How to foster kinship with nature to tackle the planetary environmental crisis?
We invited a member of the Leading Through Storms community, Professor Tom Oliver, to write a piece that explores - from his perspective as a cutting-edge ecologist - some of our central themes such as ‘othering’ and ‘who do I take myself to be?’ whilst building on Simon Cooper’s ‘leverage points’ blog.
If you are keen to exercise your curiosity and inquire further, with others, after reading this blog please join us on 16th September for our first Monthly Monday after the summer.
~
‘Earthrise’ – a photograph of Earth taken from lunar orbit by astronaut William Anders during the Apollo 8 mission on Christmas Eve 1968 – has been described as "the most influential environmental photograph ever taken”, with some crediting its appearance with the beginning of the environmental movement. Further prompted by seminal environmental works in the 1960s, such as author Rachel Carson’s book Silent Spring, a cultural shift seemed to be occurring from the hubris of infinite growth to perceiving how all humanity exists together on a fragile and finite planet.
As Michael Collins, one of the three astronauts on the historic Apollo 11 mission to the moon in 1969, described:
“The thing that really surprised me was that it [Earth] projected an air of fragility. And why, I don't know. I don't know to this day. I had a feeling it's tiny, it's shiny, it's beautiful, it's home, and it's fragile.”
The original ‘Earthrise’ photo taken by the Apollo 8 crew (source Wikipedia).
Such cultural shifts in the way we see ourselves in relation to the planetary environment are hugely important for environmental protection. Donella Meadows, a seminal systems thinker, once described ‘deep leverage points’ for systems change as being the paradigms, worldviews and goals in society. These are inevitably tricky to shift and mainstream efforts in environmentalism to date have tended to neglect these. Instead there is greater focus on economic fixes such as attempting to price nature into business decisions, or technological fixes such as putting aerosols or mirrors into space to reduce global heating (which could have major side effects). Yet, as the global environmental crisis worsens, there is greater recognition of the need for cultural change to address root causes, and we now stand at a key moment of opportunity.
Changing paradigms for human-nature relationships in the 21st Century
We are arguably in the midst of a new transformation in our human relationship with nature. A growing body of both fiction and non-fiction literature is beginning to acknowledge cooperation and symbiosis, as opposed to only competition, as fundamental organising principles for life on this planet. For our human interactions with ecosystems, there is growing recognition of the limits of an instrumentalist approach where we value nature only in terms of what it does for us, and an openness to embracing other relational and intrinsic values (i.e. emphasising how we live with and as part of nature). These values have long existed in traditional indigenous cultures around the world, and are now being explicitly recognised in major international science-policy assessments (such as the IPBES Values Assessment). Major environmental organisations are now re-orienting their efforts to focus on mindsets and worldviews (i.e. deeper cultural change), as a powerful leverage point for environmental sustainability.
Examples of the ’inflection point’ in environmental policy towards cultural change as a key solution space (source Psychology Today).
In my own work as an environmental scientist, I’ve been involved with several initiatives that follow this trend: one as a co-author on a report led by the UN Development programme outlining the theory behind inner change as an essential element for food system transformation, another by the Joint Research Centre (JRC) Europe detailing how radical reappraisal of our self-identity and relationship with nature is necessary for a successful bioeconomy strategy. A third was as a reviewer for a seminal report by the European Environment Agency (EEA), an influential body who, along with the JRC, are instrumental in informing environmental policy for 32 member countries.
The EEA report is titled “Exiting the Anthropocene? Exploring fundamental change in our relationship with nature” and it details how, despite a growing awareness of biodiversity loss over decades, we still lack effective solutions. A root cause of environmental problems, the EEA state, is the dualistic ‘us and them’ thinking that is at core of the Anthropocene. For example, treatment of other species as type of ‘natural capital’ can have perverse outcomes. It fails to tackle the consumer-driven mindsets that are the root cause of environmental degradation and, furthermore, using a language of commodification (i.e the now-common framing of nature as simply a set of assets), encourages psychological distancing and reduces pro-environmental attitudes and behaviours. The EEA argues we should instead move to a relational concept of ‘all of us’ to unlock new motivations to protect biodiversity, rooted in a wider sense of responsibility. In all this there is also an important role for ethics in understanding how to balance a healthy plurality of worldviews, while addressing behaviours that are harmful to society.
