Known but not done: how logics of inaction limit the benefits of urban green spaces

Empirical research has long shown positive connections between urban green spaces and their users’ wellbeing. But compelling evidence does not always lead to appropriate investment. In a study of the contribution of urban nature to mental wellbeing in Sheffield, UK, the authors identified greenspace investments that could lead to improved wellbeing and discussed their implementation with local stakeholders. However, this qualitative study also revealed a series of reasons why stakeholders in Sheffield would not proceed with such investments. Using the concept of ‘logics of inaction’ to examine stakeholders’ reasoning, this paper considers why such logics arise. It finds a mismatch between available evidence and the evidence practitioners say they need to justify investments. One consequence is that practitioners’ capacity to act on new knowledge is reduced, limiting innovation and potential benefits.