Habits of Connection
Abstract
Background: 45–60% of global climate emissions come from individual consumerism choices. In Western culture, nature is seen as a resource, a series of challenges to conquer, limited to facts and figures, or a threat. As practices and language of sustainability still view the environment simply as a resource, and therefore as something separate from us that can be used, any gains in sustainability are simply band-aids covering the deep wound of relationship. Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to propose a shift in focus to practices of nature-connection in outdoor education programming to develop habits of reciprocity and enhance human and nature well-being and relationship. Methodology/Approach: Research demonstrates a practical way to change how we relate to our environment is to change our habits. The pathways of nature connection provide simple behaviors that improve human–nature relationship and well-being. Findings/Conclusions: The ecological crisis is nothing more than a crisis of relationship. The pathway lies not in sustainability and saviorship, but in reciprocity and relationship cultivated by forming habits of nature connection. Implications: By shifting programmatic focus to the development and transfer of nature connection habits, outdoor educators can start the ripples of reciprocity with nature.
Introduction
While the exact year and timing of irreparable decimation to the planet and its inhabitants is subject to debate, there is no denying that the climate crisis is reaching unparalleled magnitude. In a quest for a solution, sustainable changes have started to occur in much of the public sector to minimize the impact of production on the planet. As a result, more sustainable practices, products, or green technologies, are coming to the top of corporate agendas (Cho, 2020). Sustainability has been deemed the solution and savior to this crisis. It is defined by the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) as “the ability to maintain or improve standards of living without damaging or depleting natural resources for present and future generations” (EPA, 2019, para. 2). It continues as the “conditions under which [humans] and nature can exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the social, economic and other requirements of present and future generations of Americans” (EPA, 2019, para. 2). Sustainability, in essence, is a method to improve our relationship to resource, so as to ensure resources for present and future generations. It is concerned about nature simply from the standpoint of usage and management, asking us to consider: what is our impact?
The leading cause of this crisis is excessive carbon emissions (Denchak & Turrentine, 2021). While corporations such as ExxonMobil, Shell, BP, and Chevron are among the largest contributors to gas emissions, individuals are complicit as consumers who demand the energy and consumer products made from the fossil fuels that these big companies supply (Cho, 2020). In fact, 90% of these companies’ emissions come from products produced at the demand of individual consumers (Cho, 2020). While there is need for policy change to ensure these products do not harm human beings and the planet, there is a need to change the demand for these products in the first place. Of the total carbon emissions, it is estimated that 45% come directly from the products we use and buy every day, and 60% come from the production of household goods and services (Cho, 2020). Put differently, this equates to 45–60% of global climate emissions coming from individual choices on consumerism. Technology may be getting “greener,” but it is not enough to simply “green” consumption. Without limiting individual demand, any technological improvements to increase sustainability of production are facing a losing battle (Gambrel & Cafaro, 2010). As Whitburn et al. (2019) regard it, conservation efforts are continually undermined by human behavior. As such, they stated: “Attempts to promote sustainable lifestyles or conservation behaviors must therefore focus on changing people's behavior” (Whitburn et. al, 2019, p. 181). It is evident by our current climate crisis experience that just simply switching to sustainable products and production is not the most effective strategy for existing in productive harmony with nature.
Nature Connection as Reciprocity and Relationship
Kellert and Wilson (1993) surmise that humanity has evolved with an innate desire to connect with nature. This desire is based on nine values, or attitudes towards nature, that describe a range of possible interactions and benefits derived from a relationship with nature (Kellert & Wilson, 1993). They assert that we connect with nature because of utilitarian, naturalistic, ecologistic-scientific, esthetic, symbolic, humanistic, moralistic, dominionistic, and negativistic values (Kellert & Wilson, 1993). When we see a sunset and it appears beautiful to us (esthetic value), we receive the benefits of experiences of awe, creativity, and stress reduction (Lutz & Srogi, 2010). When we raft a rapid, climb a mountain, or build a dam to channel water where we want it to go (dominionistic value), we experience feelings of competence, skill mastery, and self-esteem (Lutz & Srogi, 2010). In essence, our relationship with nature, depending on which one of the nine experiences we are in, provides various benefits to us.
This innate desire to connect with nature seems contradictory when juxtaposed with the current climate crisis. If we have this innate desire to connect, how is it possible we have become so disconnected? If we want to make informed decisions about how to move forward in our attempts to quell the climate crisis, we must first consider how it is we got to where we are. As we derive a range of benefits we call values from our experiences with nature, over time certain values became more prioritized. Values arise from our core beliefs, and behind every system of actions are a system of beliefs (Clear, 2018). Over time, as Westernized and colonial cultures prioritized actions that elicited feelings of mastery (dominionistic), comfort (utilitarian), and security (negativistic), a devastating set of beliefs came to define the core of our interactions with nature.
