-46.
  17. Browning MHEM, Rigolon A. School green space and its impact on academic performance: A systematic literature review. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2019; 16(3): 429.
  18. Liu J, Atzberger C, Huang X, Shen K, Liu Y, Wang L. Modeling grass yields in Qinghai Province, China, based on MODIS NDVI data—an empirical comparison. Front Earth Sci 2020; 14(2): 413-29.
  19. Schaefer M, Goldman E, Bartuska AM, Sutton-Grier A, Lubchenco J. Nature as capital: Advancing and incorporating ecosystem services in United States federal policies and programs. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2015; 112(24): 7383-9.
  20. Li D, Sullivan WC. Impact of views to school landscapes on recovery from stress and mental fatigue. Landsc Urban Plan 2016; 148: 149-58.
  21. Lekies KS, Yost G, Rode J. Urban youth’s experiences of nature: Implications for outdoor adventure recreation. J Outdoor Recreat Tour 2015; 9: 1-10.
  22. Kweon BS, Ellis CD, Lee J, Jacobs K. The link between school environments and student academic performance. Urban For Urban Gree 2017; 23: 35-43.
  23. Reid CE, Clougherty JE, Shmool JLC, Kubzansky LD. Is all urban green space the same? A comparison of the health benefits of trees and grass in New York City. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2017; 14(11): 1411.
  24. Derkzen ML, Teeffelen AJA, Verburg PH. Quantifying urban ecosystem services based on high-resolution data of urban green space: an assessment for Rotterdam, the Netherlands. J Appl Ecol 2015; 52(4): 1020-32.