ビッグデータを用いた国立公園の生態系サービス評価!"#$%&'()*+,-.%/012*

生態系サービス$3456789:;6<=>?@ABCDEFetc.

文化的サービス
GHIJK$34LMNOD(Pレクリエーション
インスピレーション

精神的価値

食文化

GHIJKDQRSTUVWX
美的価値SNSなどのビッグデータへの注目

van Zanten et al. 2016 PNASYZ[\]^]_D`abcdWefJghD
ijklcRSX

精神的健康とか、しあわせとかもサービス？

SCIENCE ADVANCES | REVIEWSOCIAL SCIENCES

Nature and mental health: An ecosystemservice perspective
Gregory N. Bratman1,2,3,4*, Christopher B. Anderson3,5, Marc G. Berman6,7, Bobby Cochran8,
Sjerp de Vries9, Jon Flanders10,11, Carl Folke12,13,14, Howard Frumkin15,16, James J. Gross17,Terry Hartig18,19, Peter H. Kahn Jr.1,20, Ming Kuo21, Joshua J. Lawler1,2, Phillip S. Levin1,2,22,
Therese Lindahl14, Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg23, Richard Mitchell24, Zhiyun Ouyang25,
Jenny Roe26, Lynn Scarlett27, Jeffrey R. Smith3,5, Matilda van den Bosch28,29,
Benedict W. Wheeler30, Mathew P. White30, Hua Zheng25, Gretchen C. Daily3,4,5,31*

Copyright © 2019
The Authors, somerights reserved;
exclusive licensee
American Association
for the Advancementof Science. No claim tooriginal U.S. Government
Works. Distributed
under a Creative
Commons Attribution
NonCommercial
License 4.0 (CC BY-NC).

INTRODUCTION

Human well-being is linked to the natural environment in myriadways, and actionable understanding of these links is deepening indiverse disciplines (1–3). Many of the contributions of living nature(diversity of organisms, ecosystems, and their processes) to people’squality of life can be referred to as “ecosystem services.” They include water purification, provision of food, stabilization of climate,protection from flooding, and many others (2). Worldwide, major
efforts are underway to bring ecosystem services and their values
into policy, finance, and management (4–6).
1School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA98195, USA. 2Center for Creative Conservation, University of Washington, Seattle, WA98195, USA. 3Center for Conservation Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA94305, USA. 4The Natural Capital Project, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. 5Department ofBiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. 6Department of Psychology,
University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA. 7Grossman Institute for Neuroscience, Quantitative Biology, and Human Behavior, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL60637, USA. 8Willamette Partnership, Portland, OR 97239, USA. 9Wageningen Environmental Research, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, Netherlands.
10
School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. 11Bat Conservation
International, Austin, TX 78746, USA. 12Global Economic Dynamics and the Biosphere,
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm, Sweden. 13Stockholm ResilienceCentre, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden. 14Beijer Institute, Royal Swedish
Academy of Sciences, Stockholm, Sweden. 15Wellcome Trust, London, UK. 16Schoolof Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA. 17Department
18These efforts rely increasingly upon models that relate scenariosof change in ecosystems to change in the provision of services (7),and they have been adopted on an international scale. For example,
the Natural Capital Project’s InVEST models (for Integrated Valuationof Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs) are being used in 185 countries
around the world (6). The InVEST models are based on production
functions that define how changes in an ecosystem’s composition,
configuration, and function are likely to affect the flows and valuesof ecosystem services across a landscape or seascape. They are open
source and are being tested and adapted through a broad network.
In some areas, such as in hydrology, this modeling is advanced andbuilds upon decades of work, although challenging frontiers remain(8). In other areas, such as pollination services for agriculture andhuman nutrition (9), the modeling and its empirical basis are in comparatively early stages of development. These models are designed
to be used in an ensemble to estimate change in multiple ecosystemservices.
To date, these modeling and decision-making efforts have focusedpredominantly on services tied to biophysical dimensions of Earth’s
life-support systems and more recently on cultural services (10).
However, relatively little attention has been given in the field of ecosystem services to the ways in which nature experience directly affects human mental health (see Box 1 for our definitions of “nature”

Downloaded from http://advances.sciencemag.org/ on February 12, 2021

A growing body of empirical evidence is revealing the value of nature experience for mental health. With rapid
urbanization and declines in human contact with nature globally, crucial decisions must be made about how topreserve and enhance opportunities for nature experience. Here, we first provide points of consensus across thenatural, social, and health sciences on the impacts of nature experience on cognitive functioning, emotional
well-being, and other dimensions of mental health. We then show how ecosystem service assessments can beexpanded to include mental health, and provide a heuristic, conceptual model for doing so.

自然は精神的健康を高めるとか、well-being的に重要とかってよく言うけど、生態系サービスとしては扱われてないよね。

!"!#$%&'()*+,-./01234
56&789:4;;

本研究の目的
ビッグデータで⾃然が⼈の感情に与える影響を評価
対象のソーシャルメディア：Twitter2017年３⽉〜2021年12⽉のデータを使⽤
対象の国⽴公園：⽇本の全国⽴公園（34箇所）
知床

2018年の国⽴公園内の投稿
阿寒摩周

釧路湿原
⼤雪⼭

方法
位置情報に基づき国立公園での Tweetを取得。

IBM Watson Natural
Language
Understanding

感情：ネガティブ・ポジティブ

ランダムにTweet を取得。

MLAsk
(Ptaszynski et al. 2009)

感情：
喜・怒・哀・怖・恥・好・厭・昂・安・驚結果：国立公園利用の感情への影響!"#$%&'()*+,-.&'()

