‘My wood isn’t one of those dark and scary ones’: children’s experience and knowledge of woodland in the English rural landscape

References

• Aradi, R, Thoren, K, & Fjortoft, I. (2015). The urban landscape as affordance for adolescents' everyday physical activity. Landscape Research, 41(5), 569–584.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bingley, A., & Milligan, C. (2007). Sandplay, clay and sticks: Multi-Sensory research methods to explore the long-term mental health effects of childhood play experience. Children’s Geographies, 5(3), 283–296.
   Google Scholar
• Binner, A. R., Smith, G., Bateman, I., Day, B. H., Agarwala, M., & Harwood, A. (2017). Valuing the social and environmental contribution of woodlands and trees in England. Scotland and Wales, Edinburgh: Forestry Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. California: Sage publications.
   Google Scholar
• Burgess, J. (1996). Focusing on fear: The use of focus groups in a project for the community forest unit, countryside commission. Area, 28(2), 130–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgess, J., & O’Brien, E. A. (2001). Trees, woods and forests: An exploration of personal and collective values. In E. A. O’Brien & J. Claridge (eds.), Trees are company. Farnham: Forestry Research.
   Google Scholar
• Chalwa, L. (2007). Childhood experiences associated with care for the natural world: A theoretical framework for empirical results. Children, Youth and Environments, 17(4), 144–170.
   Google Scholar
• Chalwa, L. (2015). Benefits of nature contact for children. CPL Bibliography, 30(4), 433–452.
   Google Scholar
• Cook, I. (2005). Participant Observation. In R. Flowerdew & D. Martin (eds.), Methods in human geography: A guide for students doing a research project. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). (2016). Official definition of ‘rural’. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/rural-urban-classification accessed 2017, July 3rd
   Google Scholar
• Dickinson, E. (2013). The misdiagnosis: Rethinking “nature-deficit disorder”. Environmental Communication, 7(3), 315–335.
   Google Scholar
• Donaldson, J., & Scheffler, A. (2012). The Gruffalo. London: Macmillan Children’s.
   Google Scholar
• Eder, R., & Arnberger, A. (2016). How heterogeneous are adolescents’ preferences for natural and semi-natural riverscapes in recreational settings? Landscape Research, 41(5), 555–568.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• England Marketing. (2009). Childhood and nature: A survey on changing relationships with nature across generations. Worcester: Report to Natural England
   Google Scholar
• Feinsinger, P., Margutti, L., & Oviedo, R. D. (1997). School yards and nature trails: Ecology education outside the university. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 12(3), 115–120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forestry Commission. (2015). Gruffalo Sculpture trails. Retrieved from http://www.forestry.gov.uk/forestry/infd-9htmte Accessed 2015, September 3rd
   Google Scholar
• Garland, J., & Chakraborti, N. (2006). Race’, space and place examining identity and cultures of exclusion in rural England. Ethnicities, 6(2), 159–177.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gill, T. (2007). No fear: Growing up in a risk averse society. London: Calouste.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, S., & Hill, M. (2005). Researching children’s experience: Methods and methodological issues. In S. Greene & D. Hogan (eds.), Researching children’s experience. London: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Harden, J., et al. (2000). Can’t talk, won’t talk: Methodological issues in researching children. Sociological Research Online, 5(2).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hart, R. (1979). Children’s experience of place. New York: Irrington.
   Google Scholar
• Holloway, S. L. (2014). Changing children’s geographies. Children’s Geographies, 12(4), 377–392.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holloway, S. L., & Pimlott-Wilson, H. (2014). Enriching children, institutionalizing childhood? geographies of play, extracurricular activities, and parenting in England. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 104(3), 613–627.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunter, S., Pidgeon, N., & Henwood, K. (2001). Forests, people and place: How individuals and communities perceive and relate to trees, woodland and forests in a Welsh context. In E. A. O’Brien & J. Claridge (eds.), Trees are company. Farnham: Forestry Research.