The predominant narrative of Eurocentric culture is the belief that humans are separate from nature (Stuckey, 2015). This Eurocentric belief creates an orientation that is abstract and ecologistic, rather than one that is holistic, spiritual, or ecological, as seen in numerous indigenous orientations (Abram, 1996; Bang et al., 2007). This more abstract and ecologistic orientation causes nature to be viewed as a resource (utilitarian), a source of challenges to be conquered (dominionistic), understood in terms of facts and figures (ecologistic-scientific), or as a threat (negativistic) (Richardson et al., 2020a, 2020b). Even the well-intended view derived from Eurocentric culture of human beings as “caretakers” of nature still implies a between-the-lines notion of humans as apart from as opposed to a part of nature (Bang et al., 2007). As our beliefs shape our experiences, and our experiences reaffirm our beliefs, this belief in separation has led to the experience of the climate crisis, of disconnection from nature. This is the outcome when we believe nature to be something outside of ourselves and therefore can be used and abused (Stuckey, 2015). A severance in thought has become a disconnection in the body.
An aphorism of Albert Einstein states: “No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.” As sustainability still speaks of nature and the environment simply as a resource, it cannot be our savior. There is a need to change consciousness by changing the belief that we are not separate from, but rather inseparable from nature. There is a need to promote an ecological orientation and symmetrical or reciprocal relationship between humans and nature, as opposed to the dominant Eurocentric framework of humans as separate from nature (Abram, 1996; Bang et al., 2007). The ecological crisis, and the human health crisis by extension, are nothing more than a crisis of relationship. To change our external experiences with the natural world we must change our internal attitude and relationship with the natural world. We must reconnect.
To change our relationship with nature, we must first define nature. Nature encompasses the physical world and everything in it, including flora, fauna, mountains, oceans, and stars. It is the mundane, metropolitan grasses and the magnificent mountain lakes. It does not exist solely out there in the Wilderness or wilderness, but rather everywhere and all around, if only you pay attention. As a society stewed in Westernized and colonial beliefs of separateness, we need a scientific construct to measure connectedness between what we think of as separate: humans and nature. Nature-connectedness as a construct seeks to reconnect us with nature, to eliminate the Westernized dualisms and perception of separation, and therefore the denial of dependency on nature that perpetuates the environmental crisis (Zylstra et al., 2014). Nature-connectedness is the “relationship between people and nature” and is an “individual's sense of relationship with the natural world” (University of Derby, 2021, para. 2). Nature-connectedness is more than just being in contact with nature, it is “the appreciation and understanding of the interconnection between human beings and other living organisms” beyond love or enjoyment (Berrara et al., 2020). Having nature-connectedness exceeds just a relationship to nature. It is the understanding that we are nature and having a connection with the eco-communities around us is imperative for our health and that of the planet (Martina et al., 2020). Nature connection improves physical, emotional, mental, spiritual, and social well-being (Reese, 2021), and is also the strongest predictor of pro-environmental and pro-conservation behaviors to restore and maintain natural world well-being (Richardson et al., 2020b). Thus, nature-connection truly is reciprocity: the mutual exchange of receiving and giving. Reciprocity is distinct from sustainability because it views nature not as a resource, but rather as a community of beings, our own community, with whom we have a relationship. Therefore, the way forward lies not in sustainability and saviorship, but in reciprocity and relationship.
The biophilic values that support reciprocity are symbolic, naturalistic, esthetic, moralistic, and humanistic (Lumber, 2016). A naturalistic attitude values engaging with nature through our senses (Lumber, 2016). A symbolic attitude values the meaning our lives derive from nature (Lumber, 2016). An esthetic attitude values the inherent beauty and sensation of awe given by nature (Lumber, 2016). A moralistic attitude asserts our imperative to protect natural environments from harm (Lumber, 2016). Finally, a humanistic attitude values forming an emotional attachment with non-domesticated wild animals and nature (Lumber, 2016). These attitudes are fostered through habits of nature-connection known as the pathways to nature-connection (Lumber, 2016; Lumber et al., 2017; Richardson et al., 2020a; Richardson et al., 2020b). Reciprocity as a unique form of nature connection can be fostered through these pathways as well. This can be accomplished when people engage with nature by tuning into it through their senses, feel the emotions experienced when with nature, notice nature's beauty, notice how nature brings meaning into their lives, and experience compassion and act for nature (Richardson et al., 2020a).
The Role of Outdoor Education in Promoting Nature Connection
Outdoor education is a crucial tool for promoting not only pro-environmental attitudes and behaviors, but also connection to nature (Pirchio et al., 2021). Various outdoor education professionals understand their platform in the world of environmental activism and have sought methods to increase ecologically responsible behavior in participants (Deringer et al., 2020). However, many of the practices in outdoor education focus on nature contact and ecological-scientific education as the key pathways towards sustainability and conservation goals rather than nature connection (Pirchio et al., 2021). Martina et al. (2020) confirm that it is not contact with nature, but rather connection to nature that is related to both higher levels of eudemonic well-being and pro-environmental and conservation behaviors. For simply being in contact with nature without having mindful attention to it does not create a relationship or connection that allows the benefits of spending time in nature to accrue (Martina et al., 2020). By paying attention on purpose to our experience (i.e., being mindful), there develops an understanding that our experience with nature provides us positive feelings and experiences (Reese, 2021). As we are emotive beings, not simply cognitive in function, it is our emotions that shape our experiences. When our emotional experiences with nature are emphasized, such as the experiences of awe, wonder, and spiritual enhancement, we become more greatly connected with nature and it becomes a greater part of our identity (Tam, 2013). Contact versus connection is equivalent to the difference in experience when hiking through a landscape to get somewhere else versus hiking with a landscape and paying attention to the sounds you hear around you, the smells in the air, the way the weather feels against your skin, and how being in that landscape makes you feel. Richardson et al. (2016) also conclude that education-based activities derived from an ecologistic-scientific attitude towards nature where nature is observed and learned from, did not improve nature connection and are not indicative of sustaining pro-environmental behaviors. Reciprocity, our connection to and relationship with the natural world, is the single greatest predictor of pro-environmental and pro-conservation behaviors (Martina et al., 2020). If the goal of outdoor education programs is to promote health and sustainability outcomes, and reciprocity (i.e., our connection to and relationship with the natural world) is the single greatest predictor of various facets of well-being as well as pro-environmental and pro-conservation behaviors, then it seems there exists an ethical imperative to assess current programmatic intentions, practices, and actions. What world are we wanting to create with our programs?
