Nature Deficit Disorder
A Sense of Place
Saturday, March 3, 2012
By Michael Vincent McGinnis
During the past several months, one primary theme of this column has been the importance of a sense of place. This article builds on the theme by describing an important problem — ecological illiteracy.
There is no place on earth with more resources than this community. This region can forge a more sustainable and intimate relationship between human beings and the natural world — the mountains, river and creeks, and ocean. But it will require a serious commitment toward a new era of greater ecological awareness.
Michael McGinnis
Wild salmon can navigate through oceans and fresh water because of their well-developed sensual memory of place. This sense of place drives the salmon deeper into the watershed. From fresh water to the ocean and back again to the creek of its origin, the sense of place and smell drives the salmon upstream to cross the artificial and natural boundaries that exist along its way. In reproduction, this sense is passed on from one generation to another. In Northern California, indigenous people refer to the king salmon variously as “Lightning Following One Another,” “Chief Spring Salmon,” “Two Gills on Back,” “Quartz Nose,” and “Three Jumps.”
Our human capacity to make connections between mountains, rivers, and the sea is also an important factor that contributes to our capacity to sustain our community. The problem today is that we rarely understand these connections, nor are we willing to nurture and protect these ecological and cultural relationships that sustain our economies. We enter our machines (car or bus) and quickly become passengers through a world we no longer care to understand.
We view the world through the lens of a mechanical and electronic eye (e.g., the computer, television, and camera lens). We watch the bombing of a foreign landscape on the television. This vision of war is mediated by several machines that separate the deadly impacts of war from the virtual illusions produced by machines. The war “games” depicted on the TV screen are illusions previously played out in computer games or on video, while our ability to feel the pain of war has been diminished.
The robot on Mars may be a machine, but its mechanical appendages, its mission, and its electronic vision are “remotely” controlled by human beings. Humans via the machine are on Mars. The mass media first convinced us that the imaginary was real, and now they are convincing us that the real is imaginary.
The more reality the TV screen shows us, the more cinematic our everyday world becomes. The reliance on technology can change our relationship to nature and society. Real “nature” is becoming imaginary — even as natural entities depicted on the TV screen go extinct.
[We view the Yellowstone wilderness through the car window or attempt to capture Old Faithful on film, but the unique smells, dangers, and complexity of the Yellowstone ecosystem cannot be captured on film or video. People search for the perfect machine while the loss of place permeates modern society. We continue to turn to the mass media to represent nature rather than interacting and participating in a natural world.]
As we go further into an electronic and digital era, the separation of humanity from place seems inevitable. Children are more familiar with a cell phone or iPhone that depicts images of an imaginary nature than they are with a species of oak and chaparral that are part of their landscapes. This disconnect is reflected in what psychologists refer to as the problem of “nature deficit disorder”. Richard Louv described this disorder in his book Last Child in the Woods. He argues that a range of behavioral problems are developing as a consequence of our lack of experience with the natural world and what he refers to as the “the lure of the screen.” His analysis is limited to children, but I believe that nature deficit disorder and its consequences has become part of everyday life in urban and industrialized societies.
Each generation is brought up to a different environmental context. With each generation, the diminishment of the natural world around us diminishes our shared ability to learn from other animals and our natural surroundings, and to adapt. We become more digitally connected but lose our capacity to relate to community.
One need only look to society’s treatment of a free-flowing river. A river’s water is perceived as a resource for human use — natural capital. The definition of a natural resource is something in nature redirected for human use. During the past 60 years, this instrumental value of a river has contributed to the development of some 75,000 dams in the United States or the literal rearranging of the waters of the continent. In the politics of hydroelectric power development and irrigation networks, the more-than-economic values of the natural world are silenced.
Each dam resonates with the technological treatment of nature as a factory. Drowning Hetch Hetchy to provide power for San Francisco redirected the downhill energy (potential energy being converted in nature into kinetic energy) into paths available for urban use (electric energy). Dams reflect an uncritical social reliance on modern technology, and a form of spatial apartheid — each dam separates unique ecological places (riparian areas, watersheds) to support developments that are mechanical yet human (irrigation, grain transportation, hydropower, urban development). The dams impound the river, and the awe of the spring runoffs is gone. The river itself is transformed into what the historian Richard White calls “an organic machine, a virtual river.” The virtual river can be turned on or off.
Ultimately, the denaturing of nature coincides with a dehumanized society, people disconnected from the natural world and from one another. The loss of what it means to be a human being unfolds along with the death of nature.
The cultural and social aspects of this denaturing effect are dramatic. Society faces a crisis in education, poverty, and homelessness. Our political and economic elite fail to recognize the connection between ecological decay and cultural impoverishment. A 1995 report by the U.S. Department of the Interior states that every ecosystem in the U.S. is either threatened or endangered — the threat is no longer the loss of a single species of plant or animal. Meanwhile, one out of five children in the U.S. lives at the poverty level, and these children live in regions that are in ecological decline. In cities, one out of every four homeless is a child. This scenario is being played out worldwide as material poverty accompanies what we often celebrate as technological progress.
To deny, according to Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, is “to disclaim connection with or responsibility for: disavow.” As individuals, and as members of institutions, we deny the importance of place in shaping culture and society. Our treatment of predators like the wolf, coyote, bear, and bobcat is reflected in the language of bureaucratic resource management — the wolf is referred to as a “predator control unit,” “game unit,” “management tool,” “control action,” “reduction strategy,” and is exterminated when it does not suit a given objective. Viewed as a tool, the wolf loses its character as an ecological being; the wolf has no ecological significance in itself. Lacking in the language is an understanding of the predator as an important player in diverse ecosystems. Lacking in the language of the bureaucrat is recognition of the needs of the wolf in relation to human beings.
Related Links
Comments
Richard Louv's latest book, The Nature Principle (Algonquin Books, 2011), does indeed take up the adult aspect of 'nature deficit disorder' and supports the themes in this essay. The issue is especially disheartening with children, many of whom do literally face the prospect of 'the extinction of experience' if experience is defined as something not involving screens.
DrDan (anonymous profile)
March 4, 2012 at 8:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ecological literacy (of young and old) is critical to not only the protection of our region, but the entire planet. Our children must be exposed to the natural wonders that still endure -- watching the maturation of a frog, seeing a dragonfly hatch, looking into the eyes of a truly wide animal, or gazing at the stars and wondering how we fit into the entirety of it all. Those new to this region must learn the history of this place and not only see it for just what it is today. There have been losses.
Without this knowledge there is no understanding of 'how' or even 'why'. We become isolated and self-absorbed in thinking that we are the only species that matters AND that we can actually survive without the Others. We can not!
Thank you Mr. McGinnis for focusing on this extremely important element to the future of this region! All of those enviros working to defend and protect this place will not be able to override the values of the masses. We must connect and nurture the values of place in our young and old.
Ecolocal (anonymous profile)
March 4, 2012 at 8:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
In my work with children, I often bring feathers, stones, shells, bones, and the like to my programs. Kids invariably start asking questions, and their first question is always the same. It's not a question that would have occurred to me or any of my friends when I was eight years old. Children today ask, "Is it real?"
Their question goes to the heart of the disconnect Mr. Vincent (and others) speak of. The task of reconnecting with nature is more important to me than any other, and I'm grateful for the article above.
DanFontaine (anonymous profile)
March 5, 2012 at 10:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The challenge is that there are 7 Billion people on the planet. In California, 80% live within a hour's drive to the coast. As we think about coastal trails, like the de Anza coastal trail, in this county, we need to seriously consider the impacts of future demographic change and the impacts of human beings on sensitive coastal areas -- human disturbance on habitats and species, such as sensitive shore birds and coastal habitats -- will be excerbated by a de Anza trail along the bluff of unique areas of the Gaviota coast, for instance. I don't support further access and increased use of fragile areas like our coastal area, even if it means that fewer folks have an experience with nature. We need to consider the carrying capacity of our recreational areas and human disturbance before will support more access. While ecological literacy is an important part of community-based awareness, we also need to carefully limit human access to wild places or we'll use them to death.
momohonu (anonymous profile)
March 5, 2012 at 3:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I see your point, momohonu, but politically who would DECIDE what human groups would be excluded from access to nature? The State would be causing nature deficit disorder; after teaching children for over 35 years I assure you this term is much more than a metaphor!
I DO support much more human interaction with wild places and near-wilderness nature [of course not in truly sensitive habitats and "places"]... we are hardwired for this. 7000 years of supposed civilization hasn't altered much.
In your final sentence,writing "we also need to carefully limit human access to wild places or we'll use them to death," you miss entirely the idea of ZPG and limiting the human population. Our gross numbers are the issue, we have overpopulated and need to reduce this as good stewards of the planet. Population reduction is an answer, NOT limiting the access of human children, and adults, to the wild.
DrDan (anonymous profile)
March 7, 2012 at 5:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
When I am unable to get back into nature, into the wild, to roadless areas and paths less traveled, I suffer emotionally.
The longer I go without immersing myself in Nature, the harder it is for me, very unfortunately, to see beauty in life, in people, and to enjoy life. Life becomes stressful.
When I go for a long hike, my soul sighs. My heart breathes. I become alive. I awaken. I become re-energized. I see priorities more clearly. My mind becomes sharp. Things come into focus. Yes, Nature deficit disorder affects people young and old, and must be combated.
But McGinnis is right about providing careful access to Nature. We can love it to death. The commenter who brings bones and stones to children is bridging this gap between people and Nature. We must bring Nature to people, real Nature - not TV shows - and we must bring people to Nature but in a controlled way.
My nephew's only experience with Nature is hunting/killing things. At least he is getting out there. But the kid is usually on video games or TV. I worry about the future of humans, and the future of Nature, if future generations lose sight altogether of that connection.
My hope is there will be small rural agicultural communities and clans who can persist, and teach that connection, so in the future humans relearn that we are part of the ecosystem. We are part of the environment. If we re-learn this connection, and we don't trash Nature - of which we are a part, we will have a bright future with clean water, good local produce, clean air and healthy fish and wildlife populations.
Thank you to the author for triggering this discussion.
goleta43 (anonymous profile)
March 8, 2012 at 6:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Connection to nature and literacy of our region need not be a wilderness outing for all to remote and sensitive places. That is not feasible on many levels. What is needed is an awareness of what surrounds us -- the backyard birds, the plants (native or non-native) in the parks or neighborhood lots, the direction of the wind, recognizing the changes in the season, knowing the stars -- that builds appreciation and knowledge.
We must know where our water comes from, where our waste goes and understand our own footprint on the planet. This starts with a basic understanding of how our ecosystem work and knowing what a healthy ecosystem provides -- air, water, pollination. Those fortunate enough to have wilderness experiences must serve as the ambassadors and share this knowledge!
Ecolocal (anonymous profile)
March 11, 2012 at 6:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)