Research papers tend to be on the boring side, but this is an exception.
The 2019 paper "Is nature relatedness a basic human psychological need? A critical examination of the extant literature" is by Baxter (a son of the late David Baxter) and Pelletier. The paper examines the hypothesis that humans have a basic psychological need for nature relatedness. The authors review the existing literature on the topic and conclude that there is strong evidence to support this hypothesis.
The authors define nature relatedness as the feeling of connection to nature, the sense of being part of something larger than oneself, and the appreciation of the natural world. They argue that this need is basic because it is essential for human well-being.
The authors review research that shows that nature relatedness is associated with a number of positive outcomes, including:
In addition to the research cited by Baxter and Pelletier, there is a growing body of evidence that supports the idea that nature relatedness is a basic human psychological need. For example, a study by Zelenski and Nisbet (2014) found that people who had a stronger connection to nature were more likely to report feeling happy, healthy, and connected to others. Another study by Berman et al. (2009) found that spending time in nature can reduce stress and improve cognitive function.
The research on nature relatedness is still in its early stages, but the evidence to date suggests that it is an important factor in human well-being. As more research is conducted, it is likely that we will learn even more about the benefits of connecting with nature.
-------------
Baxter, D. E., & Pelletier, L. G. (2019). Is nature relatedness a basic human psychological need? A critical examination of the extant literature. Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne, 60(1), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000145
The objective of this paper is to use previous conceptualisations of basic psychological needs, and the criteria proposed by Baumeister and Leary (1995) and Sheldon (2011) to critically examine whether enough evidence exists to support this proposition. Research from diverse research areas are reviewed, with conclusions drawn for each criterion as well as for the overall literature. In general, research supports the proposition for a basic psychological need for nature relatedness, with stronger evidence pointing to the idea of this as a need-as-requirement than a need-as-motive, though both are well-evidenced.
The 2019 paper "Is nature relatedness a basic human psychological need? A critical examination of the extant literature" is by Baxter (a son of the late David Baxter) and Pelletier. The paper examines the hypothesis that humans have a basic psychological need for nature relatedness. The authors review the existing literature on the topic and conclude that there is strong evidence to support this hypothesis.
The authors define nature relatedness as the feeling of connection to nature, the sense of being part of something larger than oneself, and the appreciation of the natural world. They argue that this need is basic because it is essential for human well-being.
The authors review research that shows that nature relatedness is associated with a number of positive outcomes, including:
- Reduced stress and anxiety
- Increased positive emotions
- Improved physical health
- Enhanced cognitive function
- Greater sense of belonging and community
- Increased self-esteem and self-efficacy
- Reduced aggression and violence
- Increased prosocial behavior
- Spending time in nature
- Engaging in nature-based activities
- Learning about the natural world
- Connecting with other people who value nature
In addition to the research cited by Baxter and Pelletier, there is a growing body of evidence that supports the idea that nature relatedness is a basic human psychological need. For example, a study by Zelenski and Nisbet (2014) found that people who had a stronger connection to nature were more likely to report feeling happy, healthy, and connected to others. Another study by Berman et al. (2009) found that spending time in nature can reduce stress and improve cognitive function.
The research on nature relatedness is still in its early stages, but the evidence to date suggests that it is an important factor in human well-being. As more research is conducted, it is likely that we will learn even more about the benefits of connecting with nature.
-------------
Baxter, D. E., & Pelletier, L. G. (2019). Is nature relatedness a basic human psychological need? A critical examination of the extant literature. Canadian Psychology / Psychologie canadienne, 60(1), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000145
Abstract
Most of the world’s population in developed regions lives in urban areas, with this proportion growing annually. A key question regarding this trend is the effects that reduced contact with nature may have on human well-being and functioning. In this paper, we propose to evaluate, using the empirical literature, the hypothesis that human beings have a basic psychological need for nature relatedness. This proposition could have positive benefits for human well-being, the way we design human environments and communities, and the natural environment itself if properly evidenced; however, to date, no article has evaluated the extant literature for such a purpose.The objective of this paper is to use previous conceptualisations of basic psychological needs, and the criteria proposed by Baumeister and Leary (1995) and Sheldon (2011) to critically examine whether enough evidence exists to support this proposition. Research from diverse research areas are reviewed, with conclusions drawn for each criterion as well as for the overall literature. In general, research supports the proposition for a basic psychological need for nature relatedness, with stronger evidence pointing to the idea of this as a need-as-requirement than a need-as-motive, though both are well-evidenced.