Asking “What's your impact?” keeps nature stuck in the box of natural resource. Hence, it makes sense that the natural antidote that is currently prioritized in the outdoor education field is conservation and restoration where the focus is on mitigating impact. However, when we still focus on viewing our time with nature through the lens of impact, we are trying to fit oceans, lakes, and rivers into the confining container of a water bottle. It is time to stop focusing on impact and diminishing nature in our language to nothing more than a resource, a source of challenge, or a fact or figure. It is time to start focusing on relationship, where nature comes alive in our language as its own being with whom we interact, experience life, and care about. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to propose a shift in focus towards routines, activities, and practices of nature connection in outdoor education programming to promote reciprocity in human and nature well-being.
Fostering Habits of Reciprocity and Connection Through Outdoor Education
Currently, connecting with nature is not an everyday habit (National Trust, 2020). The real experience of disconnection is the experience of a lack of relationship with nature. It is estimated that 80% of children do not have regular activities of nature connection and only 19% of adults spend time in nature to make themselves happy (National Trust, 2020). Individual experiences with nature are predominately functional, utilitarian, or dominionistic in purpose: walking the dog, biking to work, exercising, tidying the yard or garden (National Trust, 2020). These common experiences are in nature, but not with nature. As nature-connection is proven to be a strong provider of health and well-being outcomes along with pro-environmental behaviors, how do we prioritize connection? How do we inspire the intentional engagement with nature and foster reciprocity?
How to Climb a Mountain: One Step at a Time
30 Days Wild is a national campaign developed by The Wildlife Trusts in the United Kingdom. The goal of the campaign is not to promote health, well-being, or conservation outcomes, but rather states that “being in contact with nature makes our lives better” (Richardson et al., 2016, p. 9). 30 Days Wild is a 30-day social media challenge dedicated to intentionally and consciously engaging people with nature (Richardson et al., 2016). The challenge asks people to simply “do something wild every day” (Richardson et al., 2016, p. 3). Social media was used as a platform to encourage a wider social context and as a supportive accountability tool to maintain participation (Richardson et al., 2016). There was an emphasis on self-direction, as choice is imperative for motivation in any activity (Duhigg, 2016). Choices were constructed through two categories: level of immersion and level of technicality. This created space for progression throughout the process. Immersion was defined through level of involvement. Full immersion required an intense level of commitment, like climbing a mountain. Intermediate immersion required medium involvement, such as identifying something new in nature. Momentary immersion described fleeting activities such as smelling a flower. Technicality was the level of support or skill needed to complete the action. High technicality required expert help or skill, intermediate technicality required a field guide or other tool, and low technicality required no previous knowledge or expertise. Four types of activities were used to promote contact with nature: noticing, sharing, doing, and connecting. Noticing activities engaged the senses (senses and beauty pathways), sharing activities engaged reflection and the emotional experience of being in nature (emotions pathway), doing activities engaged compassion or pro-environmental behaviors (compassion pathway), and connecting activities included activities related to creating something from nature or exploring nature (meaning pathway). Participants were asked to do a simple activity in nature every day for 30 days. Asking people to consistently engage with nature and reflect on their experiences through sharing them on social media produced “sustained increases in connection to nature, happiness, health, and pro-nature behaviors” (Richardson et al., 2016, p. 10). This suggests that small, daily habits in nature that stimulate the pathways to nature connection are key to creating significant changes in the lives and experiences of people with the natural world.
The Glue of Connection: Habits
If 45–60% of climate change comes down to individual choices, it is evident that human behavior is at the root of most environmental challenges we face. However, the impact of habits and our daily behaviors is seldom accounted for in studies on pro-environmental behavior (Linder et al., 2021). Most studies highlight instead virtues (Martin et al., 2009), values, attitudes (Linder et al., 2021), or ecological knowledge to catalyze pro-environmental behavior (Deringer et al., 2020). These topics fail to extensively reach their intended outcomes because they start in the middle of the ripple, not with the stone that creates the ripple. The thought has often been that the stone that creates the ripple is environmental knowledge. However, as seen by the concern-behavior gap, it is not knowledge or cognitive relationships with nature that promote pro-environmental action, it is emotion and experiential connection (Tam & Chan, 2017). The stone that creates ripples of pro-environmental behavior and action is nature connection. Thus, to create positive ripples, we must start with developing behaviors that lead to the stone's throw: nature connection.
