Submitted Successfully!
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Ver. Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1 + 1232 word(s) 1232 2021-08-15 10:42:05 |
2 More detailed explanation in definition + 24 word(s) 1256 2021-08-21 16:11:39 | |
3 format correct Meta information modification 1256 2021-08-23 04:51:22 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?


Are you sure to Delete?
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Rokni, L.; Rezaei, M. Agritourism and Mental-Health in Korea. Encyclopedia. Available online: (accessed on 28 November 2023).
Rokni L, Rezaei M. Agritourism and Mental-Health in Korea. Encyclopedia. Available at: Accessed November 28, 2023.
Rokni, Ladan, Mehdi Rezaei. "Agritourism and Mental-Health in Korea" Encyclopedia, (accessed November 28, 2023).
Rokni, L., & Rezaei, M.(2021, August 21). Agritourism and Mental-Health in Korea. In Encyclopedia.
Rokni, Ladan and Mehdi Rezaei. "Agritourism and Mental-Health in Korea." Encyclopedia. Web. 21 August, 2021.
Agritourism and Mental-Health in Korea

Green-space exposure can play a crucial role in promoting the health and wellbeing of people. Agritourism is a unique ‘experience’ or ‘activity’ that can allow urban dwellers to participate and reconnect to nature through agriculture on a working farm. Moreover, visiting rural green spaces gives a chance to forget the hectic urban life; it allows the tourist to focus on their own and society’s general wellbeing. Agritourism activities can provide the feel of connection with nature and offer visitors the nostalgia of a “quiet” traditional life. Visiting agritourism sites and engaging in the associated activities can improve the perceived immediate mood. In addition, perceived wellbeing might contribute to such immediate mood-boosting.

agritourism mental health farm tourism psychological effects mood boost

1. Green Environments and Mental Health

Searching in green-based tourism journals, we found that much research has been conducted from different perspectives on this and related issues. Some studies explored broad perspectives of the impacts of rural tourism on quality of life [1][2] or on life satisfaction due to the holiday experience [3]. In contrast, some studies focused on specific tourism behaviour [2] or from the perspective of medical issue examinations [4][5]. The main focus, however, has been on outdoor activities emphasising personal growth and self-discovery [6].

It is essential to note the specific positive factors contributing to physical activity, social interaction, or a combination of different activities [7]. The health benefits can combine physiological and psychological health. Access, quantity, and types of green areas were mentioned as contributing factors to mental health benefits [8]. Three behavioural mechanisms have been involved [9]. The type of contact to the environment [10], the opportunity for social contact to improve mood and stress level [11], and the environmental design in creating conditions ‘attractive enough to recover from demanding situations of urban lifestyle’ [12].

Miller et al. (2008) investigated the contribution of parks and protected areas to human health and wellbeing. They classified the associated wellbeing as physical, mental, spiritual, social, and environmental, and in each context, they mentioned the relevant benefits at various levels [13][14]. Some studies mentioned the increased approval of nature protection by green spaces’ visitors [15][16]. Several studies revealed increased group cohesion [17][18] and more pro-social behaviour [19]. From the perspectives of the mental and spiritual benefits, the health effects of green resources tourism include the feeling of a more positive self-concept and increased self-esteem [20][21][22].

Two beneficial mental health effects were repeatedly mentioned: enhancement in wellbeing [7] and reduction in stress [9][23][24]. Two studies targeted children in their research. They found that the amount of nature in people’s environments had a strong relationship with depression and anxiety disorder and confirmed its impact on decreasing stress [25][26]. Thompson et al. confirmed the link between more green space and less stress in deprived communities [9] and social tourists who received financial support [27]. Similar results were found for young adults [14]. The quantity of visiting green spaces effective in the reported stress-related illnesses (the number of times people visit and the duration of their park visits) [23] and the quality and success of a green-based program can increase self-efficacy, mindfulness, and subjective wellbeing. It may reduce feelings of time pressure and mental stress [14]. The positive contribution of green-based leisure time is important for both long vacations [1] and for short visits longer than 20 minutes [7].

