Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Perspective
  • Published:

Towards a unified understanding of human–nature interactions

Nature Sustainability volume 5, pages 374–383 (2022)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Interest in the direct interactions between individual people and nature has grown rapidly. This attention encompasses multiple academic disciplines and practical perspectives. A central challenge thus lies in creating a rich cross-disciplinary understanding of these interactions, rather than one that might become characterized by little conceptual, terminological and methodological unity. Here, to facilitate the former outcome, we bring together concepts and theories about direct human–nature interactions drawn from diverse disciplines within a unified conceptual framework. Using this framework, we discuss the linkages among key concepts and theories, identify important knowledge gaps and suggest directions for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Examples of direct sensory interactions with nature.
Fig. 2: A unified conceptual framework for understanding the dynamics of direct human–nature interactions.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gaston, K. J. et al. Personalised ecology. Trends Ecol. Evol. 33, 916–925 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Soga, M. & Gaston, K. J. The ecology of human–nature interactions. Proc. R. Soc. B 287, 20191882 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Leong, M., Dunn, R. R. & Trautwein, M. D. Biodiversity and socioeconomics in the city: a review of the luxury effect. Biol. Lett. 14, 20180082 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Mace, G. M. Whose conservation? Science 345, 1558–1560 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Soga, M. & Gaston, K. J. Extinction of experience: the loss of human–nature interactions. Front. Ecol. Environ. 14, 94–101 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hartig, T., Mitchell, R., De Vries, S. & Frumkin, H. Nature and health. Annu. Rev. Public Health 35, 207–228 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chippaux, J. P. Incidence and mortality due to snakebite in the Americas. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 11, e0005662 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Markevych, I. et al. Exploring pathways linking greenspace to health: theoretical and methodological guidance. Environ. Res. 158, 301–317 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bratman, G. N. et al. Nature and mental health: an ecosystem service perspective. Sci. Adv. 5, eaax0903 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Marselle, M. R. et al. Pathways linking biodiversity to human health: a conceptual framework. Environ. Int. 150, 106420 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Hanski, I. et al. Environmental biodiversity, human microbiota, and allergy are interrelated. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 8334–8339 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Rook, G. A. Regulation of the immune system by biodiversity from the natural environment: an ecosystem service essential to health. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 18360–18367 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Tzoulas, K. et al. Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using Green Infrastructure: a literature review. Landsc. Urban Plann. 81, 167–178 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Balmford, A. et al. A global perspective on trends in nature-based tourism. PLoS Biol. 7, e1000144 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Nisbet, E. K., Zelenski, J. M. & Murphy, S. A. The nature relatedness scale: linking individuals’ connection with nature to environmental concern and behavior. Environ. Behav. 41, 715–740 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chawla, L. Childhood nature connection and constructive hope: a review of research on connecting with nature and coping with environmental loss. People Nat. 2, 619–642 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Shanahan, D. F. et al. Nature-based interventions for improving health and wellbeing: the purpose, the people and the outcomes. Sports 7, 141 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Chapman, B. K. & McPhee, D. Global shark attack hotspots: identifying underlying factors behind increased unprovoked shark bite incidence. Ocean Coast. Manag. 133, 72–84 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Penteriani, V. et al. Human behaviour can trigger large carnivore attacks in developed countries. Sci. Rep. 6, 20552 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Ives, C. D. et al. Reconnecting with nature for sustainability. Sustain. Sci. 13, 1389–1397 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cox, D. T. C. & Gaston, K. J. Human-nature interactions and the consequences and drivers of provisioning wildlife. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 373, 20170092 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Michie, S., Van Stralen, M. M. & West, R. The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implement. Sci. 6, 42 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Soga, M., Evans, M. J., Cox, D. T. & Gaston, K. J. Impacts of the COVID‐19 pandemic on human–nature interactions: pathways, evidence and implications. People Nat. 3, 518–527 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Shaw, L. M., Chamberlain, D. & Evans, M. The house sparrow Passer domesticus in urban areas: reviewing a possible link between post-decline distribution and human socioeconomic status. J. Ornith. 149, 293–299 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Gaston, K. J. & Evans, K. L. Birds and people in Europe. Proc. R. Soc. B 271, 1649–1655 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Soga, M. & Gaston, K. J. Shifting baseline syndrome: causes, consequences, and implications. Front. Ecol. Environ. 16, 222–230 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Pauly, D. Anecdotes and the shifting baseline syndrome of fisheries. Trends Ecol. Evol. 10, 430 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Kellert, S. R. & Wilson, E. O. The Biophilia Hypothesis (Island, 1993).

  29. Balling, J. D. & Falk, J. H. Development of visual preference for natural environments. Environ. Behav. 14, 5–28 (1982).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Ulrich, R. S. in The Biophilia Hypothesis (eds Kelbert, S. R. & Wilson, E. O.) 73–137 (Island, 1993).

