Both frequency and diversity of childhood nature experiences are associated with self-reported pro-biodiversity behaviors in adulthood

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3291460/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Both frequency and diversity of childhood nature experiences are associated with self-reported pro-biodiversity behaviors in adulthood

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3291460/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

The ongoing degradation of Earth’s ecosystems through human activities poses a severe threat to biodiversity. To mitigate this crisis, substantial changes in human behavior are required. The frequency of nature experiences, particularly during childhood, has been established as a key predictor of actions that support biodiversity (hereafter, pro-biodiversity behaviors). However, the significance of the quality of these experiences remains poorly understood. In this study, we analyzed a large sample of Japanese adults and observed positive associations between both the frequency and diversity of nature experiences during childhood and increased pro-biodiversity behaviors. These associations held true across a range of behaviors, including the purchase of eco-friendly products, reduced use of pesticides in domestic gardens, and contributions to conservation organizations. Our findings indicate that the association between pro-biodiversity behaviors and the diversity of childhood nature experiences is comparable to that of the frequency of such experiences. These findings suggest that expanding people’s access to diverse and frequent nature experiences can play a crucial role in promoting positive behavioral changes to prevent biodiversity loss.

behavioral change

connection to nature

extinction of experience

human&ndash

nature interaction

urban greenspace

The continued loss of biodiversity due to human activities remains a pressing global concern in the 21st century (Cardinale et al., 2012;Ceballos et al., 2015). Mitigating and reversing this trend requires substantial changes to individual behavior (Balmford et al., 2021; Schultz, 2011). In fact, almost every activity undertaken by individuals has either a direct or an indirect impact on biodiversity. Such activities may range from simple acts like caring for wildlife in a domestic garden to more complex decisions such as purchasing eco-friendly products or supporting environmentally aligned political candidates (Balmford et al., 2021; Nielsen et al., 2021). Therefore, increasing the number of individuals who engage in actions that benefit biodiversity (hereafter, pro-biodiversity behavior) can have an enormous collective impact on the success of biodiversity conservation (Nielsen et al., 2021; Veríssimo, 2019).

As the importance of human behavior to environmental protection gains increasing recognition, researchers and governments are working to identify effective strategies for promoting positive actions towards the natural environment and biodiversity (IPBES 2019; Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, 2022). Determining the factors that predict an individual’s pro-biodiversity behaviors is the first step toward achieving this goal; the knowledge gained from such research will provide key information about what actions need to be taken to increase motivation and reduce barriers to positive behaviors. Many studies have explored this topic, and a variety of personal factors have been identified as important predictors of pro-environmental behavior, including place attachment (Daryanto & Song, 2021), social norms (Farrow et al., 2017), and ecological knowledge (Osman, 2014).

Direct experiences with nature are an important predictor of pro-biodiversity behaviors (Cooper et al., 2015; Prévot et al., 2018; Richardson et al., 2020; Richardson et al., 2020; Rosa et al., 2018; Soga & Gaston, 2023a). This idea stems from evidence that direct experiences with nature, especially during childhood, can shape positive emotions and attitudes towards nature (Cheng & Monroe, 2012; Hoover, 2021; Soga and Gaston 2016). Indeed, studies have shown that people who frequently participate in nature-based activities (e.g., visiting urban greenspace, birdwatching) are more likely to engage in positive actions towards biodiversity, such as purchasing environmentally friendly products, managing their gardens in a wildlife-friendly manner, and participating in conservation volunteering (e.g., Cooper et al., 2015; Prévot et al., 2018; Richardson et al., 2020; Rosa et al., 2018; Soga & Gaston, 2023a). As a result, it is often suggested that enhancing people’s experiences with nature can promote pro-biodiversity behaviors, leading to positive outcomes for biodiversity conservation (Soga & Gaston, 2022, 2023a).