Habits are our behaviors that become regular practices, actions, and routines (Clear, 2018). It is estimated that 40% of our lives is constructed by habitual behavior (Society for Personality and Social Psychology, 2014). While theories of habit differ in specifics, all speak to a movement from goal-directed behavior to habitual behavior through repetition (Carden & Wood, 2018). Habits form often from a deliberate choice to achieve specific goals (Linder et al., 2021). Through repetition within a specific context or environment, habits form as rewards for doing the action of the habit are accrued (Linder et al., 2021). Behaviors that become habits are heavily reliant on automatic processes and become useful because they free up working memory and allow us to save time in our days, as well as “motivate us to act when we are low on willpower, stressed, or not able to deliberate on responses” (Linder et al., 2021, p. 2). In a world where the “attention economy” has created organizations and companies that make money from grabbing our attention, pro-environmental “interventions that utilize our tendency to depend on the impulsive, automatic system can be effective tools” for promoting pro-environmental changes (Linder et al., 2021, p. 4). If the automatic response when stressed or anxious becomes to take a walk outside, rather than flipping through our smartphones, we can create a world of greater connection rather than disconnection.
Making Habits Stick
The key to any successful habit is not its intensity, but rather its consistency within a certain context. Habits are supported through four domains: making it obvious, making it attractive, making it easy, and making it satisfying (Clear, 2018). As habits are goal directed, making a habit easy requires understanding why you are engaging with this habit: what is it that you want that you think this habit can help you achieve, and what is important to you about that? (Carden & Wood, 2018). Making it attractive requires understanding how you and others benefit from this habit (Morgenstern & Peters, 2021). Making it easy requires support through your physical environment and through others who can hold you accountable (Morgenstern & Peters, 2021). Finally, making it satisfying requires reflection on what benefits you are deriving from the habit so you can fully integrate your own unique reason for why you are engaging with the habit (Morgenstern & Peters, 2021). Once a habit has been developed through consistency and repetition within a certain environment, “context cues can automatically bring habitual responses to mind” (Carden & Wood, 2018, p. 118).
Habits are a method of changing beliefs and values (Clear, 2018). As there is a need to change our beliefs and values about nature from separation and resource to inseparability and being, habits act as the individual stairs in the staircase. Core beliefs shape our decisions or habits, our habits reinforce those beliefs, our beliefs then shape our identity, our identity then informs future habits, and our habits determine our results (Morgenstern & Peters, 2021). While this model may have you believe the first step would be belief or identity change, Clear (2018) asserts “the more you repeat a behavior (habit)” within a certain context, “the more you reinforce the identity associated with that behavior” (p. 36). Thus, the more we repeat behaviors and reinforce the identity associated with those behaviors, the more we reconfigure beliefs about who we are and about our experiences. When it comes to nature connection, as we live more time in experiences with nature, our self-identity is expanded to include nature and experiences of belonging with nature (Whitburn et al., 2019).
The Habits of Reciprocity
As habits are goal-directed, there is a need for a goal for habits to form. A recent study by Forbes confirms that 77% of Americans want to live more sustainable lifestyles but just do not know how (Ellsmoor, 2019). Therefore, the desire for a goal to have a different relationship with nature is already a seed for a vast majority of Americans. Now, they just need the right soil and water to nourish it. The habits of reciprocity are fostered through the five pathways of nature connection. The five pathways are the themes of actions that can become habits. These pathways include senses, emotions, meaning, beauty, and compassion (Lumber, 2016; Lumber et al., 2017; Richardson et al., 2020a; Richardson et al., 2020b). The senses pathway deals with physical and sensory contact with nature: noticing or actively engaging with nature through the senses. The themes of action associated with the senses pathway can include listening to birdsong, smelling flowers or plants, walking barefoot or playing in water, watching a sunrise or sunset, or tasting an edible plant or fruit. The emotions pathway deals with engaging emotionally with nature. Actions can include noticing good things in nature, experiencing which environments stimulate joy or calm, and sharing feelings about nature with others. The meaning pathway deals with exploring and expressing how nature brings meaning to our lives. This pathway can include activities such as exploring how nature appears in art, songs, stories, or poems, reflecting on how you relate to different aspects of nature, or celebrating signs and cycles of nature. Beauty is finding beauty in the natural world. Finding beauty looks like simply taking time to appreciate eye-catching colors, or even perpetuating that beauty through creation via art, music, or words. Finally, the compassion pathway is caring for nature. Caring for nature actions can look like simply imagining and planning what can be done to support nature, taking actions that are good for nature such as building homes for nature, supporting conservation efforts and non-profits, and evaluating our consumerism. Table 1 provides a list of potential activities that can be used in outdoor education programming. While various activities are commonplace among outdoor programs, the differentiation here is not what is done, but how it is done. As opposed to other activities that just happen to occur outside with nature as the backdrop, the activities related to the pathways of nature connection bring nature to the foreground. Thus, although the activity itself might be similar, the intention shapes the facilitation and questions derived from the activity to focus on the experiences of the five pathways of nature connection. As Høyem (2020) asserts, it is not the choice of activity that is related to environmental attitudes, but rather the approach to the activity. These activities provide an experiential connection to nature while the facilitation can help to build an emotional connection as well as understand thoughts and beliefs that are critical in enhancing pro-environmental behaviors and connection (Whitburn et al., 2019).
Open in Viewer
Table 1. Matrix of Activities and Prompts for Nature Connection.
ActivitiesSensesEmotionsBeautyMeaningCompassionEngage with waterLook at the movement of water; Listen to the sounds of moving water; Feel the temperature and texture of water.In what ways do you relate to water? How does still water make you feel? How does running water make you feel?What makes water beautiful to you? Does it change with the light? The rock structures beneath? The type of water?How might you use water to describe an idea or experience? If you were a water feature, what type of feature would you be?What action can you take that helps fight water pollution? Take action.View the skyNotice a sunset, sunrise, a starry sky, or patches of clouds.In what ways do you relate to the sun? In what ways do you relate to the wind? How does each different sky make you feel?What makes this sky beautiful to you?What does your favorite sky mean to you? What does a sunset or sunrise symbolize to you? What do the clouds symbolize to you? What do the stars mean to you?What action can you take to help fight air pollution? Take action.Create something with natureCollect an assortment of treasures from nature. What different textures do you feel? What colors do you see? What essences can you smell?What are three good things that you collected? How does seeing these good things make you feel?What beautiful thing can you create with what you collected?How might you use these objects to express something within you?What do these different pieces of nature do for the natural world? How do they give back to the environment? Make sure to put stuff back.Encounter wildlifeWhat animals, insects, fish, or birds do you see? What colors are they? What might they feel like? How do they sound?What wildlife makes you feel calm? What wildlife excites you? What wildlife makes you happy?Notice the beauty of wildlife. What makes the animal, bird, fish, or insect beautiful to you?What might these animals, birds, or insects be saying? What does wildlife mean to you? What is your favorite animal and why? If you were a wild animal what animal would you be and why?What action can you take to take care of wildlife? What organization can you donate to? Take action.Notice trees and plantsTake a moment to notice a tree or plant. What colors do you see? What do the bark, petals, or leaves feel like? What can you smell? What other sounds are around this tree or plant?What elements of the tree or plant make you feel calm? Does noticing nature help regulate your emotions? In what ways do you relate to a tree or this plant?What is beautiful to you about this plant or tree?Do you have a favorite tree or plant? What makes it your favorite? If you were a plant or a tree, what type of plant or tree would you be and why?How do trees provide for the world around us? What can you do to provide for trees? Take action.
Implications
Zylstra et al. (2014) found that “individuals are likely to only achieve deep, or true, nature connection through an intentional process of being strategically mentored as part of a culturally embedded (i.e., community based) process” (p. 126). As facilitators of outdoor, community-based experiences, outdoor education serves as an excellent platform for working to catalyze a revolution of reciprocity through nature connection. More and more people are getting outside and looking to outdoor education programs for guidance, as evidenced by the 52% of Americans who engaged in outdoor participation in 2020 (Outdoor Foundation, 2021). However, while outdoor recreation provides a way of meeting nature, it in and of itself does not necessarily promote reflection or connection with nature. Høyem (2020) affirms that the determining factor in environmentally responsible behavior is not how often or what we do outside, but rather our understanding of our interaction between ourselves and nature, or the human-nature relationship. Further, it is not the intensity and length of programs that boosts nature connection. Rather, it is the opportunities for intentional connection through our senses and emotions, reflection on the meaning of our experiences, appreciation of beauty, and caring actions of compassion for nature (Zylstra et al., 2014). It is the conscious reflection on our relationship with nature that results in the development of a connection with nature (Høyem, 2020). This process of reflection must be a part of all outdoor recreational and educational programming if we are to promote a sense of connection and care for nature among our program participants. All these pathways can be addressed in actions instilled in programs regardless of the length of the program. Within wilderness programs, this could look like creating routines of nature connection through morning barefoot stretching or yoga, nature beauty appreciation moments before dinner, or daily reflections relating to emotions of being in nature or with different natural elements before bed. It could also include using nature as a metaphor in creating art pieces, songs, or poems, or daily acts of service to the natural world. Urban programming can promote social media challenges such as the 30 Days Wild to engage populations to create a broader definition of the nature that exists in their area. In addition, urban programming can use this framework to promote public policy change in advocating for the public health need for sensory access to natural areas. Federal and environmental education programs can lean less on facilitating understanding and expanding cognitive knowledge about the natural world, and more on integrating the various pathways and actions. For example, using senses to explore an area, the meaning participants derive from being in that place, or promoting reflection on how being in that natural area makes them feel. In addition, federal agencies might consider changes in language away from language that denotes nature as “resource,” and something to be managed, but rather as communities that are alive and needing protection or care. As habits require reward, there is a need for reflection and acknowledgement on the benefits being derived from the habit. As nature connection is associated objectively with many measures of health in lowering manifestations of physical stress and boosting our immune system (Oschman et al., 2015) and autonomic functioning (Ghaly & Teplitz, 2004), as well as subjectively increasing the mental and emotional well-being through higher reported levels of flourishing, subjective vitality, positive emotions, lower levels of negative emotions (Wolsko & Lindberg, 2013), and increased outlook on life (Godbey, 2009), there is an inherent reward in engaging with nature if only attention is brought to it.
From Field to Home
As the automation of habits is often triggered by environmental and context specific cues, and a large percentage of climate impact comes from at-home behaviors, there is a need to connect these pathway practices from outdoor experiences to moments at home. For nature connection to be upheld, a level of consistency and commitment is required (Zylstra et al., 2014). Building this continuity makes nature connection transferable between contexts even when the context is less favorable or appealing, and ultimately acting on nature connection consistently helps it to become operationalized as habit (Zylstra et al., 2014). The idea of transfer is often at the center of outdoor education debate on our validity as a field (Gass & Seaman, 2012). If nature connection and reciprocity only exist in the field away from home, then we are not truly reaching our overarching goal of reciprocity to change individual relationships with nature. What is needed is a trail between the outdoor education environments and home environments that connects the learning that happened in the field to contexts within the home environment. Gass (1999) argues that we must be transfer-oriented in the development and facilitation of our programs. He argues that one of the ten factors that promotes transfer is follow-up. However, how many organizations have follow-up with participants as an integral part of their programs? As making habits easy requires support and accountability and making habits rewarding requires reflection on the benefits being experienced, follow-up is integral to the process of transferring pathways practices to habits of connection in the home environment. If outdoor education is going to claim that transferable skills and practices are what is offered to participants, then we must actually see and hear how, why, and when they use the practices they have learned on course in their daily lives.
Following Up
As habits require stable context cues to be successful, there is a need to link habits of nature connection created in outdoor recreation and education contexts to cues within the home environment (Fiorella, 2020). As 72% of the American public uses social media (Pew Research Center, 2021), all program types can promote social media challenges, or other types of outreach, to engage their viewers, followers, or partners in activities, challenges, and accountability reflections leading to nature connection. This could be especially beneficial as a re-entry activity following wilderness-based courses. In addition, this could look like creating a habits of connection re-entry/transfer reflection packet or program for students. This would include a list of primers, or examples of nature connection behaviors that were practiced within the outdoor education context, visualization and accountability practices that focus on the cues of time, location, preceding events, emotional states, and other people in the home environment that might act as triggers for behaviors (Clear, 2018), and reflection questions that focus on the benefits derived from engaging with the nature connection behaviors. If outdoor recreation introduces students to a relationship with nature, then the role of outdoor education is to broaden and expand that relationship through meaningful reflection (Høyem, 2020). By following up with participants, transfer can transform from a question to an answer as behaviors learned in outdoor education programs become automatic habits within home contexts.
Limitations
This paper is intended for outdoor educators and facilitators across the outdoor industry. As people who work with and in the outdoor industry, and specifically the outdoor education sector, we come from and educate folks from a wide variety of backgrounds, demographics, and individual and collective cultures. This paper focuses on a narrow cultural scope of the Western and colonial view of nature. It aims to address the specific problems and practices that stem from this view. This paper seeks to address issues arising from a Eurocentric cultural framework where humans and our broader biotic community have an asymmetrical relationship (Bang et al., 2007). This approach is an attempt to develop an ecological orientation that promotes symmetry, or reciprocity, in the human-nature relationship, for students that have grown up with an asymmetrical relationship and belief structure with nature. It is an attempt to consciously change overarching Eurocentric belief structures through habit change, that might not be appropriate for students that come from a different cultural perspective where the human-nature relationship is fundamental as opposed to abstract. This paper focuses on habit change as a back-door approach to changing current belief structures that promote harmful environmental behaviors. As such, this paper might not be transferable to educators and participants or students that come from different cultural value and belief structures. As connection is inherently a personal experience, it is best to cater practices to the individual and group with whom you are working.
Future Research
Future research can look at effectiveness of various activities and progressions of nature connection habits on beliefs and actions related to reciprocity. Research could be conducted to address what pro-environmental behaviors are linked to which pathways of nature connection. Research may address how the human-nature relationship may change when reflection is used to facilitate activities across the spectrum of nature as the background to an activity to when nature is fore-grounded in the activity. Specific attention can be placed on measuring which pathway has the strongest overall causation of pro-environmental behavior. In addition, future research can look at how developing a social media challenge post wilderness-based courses or other programs promotes nature connection in students’ hometowns. As transfer packets or re-entry facilitation is suggested within the scope of this paper, future research should study the effect of various methods of follow-up with participants post outdoor education experiences. Research should address different methods of reflection and their effectiveness in altering ecological orientation or behavioral practice. Research can also investigate the effectiveness of having a follow-up program to ensure transfer of nature connection habits, as well as what components of a follow up program are most beneficial to overall transfer. Overall, future research is needed to ground suggestions in institutional practice and outcomes.