Wendelboe-Nelson et al. (2019) investigated the context of green-space exposure and its association with mental health wellbeing through a scoping review approach. They note that different green spaces (e.g., recreational, residential, urban, or rural) may affect mental health well-being differently [28]. Therefore, studying agritourism as a new beneficial environment for mental health, with different functions and activities, might affect new contexts.

2. Mental Health: Well-Being, Stress

Based on the World Health Organisation (WHO) definition, mental health is not only the absence of mental disorders but also has a broader state of subjective wellbeing, comprising physical, mental, and social wellbeing factors. The WHO has emphasised the effective functioning of time spent in the countryside for both the individual and the community, allowing individuals to realise their abilities, cope with the everyday stresses of life, work productively and fruitfully, and contribute to their community [29]. Although the definition presented by WHO is still the main reference to describe mental health, there is no universal definition of mental health wellbeing, which makes it difficult for researchers in this subject. A review study on the wellbeing outcomes of green-space exposure suggested a definition of mental health wellbeing as a starting point in which wellbeing incorporates more social aspects and the potential of individuals rather than physical health [28]. There is also a translation problem; it is sometimes difficult to find an appropriate comparable synonym when wellbeing is translated into other languages [30].

In social and behavioural science, researchers need to prove reliability and validity when measuring mental health; therefore, it is recommended to apply the standard models [28].

Wellbeing can often be described in terms of happiness, which is a fundamental goal of society [31]. The literature on subjective wellbeing broadly differentiates long-term life satisfaction from short-term emotional wellbeing [14][32]. Stress, the other core variable in this study, is regarded as one of the most critical factors in evaluating mental health in modern society [23]. Stress is considered a type of adjustment activated by physical or psychological tensions [33]. Contact with nature and relieving stress has been practically shown to have a significant relationship [28]. However, there is no homogeneous result regarding green spaces and the mental health relationship [26].

Living conditions and environments support mental health since these two factors allow people to adopt and maintain healthy lifestyles [19]. However, it is not easy to consider all the contextual factors that might affect mental health wellbeing outcomes due to the lack of information [28].

3. Agritourism in Korea

South Korea is a high per capita GDP country with a dynamic and flourishing economy; however, an unbalanced growth strategy was adopted to modernise the economy quickly. It seems that the achievements have been at a high cost to environmental health and the imbalance between urban and rural development [34]. Due to such rapid transformation, rural and urban areas suffered from socio-economic problems [35]. It led to high levels of stress and life dissatisfaction in the metropolitan area, especially among the young generation [36].

In the fourth national territorial plan (2000 to 2020), the government’s main focus was to launch strategies that could eliminate gaps between urban and rural areas by diversifying rural economic activities, establishing a regional innovation system, and encouraging rural-urban interactions. Hence, the plan has been to develop rural areas through innovative activities, specifically, encouraging farm diversification through tourism activities. Farms Tour appeared as a new concept, with activity farming-experience centres, restaurants, resorts, and accommodations for visitors. Later the new policy changed and focused on cooperation and community-based business. Nowadays, agritourism in South Korea includes cooperatively developed farm tourism by at least five households [37].

The government supports agritourism as a rural tourism project, especially “rural theme villages”, the promotion of organic farming, and encouraging engagement in harvesting events [31][38].

Given the contemporary situation in South Korea and the proven relationship between green-resources tourism with some aspects of mental health, it was hypothesised that:

  • Agritourism activities might contribute to improve the immediate mood and further improve mental health.

    To our knowledge, there has been no study to find evidence of the agritourism benefits of mental health. This research aimed to test which, if any, mental health benefits are related to agritourism experiences. Two dimensions of mental health were at the core of this research: perceived wellbeing and perceived stress. It was hypothesised that:

    • There might be an interaction between self-reported wellbeing and agritourism.

    • There might be an interaction between self-reported stress and agritourism.