   Google Scholar
• Konijnendijk, C. C. (2008). The forest and the city – The cultural landscape of urban woodland. Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Linzmayer, C. D., Halpenny, E. A., & Walker, G. J. (2014). A multidimensional investigation into children’s optimal experiences with nature. Landscape Research, 39(5), 481–501.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Louv, R. (2008). Last child in the Woods: Saving our children from nature deficit disorder. London: Atlantic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Macpherson, H. (2016). Walking methods in landscape Research: Moving bodies, spaces of disclosure and rapport. Landscape Research, 41(4), 426–432.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matless, D., Watkins, C., & Merchant, P. (2010). Nature trails: The production of instructive landscapes in Britain 1962–72. Rural History, 21(1), 97–131.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maynard., T. (2007). Forest schools in Great Britain: An initial exploration. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 8(4), 320–331.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, J. R. (2005). Biodiversity conservation and the extinction of experience. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 20(8), 430–434.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milligan, C., & Bingley, A. (2007). Restorative places or scary spaces? The impact of woodland on the mental well-being of young adults. Health and Place, 13, 799–811.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monbiot, G. (2012). ‘If children lose contact with nature they won’t fight for it’, The Guardian newspaper, 19 November, 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Moore, R. C., & Cooper, A. (2014). Nature play and learning places: Creating and managing places where children engage with nature. North Carolina: North Carolina State University.
   Google Scholar
• Moss, S. (2012). Natural Childhood, National Trust Report
   Google Scholar
• O’Brien, L. (2005). Publics and woodlands in England: Well-being, local identity, social learning, conflict and management. Forestry, 78(4), 321–336.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Brien, L. (2006). Social housing and green space: A case study in inner London. Forestry, 79(5), 535–549.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Brien, L. (2009). Learning outdoors: The forest school approach. International Journal of Primary Elementary and Early Years Education, 37(1), 45–60.
   Google Scholar
• O’Brien, L., & Morris,, J. (2014). Well-being for all? The social distribution of benefits gained from woodlands and forests in Britain. Local Environment, 19(4), 356–383.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Office for National Statistics. (2016). 2011 Census data. London: UK Statistics authority.
   Google Scholar
• Pain, R. (2006). Paranoid parenting? Rematerializing risk and fear for children. Social and Cultural Geography, 7(2), 221–243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. (2010). Every child outdoors: Children need nature. Nature needs children. Sandy, Bedfordshire: The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, A. (2002). Assessing public perception of landscape: The LANDMAP experience. Landscape Research, 27(3), 271–295.
   Google Scholar
• Skar, M., Wold, L. C., Gundersen, V., & O’Brien, L. (2016). Why do children not play in nearby nature? Results from a Norwegian survey. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 16(3), 239–255.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soga, M., & Gaston, K. J. (2016). Extinction of experience: The loss of human–Nature interactions. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 14(2), 94–101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, K. (2010). Do we need pandas? Totnes, England: Green Books.
   Google Scholar
• Tranter, P. J., & Malone, K. (2004). Geographies of environmental learning: An exploration of children’s use of school grounds. Children’s Geographies, 2(1), 131–155.
   Google Scholar
• University of Edinburgh. (2015), Edina website. Retrieved from www.edina.ac.uk Accessed 2015, August 28th.
   Google Scholar
• Veale, A. (2005). Creative methodologies in participatory research with children. In S. Greene & D. Hogan (eds.), Researching children’s experience. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Ward Thompson, C.W., Aspinall, P., Bell, S. & Findlay, C. (2005). It gets you away from everyday life: Local woodlands and community use – What makes a difference? Landscape Research, 30(1), 109–146.
   Google Scholar
• Ward Thompson, C.W., Aspinall, P., Bell, S., Findlay, C., Wherrett, J. & Travlou, P. (2004). Open space and social inclusion: Local woodland use in Central Scotland. Edinburgh: Forestry Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Watkins, C. (2014). Trees, woods and forests: A social and cultural history. London: Reaktion Books.
   Google Scholar
• Woolley, H., & Griffin, E. (2014). Decreasing experiences of home range, outdoor spaces, activities and companions: Change across three generations in Sheffield in North England. Children’s Geographies, 13(6), 677–691.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yuen, F. C. (2004). ‘It was fun….I like drawing my thoughts’: Using drawings as part of the focus group process with children. Journal of Leisure Research, 36(4), 461–482.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar