The authors hypothesize that environmental values derive from a sense of connectivity with nature. Connectivity describes a perception of sameness between the self, others, and the natural world. The experience of connectivity involves dissolution of boundaries and a sense of a shared or common essence between the self, nature, and others. Connectivity with nature differs theoretically and operationally from other explanations of environmental values, including cultural bias, postmaterialism, and social altruism. The authors describe their development of a sociometric scale to operationalize connectivity with nature. Based on data from a mail survey of Pennsylvania landowners, the authors use multiple regression analyses to determine the extent to which connectivity with nature predicts and explains environmental concern and behavior in the presence of standard sociodemographic variables. Survey respondents reported a high level of connectivity with nature, and connectivity retained a significant and positive relationship to environmental concern and environmental behavior in multiple regression models. Implications of these findings are advanced.
Aron, A., Aron, E.N., & Smollan, D. (1992). Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 596-612.
2.
Batson, C.D., Sager, K., Garst, E., Kang, M., Rubchinsky, K., & Dawson, K. (1997). Is empathy-induced helping due to self-other merging ? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 495-509.
3.
Chase, A. (1995). In a dark wood: The fight over forests and the rising tyranny of ecology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
4.
Crowley, J.M. (1995). Environmental attitudes and behaviors. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon.
5.
Dillman, D.A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. New York: John Wiley.
6.
Douglas, M., & Wildavsky, A. (1982). Risk and culture: An essay on the selection of technical and environmental dangers. Berkeley: University of California Press.
7.
Dunlap, R.E., Van Liere, K.D., Mertig, A.G., Catton, W.R. Jr., & Howell, R.E. (1992, August & October). Measuring endorsement of an ecological world view: A revised NEP scale. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Rural Sociology Society, Pennsylvania State University, and at the Sixth Meeting of the Society for Human Ecology at Snowbird, UT.
8.
Dutcher, D.D. (2000). Landowner perceptions of protecting and establishing riparian forests in Central Pennsylvania. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Pennsylvania State University.
9.
Dutcher, D.D., Finley, J.C., Luloff, A.E., & Johnson, J. (2004). Landowner perceptions of protecting and establishing riparian forests: A qualitative analysis. Society and Natural Resources, 17, 319-332.
10.
Ellis, R.J., & Thompson, F. (1997a). Culture and the environment in the Pacific Northwest. American Political Science Review, 91, 885-897.
11.
Ellis, R.J., & Thompson, M. (1997b). Culture matters: Essays in honor of Aaron Wildavsky. Boulder, CO: Westview.
12.
Field, D.R., & Burch, W.R. Jr. (1988). Rural sociology and the environment. Middleton, WI: Social Ecology Press.
13.
Firey, W. (1990). Some contributions of sociology to the study of natural resources. In R. G. Lee, D. R. Field, & W. R. Burch (Eds.), Community and forestry: Continuities in the sociology of natural resources (pp. 15-25). Boulder, CO: Westview.
14.
Gardner, G.T., & Stern, P.C. (2002). Environmental problems and human behavior (2nd ed.). Boston: Pearson.
15.
Hesse, H. (1951). Siddhartha. New York: New Directions.
16.
Inglehart, R. (1990). Cultural shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
17.
Jordan, W. (2003). The sunflower forest: Ecological restoration and the new communion with nature. Berkeley: University of California Press.
18.
Kals, E., Schumacher, D., & Montada, L. (1999). Emotional affinity toward nature as a motivational basis to protect nature. Environment and Behavior, 31, 178-202.
19.
Kempton, W., Boster, J.S., & Hartley, J.A. (1995). Environmental values in American culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20.
Leopold, A. (1949). A Sand County almanac and sketches here and there. New York: Oxford University Press.
21.
Luloff, A.E., Wilkinson, K.P., Schwartz, M.R., Finley, J.C., Jones, S.B., & Humphrey, C.R. (1993). Pennsylvania's forest stewardship program's media campaign: Forest landowners and the general public's opinions and attitudes. Unpublished report submitted to the state forester, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and theUSDA Forest Service. University Park: Pennsylvania State University.
22.
Merchant, C. (1992). Radical ecology: The search for a livable world. New York: Routledge.
23.
Miller, C., & Sample, V.A. (1999). Gifford Pinchot: A life in progress. Journal of Forestry, 97(1), 27-32.
24.
Oelschlaeger, M. (1994). Caring for creation: An ecumenical approach to the environmental crisis. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
25.
Robinson, J. P., Shaver, P. R., & Wrightsman, L. S. (Eds.). (1991). Measures of personality and social psychological attitudes, volume 1 of measures of social psychological attitudes. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
26.
Schultz, P.W. (2000). Empathizing with nature: The effects of perspective taking on concern for environmental issues. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 391-406.
27.
Schultz, P.W. (2001). The structure of environmental concern: Concern for self, other people, and the biosphere. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 327-339.
28.
Schultz, P.W. (2002). Inclusion with nature: The psychology of human-nature relations. In P. Schmuck & P. W. Schultz (Eds.), Psychology of sustainable development (pp. 61-78). Boston: Kluwer.
29.
Schultz, P.W., Shriver, C., Tabanico, J., & Khazian, A.M. (2004). Implicit connections with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 31-42.
30.
Schultz, P.W., & Zelezny, L. (1999). Values as predictors of environmental attitudes: Evidence for consistency across 14 countries. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19, 255-265.
31.
Schwartz, S. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the structure and content of human values? Journal of Social Issues, 50, 19-45.
32.
Scott, D., & Willits, F.K. (1994). Environmental attitudes and behavior: A Pennsylvania survey. Environment and Behavior, 26, 239-260.
33.
Steelman, T.A., & Carmin, J. (1998). Common property, collective interests, and community opposition to locally unwanted land uses. Society and Natural Resources, 11, 485-505.
34.
Stern, P.C., & Dietz, T. (1994). The value basis of environmental concern. Journal of Social Issues, 50, 65-84.
35.
Stern, P.C., Dietz, T., & Guagnano, G.A. (1995). The new ecological paradigm in social-psychological context. Environment and Behavior, 27, 723-743.
36.
Stern, P.C., Dietz, T., & Kalof, L. (1993). Value orientations, gender, and environmental concern. Environment and Behavior, 25, 332-348.
37.
Stern, P.C., Dietz, T., Kalof, L., & Guagnano, G.A. (1995). Values, beliefs, and proenvironmental action: Attitude formation toward emergent attitude objects. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 25, 1611-1636.
38.
Thompson, M., Ellis, R., & Wildavsky, A. (1990). Cultural theory. Boulder, CO : Westview.
39.
Tonnies, F. (1957). The summing up: Gemeinschaft und gesellschaft. In C. P. Loomis (Ed. & Trans.), Community and society (pp. 237-259). East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
40.
Van Kalmthout, M.A. (1995). The religious dimension of Rogers's work. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 35(4), 23-39.
41.
Wilson, E.O. (1984). Biophilia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