Conclusion
The ecological crisis, and the human health crisis by extension, are nothing more than a crisis of relationship. As our beliefs shape our experiences, and our experiences reinforce our beliefs, certain beliefs about the natural world have led to our current experience of the climate crisis. Albert Einstein suggests that “no problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.” Therefore, there is a need to change consciousness by changing the belief that we are not separate from, but rather inseparable from nature. As sustainability still speaks of nature and the environment simply as a resource, it cannot be our savior. To change our external experience, there is a need to change our internal belief of being separate from to being inseparable from nature. This is the belief of nature connection, of reciprocity. Nature connection is the single greatest predictor of pro-environmental and pro-conservation behaviors, as well as eudemonic well-being. To change our beliefs, we must change our behaviors, or habits, to promote nature connection. This is done through engaging with the five pathways of nature connection: senses, emotions, beauty, meaning, and compassion (Lumber, 2016; Lumber et al., 2017; Richardson et al., 2020a; Richardson et al., 2020b). By shifting programmatic focus away from educational and contact activities towards nature connection activities and reflections, outdoor educators and leaders can be catalysts for the revolution of reciprocity. By making follow-up with participants integral to programmatic structure, transfer can transform from a question to an answer as behaviors learned in outdoor education programs become automatic habits within home contexts. Aligning programmatic factors with the pathways to nature connection allows outdoor educators to no longer hope for, but rather make outcomes of health and well-being, pro-environmental behaviors, and pro-conservation behaviors inevitable. The climate crisis mountain is steep and rugged, but it is just like every other mountain we have ever climbed. It does not require big, daring feats, but rather small, simple steps through changes in daily habits. We will climb this mountain just like we have climbed every other: one step at a time.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article
ORCID iD
Bruce Martin https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0187-3236
References
Abram D. (1996). The spell of the sensuous: Perception and language in a more-than-human world. Vintage Books.
Bang M., Medin D. L., Atran S. (2007). Cultural mosaics and mental models of nature. PNAS, 104(35), 13868–13874. www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.0706627104
Berrara L. F., Sotelo-Castillo M. A., Echeverría-Castro S. B., Tapia-Fonllem C. O. (2020). Connectedness to nature: Its impact on sustainable behaviors and happiness in children. Frontiers in Psychology, 11(276), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00276
Carden L., Wood W. (2018). Habit formation and change. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 20, 117–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2017.12.009
Cho R. (2020, December 16). How buying stuff drives climate change. Columbia Climate School. https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2020/12/16/buying-stuff-drives-climate-change/.
Clear J. (2018). Atomic habits: An easy and proven way to build good habits and break bad ones. Penguin Random House. https://icrrd.com/media/01-11-2020-043223Atomic%20Habits%20-%20James%20Clear.pdf.
Denchak M., Turrentine J. (2021, September 1). Global climate change: What you need to know. NRDC. https://www.nrdc.org/stories/global-climate-change-what-you-need-know.
Deringer S. A., Hanley A. W., Hodges J. S., Griffin L. K. (2020). Improving ecological behavior in outdoor recreation through mindfulness interventions: A mixed methods inquiry. Journal of Outdoor Recreation. Education, and Leadership, 12(2), 149–163. https://doi.org/10.18666/JOREL-2020-V12-12-9802
Duhigg C. (2016). Smarter, faster, better: The transformative power of real productivity. Random House Publishing Group. 9780812983593.
Ellsmoor J. (2019, July 23). 77% of people want to learn how to live more sustainably. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesellsmoor/2019/07/23/77-of-people-want-to-learn-how-to-live-moresustainably/?sh=9c1dea82b011
EPA. (2019). Report on the environment: Sustainability. EPA. https://cfpub.epa.gov/roe/chapter/sustain/index.cfm.
Fiorella L. (2020). The science of habit and its implications for student learning and well-being. Educational Psychology Review, 32, 603–625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09525-1
Gambrel J. C., Cafaro P. (2010). The virtue of simplicity. Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Ethics, 23, 85–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-009-9187-0
Gass M. (1999). Transfer of learning in adventure programming. In Miles J. C., Priest S. (Eds.), Adventure programming (pp. 227–234). Venture Publishing.
Gass M., Seaman J. (2012). Programming the transfer of learning in adventure education: An update. In Martin B., Wagstaff M. (Eds.), Controversial issues in adventure programming (pp. 31–38). Human Kinetics.
Ghaly M., Teplitz D. (2004). The biologic effects of grounding the human body during sleep as measure by cortisol levels and subject reporting of sleep, pain, and stress. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 10(5), 767–776. https://doi.org/10.1089/acm.2004.10.767
Godbey G. (2009). Outdoor recreation, health, and wellness: Understanding and enhancing the relationship. Resources for the Future. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1408694#
Høyem J. (2020). Outdoor recreation and environmentally responsible behavior. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 31, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2020.100317
Kellert S. R., Wilson E. O. (1993). The biophilia hypothesis. Island Press.
Linder N., Giusti M., Samuelsson K., Barthel S. (2021). Pro-environmental habits: An underexplored research agenda in sustainability science. Kungl Vetenskps Akademien: The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-021-01619-6
Lumber R. (2016). Contact, emotion, meaning, compassion, and beauty as pathways to nature connectedness [Dissertation]. University of Derby. https://derby.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10545/621530/Thesis%20Final%20Version%20Copyright%20Cleared.pdf?sequence = 6&isAllowed = y.
