Editorial

Human health and nature conservation

BMJ 2005; 331 doi: 10.1136/bmj.331.7527.1221 (Published 24 November 2005)
Cite this as: BMJ 2005;331:1221
  1. Ambra Burls, senior lecturer in mental health (a.burls@apu.ac.uk),
  2. Woody Caan, professor of public health
  1. Institute of Health and Social Care, Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford, Essex CM1 1SQ
  2. Institute of Health and Social Care, Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford, Essex CM1 1SQ

    Ecotherapy could be beneficial, but we need more robust evidence

    We call animals in their natural habitat wild, implying danger. Research that focuses on risk can foster a fearful attitude towards nature, disabling society's capacity for choice.1 These fearful views from contemporary anthropology contrast sharply with the biological, evolutionary, and ecological view of the influential American zoologist Edward Wilson. Wilson coined the concept of biophilia: “The connection that human beings subconsciously seek and need with the rest of life.”2 This view, emphasising connection with nature, builds on behavioural observations by Konrad Lorenz, a Nobel prize winner for medicine.3

    The therapeutic implication of biophilia is ecotherapy: restoring health through contact with nature.4 British author Gregory Bateson's theoretical framework for …

    Rapid responses

    THIS WEEK'S POLL

    Read related article

    See previous polls

    BMJ most popular