Human–nature connection: a multidisciplinary review

Abstract

22In sustainability science calls are increasing for humanity to (re-)connect with nature, yet no 23 systematic synthesis of the empirical literature on Human-Nature Connection (HNC) exists. We

Fostering Children’s Connection to Nature Through Authentic Situations: The Case of Saving Salamanders at School

“…Multiple studies in distinct scientific traditions have considered adults’ connectedness to nature, otherwise termed human-nature connections, and its relationship to pro-environmental behavior (e.g., Raymond et al, 2010; Brehm et al, 2013; Restall and Conrad, 2015; Ives et al, 2017). In the environmental psychology literature, connectedness with nature can be seen as a psychological construct that reflects the degree to which individuals perceive that they are part of the natural environment (Schultz, 2001, 2002), and such perception arguably influences adults’ motivations to engage in pro-environmental behavior (Kals et al, 1999; Chawla, 2007; Ernst and Theimer, 2011; Cheng and Monroe, 2012; Liefländer et al, 2013; Mayer and Frantz, 2014; Richardson et al, 2016).…”

Moving beyond the human–nature dichotomy through biocultural approaches: including ecological well-being in resilience indicators

“…Most internationally derived indicator sets (e.g., GDP ranking, world development indicators, IUCN Red List index) measure ecosystem and human health separately. Recent efforts to reconcile nature conservation and human development include promoting the integration of social sciences into conservation (Mascia et al 2003, Agrawal and Ostrom 2006, Brosius 2006, Barry and Born 2013, Sandbrook et al 2013, Bennett et al 2016, Ives et al 2017 and the integration of local actors (e.g., community members, NGOs, local government) into research and action through social-ecological systems resilience studies, community-based management, or in situ conservation of agrobiodiversity (Altieri and Merrick 1987, Alcorn 1993, Pinedo-Vásquez and Padoch 1993, Berkes 2008, Liu and Opdam 2014, Ens et al 2016. These efforts have led to (1) more nuanced human well-being indicators, modified from the Human Development Index, to better integrate material conditions, quality of life (e.g., spiritual dimensions, social connections, environmental quality, and subjective wellbeing), and sustainability of well-being (i.e., human, social, economic, and natural capital) (Clark 2014, OECD 2015, Biedenweg et al 2017, Gross-Camp 2017, Wali et al 2017, and (2) sets of indicators, such as the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, that include people-focused and ecological goals but fall short in integrating these domains through attention to the feedbacks and interactions between humans and the environment.…”

“Connectedness to Nature Scale”: Validity and Reliability in the French Context

“…However, this has not yet been the case within the French speaking world for connectedness to nature, even though this kind of approach to studying human connection with nature represents one-third of the most recent research in this field (Ives et al, 2017). The growing interest of this dimension in the French-speaking countries requires the development of the validated and trustable tools to be able to study the links between connectedness to nature and the well-being and/or pro-ecological behaviors.…”