  1. Dolnicar, S.; Yanamandram, V.; Cliff, K. The contribution of vacations to quality of life. Ann. Tour. Res. 2012, 39, 59–83.
  2. Lin, Y.-S.; Huang, W.-S.; Yang, C.-T.; Chiang, M.-J. Work–leisure conflict and its associations with wellbeing: The roles of social support, leisure participation and job burnout. Tour. Manag. 2014, 45, 244–252.
  3. Chen, C.-C.; Huang, W.-J.; Petrick, J.F. Holiday recovery experiences, tourism satisfaction and life satisfaction–Is there a relationship? Tour. Manag. 2016, 53, 140–147.
  4. Li, Q.; Morimoto, K.; Nakadai, A.; Inagaki, H.; Katsumata, M.; Shimizu, T.; Hirata, Y.; Hirata, K.; Suzuki, H.; Miyazaki, Y.; et al. Forest bathing enhances human natural killer activity and expression of anti-cancer proteins. Int. J. Immunopathol. Pharmacol. 2007, 20, 3–8.
  5. Li, Q.; Morimoto, K.; Kobayashi, M.; Inagaki, H.; Katsumata, M.; Hirata, Y.; Hirata, K.; Suzuki, H.; Li, Y.; Wakayama, Y.; et al. Visiting a forest, but not a city, increases human natural killer activity and expression of anti-cancer proteins. Int. J. Immunopathol. Pharmacol. 2008, 21, 117–127.
  6. Freeman, M. From ′character-training′ to ′personal growth′: The early history of Outward bound 1941–1965. Hist. Educ. 2011, 40, 21–43.
  7. Yuen, H.K.; Jenkins, G.R. Factors associated with changes in subjective wellbeing immediately after urban park visit. Int. J. Environ. Health Res. 2020, 30, 134–145.
  8. Wood, L.; Hooper, P.; Foster, S.; Bull, F. Public green spaces and positive mental health—investigating the relationship between access, quantity and types of parks and mental wellbeing. Health Place 2017, 48, 63–71.
  9. Thompson, C.W.; Roe, J.; Aspinall, P.; Mitchell, R.; Clow, A.; Miller, D. More green space is linked to less stress in deprived communities: Evidence from salivary cortisol patterns. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2012, 105, 221–229.
  10. De Vries, S. Nearby nature and human health: Looking at mechanisms and their implications. In Innovative Approaches to Researching Landscape and Health; Routledge: England, UK, 2014; pp. 77–96.
  11. Heinrichs, M.; Baumgartner, T.; Kirschbaum, C.; Ehlert, U. Social support and oxytocin interact to suppress cortisol and subjective responses to psychosocial stress. Biol. Psychiatry 2003, 54, 1389–1398.
  12. Kaplan, S. The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. J. Environ. Psychol. 1995, 15, 169–182.
  13. Maller, C.; Townsend, M.; St Leger, L.; Henderson-Wilson, C.; Pryor, A.; Prosser, L.; Moore, M. The Health Benefits of Contact with Nature in a Park Context: A Review of Relevant Literature; Deakin University and Parks Victoria: Melbourne, Australia, 2008.
  14. Mutz, M.; Müller, J. Mental health benefits of outdoor adventures: Results from two pilot studies. J. Adolesc. 2016, 49, 105–114.
  15. Romagosa, F.; Eagles, P.F.; Lemieux, C.J. From the inside out to the outside in: Exploring the role of parks and protected areas as providers of human health and wellbeing. J. Outdoor Recreat. Tour. 2015, 10, 70–77.
  16. Martin, P. Outdoor adventure in promoting relationships with nature. J. Outdoor Environ. Educ. 2004, 8, 20–28.
  17. Greffrath, G.; Meyer, C.D.P.; Strydom, H. A comparison between centre-based and expedition-based (wilderness) adventure experiential learning regarding group effectiveness: A mixed methodology. S. Afr. J. Res. Sport Phys. Educ. Recreat. 2013, 35, 11–24.
  18. Cooley, S.J.; Burns, V.E.; Cumming, J. The role of outdoor adventure education in facilitating groupwork in higher education. High. Educ. 2015, 69, 567–582.