Although previous studies have demonstrated that the quantity of nature experiences is an important predictor of self-reported pro-biodiversity behaviors, the importance of the quality of these experiences remains poorly understood. The quality of nature experiences may play a vital role in shaping individuals’ pro-biodiversity behaviors, because research has demonstrated that it can enhance people’s emotional connection to nature (Colléony et al., 2020; Hoover, 2021; Hosaka et al., 2017), which is a key driver of pro-biodiversity behaviors (Whitburn et al., 2020). Given that interventions aimed at enhancing the quality and quantity of nature experiences often differ, it is crucial that we understand how these two variables are linked to pro-biodiversity behavior. Whereas the quantity of nature experiences can be increased through greater exposure to nature, improving the quality of experiences requires changes in how people interact with nature. If the quality of nature experience as a predictor of pro-biodiversity behaviors is comparable to the quantity, then promoting quality could foster such behaviors without the need to increase quantity. This point is particularly relevant in the current era of global urbanization, where many people find it challenging to engage with nature frequently (Miller, 2005; Soga & Gaston, 2016).

Here, we sought to examine the relationship between the quantity and quality of nature experiences and self-reported pro-biodiversity behaviors among adults in Japan. In accordance with the method of Fleming and Shwartz (2023) we used the frequency and diversity of nature experiences an individual had during their childhood as indicators of the quantity and quality, respectively, of their nature experiences. Our analysis aimed to quantify the associations between the frequency and diversity of childhood nature experiences and the likelihood of adults adopting various pro-biodiversity behaviors.

Survey design

In October 2022 we conducted an online questionnaire survey in Japan. The survey included a total of 4000 participants (2000 females and 2000 males) between 20 and 39 years old. The participants were selected from all prefectures in Japan, ensuring proportional representation. The age range was chosen deliberately to minimize memory bias. The survey addressed four key topics: (1) self-reported pro-biodiversity behaviors, (2) frequency of childhood nature experiences, (3) diversity of childhood nature experiences, and (4) sociodemographic and personal information (Table 1). The study was approved by the ethics committee of the Graduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences at the University of Tokyo.

Table 1

List of variables obtained through our questionnaire.
Category and variable		Description	Scale
Pro-biodiversity behavior
	Likelihood of regularly adopting pro-biodiversity behavior	Participants were asked to report how frequently in the past year they had regularly adopted 18 major pro-biodiversity behaviors (see Table 2), by using a five-point Likert scale.	0: never; 1: rarely; 2: sometimes; 3: usually; 4: always
Nature experiences during childhood
	Frequency of nature experiences	Participants were asked to report how frequently they participated in nature experiences during childhood, by using a seven-point Likert scale.	0: never; 1: yearly; 2: quarterly; 3: monthly; 4: weekly; 5: almost daily; 6: daily
	Diversity of nature experiences	Participants were asked to report whether they had engaged in the following 15 nature-based activities during childhood: 1: tree climbing; 2: hiking; 3: observing or picking mushrooms; 4: playing in a river; 5: swimming in the sea; 6: observing aquatic organisms; 7: observing or picking wild plants; 8: planting a tree; 9: observing plants budding; 10: fishing, or catching or observing fish; 11: observing or catching insects; 12: bird watching; 13: picking and eating wild fruits; 14: sucking flower nectar; 15: smelling plants or flowers	Number of nature-based activities, ranging from 0 to 15
Sociodemographic and personal characteristics
	Age	–	Age in years (20 to 39 years)
	Gender	–	Female; Male
	Annual household income	–	1: less than ¥3,000,000; 2: Approximately ¥3,000,000–5,000,000; 3: Approximately ¥5,000,000–7,000,000; 4: Approximately ¥7,000,000–10,000,000; 5: Approximately ¥10,000,000–15,000,000; 6: more than ¥15,000,000

Self-reported pro-biodiversity behaviors

The survey included a set of 18 pro-biodiversity behaviors (Tables 1, 2), and participants were asked to indicate how frequently they had engaged in each behavior over the past year. These behaviors were chosen on the basis of a recent study conducted in Japan (Soga & Gaston, 2023a). That study compiled a list of pro-biodiversity behaviors that are accessible by, and feasible for, ordinary individuals in Japan (Table 2). Initially, in the current study, participants provided their self-reported levels of engagement on a five-point Likert scale, ranging from Never to Always (Table 1). Participants who reported not having encountered situations enabling them to perform specific pro-biodiversity behaviors within the past year were excluded from the analysis.