Frontispiece to a seminal 2023 sustainability report indicating the crucial role of cultural change (source: EEA)
Cultivating a ‘nature-centric’ perspective
A nature-centric perspective is one where we see humans as being on a par with other species, fostering a sense of kinship where we deeply appreciate a more equal connection to nature and appreciating its intrinsic value. This is opposed to anthropocentrism, which sees humans as exceptional and ‘above’ other species. Importantly, a nature-centric perspective and a sense of connection to nature is associated with increased pro-environmental and pro-social behaviours, i.e. people holding such worldviews are more likely to recycle, reduce their carbon footprint, join conservation groups and vote on environmental issues.
A novel but critical and timely question therefore is what are the catalysing factors for enhancing a ‘nature-centric’ perspective across society? Despite its crucial importance, the answer to this question is lacking, with disparate primary research fragmented across many fields.
As a consequence, I have reoriented my career to engage on a new initiative (‘The Nature Dialogues’), with a wide set of interdisciplinary academic partners and input from lay persons, to bring together evidence for how we can create cultural transformation to dispel the delusion of our separation from nature. The hope is that this will open new avenues to restore our relationship with nature and enable new governance approaches for a thriving natural world.
Evidence-based approaches to accelerate transformation towards nature-centrism
The question that drives me in this new initiative is ‘can we identify potential developmental programmes that will be most effective in enabling the acceleration of nature-centric awareness in both policy makers and wider society’? We will be exploring the following research areas, which have scientific support for leading to psychological states where the self-concept is seen as more interdependent with nature, i.e. where the boundaries of our small ego dissolve and we feel connected to nature:
1. Meditation: Combined analysis of multiple studies (‘meta-analyses’) evidence how meditation literally rewires our brains, increasing the degree of empathy we feel towards other people and other species. Frequent meditation downregulates the ‘default mode network’ in the brain which is responsible for self-rumination (and anxiety). This weakens our sense of being an atomised ego competing against others in the world and makes us feel a greater sense of collective identity with other people and other species.
2. Nature engagement activities: Actively noticing nature through activities such as painting or bird watching, or just being mindful of the natural world around us is found to promote health, wellbeing and pro-environmental behaviours. Similarly, when we experience awe in nature– encountering something vast and incomprehensible, it diminishes the sense of self and shifts attention away from individual interests and concerns. This means experiencing awe can making us more compassionate and kind.
3. Sage use of psychedelics: There is now a substantial science behind the value of psychedelic drugs in therapies for problems such as depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). Clinical trials show that single well-facilitated interventions can have far more effectiveness on these psychological diseases then extended courses of other (potentially harmful) drugs, such as prescription anti-depressants. Psychedelics such as psilocybin (found in magic mushrooms) and LSD increase emotional empathy, with similar effects from Ayahuasca persisting days after trials. Like the experience of awe and meditation, psychedelics deactivate the default mode network in the brain, leading to feelings of common humanity and kinship with other species, perceiving fewer distinctions between us and others.
4. Immersive virtual/augmented reality: Although getting back to nature does not rely heavily on technology, there may be ways to use technologies such as virtual reality to assist with the development of a nature-centric perspective. Studies have shown the multisensory digital environments can increase nature connectedness and at least temporarily shift perspectives leading to pro-environmental behaviour.
Therefore, there is credible evidence for many possible leverage points to increase nature-centric awareness. Yet, a novel, unanswered question is what combinations of practices would be most effective to accelerate this transformation in individuals and wider society? An exciting new frontier, which we will explore in the Natures Dialogues initiative is how combinations of the above practices could create an effective developmental pathway for shifting individuals towards a biocentric perspective, and ultimately catalysing wider cultural change towards sustainability.
Questions I’m left with include:
· Are there other approaches/practices with good evidence for shifting mindsets towards a nature-centric perspective?
· How can the risks as well as the benefits of these approaches be taken into account in their research and application?
· What can we learn from indigenous cultures about nature-centrism; bearing in mind that we cannot ‘go back’ to historical states, and need solutions that fit a modern context?
· What are the ethical implications of trying to create a cultural shift in society? Can a focus on psychological development adequately avert criticisms of manipulation and ‘brainwashing’?
· How can we nurture progressive cultural change in the face of the growing polycrisis? In the face of adversity can we ‘carry through’ the seeds of a new nature-centric civilisation?
What do you think? I invite you to comment below, and / or to join the discussion at the Monthly Monday on September 16th 2024.
[And, you might be interested in Tom’s earlier book on ‘self’: The Self Delusion — Leading Through Storms]