  19. Cook, E.C. Residential wilderness programs: The role of social support in influencing self-evaluations of male adolescents. Adolescence 2008, 43, 172.
  20. Belanger, L.; McGowan, E.; Lang, M.; Bradley, L.; Courneya, K. Adventure Therapy: A Novel Approach to Increasing Physical Activity and Physical Self-Concept in Young Adult Cancer Survivors: P3–70. Pscyho-Oncology 2013, 22, 320–321.
  21. Gehris, J.; Kress, J.; Swalm, R. Students’ views on physical development and physical self-concept in adventure-physical education. J. Teach. Phys. Educ. 2010, 29, 146–166.
  22. Schell, L.; Cotton, S.; Luxmoore, M. Outdoor adventure for young people with a mental illness. Early Interv. Psychiatry 2012, 6, 407–414.
  23. Grahn, P.; Stigsdotter, U.A. Landscape planning and stress. Urban For. Urban Green. 2003, 2, 1–18.
  24. Kondo, M.C.; Fluehr, J.M.; McKeon, T.P.; Branas, C.C. Urban green space and its impact on human health. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 445.
  25. McCurdy, L.E.; Winterbottom, K.E.; Mehta, S.S.; Roberts, J.R. Using nature and outdoor activity to improve children’s health. Curr. Probl. Pediatric Adolesc. Health Care 2010, 40, 102–117.
  26. D’Alessandro, D.; Buffoli, M.; Capasso, L.; Fara, G.M.; Rebecchi, A.; Capolongo, S. Green areas and public health: Improving wellbeing and physical activity in the urban context. Epidemiol. Prev. 2015, 39, 8–13.
  27. McCabe, S.; Johnson, S. The happiness factor in tourism: Subjective wellbeing and social tourism. Ann. Tour. Res. 2013, 41, 42–65.
  28. Wendelboe-Nelson, C.; Kelly, S.; Kennedy, M.; Cherrie, J.W. A scoping review mapping research on green space and associated mental health benefits. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 2081.
  29. Organisation, W.H. The World Health Report 2001: Mental Health: New Understanding, New Hope; WHO Library Cataloguing in Publication Data: Geneva, Switzerland, 2001.
  30. Fleuret, S.; Atkinson, S. Wellbeing, health and geography: A critical review and research agenda. N. Zealand Geogr. 2007, 63, 106–118.
  31. Lyubomirsky, S.; Lepper, H.S. A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Soc. Indic. Res. 1999, 46, 137–155.
  32. Schimmack, U. The structure of subjective wellbeing. In The Science of Subjective Wellbeing; Eid, M., Larsen, R.J., Eds.; Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2008; Volume 54, pp. 97–123.
  33. Van Den Berg, A.E.; Maas, J.; Verheij, R.A.; Groenewegen, P.P. Green space as a buffer between stressful life events and health. Soc. Sci. Med. 2010, 70, 1203–1210.
  34. Choi, K.-S. Rural Tourism in Korea; Food & Fertilizer Technology Center: Seoul, South Korea, 1998.
  35. Choo, H.; Jamal, T. Tourism on organic farms in South Korea: A new form of ecotourism. J. Sustain. Tour. 2009, 17, 431–454.
  36. Nam, M.; Heo, D.S.; Jun, T.Y.; Lee, M.S.; Cho, M.J.; Han, C.; Kim, M.K. Depression, suicide, and Korean society. J. Korean Med Assoc. 2011, 54, 358–361.
  37. Lee, S.W.; Kim, H.J. Agricultural transition and rural tourism in Korea: Experiences of the last forty years. In Agricultural Transition in Asia; Thapa, G., Viswanathan, P., Routray, J., Ahmad, M., Eds.; Asian Institute of Technology: Bangkok, Thailand, 2010; pp. 37–64.
  38. Choo, H.; Park, D.B. The Role of Agritourism Farms’ Characteristics on the Performance: A Case Study of Agritourism Farms in South Korea. Int. J. Hosp. Tour. Adm. 2020, 1–14.
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to : ,
View Times: 852
Revisions: 3 times (View History)
Update Date: 23 Aug 2021