Table 2

List of the 18 pro-biodiversity behaviors considered in this study. They were classified into six categories: consumption, social, stewardship, advocacy, donation, and lifestyle.
Category	ID	Behavior
Consumption
	1	When buying products, choose environmentally friendly products (e.g., papers certified with FSC label)
	2	When buying vegetables or fruits, choose organic ones
	3	When buying fish, avoid choosing species with a relatively high extinction risk (e.g., tuna, eel)
	4	When purchasing ornamental plants, avoid choosing wild plant species with a relatively high extinction risk (e.g., cacti, orchids)
	5	When purchasing furniture or clothes, avoid choosing products from rare wild animals and plants (e.g., wooden furniture, fur coats, leather products)
Social
	6	Discuss with other people (e.g., family members, friends) the actions and practices that benefit biodiversity conservation
	7	Encourage other people (e.g., family members, friends) to adopt biodiversity-friendly behaviors
	8	Tell other people (e.g., family members, friends) how wonderful nature is (e.g., share beautiful nature images on social media)
	9	Take other people (e.g., family members, friends) to natural environments
	10	Share (e.g., on social media) official announcements and messages from conservation organizations with other people (e.g., family or friends)
Stewardship
	11	Volunteer for activities that preserve the natural environment
	12	When managing domestic gardens, avoid using chemical herbicides or insecticides
	13	When visiting wild areas (e.g., protected areas), remove soil on footwear to prevent the introduction and spread of alien plants
Advocacy
	14	When deciding for whom to vote, confirm their opinions towards the natural environment
	15	Take action to influence environmental policy implemented by local governments (e.g., participating in environmental campaigns, writing to local members of parliament)
Donation
	16	Donate to organizations that focus on threatened species and ecosystem advocacy
Lifestyle
	17	Visit natural environments such as greenspaces, parks, and fields to experience the wonder of nature
	18	Learn about nature at zoos, botanical gardens or museums

Frequency of childhood nature experiences

On the basis of previous studies (Soga & Gaston, 2023a; Soga et al., 2018, 2020), we assessed the frequency of childhood nature experiences by asking participants to report how often they had visited natural environments (such as greenspace, woodlands, and grasslands) during their childhoods, which we defined as the period between 6 and 12 years old. To measure these frequencies, we used a seven-point Likert scale (Table 1).

Diversity of childhood nature experiences

This part of the survey comprised questions on a set of 15 nature-based activities (Table 1). Participants were asked to indicate their level of engagement in each activity during their childhoods,. By drawing on previous research (Hoover, 2021; Hosaka et al., 2017; Wells & Lekies, 2006a; Zhang et al., 2014), we aimed to encompass a broad spectrum of nature-based activities (Table 1). The total count of activities in which a participant had engaged was used as an indicator of the diversity of childhood nature experiences, with scores ranging from 0 to 15.

Sociodemographic and personal characteristics

We collected three sets of sociodemographic and personal circumstance data that we considered might have an impact on the adoption of pro-biodiversity behaviors (Table 1).

Statistical analyses

To examine the association between nature experiences and pro-biodiversity behaviors, we conducted multiple logistic regression analyses. We calculated the odds ratios (ORs) to assess the likelihood of regularly adopting each of the 18 pro-biodiversity behaviors on the basis of the frequency and diversity of childhood nature experiences. For each pro-biodiversity behavior, participants were allocated to two groups: (i) those who had engaged in pro-biodiversity behaviors on a regular basis (answered Always or Usually for each question), and (ii) those who had not engaged in pro-biodiversity behaviors regularly (answered Never, Rarely, Sometimes, or Often) (Table 1). We used this approach because our focus was habitual behaviors rather than occasional actions. The frequency of childhood nature experiences was categorized into seven groups (Never, Yearly, Quarterly, Monthly, Weekly, Almost daily, or Daily), and the diversity was categorized into six groups (0: no activities; 1: 1 to 3 activities; 2: 4 to 6 activities; 3: 7 to 9 activities; 4: 10 to 12 activities, or 5: 13 to 15 activities). To account for potential confounding variables, we adjusted the ORs for the three sociodemographic and personal factors (Table 1). Preliminary analysis suggested that, because of multicollinearity, only one of the two metrics of nature experiences could be included in a single regression; using these two variables in a single model resulted in a drastic change in the direction and magnitude of the effect sizes of the variables. Accordingly, separate models were developed for the frequency and diversity of nature experiences. These statistical analyses were performed by using the epiDisplay package in R version 4.2.2 (R Core Team, 2022)

