In A Nutshell
- Living close to the ocean is associated with a longer life expectancy in urban and rural settings.
- For people near large inland waters, shorter lifespans are noted, but this is primarily in cities.
- Various environmental factors, including heat, air quality, elevation, and income, contribute to these differences.
- Rural areas near lakes and rivers might still gain some health benefits from their surroundings.
COLUMBUS, Ohio — A recent study has challenged widely held beliefs about living near water. While it’s commonly thought that being close to any body of water is advantageous, this research indicates that coastal living is significantly more beneficial for longevity compared to residing near inland waters like lakes and rivers.
It seems that just having water nearby isn’t enough; the type of water—coastal versus inland—actually plays a critical role in health outcomes.
Researchers Analyze 66,000+ Communities Nationwide
Researchers at Ohio State University looked at data from over 66,000 census tracts throughout the continental U.S., making this one of the most extensive studies of its kind. They compared life expectancy figures from 2010 to 2015 with how close residents lived to both coastal and inland waters, keeping in mind numerous other factors that can impact longevity.
The findings revealed that Americans living within 31 miles of the coast had notably longer life expectancies compared to those near large inland water bodies. On average, Americans in this study lived 78.3 years, a figure that varied depending on water proximity.
How Climate, Air Quality, and Income Differ Near Coasts vs Inland Waters
The contrast between coastal and inland water environments is striking. Areas near inland waters experienced an average of 21 hot days per year—garnering temperatures over 95°F—while coastal regions logged only about 2.2 such days. Additionally, coastal dwellers enjoy cleaner air, with reduced levels of pollution and smoke from wildfires.
Financial factors also come into play. The average household income near coastal waters was $91,075, whereas it was just $67,774 near inland bodies—a difference exceeding $23,000 annually. This income gap often results in better access to healthcare, nutrition, and overall living conditions.
Moreover, coastal geography typically offers logistical advantages. Areas near the ocean usually feature flatter, more accessible terrain, unlike the more mountainous inland regions, which can complicate everything from emergency services to daily commutes.
The ocean works as a natural climate regulator, assisting in air purification and temperature moderation. Generally, coastal regions experience less severe weather, resulting in fewer dangerously cold days and more stabilizing seasonal changes. This, coupled with recreational opportunities such as swimming or beach activities, can contribute to better health, benefits that might not be as pronounced with inland waterways.
Why Inland Water Impacts Life Expectancy Differently in Cities and Rural Areas
Here’s where things get particularly intriguing: the adverse effects of inland waterways mostly affect urban areas. Surprisingly, rural communities situated near such waters may even see modest improvements in life expectancy.
In urban settings, being close to larger inland bodies tends to correlate with shorter lifespans. Conversely, in rural locales, this relationship flips. Urban inland waters often suffer from increased pollution, flooding risks, and poor air quality. In contrast, rural inland regions can offer aesthetic and recreational perks without the same level of environmental threats.
This urban-rural divide underscores that context is incredibly important when considering how proximity to water affects health.
What the Findings Mean for Public Health
The findings, published in Environmental Research, could have significant implications for the millions living near inland waters. Areas in the Great Lakes region, mountain lake communities, and riverside cities might need to confront environmental challenges that could adversely impact their residents’ health and life expectancy.
While the researchers noted some limitations, such as not being able to assess actual water quality or track individual interactions with nearby water, the extensive nature of the study covering virtually all American communities provides solid evidence for their analyses. The consistent results across different statistical methods lend confidence to their conclusions.
Instead of assuming that all waterfront lifestyles afford similar benefits, it might be wise for Americans to reflect on whether their nearby water is coastal or inland. The differentiation, the authors propose, could be linked to significant variations in health and longevity.
Paper Summary
Methodology
Researchers from Ohio State University studied life expectancy data from over 66,000 U.S. census tracts between 2010 and 2015. They evaluated distances to coastal waters using thresholds of 0, 20, and 50 kilometers and determined proximity to inland waters based on whether tracts contained water bodies larger than 10 or 20 square kilometers. Various regression models were employed to explore the relationships while accounting for environmental, socioeconomic, and geographic factors. They also conducted sensitivity analyses to identify significant differentiating factors between coastal and inland environments.
Results
The research indicated that being close to coastal waters was positively associated with life expectancy, while proximity to inland waters larger than 20 square kilometers correlated negatively. The data showcased consistently higher life expectancy for those near coastal waters. Key differences included fewer extreme heat days, better air quality, and higher average incomes in coastal areas compared to inland ones. The urban-rural analysis further illustrated that urban populations faced negative impacts from inland waters, while rural populations might actually benefit.
Limitations
The study acknowledged certain limitations like the use of cross-sectional data that could restrict causal inference and the absence of specific behavioral metrics such as smoking or diet. Proximity-based exposure measurements may not completely capture individual interactions with blue spaces. Potential discrepancies between exposure timing and life expectancy estimates were also noted.
Funding and Disclosures
Jianyong Wu received initial funding from the College of Public Health at Ohio State University. The authors confirmed that they had no conflicting financial interests or personal relationships that might have influenced their research.
Publication Information
This research was published in Environmental Research, Volume 281 (September 15, 2025), Article 121981, conducted by researchers from the Division of Environmental Health Sciences at Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