MLAsk!
"
#$%
#&'

MLAsk

Watson!"#$%&'()(((*+,-./0Watson

⻘⾊：ポジティブな投稿
⾚⾊：ネガティブな投稿
灰⾊：感情なし投稿!"#<=>?@A$BCDEFGH@A$BIJKLMNOPH/0,QRSTUNOPH/0,VHW

結果：国立公園利用の感情への影響
༑቟

ᅢ

ᣵ

㛳

緑：国⽴公園内
灰：ランダムな投稿<=>?9CXYZ./0,[W\]^_`]^_.ab,c4;

結果：国立公園利用の感情への影響
༑቟

ᅢ

ᣵ

㛳

緑：国⽴公園内
灰：ランダムな投稿

d.efXgZ./0,VhiW\

結果：国立公園利用の感情への影響
ຟᔺ

෤

ᕯ

ᔶ

緑：国⽴公園内
灰：ランダムな投稿<=>?9CTUNOPH/0.jk,VHl\

結果：国立公園利用の感情への影響
ຟᔺ

෤

ᕯ

ᔶ

緑：国⽴公園内
灰：ランダムな投稿

m1XnZ)XoZ,VHW\

考察：国立公園の感情への影響
<=>?

DEFG

mnopqK`ar!

"stopqK`ar"!

uvwxyr!

"uvwzyw{yK|r"!

<=>?Cpqr./01s.56\考察：国立公園の感情への影響<=>?

uvw}yr

"DEFG

!

!

「好」に対応する表現

HUGする、いい感情を持つ、いそいそ、いとおしい、いとおしむ、うきうきする、うっとり、お気に入り、かけがえのない、かわいい、くにゃくにゃ、くびったけ、ぞっこん、でれでれ、のめり込む、ふらふら、ふわふわ、ほれる、ぽうっとなる、まんざらでもない、めろめろ、カワイイ、キスする、デレデレ、ハグする、フレンドリー、メロメロ、リスペクト、人情、仁愛、仄仄、仰ぐ、仰望、信頼する、偏愛、傾倒、冀う、冀うくるは、冀わくは、再燃、切ない思い、博愛、厚志、厚情、厚意、参る、友好、友情、友愛、友誼、可愛い、可愛いがる、可愛がる、和敬、哀れを催す、嗜好、堪らない、堪るない、夢中、夢中になる、大好き、失恋、好い、好き、好き好き、好き好む、好く、好ましい、好ましいさ、好ましさ、好み、好む、好もしい、好もしいさ、好もしさ、好尚、好意、好感、密心、寵愛、尊い、尊ぶ、尊崇、尊敬、岡惚れ、崇める、崇敬、引かされる、引かれる、引き込まれる、引き込むれる、引くすれる、引くれる、弾む、待ち焦がれる、微かだ或り気持ちを感じる、微かな或る気持ちを感じる、心を奪うれる、心を奪われる、心惹かれる、心服、心酔、思いつめる、思いやり、思いをかける、思い焦がれる、思う焦がれる、思慕、恋々、恋い焦がれる、恋心、恋情、恋愛、恋慕、恍惚、恩寵、恩愛、恭敬、悲恋、情愛、情欲、情炎、情熱、惑溺、惚れる、惚れ惚れ、惚れ込む、意に適う、愛しい、愛しいがる、愛しいさ、愛しがる、愛しさ、愛す、愛執、愛好、愛情、愛惜、愛慕、愛敬、愛染、愛欲、愛玩、愛着、愛護、愛顧、感服、慈しみ、慈しむ、慈悲、慈愛、慕情、憎いぬ思う、憎からず思い、憧れ、憧れる、憧憬、懇意、懐かしい、懐かし
いがる、懐かしがる、懐かしさ、懐かしみ、懐かしむ、懐く、懐古、懐旧、懐郷、懸想、振るい付く、振るう付句、敬う、敬愛、敬慕、敬服、敬重、旧懐、時好、景仰、暖かい感情、最愛、横好き、横恋慕、欲情、欽慕、母性愛、気がある、気が置けない、気に入る、気触れる、求愛、浮かれる、浮き浮きする、浮き立つ、渇く、渇仰、渇望、溺れる、溺愛、焦がれる、焦がれる悩む、焦がれ悩む、熱い思い、熱情、熱愛、熱病、父性愛、片思い、片恋、狂恋、畏敬、痺れる、目じりを下げる、盲愛、睦まじい、瞳が熱する、
私淑、純愛、羨望、耽る、耽溺、胸を焦がす、自愛、至情、莫逆、蕩ける、表敬、見る染める、見上げる、見惚れる、見染める、親しみ、親しむ、親和の心、親善、親密、親心、親愛、親身、言い寄る、贔屓、踊る、追慕、選り好み、酔う、重んじる、鍾愛、鑽仰、陶然、陶酔、震えが来る、食指を動かす、首く丈、首ったけ、首っ丈、馴染む、高鳴る、鶴首-1tu4gvhw&xuxy,QW\

考察：国立公園の感情への影響uvw}yr

<=>?

DEFG

"!

<=>?9Czt{1-|.}~,iW.•K\('&%$#jk€•‚ƒ„/0•‚多数
稿→投色濃('&)*

情…†•‚&K‡ˆu‰Š&‹Œ•ˆ•Žu4••濃感
ィブテ
ポジ→色

ご清聴ありがとうございました。

!"#$%&'()&'*+,-./ &'#$01234567899:;<=<=>:=<?@ABCDEFEGH