Research producing evidence-based information on the health benefits of green and blue spaces often has within its design, the potential for inherent or implicit bias which can unconsciously orient the outcomes of such studies towards preconceived hypothesis. Many studies are situated in proximity to specific or generic green and blue spaces (hence, constituting a green or blue space led approach), others are conducted due to availability of green and blue space data (hence, applying a green or blue space data led approach), while other studies are shaped by particular interests in the association of particular health conditions with presence of, or engagements with green or blue spaces (hence, adopting a health or health status led approach). In order to tackle this bias and develop a more objective research design for studying associations between human health outcomes and green and blue spaces, this paper discussed the features of a methodological framework suitable for that purpose after an initial, year-long, exploratory Irish study. The innovative approach explored by this study (i.e., the health-data led approach) first identifies sample sites with good and poor health outcomes from available health data (using data clustering techniques) before examining the potential role of the presence of, or engagement with green and blue spaces in creating such health outcomes. By doing so, we argue that some of the bias associated with the other three listed methods can be reduced and even eliminated. Finally, we infer that the principles and paradigm adopted by the health data led approach can be applicable and effective in analyzing other sustainability problems beyond associations between human health outcomes and green and blue spaces (e.g., health, energy, food, income, environment and climate inequality and justice etc.). The possibility of this is also discussed within this paper.