  31. Fukano, Y. & Soga, M. Why do so many modern people hate insects? The urbanization-disgust hypothesis. Sci. Total Environ. 777, 146229 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Pergams, O. R. & Zaradic, P. A. Is love of nature in the US becoming love of electronic media? 16-year downtrend in national park visits explained by watching movies, playing video games, internet use, and oil prices. J. Environ. Manag. 80, 387–393 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kesebir, S. & Kesebir, P. A growing disconnection from nature is evident in cultural products. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 12, 258–269 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Soga, M. et al. How can we mitigate against increasing biophobia among children during the extinction of experience? Biol. Conserv. 242, 108420 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Soga, M., Yamanoi, T., Tsuchiya, K., Koyanagi, T. F. & Kanai, T. What are the drivers of and barriers to children’s direct experiences of nature? Landsc. Urban Plann. 180, 114–120 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Pett, T. J., Shwartz, A., Irvine, K. N., Dallimer, M. & Davies, Z. G. Unpacking the people–biodiversity paradox: a conceptual framework. BioScience 66, 576–583 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Balding, M. & Williams, K. J. Plant blindness and the implications for plant conservation. Conserv. Biol. 30, 1192–1199 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Gerl, T., Randler, C. & Neuhaus, B. J. Vertebrate species knowledge: an important skill is threatened by extinction. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 43, 928–948 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Cheng, J. C. H. & Monroe, M. C. Connection to nature: children’s affective attitude toward nature. Environ. Behav. 44, 31–49 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Pyle, R. M. The Thunder Tree: Lessons from an Urban Wildland (Houghton Mifflin, 1993).

  41. Wells, N. M. & Lekies, K. S. Nature and the life course: pathways from childhood nature experiences to adult environmentalism. Child. Youth Environ 16, 41663 (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Wilson, E. O. in The Biophilia Hypothesis (Island, 1993).

  43. Nisbet, E. K., Zelenski, J. M. & Murphy, S. A. Happiness is in our nature: exploring nature relatedness as a contributor to subjective well-being. J. Happiness Stud. 12, 303–322 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Lin, B. B. et al. How green is your garden? Urban form and socio-demographic factors influence yard vegetation, visitation, and ecosystem service benefits. Landsc. Urban Plann. 157, 239–246 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Uitto, A., Juuti, K., Lavonen, J. & Meisalo, V. Students’ interest in biology and their out-of-school experiences. J. Biol. Educ. 40, 124–129 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Pretty, J. et al. Green exercise in the UK countryside: effects on health and psychological well-being, and implications for policy and planning. J. Environ. Plann. Manag. 50, 211–231 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Strachan, D. P. Family size, infection and atopy: the first decade of the ‘hygiene hypothesis’. Thorax 55, S2–S10 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Mills, J. G. et al. Urban habitat restoration provides a human health benefit through microbiome rewilding: the Microbiome Rewilding Hypothesis. Restor. Ecol. 25, 866–872 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Ulrich, R. S. et al. Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. J. Environ. Psychol. 11, 201–230 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Kaplan, R. & Kaplan, S. The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1989).

  51. Fuller, R. A., Irvine, K. N., Devine-Wright, P., Warren, P. H. & Gaston, K. J. Psychological benefits of greenspace increase with biodiversity. Biol. Lett. 3, 390–394 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Kuo, F. E. Nature-deficit disorder: evidence, dosage, and treatment. J. Policy Res. Tour. Leis. Events 5, 172–186 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Louv, R. Last Child in the Woods (Algonquin Books, 2005).

  54. Mygind, L. et al. Mental, physical and social health benefits of immersive nature-experience for children and adolescents: a systematic review and quality assessment of the evidence. Health Place 58, 102136 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Nyhus, P. J. Human–wildlife conflict and coexistence. Annu. Rev. Environ. Res. 41, 143–171 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. von Döhren, P. & Haase, D. Ecosystem disservices research: a review of the state of the art with a focus on cities. Ecol. Indic. 52, 490–497 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Geffroy, B., Samia, D. S., Bessa, E. & Blumstein, D. T. How nature-based tourism might increase prey vulnerability to predators. Trends Ecol. Evol. 30, 755–765 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Richardson, M. et al. The green care code: how nature connectedness and simple activities help explain pro‐nature conservation behaviours. People Nat. 2, 821–839 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Van der Wal, A. J., Schade, H. M., Krabbendam, L. & Van Vugt, M. Do natural landscapes reduce future discounting in humans? Proc. R. Soc. B 280, 20132295 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Zelenski, J. M., Dopko, R. L. & Capaldi, C. A. Cooperation is in our nature: nature exposure may promote cooperative and environmentally sustainable behavior. J. Environ. Psychol. 42, 24–31 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Barua, M., Bhagwat, S. A. & Jadhav, S. The hidden dimensions of human-wildlife conflict: health impacts, opportunity and transaction costs. Biol. Conserv. 157, 309–316 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to D. T. C. Cox, M. J. Evans, T. Kubo, C. McKinnon and M. J. Miller for comments on the manuscript. M.S. was supported by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (grant no. 20H04375), the Toyota Foundation (grant no. D19-R-0102), the Research Institute for Humanity and Nature (RIHN, a constituent member of NIHU): Feasibility Project (project no. 14200158) and the UTokyo Global Activity Support Program for Young Researchers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

    Masashi Soga

  2. Environment and Sustainability Institute, University of Exeter, Penryn, UK

    Kevin J. Gaston

Authors
  1. Masashi Soga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kevin J. Gaston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Both authors conceived the work, drafted and edited the manuscript, and approved the final version.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Masashi Soga.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review Information Nature Sustainability thanks Melissa Marselle, Kim-Pong Tam and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Soga, M., Gaston, K.J. Towards a unified understanding of human–nature interactions. Nat Sustain 5, 374–383 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00818-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00818-z

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing