This scoping review outlines psychological pathways that foster attunement with self, others, and the planet in service of a future composed of more sustainable relationships. Shifts in the social and sustainability sciences represent a relational turn, one that focuses on the interconnectedness of the human and more-than-human earth. In this review, we explore how psychologists can deepen their relational and ecological orientations by attending to the interdisciplinary work that has been done and still needs doing, all in service of personal, interpersonal, and planetary health. Sustainable relationships maintain mutuality, balance, and harmony, minimize harm, and maximize equity, in ways that are viable and persist over time. In this paper, we explore a psychological framework for sustainable relationships through the lens of embodied ecology—a perspective that foregrounds relations instead of bounded entities. Embodied ecology encompasses and transcends ontology and epistemology, where individual and wider relations are in a constant state of motion: being and becoming mutually interdependent. We examine three psychological dimensions of sustainable relationships through the lens of embodied ecology: (1) transcendent moral emotions (2) relational animistic beliefs, and (3) relational moral reasoning. This scoping review provides a conceptual map of psychology’s role in understanding sustainable relationships.
AbramD. (2012). The spell of the sensuous: Perception and language in a more-than-human world. Vintage.
2.
AbramD. (2017). Storytelling and wonder: On the rejuvenation of oral culture as an ecological imperative. In UrbainO.TempleD. (Eds.), Ethical transformations for a sustainable future (pp. 9–17). Routledge.
3.
AndersonE. N. (1996). Ecologies of the heart: Emotion, belief, and the environment. Oxford University Press.
4.
BaiY.MaruskinL. A.ChenS.GordonA. M.StellarJ. E.McNeilG. D.PengK.KeltnerD. (2017). Awe, the diminished self, and collective engagement: Universals and cultural variations in the small self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(2), 185–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000087
5.
BallewM. T.OmotoA. M. (2018). Absorption: How nature experiences promote awe and other positive emotions. Ecopsychology, 10(1), 26–35. https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2017.0044
6.
BangM. (2017). Towards an ethic of decolonial trans-ontologies in sociocultural theories of learning and development. In EsmondeI.BookerA. N. (Eds.), Power and privilege in the learning sciences: Critical and sociocultural theories of learning (pp. 115–138). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315685762
7.
BatesonG. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind: Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology. University of Chicago Press.
8.
BerenguerJ. (2007). The effect of empathy in proenvironmental attitudes and behaviors. Environment and Behavior, 39(2), 269–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916506292937
Bird-DavidN. (1999). “Animism” revisited: Personhood, environment, and relational epistemology. Current Anthropology, 40(S1), S67–S91. https://doi.org/10.1086/200061
11.
ChanK. M. A.BalvaneraP.BenessaiahK.ChapmanM.DiazS.Gomez-BaggethunE.GouldR.HannahN.JaxK.KlainS.LuckG. W.MuracaB.NortonB.OttK.PascualU.SatterfieldT.TadakiM.TaggartJ.TurnerN. (2016). Opinion: Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113(6), 1462–1465. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1525002113
12.
CialdiniR. B.BrownS. L.LewisB. P.LuceC.NeubergS. L. (1997). Reinterpreting the empathy–altruism relationship: When one into one equals oneness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(3), 481–494. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.73.3.481
CoopeJ. (2019). How might Indigenous traditional ecological knowledge (ITEK) inform ecopsychology?Ecopsychology, 11(3), 156–161. https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2019.0005
15.
DavisJ. L.GreenJ. D.ReedA. (2009). Interdependence with the environment: Commitment, interconnectedness, and environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(2), 173–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.11.001
16.
De OliveiraV. M. (2021). Hospicing modernity: Facing humanity's wrongs and the implications for social activism. North Atlantic Books.
17.
DescolaP. (2006). Beyond nature and culture. In Proceedings-British Academy(139). Oxford University Press Inc.
18.
De WaalF. (2016). Are we smart enough to know how smart animals are?WW Norton & Company.
19.
DutcherD. D.FinleyJ. C.LuloffA. E.JohnsonJ. B. (2007). Connectivity with nature as a measure of environmental values. Environment and Behavior, 39(4), 474–493. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916506298794
20.
EisenbergN.SpinradT. L.MorrisA. S. (2013). Prosocial development. In ZelazoP. D. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of developmental psychology Self and other(2, pp. 300–325). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199958474.013.0013
GiffordR.NilssonA. (2014). Personal and social factors that influence pro‐environmental concern and behaviour: A review. International Journal of Psychology: Journal International de Psychologie, 49(3), 141–157. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12034
23.
GouldR. K.MartinezD. E.HoeltingK. R. (2023). Exploring Indigenous relationality to inform the relational turn in sustainability science. Ecosystems and People, 19(1), Article 2229452. https://doi.org/10.1080/26395916.2023.2229452
24.
GruenL. (2015). Entangled empathy: An alternative ethic for our relationships with animals. Lantern Books.
25.
HaidtJ. (2003). The moral emotions. In DavidsonR. J.SchererK. R.GoldsmithH. H. (Eds.), Handbook of affective sciences (pp. 852–870). Oxford University Press.
26.
HanhT. N. (1991). Call me by my true names. Parallax Press.
27.
HarawayD. (2016). Staying with the trouble: Making kin in the chthulucene. Duke University Press.
28.
HarawayD. J. (2003) The companion species manifesto: Dogs, people, and significant otherness (1): Prickly Paradigm Press.
29.
HooksB. (1996). Touching the earth (pp. 21–22). Orion Magazine.
30.
HooksB. (2001). All about love: New visions (first perennial edition.). William Morrow.
KahnJ. P. H. (1999). The human relationship with nature: Development and culture. MIT Press.
35.
KahnJ. P. H.FriedmanB. (1995). Environmental views and values of children in an inner-city black community. Child Development, 66(5), 1403–1417. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131654
36.
KahnP. H.SeversonR. L.RuckertJ. H. (2009). The human relation with nature and technological nature. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(1), 37–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01602.x
37.
KaplanR.KaplanS. (1998). With people in mind: Design and management of everyday nature. Island Press.
38.
KelemenD.BrownS. A.PizzaL. (2023). Don’t bug me!: The role of names, functions, and feelings in shaping children’s and adults’ conservation attitudes about unappealing species. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 87(4), Article 101990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2023.101990
39.
KeltnerD.HaidtJ. (2003). Approaching awe, a moral, spiritual, and aesthetic emotion. Cognition & Emotion, 17(2), 297–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930302297
KimmererR. (2013). Braiding sweetgrass: Indigenous wisdom, scientific knowledge and the teachings of plants. Milkweed editions.
42.
KortenkampK. V.MooreC. F. (2001). Ecocentrism and anthropocentrism: Moral reasoning about ecological commons dilemmas. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21(3), 261–272. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2001.0205
43.
LejanoR. (2019). Relationality and social-ecological systems: Going beyond or behind sustainability and resilience. Sustainability, 11(10), 2760–2768. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11102760
44.
LeopoldA. (1949). A sand county Almanac. Ballantine.
45.
LumberR.RichardsonM.SheffieldD. (2017). Beyond knowing nature: Contact, emotion, compassion, meaning, and beauty are pathways to nature connection. PLoS One, 12(5), e0177186. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177186
46.
MacyJ.BrownM. Y. (2014). Coming back to life: The guide to the work that reconnects. New Society Publishers.
47.
MacyJ. R. (1990). The ecological self: Postmodern ground for right action. In GriffinD. R. (Ed.), Sacred interconnections: Postmodern spirituality, political economy, and art (pp. 35–48). SUNY Press.
48.
MarkowitzE. M.ShariffA. Z. (2012). Climate change and moral judgement. Nature Climate Change, 2(4), 243–247. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1378
49.
MayerF. S.FrantzC. 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
50.
MedinD. L.BangM. (2014). Who's asking? Native science, western science, and science education. MIT Press.
51.
MerewetherJ. (2019). Listening with young children: Enchanted animism of trees, rocks, clouds (and other things). Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 27(2), 233–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2018.1460617
52.
MiltonM. (2016). Psychological practice in a time of environmental crisis: Counselling psychology and ecopsychology. In DouglasB.WoolfeR.StrawbridgeS.KasketE.GalbraithV. (Eds.), The handbook of counselling psychology (pp. 379–396). Sage Publications.
53.
MiniottiM. (2022). Empathy for patient care in medical students: New evidence on the importance of self-transcendence. Psychology Health & Medicine, 27(5), 1035–1041. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2020.1842897
54.
MitchellS. (2018). Sacred instructions: Indigenous wisdom for living spirit-based change. North Atlantic Books.
55.
NarvaezD. (2024). Returning to evolved nestedness, well-being, and mature human nature, an ecological imperative. Review of General Psychology, 28(2), 83–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/10892680231224035
56.
NavehD.Bird-DavidN. (2013). Animism, conservation and immediacy. In HarveyG. (Ed.), The handbook of contemporary animism. Acumen handbooks (pp. 27–37). Acumen Publishing.
57.
NisbetE. K.ZelenskiJ. M.MurphyS. A. (2009). The nature relatedness scale: Linking individuals’ connection with nature to environmental concern and behavior. Environment and Behavior, 41(5), 715–740. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916508318748
58.
NisbetE. K.ZelenskiJ. M.MurphyS. A. (2011). Happiness is in our nature: Exploring nature relatedness as a contributor to subjective well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 12(2), 303–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-010-9197-7
59.
NxumaloF. (2017a). Stories for living on a damaged planet: Environmental education in a preschool classroom. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 16(2), 148–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X17715499
NxumaloF. (2019). Decolonizing place in early childhood education. Routledge.
62.
NxumaloF. (2021). Disrupting anti-Blackness in early childhood qualitative inquiry: Thinking with Black refusal and Black futurity. Qualitative Inquiry, 27(10), 1191–1199. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004211021810
63.
OjalehtoB. M.SeligmanR.MedinD. L. (2020). Cognition beyond the human: Cognitive psychology and the new animism. Ethos, 48(1), 50–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/etho.12264
64.
PascualU.BalvaneraP.AndersonC. B.Chaplin-KramerR.ChristieM.González-JiménezD.MartinA.RaymondC. M.TermansenM.VatnA.AthaydeS.BaptisteB.BartonD. N.JacobsS.KelemenE.KumarR.LazosE.MwampambaT. H.NakanguB.ZentE. (2023). Diverse values of nature for sustainability. Nature, 620(7975), 813–823. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06406-9
65.
PassmoreH. A.HolderM. D. (2017). Noticing nature: Individual and social benefits of a two-week intervention. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(6), 537–546. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1221126
66.
PerlinJ. D.LiL. (2020). Why does awe have prosocial effects? New perspectives on awe and the small self. Perspectives on Psychological Science: A Journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 15(2), 291–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619886006
67.
PiagetJ. (1926). The language and thought of the child. Harcourt Brace & Company.
68.
PiffP. K.DietzeP.FeinbergM.StancatoD. M.KeltnerD. (2015). Awe, the small self, and prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(6), 883–899. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000018
PizzaL.KelemenD. (2023). Are humans part of the natural world? US children’s and adults’ concept of nature and its relationship to environmental concern. Topics in Cognitive Science, 15(3), 452–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12675
71.
PizzaL.PosadaR. (2020). “You have the river to throw it away”: Colombian children's reasoning about transgressions to nature in contexts of economic performance and communitarian needs. Ecopsychology, 12(4), 267–276. https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2019.0061
72.
PlumwoodV. (2010). Nature in the active voice. In IrwinR. (Ed.), Climate change and philosophy: Transformational possibilities (pp. 32–47). Continuum.
PritchardA.RichardsonM.SheffieldD.McEwanK. (2020). The relationship between nature connectedness and eudaimonic well-being: A meta-analysis. Journal of Happiness Studies, 21(3), 1145–1167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-019-00118-6
75.
RichardsonM.PassmoreH. A.LumberR.ThomasR.HuntA. (2021). Moments, not minutes: The nature-well-being relationship. International Journal of Wellbeing, 11(1), 8–33. https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v11i1.1267
76.
RomaR.Tardif-WilliamsC.BosackiS. (2023). ‘Because they are a part of life: ’Children’s ideas about the welfare, rights, and protection of animals and ecosystems. Journal of Moral Education, 52(4), 511–525. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2023.2176835
77.
RuckertJ. H. (2016). Justice for all? Children’s moral reasoning about the welfare and rights of endangered species. Anthrozoös, 29(2), 205–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2015.1093297
78.
RuckertJ. H. (2019). Generation conservation: Children’s developing folkbiological and moral conceptions of protecting endangered species. In Young children’s developing understanding of the biological world (pp. 28–42). Routledge.
79.
RuckertJ. H.ArnoldR. (2018). Empathy-Related Reasoning is associated with children's moral concerns for the welfare and rights of animals. Ecopsychology, 10(4), 259–269. https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2018.0039
80.
RuckertJ. H.CassonN. F.KuhD. N. (2021). Ecopsychology for sustainable relationships: A review of reddick's the same river. Ecopsychology, 13(2), 139–147. https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2020.0049
81.
RuckertJ. H.GranatoH. F.BarnesA.MartinE. G. (2025). Nature relatedness and self-transcendent emotions: A mediational exploration of the role of mindfulness. The Humanistic Psychologist. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/hum0000372
82.
RuckertJ. H.MorenoC.PostigoM.ThurstonM. J. (2024). Encountering animals cultivates meaningful shared experiences between children and parents. Anthrozoös, 1–22(4), 705–726. https://doi.org/10.1080/08927936.2024.2345473
83.
SchultzP. W. (2000). New environmental theories: Empathizing with nature: The effects of Perspective taking on concern for environmental issues. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 391–406. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00174
84.
SchultzP. W. (2002). Inclusion with nature: The psychology of human–nature relations. In SchmuckP. ,SchultzP. W. (Eds.), Psychology of sustainable development (pp. 61–78). Kluwer Academic.
85.
SchultzP. W.ZeleznyL. (1999). Values as predictors of environmental attitudes: Evidence for consistency across 14 countries. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19(3), 255–265. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1999.0129
86.
SeversonR. L.CarlsonS. M. (2010). Behaving as or behaving as if? Children’s conceptions of personified robots and the emergence of a new ontological category. Neural Networks: The Official Journal of the International Neural Network Society, 23(8), 1099–1103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neunet.2010.08.014
87.
SeversonR. L.KahnP. H. (2010). In the orchard: Farm worker children's moral and environmental reasoning. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 31(3), 249–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2010.02.003
88.
ShiotaM. N.KeltnerD.MossmanA. (2007). The nature of awe: Elicitors, appraisals, and effects on self-concept. Cognition & Emotion, 21(5), 944–963. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930600923668
89.
SmetanaJ. G.KillenM. (2008). Moral cognition, emotions, and neuroscience: An integrative developmental view. International Journal of Developmental Science, 2(3), 324–339. https://doi.org/10.3233/DEV-2008-2309
90.
StellarJ. E.GordonA. M.PiffP. K.CordaroD.AndersonC. L.BaiY.MaruskinL. A.KeltnerD. (2017). Self-transcendent emotions and their social functions: Compassion, gratitude, and awe bind us to others through prosociality. Emotion Review, 9(3), 200–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073916684557
91.
StraussC.TaylorB. L.GuJ.KuykenW.BaerR.JonesF.CavanaghK. (2016). What is compassion and how can we measure it? A review of definitions and measures. Clinical Psychology Review, 47(1), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2016.05.004
92.
TamK. P. (2013). Concepts and measures related to connection to nature: Similarities and differences. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34(1), 64–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2013.01.004
TamK. P.LeeS.-L.ChaoM. M. (2013). Saving Mr. Nature: Anthropomorphism enhances connectedness to and protectiveness toward nature. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(3), 514–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.02.001
95.
TurielE.KillenM. (2010). Taking emotions seriously: The role of emotions in moral development. In ArsenioW. F.LemeriseE. A. (Eds.), Emotions, aggression, and morality in children: Bridging development and psychopathology (pp. 33–52). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12129-002
96.
VerhaeghenP. (2019). The mindfulness manifold: Exploring how self-preoccupation, self-compassion, and self-transcendence translate mindfulness into positive psychological outcomes. Mindfulness, 10(1), 131–145. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-018-0959-3
WainrybC.BrehlB. (2006). I thought she knew that would hurt my feelings: Developing psychological knowledge and moral thinking. In KailR. (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (pp. 131–171). Academic Press.
99.
WallaceB. A. (2007). Contemplative science: Where Buddhism and neuroscience converge. Columbia University Press.
100.
WamslerC.BrossmannJ.HenderssonH.KristjansdottirR.McDonaldC.ScarampiP. (2018). Mindfulness in sustainability science, practice, and teaching. Sustainability Science, 13(1), 143–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0428-2
101.
WattsR.KettnerH.GeertsD.GandyS.KartnerL.MertensL.TimmermannC.NourM. M.KaelenM.NuttD.Carhart-HarrisR.RosemanL. (2022). The Watts connectedness scale: A new scale for measuring a sense of connectedness to self, others, and world. Psychopharmacology, 239(11), 3461–3483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-022-06187-5
102.
WehiP. M.KamelamelaK. L.WhyteK.WateneK.ReoN. (2023). Contribution of Indigenous Peoples' understandings and relational frameworks to invasive alien species management. People and Nature, 5(5), 1403–1414. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10508
103.
WestS.HaiderL. J.StålhammarS.WoronieckiS. (2020). A relational turn for sustainability science? Relational thinking, leverage points and transformations. Ecosystems People, 16(1), 304–325. https://doi.org/10.1080/26395916.2020.1814417
104.
WhitburnJ.LinklaterW.AbrahamseW. (2020). Meta‐analysis of human connection to nature and proenvironmental behavior. Conservation Biology: The Journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 34(1), 180–193. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13381
WilsonE. O. (1984). Biophilia. Harvard University Press.
107.
YadenD. B.HaidtJ.Hood JrR. W.VagoD. R.NewbergA. B. (2017). The varieties of self-transcendent experience. Review of General Psychology, 21(2), 143–160. https://doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000102
108.
ZelenskiJ. M.DesrochersJ. E. (2021). Can positive and self-transcendent emotions promote pro-environmental behavior?Current Opinion in Psychology, 42(1), 31–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.02.009
109.
ZylstraM. J.KnightA. T.EslerK. J.Le GrangeL. L. (2014). Connectedness as a core conservation concern: An interdisciplinary review of theory and a call for practice. Springer Science Reviews, 2(1–2), 119–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40362-014-0021-3
