7.1 Introduction
Over half of the world population lives in cities and this proportion continues to increase. For many urban citizens, the physical separation from nature is large. It takes effort, time and money to get there. Even when we do not strictly define nature as areas that are not influenced by humans, distances to green spaces may be large for many citizens (e.g. Soliman et al., 2017). Furthermore, technology and digitalization are booming and modern society relies on them. It is, perhaps, more difficult for people to imagine life without technology than to imagine life without nature. Yet, nature is essential for life on earth, for our well-being and for our future. We tend to forget that modern societies rely on nature, just as ancient societies did. We are part of it. We forget because most of us no longer feel connected to nature (Beery et al., 2022). Interestingly, we rarely think of the many ways in which technology influences this connection and our behaviour with respect to nature. In this chapter, we reflect on the role of technology in our connection with nature. Let us consider some hypothetical situations to illustrate why we should think about this topic â situations that are likely to commonly arise (See Example 7.1).
Example 7.1
Rethinking humanânature connectedness
We zoom in on a train travelling between two cities in the Netherlands (Figure 7.1), one of the most densely populated countries in the world, where the landscape is dominated by agriculture. While much of this landscape is âgreenâ, most passengers do not notice it. Their eyes are on their smartphones or their laptops. They are playing games, watching videos, and active on social media. Some passengers are studying or working. Only a few people look outside, only a few are engaged in conversations with others. In this situation, digital technology that captures our attention has reduced human connection with the physical and social environment. We zoom out and consider another, contrasting, situation: a group of people sitting quietly on the forest floor before going on a walk in the woods. They are forest-bathing. Being in the forest has positive effects on mental and physical health, exposing participants to a beneficial microbiome, reducing stress levels, calming their minds. The positive effects of forest-bathing â restoration of concentration and mental well-being â are highlighted in attention restoration theory (e.g. Hansen et al., 2017). In addition, this ânature-interventionâ, in which technology does not play a role, is intended to restore the ancient relationship between humans and nature.
Here, we consider two different, contrasting situations.
It is Saturday morning and Mr Smith is reading the electronic newspaper on his tablet, while the automatic lawnmower has been mowing the lawn since 6 oâclock that morning. The lawn looks picture-perfect, not a dandelion in sight. Mr Smith has no idea that this also means that his garden is a dead-zone for insects.
Two blocks down, a group of neighbours are working together to sow flowers and plant fruit trees in the garden in the centre of the square in which they live. This âgardenâ used to be maintained by the municipality: the grass was mown every week, and the hedges were pruned once a year. Today, this central garden is more biodiverse, and has become a meeting place where neighbours drink coffee together. They are proud to have organized themselves and have taken over maintenance of this public green space. As a result, these people feel more connected to nature and to each other.
Technology tends to reduce our connection with nature
source: photo 1: https://freerangestock.com/photos/120873/people-on-the-train-looking-at-their-mobile-phones.html, photo 120873; photo 2: https://www.flickr.com/photos/keepitsurreal/46981596084
The hypothetical situations in Example 7.1 suggest that technology (unintentionally) decreases our connection with nature. Yet, restoring this connection and/or reinventing our relationship with nature is considered crucial for sustainable development (Richardson et al., 2023). This is not only because nature and natural processes are the basis of our being, which is threatened by the biodiversity crisis and consequences of global climate change, but also because nature is essential for our (mental) health. In the following sections, we first introduce and explain important key concepts and their relationships in the context of this chapter. Next, we provide detailed descriptions of three case studies in which technology potentially mediates humanânature connectedness at different levels of citizen participation. Finally, we attempt to look ahead, envisioning a future in which humanânature connectedness is reinvented, supported by technology.
humanânature connectednes
7.2 Key concepts and their relationships
In this section we introduce the key concepts of our approach and the coherence of these concepts: socio-technical-ecological systems, technology, citizen participation and humanânature connectedness. We also introduce relationships between the key concepts, whereby the intermediating role of technology is emphasized (7.2.2).
7.2.1 Key concepts
7.2.1.1 Society
Modern society can be described as a system combining social, technological and ecological realms that are interconnected (e.g. Ahlborg et al., 2019). Changes in one realm of a Socio-Technical-Ecological system (STES) aff ect the other realms (Figure 7.2). As such, these systems have leverage points at which the complete system can change. While changes at the societal level are generally slow, they are triggered by changes at the âstreet levelâ, the level where we live. Feedback loops between the âstreet levelâ and the âsocietal levelâ can accelerate system change. We use these two levels to make our point that organization (participation) of people and humanânature connectedness take place in a larger system, influenced by but also influencing daily life (Balászi et al., 2019; Beery, 2023). Special attention should be given to the role of technology, because this often mediates the connection between the street level and the system level. For example, as also illustrated above, the introduction of smartphones (technology) changed our ways of communicating (human behaviour) and hence our social interactions (social realm). At the same time, the introduction of this technology contributed to reduced interaction with our physical environment and hence contributed to reduced nature connectedness (e.g. Richardson et al., 2018; Richardson et al., 2022, Balázsi et al., 2019). This in turn might change the ecological realm because we become less interested in taking care of the environment (see figure 7.2).
Socio-Technical-Ecological system (STES)
Theoretical model of the mutual influence between system level and daily life level
source: photo 1: https://freerangestock.com/photos/120873/people-on-the-train-looking-at-their-mobile-phones.html, photo 120873; photo 2: https://www.flickr.com/photos/keepitsurreal/46981596084
7.2.1.2 Technology
Technology is âthe use of science in industry, engineering, etc., to invent useful things or to solve problemsâ, or âa machine, piece of equipment, method, etc., that is created by technologyâ (Wernaart, 2022). In our case special attention should be paid to apps, podcasts, binoculars, (digital) maps and even serious games. Given the digital revolution (e.g. Wernaart 2022), we focus primarily on digital techniques in the case studies below. Technology is not usually developed with the specific purpose of connecting humans and nature (or of encouraging citizen participation in nature conservation). However, technology designed for other purposes can be used in the context of enhancing citizen participation (e.g. media channels for communication, etc.).
Technology has moral aspects (Wernaart, 2022). New technologies change society, introducing new moral questions. Indeed, industrialization and urbanization are also effects of technological development. Wernaart (2022) describes the example of the industrial revolution bringing inequality into society. In our case, we can see that technology tends to widen the gap between human and nature (Soga and Gaston, 2016; Richardson et al. 2022). In our case, we interpret morality as the positive contribution to sustainability in general (or absence of) and to the effects on humanânature connectedness in particular.
moral aspects
7.2.1.3 Citizen participation
Citizen participation refers to citizen involvement in public decision-making. While interpretations differ, âgroupâ, âorganizationsâ and âpowerâ are important keywords. âCitizensâ may be either individuals or organized communities and âparticipationâ may involve either observation, engagement or power. âThe means of citizen participation include groups and formal organizations, meetings, inquiries, action, and technical assistanceâ (Baum, 2001). In this definition, participation is a form of organization of individuals in a larger group. Arnstein (1969) puts more emphasis on the power aspect of participation, simply seeing citizen participation as a categorical term for citizen power. âIt is the redistribution of power that enables the have-not citizens, presently excluded from the political and economic processes, to be deliberately included in the future.â Citizen participation thus provides the means by which these individuals can induce significant social reform, enabling them to share in the benefits of the affluent society. Arnstein (1969) distinguishes three major levels of participation: information, consultation and engagement. These levels are also referred to as the âparticipation-ladderâ, where self-organization is seen as the highest possible (sub)level.
The OECD (2022) says: âCitizen and stakeholder participation includes all the ways in which stakeholders (including citizens) can be involved in the policy cycle and in service design and delivery.â This also requires efforts by public institutions to hear the views, perspectives, and inputs from citizens and stakeholders. Indeed, Ferreira et al. (2020) highlights the importance of citizenâs perceptions, preferences and perspectives for public participation and conclude that it is essential that managers and planners become more aware of this.
Interestingly, Ferreira et al. (2020) notes that, in most cases, participation processes in nature-based solutions were organized bottom-up and/or led by citizens (see section 7.3.3, the IJsselstein case study). Balancing this autonomy of social initiatives with expert knowledge in a context-specific way can lead to novel governance concepts (âmosaic governanceâ), as proposed by Buijs et al. (2016).
7.2.1.4 HumanâNature Connectedness
Restoring HumanâNature Connectedness (HNC) is perhaps the biggest challenge of our time (Richardson, 2023). HNC has been emphasized as a key concept for leveraging sustainable changes in social-ecological systems (Balászi et al., 2019, Ives et al., 2018; Richardson et al., 2022). When people really get attached to nature, then care for nature will be obvious. The question is, what can technologies do to support this attachment, thus extending a social ecological system (SES) to a social-technical-ecological system (STES)?
Several types of HNC are identified in the literature. One of the most used is HNC as described by Ives et al. (2018), who introduce material, experiential, emotional, cognitive and philosophical connections with nature (further explained in Table 7.2 in section 7.2.2). Interactions between these types of nature connectedness and feedback loops between types can offer stronger leverage potential in the sustainability transition. Structural change may often be necessary to enable successful implementation of interventions that reconnect people with nature and to realize the benefits. Ives et al. (2018) illustrate this with examples where a revised educational policy is needed to allow students greater interaction with nature as part of the curricula; reformed planning law is needed to increase biodiversity in cities and modified transport networks are needed to enable people to access natural areas easily. Reconnecting people with nature may therefore both affect and depend upon deep structural change.
The above-mentioned STES approach and the interaction between the societal and street levels make it clear that a certain level of participation (organization) should take place before human nature interactions can completely unfold. These participation processes can stimulate individual citizens to connect with nature (see also detailed case study descriptions).
7.2.2 Relationships between key concepts
7.2.2.1 The relationship between human behaviour and ecology (mediated by technology)
Richardson (2023 after Timothy Tayler, 2010) described men as the technological ape. We can no longer survive without technology: âWe are born helpless and become bound to the technological culture we learn to survive in.â But technology is progressively separating us from nature. In the early days of mankind, technology, such as bows and axes, was directly attached to survival and nature. Now, our technology is the pen and the computer. This separation is visible in all areas of life (Table 7.1).
Examples of changes through technology in various aspects of daily life
Many daily activities now take place indoors as a result of technological advancements. That means that, at the very least, the physical connection with nature is diminishing. However, the effects are going deeper. Changes are taking place on all levels of HNC (Table 7.2). Although it is difficult to pinpoint exactly what has led to this decline in spontaneous outdoor activities, several possible triggers have been identified. These include the rapid growth in the number and proportion of people living in urban areas (Turner et al., 2004; Zhang et al., 2014); technological advancements and the emergence of sedentary pastimes such as watching television, playing computer games, and browsing the internet (Pergams and Zaradic, 2006; Ballouard et al., 2011); the overscheduling and micromanagement of childrenâs lives (Clements, 2004; Hofferth, 2009). For many people today, outdoor experiences of natured are being replaced by virtual alternatives (Pergams and Zaradic 2006; Hofferth, 2009; Ballouard et al., 2011).
Types of HumanâNature Connectedness (after Ives et al., 2018) and examples of the role of technology
However, after this rather negative exposé of the role of technology in our separation from nature and our loss of nature connection, we can ask ourselves about positive possibilities. Can technology also help to create new connections to nature, possibly even support the reinvention of our relationship with nature?
Several studies have looked into this potential. Soliman et al. (2017) found that watching nature videos could increase nature relatedness (although this did not result in pro-environmental behaviour). Zabini et al. (2020) examined the relaxation effect of audio-visual stimulation using a forest video, in the absence of human â nature interactions resulting from the COVID-19 quarantine. The results showed a short-term decrease in anxiety levels after exposure to a forest video, but they did not indicate long-term changes. The virtual exposure to forest environments was effective in reducing human stress levels in people lacking direct nature contact. The authors concluded that virtual nature is unable to fully reproduce the effects of real nature, such as boosting of immune functions due to exposure to phytoncides. However, they also concluded that immersive virtual nature technologies could contribute positively to the physiological well-being of people who do not have direct access to nature, albeit with only short-term effects. As Matey (2017) described it: âTechnological nature has its benefits; engaging with it makes us feel good by triggering our innate âbiophilia,â a term for humanityâs inborn, primordial affiliation with the environment. For example, researchers have found that nature videos played in prisons drastically reduce violence amongst inmates, suggesting that natureâs relaxing influence translates through screens.â Altrudi (2021) introduces a warning note on this point. Not everybody can be reached with technology. Most of those people reached by this means are already interested in nature (Altrudi, 2021).
So, the conclusion of this section is that technology has driven human beings away from nature, with a diminishing HNC as a consequence. Some technologies are already used to restore the connection between people and nature. However, the overall conclusion is that more change is needed in order to support a transition towards nature inclusive behaviour.
7.2.2.2 The relationship between participation and the social realm (mediated by technology)
Technology can be used to condition people. The critiques shared on social media are a good example of this role of technology. They steer people in certain directions in order to keep them occupied. People get âorganizedâ around subjects that keep them away from their direct surroundings.
Similarly, technology can also be used to organize people around nature, landscape and their home area, thus producing a force to counter technology that generally disconnects people from nature. There is considerable literature on citizen participation in urban planning. The literature review of Ferreira et al. (2020) shows that technological methods and tools may be used to involve citizens and stakeholders as participants in Nature Based Solutions (a wider term than green infrastructure and other narrower terms). For example, GIS-based tools, digital twins and VR may enhance citizen participation in the strategic planning of green space in cities (see also the case study in IJsselstein). Questionnaires and surveys remain one of the most common tools in the participatory process. Nowadays, such methods often rely on technology, although they can be supplemented by approaches that are not necessarily technology-based, such as interviews, meetings or workshops.
This use of technology can also be seen in the work of organisations such as Ecó (previously known as AVAAZ), Greenpeace, Milieudefensie (Dutch Friends of the Earth) etc. â organisations that initiate signature campaigns around environmental problems. The Internet, with all its features, is very helpful in raising awareness and in starting a movement around (green) public issues. In addition, many organisations, such as E-NGOs, try to combat disconnection by offering educational programs and outdoor experiences (Beery et al., 2023). Importantly, the effect of these programmes depends on the social and political context (STES) in which they operate.
7.2.2.3 The relationship between participation and humanânature connectedness
Often participation (in the sense of organization and social power) is necessary to enhance humanânature connectedness. Groups of people have to create and provide the means to make this relationship possible. It is important to understand how participation in such groups translates to the daily life of the participants, in particular, how their participation affects their connection with nature and the level of their nature-inclusive behaviour. Here, we will consider this relationship as âcitizen scienceâ â research that is carried out in whole or in part by citizens. Examples include measurement of air or water quality or observation of animals or plants. This data can be collected and analysed by scientists. The largely voluntary contribution of citizens increases data availability and often increases temporal and geographic coverage. This is a relevant advantage in biodiversity research because the monitoring and identification of organisms takes a lot of time. Through citizen science, monitoring can be carried out at several different times of the year and at many locations. This is crucial in order to analyse the development of biodiversity and to link it to the functioning of ecosystems and (changes in) environmental factors. In the Netherlands, an estimated 25,000 people are active as volunteers in biodiversity monitoring. The vast majority of observations are recorded for birds. Lesser numbers of observations are received for vascular plants and butterflies (Wallis de Vries and Sparrius, 2022), a pattern that exists worldwide (Chandler et al., 2017). Many studies based on citizen science have already been published and it can be concluded that this approach is very valuable for biodiversity research (e.g. Chandler et al., 2017; Koffler et al., 2021; Peter et al., 2019, 2021). This is especially the case when projects are well-structured and observations are made according to strict protocols (Galvan et al., 2022; Johnston et al., 2022).
citizen science
In addition to generating data on biodiversity, citizen science can also be meaningful in other ways. It increases participantsâ knowledge of biodiversity and of species and their value (Peter et al., 2019). In addition, participation in a citizen science project can contribute to greater involvement with nature, which may lead to a different attitude towards and connection to nature and, potentially, to changes in behaviour. Recent research shows that participants in citizen science projects in the field of biodiversity report that they can indeed communicate better about biodiversity and research, and that they also observe a change in their own behaviour in activities such as gardening (Peter et al., 2021). Interestingly, Mattijssen and Terluin (2018) note that the relationship between citizen science and nature connectedness is reciprocal: increased HNC can result from participation in citizen science but is often also a driver to participate in such initiatives.