To validate the results, we used generalized additive models while controlling for covariates (the three sociodemographic and personal variables). We explored the relationship between childhood nature experiences and pro-biodiversity behaviors by treating the frequency and diversity of nature experiences as continuous variables, with the three sociodemographic and personal variables serving as fixed factors. The analysis and data visualization were performed by using the gamm4 and ggplot2 packages in R.

Data analysis

After the elimination of incomplete and invalid survey responses, a total of 3615 surveys were included in the analysis (see Table S1 for complete participant information). Among the participants, there was substantial variation in the frequency and diversity of childhood nature experiences (see Figure S1). Moreover, the frequency of adopting pro-biodiversity behaviors varied substantially among participants and across the 18 pro-biodiversity behaviors (Figure S2). On average, participants reported having regularly engaged in 1.93 pro-biodiversity behaviors over the past year (SD = 3.75).

We calculated the ORs and 95% confidence intervals for the logistic regressions predicting the likelihood of regularly adopting the 18 pro-biodiversity behaviors as a function of the frequency or diversity of childhood nature experiences (Table S2). There was a positive association between both the frequency and the diversity of childhood nature experiences and the likelihood of regularly adopting pro-biodiversity behaviors (Figs. 1, 2; see also Table S2 for the results of the regression models). This association held true across a range of behaviors, including the purchase of eco-friendly products, reduced use of pesticides in domestic gardens, and contributions to conservation organizations. For all 18 pro-biodiversity behaviors, those who had engaged in childhood nature experiences at least once a month were more likely than those who had never had such experiences to regularly adopt the behavior (Fig. 1). Similarly, for the majority of the 18 behaviors, those who had engaged in at least 10 of the 15 childhood nature-based activities were more likely than those who had not engaged in any of the activities to regularly adopt the behavior (Fig. 2).

Although previous studies have highlighted the importance of the frequency of nature experiences in predicting pro-biodiversity behaviors (Cooper et al., 2015; Molinario et al., 2020; Prévot et al., 2018; Richardson et al., 2020; Soga & Gaston, 2023a), our understanding of the relative importance of the diversity of these experiences remains limited. We consider that, in an effort to close this knowledge gap, our study contributes substantially to the existing literature by examining and comparing the associations of both the frequency and diversity of childhood nature experiences with adult pro-biodiversity behaviors. Our findings provide evidence that the relationship between pro-biodiversity behaviors and the diversity of childhood nature experiences is comparable to that observed for the frequency of these experiences (Fig. 3; Table S2). This raises an intriguing hypothesis that the diversity of nature experiences may play an important role in shaping an individual’s attitudes and behaviors toward nature.

Interestingly, the association between adult pro-biodiversity behaviors and the diversity of childhood nature experiences differs from that of the frequency of childhood experiences. In the case of frequency, there was a gradual increase in the likelihood of regularly adopting pro-biodiversity behaviors up to a weekly frequency, without a substantial further increase (Fig. 1). This finding aligns with that of a recent study conducted in Japan (Soga & Gaston 2023a), which showed a non-linear relationship between frequency of nature experiences and self-reported pro-biodiversity behaviors. Conversely, in the case of diversity, there was a steady increase in the likelihood of adopting pro-biodiversity behaviors up to the highest childhood nature diversity category (Fig. 2). These patterns were also evident in the results of the generalized additive models (Figures S3, S4). Owing to the cross-sectional design of our study, we were unable to investigate in more detail the reasons underlying this difference between the two sets of results. Nevertheless, this finding emphasizes the likelihood that the frequency and diversity of childhood nature experiences are distinct and can lead to unique patterns of adult pro-biodiversity behavior.

The ORs of adults regularly adopting pro-biodiversity behaviors were much higher for the two childhood nature experience variables than for the three sociodemographic and personal factors (Fig. 3). This finding is important, because these sociodemographic and personal factors have previously been found to be the key determinants of pro-environmental behaviors (Ahmad et al., 2021; Ahmat Zainuri et al., 2022; Mónus, 2022). It is therefore possible to interpret the magnitude of the childhood relationship with nature experiences as meaningful in terms of potential implications for behavioral change, although further research on causality is warranted.

Although our analysis yielded clear results, untangling the causal relationships between the diversity of nature experiences and the implementation of pro-biodiversity behaviors is not an easy task. Two primary mechanisms may explain how diversity promotes pro-biodiversity behaviors. The first mechanism is the complementary effect, whereby an increased diversity of nature experiences offers individuals opportunities to engage with various facets of the natural world, strengthening their positive emotions and attitudes towards nature. This possibility arises from the notion that different nature components can elicit distinct emotional and attitudinal responses in individuals (see Collado et al., 2015). The second mechanism is the sampling effect, which suggests that encountering specific nature experiences can effectively promote pro-environmental behaviors. A greater diversity of nature experiences would increase the likelihood of encountering these influential experiences. Previous studies have indeed indicated that not all nature experiences hold equal sway over individuals’ attitudes and behaviors toward nature (Wells & Lekies, 2006b), implying that some nature experiences can have particularly strong impacts. This is related to memory consolidation, as well as to positive emotional responses to nature. Emotional or stressful experiences result in formation of especially strong memories, because of involvement of the amygdala (Roozendaal et al., 2009); emotional nature experiences thus form lasting memories (c.f., Chawla, 2007). A specific nature experience may remain unforgettable and thus lead to a positive attitude toward nature.

Limitations and future research directions

Although we consider that our findings are important to the understanding of pro-environmental behavior, it is important to acknowledge some limitations. First, the cross-sectional design of our study prevented us from establishing causality. It is possible to argue that the diversity and frequency of nature experiences are merely substitution variables of nature relatedness, and that the factor that actually influenced individuals’ pro-biodiversity behaviors was in fact nature relatedness (Forstmann & Sagioglou, 2017; Torrejos & Israel, 2022). Previous research has demonstrated a strong association between individuals’ frequency of nature experiences and their positive emotions towards nature (Alcock et al., 2020; Křepelková et al., 2020). Thus increased nature relatedness might have had an important role in our study in driving people’s pro-biodiversity behaviors. However, studies employing pre/post-testing designs have shown that participation in nature-based activities increases individuals’ intention to engage in pro-environmental behaviors (e.g., Collado et al., 2015; Hoberg et al., 2021), suggesting a likely causal relationship between nature experiences and pro-environmental behavior. Further research using experimental approaches is needed to better understand the mechanistic link between nature experiences and pro-biodiversity behaviors. Secondly, our study relied on self-reported surveys, which may have introduced reporting bias, including potential under- or over-reporting of the actual frequency of engaging in pro-biodiversity behaviors or nature experiences. However, we partially addressed this concern by focusing our sample exclusively on individuals in their 20s and 30s, thus reducing the impact of memory bias on our results. Thirdly, the survey was conducted only among Japanese adults, and future research needs to be expanded to include a broader population. Preferences for, and valuations of, nature are likely to vary with variations in socioeconomic and cultural contexts (Lindemann-Matthies et al., 2014). Lastly, although we used the diversity of nature-based activities as an indicator of the quality of nature experiences, there are various other approaches to evaluating quality. Physical and psychological proximity to wild animals and plants, for example, is one such factor, as experiences involving more direct contact with these organisms (e.g., catching insects, touching flowers) are likely to have a stronger impact on people’s attitudes and behaviors towards nature (Cooper et al., 2015). It is therefore important in future to assess how the relative importance of the quality of nature experiences varies with the measurement methodologies used.

Recommendations

Despite the aforementioned limitations, we consider that our findings provide valuable insights into the relationship between direct experiences of nature and pro-biodiversity attitudes and behaviors. Although our study was preliminary, our results suggest that enhancing both the frequency and diversity of people’s childhood nature experiences may be an effective approach to promoting the desired behavioral changes needed to combat biodiversity loss. This is particularly crucial in the current era of “extinction of experience,” where people’s direct encounters with nature are rapidly diminishing (Soga & Gaston, 2023a, 2023b). The prevailing discussion on the extinction of experience focuses primarily on loss of the quantity of nature experiences (Mykletun et al., 2021; Pyle, 2003; Soga et al., 2015). However, if, as our data suggest, the diversity of experiences is also important, then future conservation policies would greatly benefit from expanding efforts to preserve a wide range of nature-based activities that individuals can engage with in their daily lives. Addressing this challenge requires an increase in both the opportunities and the motivation for people to interact with nature. The former can be achieved through the protection and restoration of diverse ecosystems in urban areas, whereas the latter necessitates the fostering of people’s—and especially children’s—interest in, and familiarity with, nature experiences.

Acknowledgments

We thank M. Hisano for helpful advice in analysis of the study.

Ethics clearance

This study was approved by the ethics committee of the Graduate School of Agricultural and Life Sciences at the University of Tokyo.

Funding and/or Conflicts of interests/Competing interests

This study was supported by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (Grant Numbers: 20H04375, 19H04317). The authors have no competing interests to declare.

Ahmad, N., Ullah, Z., Arshad, M. Z., Kamran, H. waqas, Scholz, M., & Han, H., 2021. Relationship between corporate social responsibility at the micro-level and environmental performance: The mediating role of employee pro-environmental behavior and the moderating role of gender. Sustainable Production and Consumption. 27, 1138–1148.
Ahmat Zainuri, N., Abd-Rahman, N., Halim, L., Chan, M. Y., Mohd Bazari, N. N., 2022. Measuring Pro-Environmental Behavior Triggered by Environmental Values. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(23), 16013.
Alcock, I., White, M. P., Pahl, S., Duarte-Davidson, R., Fleming, L. E., 2020. Associations between pro-environmental behaviour and neighbourhood nature, nature visit frequency and nature appreciation: Evidence from a nationally representative survey in England. Environment International. 136, 105441.
Torrejos, C. B., Israel, G. F. G., 2022. Pro-Environmental Behavior of Undergraduate Students as a Function of Nature Relatedness and Awareness of Environmental Consequences. International Journal of Humanities, Social Sciences and Education. 9(1), 147–156.
Balmford, A., Bradbury, R. B., Bauer, J. M., Broad, S., Burgess, G., Burgman, M., Byerly, H., Clayton, S., Espelosin, D., Ferraro, P. J., Fisher, B., Garnett, E. E., Jones, J. P. G., Marteau, T. M., Otieno, M., Polasky, S., Ricketts, T. H., Sandbrook, C., Sullivan-Wiley, K., Trevelyanu, R., Lindenv, S.V.D., Verissimow, D., Nielsen, K. S., 2021. Making more effective use of human behavioural science in conservation interventions. Biological Conservation. 261, 109256.
Cardinale, B. J., Duffy, J. E., Gonzalez, A., Hooper, D. U., Perrings, C., Venail, P., Narwani, A., MacE, G. M., Tilman, D., Wardle, D. A., Kinzig, A. P., Daily, G. C., Loreau, M., Grace, J. B., Larigauderie, A., Srivastava, D. S., Naeem, S., 2012. Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature. 486(7401), 59–67.
Ceballos, G., Ehrlich, P. R., Barnosky, A. D., García, A., Pringle, R. M., Palmer, T. M., 2015. Accelerated modern human-induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction. Science Advances. 1(5), e1400253.
Chawla, L., 2007. Childhood Experiences Associated with Care for the Natural World: A Theoretical Framework for Empirical Results. Youth and Environments. 17(4), 144–170.
Cheng, J. C. H., Monroe, M. C., 2012. Connection to nature: Children’s affective attitude toward nature. Environment and Behavior. 44(1), 31–49.
Collado, S., Corraliza, J. A., Staats, H., Ruíz, M., 2015. Effect of frequency and mode of contact with nature on children’s self-reported ecological behaviors. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 41, 65–73.
Colléony, A., Levontin, L., Shwartz, A., 2020. Promoting meaningful and positive nature interactions for visitors to green spaces. Conservation Biology, 34(6), 1373–1382.
Cooper, C., Larson, L., Dayer, A., Stedman, R., Decker, D., 2015. Are wildlife recreationists conservationists? Linking hunting, birdwatching, and pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Wildlife Management. 79(3), 446–457.
Daryanto, A., Song, Z., 2021. A meta-analysis of the relationship between place attachment and pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Business Research. 123, 208–219.
Fabozzi, F. J., Markowitz, H. M., Gupta, F., 2008. Portfolio Selection. The Journal of Finance. 7(1), 77-91.
Farrow, K., Grolleau, G., Ibanez, L. 2017. Social Norms and Pro-environmental Behavior: A Review of the Evidence. Ecological Economics. 140, 1–13.
Figge, F., 2004. Bio-folio: applying portfolio theory to biodiversity. Biodiversity and Conservation. 13, 827–849.
Fleming, W., & Shwartz, A., 2023. Nature interactions and their associations with connection to nature and well-being varies between different types of green spaces. People and Nature. 00, 1–14.
Forstmann, M., & Sagioglou, C., 2017. Lifetime experience with (classic) psychedelics predicts pro-environmental behavior through an increase in nature relatedness. Journal of Psychopharmacology. 31(8), 975–988.
Hoberg, R., Kannis-Dymand, L., Mulgrew, K., Schaffer, V., Clark, E., 2021. Humpback whale encounters: encouraging pro-environmental behaviours. Current Issues in Tourism. 24(13), 1918–1929.
Hoover, K. S., 2021. Children in nature: exploring the relationship between childhood outdoor experience and environmental stewardship. Environmental Education Research. 27(6), 894–910.
Hosaka, T., Sugimoto, K., & Numata, S., 2017. Childhood experience of nature influences the willingness to coexist with biodiversity in cities. Palgrave Communications. 3, 17071.
IPBES. 2019. In: S. Díaz, J. Settele, E. S. Brondízio E.S., H. T. Ngo, M. Guèze, J. Agard, A. Arneth, P. Balvanera, K.A. Brauman, S. H. M. Butchart, K. M. A. Chan, L. A. Garibaldi, K. Ichii, J. Liu, S. M. Subramanian,G. F. Midgley, P. Miloslavich, Z. Molnár, D. Obura, A. Pfaff, S. Polasky, A. Purvis, J. Razzaque, B. Reyers, R. Roy Chowdhury, Y. J. Shin, I. J. Visseren-Hamakers, K. J. Willis, and C. N. Zayas (eds.). IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany. 56 pagess.
Křepelková, Š. D., Krajhanzl, J., Kroufek, R., 2020. The influence of interaction with nature in childhood on future proenvironmental behavior. Journal of Baltic Science Education. 19(4), 536–550.
Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, agreed at the 15th meeting of the Conference of Parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity. CBD/COP/15/L25.
Lindemann-Matthies, P., Keller, D., Li, X., Schmid, B., 2014. Attitudes toward forest diversity and forest ecosystem services - A cross-cultural comparison between China and Switzerland. Journal of Plant Ecology. 7(1), 1–9.
Miller, J. R., 2005. Biodiversity conservation and the extinction of experience. Trends in Ecology and Evolution. 20(8), 430–434.
Molinario, E., Lorenzi, C., Bartoccioni, F., Perucchini, P., Bobeth, S., Colléony, A., Diniz, R., Eklund, A., Jaeger, C., Kibbe, A., Richter, I., Ruepert, A., Sloot, D., Udall, A. M., Bonaiuto, M., 2020. From childhood nature experiences to adult pro-environmental behaviors: An explanatory model of sustainable food consumption. Environmental Education Research. 28(6), 1137–1163.
Mónus, F., 2022. Environmental education policy of schools and socioeconomic background affect environmental attitudes and pro-environmental behavior of secondary school students. Environmental Education Research. 28(2), 169–196.
Mykletun, R. J., Oma, P. Ø., Aas, Ø., 2021. When the hiking gets tough: “New adventurers” and the “extinction of experiences.” Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism. 36, 100450.
Nielsen, K. S., Marteau, T. M., Bauer, J. M., Bradbury, R. B., Broad, S., Burgess, G., Burgman, M., Byerly, H., Clayton, S., Espelosin, D., Ferraro, P. J., Fisher, B., Garnett, E. E., Jones, J. P. G., Otieno, M., Polasky, S., Ricketts, T. H., Trevelyan, R., van der Linden, S., Verissimo, D., Balmford, A., 2021. Biodiversity conservation as a promising frontier for behavioural science. Nature Human Behaviour. 5(5), 550–556.
Osman, A., Jusoh, M.S., Amlus, M.H., Khotob, N., 2014. Exploring The Relationship Between Environmental Knowledge and Environmental Attitude Towards Pro-Environmental Behaviour: Undergraduate Business Students Perspective. American-Eurasian Journal of Sustainable Agriculture. 8(8), 1-4.
Prévot, A. C., Cheval, H., Raymond, R., Cosquer, A., 2018. Routine experiences of nature in cities can increase personal commitment toward biodiversity conservation. Biological Conservation. 226. 1–8.
Pyle, R. M., 2003. Nature matrix: Reconnecting people and nature. ORYX. 37(2), 206–214.
R Core Team. 2023. _R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing_. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. <https://www.R-project.org/>.
Richardson, M., Passmore, H. A., Barbett, L., Lumber, R., Thomas, R., Hunt, A., 2020. The green care code: How nature connectedness and simple activities help explain pro-nature conservation behaviours. People and Nature. 2(3), 821–839.
Roozendaal, B., McEwen, B. S., Chattarji, S., 2009. Stress, memory and the amygdala. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 10(6), 423–433.
Rosa, C. D., Profice, C. C., Collado, S., 2018. Nature experiences and adults’ self-reported pro-environmental behaviors: The role of connectedness to nature and childhood nature experiences. Frontiers in Psychology. 9, 1005.
Schultz, P. W., 2011. Conservation Means Behavior. Conservation Biology. 25(6), 1080–1083.
Soga, M., Evans, M. J., Yamanoi, T., Fukano, Y., Tsuchiya, K., Koyanagi, T. F., Kanai, T., 2020. How can we mitigate against increasing biophobia among children during the extinction of experience? Biological Conservation. 242, 108420.
Soga, M., Gaston, K. J., 2016. Extinction of experience: The loss of human-nature interactions. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 14(2), 94–101.
Soga, M., Gaston, K. J., 2022. Towards a unified understanding of human–nature interactions. Nature Sustainability. 5(5), 374–383.
Soga, M., Gaston, K. J., 2023a. Nature benefit hypothesis: Direct experiences of nature predict self-reported pro-biodiversity behaviors. Conservation Letters. e129425.
Soga, M., Gaston, K. J., 2023b. Global synthesis reveals heterogeneous changes in connection of humans to nature. One Earth. 6(2), 131–138.
Soga, M., Gaston, K. J., Kubo, T., 2018. Cross-generational decline in childhood experiences of neighborhood flowering plants in Japan. Landscape and Urban Planning. 174, 55–62.
Soga, M., Yamaura, Y., Aikoh, T., Shoji, Y., Kubo, T., Gaston, K. J., 2015. Reducing the extinction of experience: Association between urban form and recreational use of public greenspace. Landscape and Urban Planning. 143, 69–75.
Veríssimo, D., 2019. The Past, Present, and Future of Using Social Marketing to Conserve Biodiversity. Social Marketing Quarterly. 25(1), 3–8.
Wells, N. M., Lekies, K. S., 2006. Nature and Life Course: Pathways from Childhood Nature Experiences to Adult Environmentalism. Children, Youth and Environments. 16(1), 1-24.
Whitburn, J., Linklater, W., Abrahamse, W., 2020. Meta-analysis of human connection to nature and proenvironmental behavior. Conservation Biology. 34(1), 180–193.
Zhang, W., Goodale, E., Chen, J., 2014. How contact with nature affects children’s biophilia, biophobia and conservation attitude in China. Biological Conservation. 177, 109–116.

No competing interests reported.

Supportinginformation.pdf

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Both frequency and diversity of childhood nature experiences are associated with self-reported pro-biodiversity behaviors in adulthood

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Methods

Survey design

Self-reported pro-biodiversity behaviors

Frequency of childhood nature experiences

Diversity of childhood nature experiences

Sociodemographic and personal characteristics

Statistical analyses

Results and Discussion

Data analysis

Limitations and future research directions

Recommendations

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1