Reclaiming a Lost Kinship
Part 1: Why Nature Connection Matters for Mental Health
Adapted from thesis research on biophilia, psychological restoration, and values-based orientation in ecological contexts, this is the first in a four part series.
In contemporary psychological discourse, there is growing recognition that human wellbeing is shaped not only by interpersonal and intrapsychic dynamics, but also by our relationship with the natural world. Despite this, the concept of nature connection remains peripheral in many clinical frameworks, often treated as a lifestyle preference rather than a therapeutic process.
This article draws on interdisciplinary research, including emerging work in ecopsychology and environmental psychology, to examine the psychological relevance of nature connection. It outlines key theoretical underpinnings and clinical implications, with a view to integrating environmental context into mental health care particularly during times of disconnection, disorientation, or emotional depletion.
Nature Connection as Relational and Regulating
Nature connection can be defined as an emotional, cognitive, and embodied relationship with the non-human world. It reflects a subjective sense of affinity, belonging, and attentional attunement to natural environments (Mayer & Frantz, 2004). Importantly, this connection is not simply a by-product of time spent outdoors, but a relational and meaning-based experience that supports affective modulation and cognitive flexibility.
The restorative effects of nature have been explored extensively through Attention Restoration Theory (Kaplan, 1995), which posits that natural environments evoke “soft fascination” a type of effortless attention that facilitates recovery from cognitive fatigue. This is particularly relevant in the context of digital saturation and environmental stress, where attentional depletion is a common feature of distress presentations.
Physiological studies have also demonstrated that even brief nature exposure is associated with measurable reductions in stress markers, such as cortisol levels and heart rate (Ulrich et al., 1991). These findings are consistent with broader ecological frameworks that position nature connection as a psychologically and biologically coherent response to environmental engagement (Clayton, 2017).
Disorientation and the “Old World / New World” Model
Psychological distress frequently arises during transitional periods in which previous frameworks for meaning no longer apply. This includes bereavement, illness, trauma, or significant role changes. Padesky’s (2012) “Old World / New World” model describes this process as one in which individuals are suspended between familiar internal landscapes and a new reality that is not yet integrated.
Nature connection may offer stabilising input during these periods of disorientation. It provides continuity, sensory grounding, and a relational frame that exists outside the constraints of language or performance. Ecological rhythms seasonal transitions, daylight cycles, and natural movement can support clients to orient physiologically and psychologically without demanding resolution.
Nature connection also supports access to biophilic responses, innate affiliative tendencies toward the natural world, which are associated with emotion regulation, value activation, and perspective broadening (Saleeba, 2021).
Integration into Psychological Practice
Nature connection is consistent with the principles of several existing therapeutic frameworks. In Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), for instance, the processes of present-moment awareness, defusion, and values-based action can be supported through environmental engagement (Hayes et al., 2012). Schema Therapy similarly recognises the role of corrective sensory experience in reactivating adaptive modes such as the Contented Child or Healthy Adult.
Nature-based practices need not involve outdoor therapy. Clinicians may begin by exploring clients’ relationship to natural environments and identifying small, feasible ways of enhancing awareness. Symbolic, aesthetic, or metaphorical references to nature can also be therapeutically relevant, particularly for clients who feel disengaged from verbal processing or self-reflection.
Clinical Considerations
Nature connection is not a prescriptive technique but a contextual resource. It is best understood not as a treatment protocol but as an environmental factor that can support psychological functioning across multiple dimensions. Its utility may be particularly evident for individuals experiencing emotional overload, cognitive fatigue, or existential disruption.
Clinicians may wish to consider:
Exploring clients’ personal experiences of calm or orientation in natural settings
Using nature metaphors to scaffold therapeutic reflection
Encouraging present-moment sensory engagement outdoors or through nature-based stimuli
Integrating environmental values into identity or purpose-oriented work
Conclusion
Nature connection offers a viable and under-utilised complement to conventional mental health approaches. It provides access to regulation, orientation, and values-based reflection, especially in times of uncertainty. Recognising its role does not require abandoning clinical frameworks it simply requires widening them.
Suggested Practice Prompt
Invite clients to reflect on a time they felt steadier or more psychologically spacious in a natural setting. What elements contributed to that experience? What might be replicable?
References
Clayton, S. (2017). Nature and psychological well-being. In L. Bruni & S. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of well-being. DEF Publishers.
Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K. D., & Wilson, K. G. (2012). Acceptance and commitment therapy: The process and practice of mindful change (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 169–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-4944(95)90001-2
Mayer, F. S., & Frantz, C. M. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(4), 503–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.10.001
Padesky, C. A. (2012). [Conference presentation]. British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies.
Saleeba, M. (2021). Combatting the climate crisis: Cueing threat perception and biophilia to trigger intended pro-environmental behaviour (Thesis, Murdoch University). Murdoch University Research Repository.
Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A., & Zelson, M. (1991). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11(3), 201–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80184-7