Lumber R., Richardson M., Sheffield D. (2017). Beyond knowing nature: Contact, emotion, compassion, meaning, and beauty. PLOS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177186
Lutz T., Srogi L. (2010). A values framework for students to develop thoughtful attitudes about citizenship and stewardship. Journal of Geoscience Education, 58(1), 14–20. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1164602.pdf
Martin B., Bright A., Cafaro P., Mittelstaedt R., Bruyere B. (2009). Assessing the development of environmental virtue in 7th and 8th grade students in an expeditionary learning outward bound school. Journal of Experiential Education, 31(3), 341–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/105382590803100303
Martina L., White M. P., Hunt A., Richardson M., Pahl S., Burta J. (2020). Nature contact, nature connectedness and associations with health, wellbeing and pro-environmental behaviours. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 68, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101389
Morgenstern S., Peters C. (2021). Become a health coach. Health Coach Institute. https://utility-thelearninghub.empowerededu.org/dashboard.
National Trust (2020). Nature and me. http://ncxrg.wp.derby.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/28/2021/04/NatureMe-Booklet-2021.pdf.
Oschman J. L., Chevalier G., Brown R. (2015). The effects of grounding (earthing) on inflammation, the immune response, wound healing, and prevention and treatment of chronic inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. Journal of Inflammation Research, 8, 83–96. https://doi.org10.2147/JIR.S69656
Outdoor Foundation (2021). 2021 outdoor participation trends report. Outdoor Foundation. https://ip0o6y1ji424m0641msgjlfy-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/2021-Outdoor-Participation-Trends-Report.pdf.
Pew Research Center (2021, April 7). Social media fact sheet. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/social-media/.
Pirchio S., Passiatore Y., Panno A., Cipparone M., Carrus G. (2021). The effects of contact with nature during outdoor environmental education on students’ wellbeing, connectedness to nature and pro-sociality. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.648458
Reese R. F. (2021, April 20). EcoWellness: Optimizing time outdoors. OSU Cascades Science Pub. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v = KGUcb7zPPYM&t = 907s.
Richardson M., Cormack A., McRobert L., Underhill R. (2016). 30 Days wild: Development and evaluation of a large-scale nature engagement campaign to improve well-being. PLOS One, 11(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149777
Richardson M., Dobson J., Abson D. J., Lumber R., Hunt R., Young B., Moorhouse B. (2020a). Applying the pathways to nature connectedness at a societal scale: A leverage points perspective. Ecosystems and People, 16(1), 387–401. https://doi.org/10.1080/26395916.2020.1844296
Richardson M., Passmore H., Barbett L., Lumber R., Thomas R., Hunt A. (2020b). The green care code: How nature connectedness and simple activities help explain pro-nature conservation behaviours. People and Nature, 2, 821–839. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10117
Society for Personality and Social Psychology (2014, August 8). How we form habits, change existing ones. ScienceDaily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/08/140808111931.htm.
Stuckey P. (2015). Breathing in, breathing out: The biological foundation for sustainable economic and social life. Journal of Sustainability Education, 9, 1–22. http://www.jsedimensions.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/PDF-Stuckey-JSE-March-2015-Love-Issue.pdf
Tam K. (2013). Concepts and measures related to connection to nature: Similarities and differences. Journal of Environmental Psychology, (34), 64–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.01.004
Tam K., Chan H. (2017). Environmental concern has a weaker association with pro-environmental behavior in some societies than others: A cross-cultural psychology perspective. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 53, 213–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2017.0
University of Derby (2021). Nature connectedness research group. University of Derby. https://www.derby.ac.uk/research/centres-groups/nature-connectedness-research-group/.
Whitburn J., Linklater W., Abrahamse W. (2019). Meta-analysis of human connection to nature and proenvironmental behavior. Conservation Biology, 34(1), 180–193. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13381
Wolsko C., Lindberg K. (2013). Experiencing connection with nature: The matrix of psychological well-being, mindfulness, and outdoor recreation. Ecopsychology, 5(2), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2013.0008
Zylstra M. J., Knight A. T., Esler K. J., Le Grange L. L. L. (2014). Connectedness as a core conservation concern: An interdisciplinary review of theory and a call for practice. Springer Science Reviews, 2, 119–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40362-014-0021-3
Biographies
Maggie Wise is a recent graduate of Ohio University with a Master of Science in Parks, Recreation, and Leisure Studies with a concentration in Outdoor Recreation and Education. Her research interests are at the intersection of personal growth and transformation, health and well-being, and outdoor recreation, with an emphasis on our personal and collective relationships with nature. She personally experiences this intersection through the pursuits of thru-hiking and ultra-running. Future research and academic interests include studying the transitional and personal integration process of thru-hikers post hike.
Bruce Martin is a Professor of Parks, Recreation, and Leisure Studies at Ohio University whose teaching and research interests are focused primarily on the practice of outdoor leadership and psychosocial processes and outcomes related to outdoor adventure programming.
Andrew Szolosi is an Associate Professor of Parks, Recreation, and Leisure Studies at Ohio University. His major research interests include restorative environments and the effect that certain types of human-nature interactions can have on individuals’ cognitive capacity.
Tamarine Foreman is an Associate Professor of Counselor Education at Ohio University. Her research is centered on understanding the impact of working with people who have experienced trauma by examining vicarious traumatization and posttraumatic growth with the goals of illuminating these processes, inspiring wellness, and supporting the developmental journey of counselors and helping professionals.