7.3 Case studies on citizen participation
Here we introduce three case studies with increasing emphasis on the role of citizen participation. All of the case studies make use of technology that helps people to become more strongly connected with nature (increased HNC). The first study is about walking apps. The next concerns the citizen science activities of the Dutch Butterfly Conservation foundation (De Vlinderstichting). The last study is about an environmental group in IJsselstein that built a GIS map that gives counterforce against the municipality and unites the inhabitants of IJsselstein in their activities around the special collection of fruit trees in the public green space.
7.3.1 Walking apps
There are different types of walking apps. Some direct attention to the environment, identifying items of interest and their locations. However, most help to measure achievement, such as the number of steps taken, or aim to support a certain state of mind (apps intended to improve physical or mental health).
In the Dutch National Prevention Agreement, the central government has made agreements with 70 social organizations aiming to achieve substantial health gains for the entire Dutch population by 2040 (Rijksoverheid, n.d.). One objective of these agreements is to reduce the percentage of overweight people from the current 50% to 38% of the population. The Dutch Brain Foundation (Hersenstichting) has therefore created the Ommetje app,1 in collaboration with prominent brain scientist Erik Scherder. This app is designed with the intention of encouraging people to walk every day. The emphasis is on health benefits, not on experiencing nature. According to the Brain Foundation, the app has been downloaded 1.6 million times, 30% of those who have downloaded the app use it regularly (walked with the app for more than 66 days) and users have already walked a total of 272 million kilometres with the app. Each walk ends with a brain fact expressed by Erik Scherder. The research of De Bruin et al. (2021) stated that walking apps encourage people to go outside.
The success of the Ommetje app can be explained by the influencing techniques incorporated in it (Schooltink and Hippert, 2021; Kramer et al., 2020). These include rewarding good behaviour (earning points), continuing pays off (more points for continued performance), social proof (everyone does it, including me) and rankings (you can measure your performance against others). These are all motivational techniques that can be built into apps.
This app is therefore a good example of how the government (via the Brain Foundation) can nudge people to participate in desired behaviour through smart information provision. This is participation at the level of information (OECD, 2017). People can share their experiences via Facebook or other social media. It is unclear to what extent this sharing has an effect on government campaigns, but this is probably more of an exchange between the participants. The level of consultation (Arnstein, 1969) is therefore not reached. As the app is mainly aimed at encouraging walking as an activity, there is less or no attention directed at the environment. In short, the app has a very limited design, but perhaps that is also part of its success.
The Klompenpad app (clog path) is an exception to the many apps such as the Ommetje app that focus solely on personal health and development.2 This app focuses on walking several routes (clog paths) and provides information about the area, not only about the ecological environment but also about the cultural- historical aspects of the landscape. This app can be compared to a digital travel guide, with all kinds of useful extras such as the option to keep track of where you have walked and options to share the routes with others via WhatsApp and email. The literature seems to suggest that more knowledge of the socio-ecological environment increases appreciation (emotional bond). Runaar (2020) supports this, identifying that people came to appreciate the landscape more after seeing videos of farms.
In terms of HNC, the Ommetje app can provide some experiential connectedness, when the walker is able to see his/her surroundings (Table 7.3). The Klompenpad app adds the possibility of cognitive connectedness and some emotional binding through the stories about the landscape that are included in the app. Material HNC could be promoted by connecting with sites such as Wildplukwijzer3.
Case study 1, walking apps may be designed to stimulate people to connect more strongly to nature, e.g. by providing information and stories
7.3.2 Citizen science organized by the Dutch Butterfly Conservation Foundation (De Vlinderstichting)
The Dutch Butterfly Conservation foundation (De Vlinderstichting)4 is a public organization aiming to protect butterflies, moths and dragonflies in the Netherlands. They do this by collecting data and developing information and knowledge about where these insects can be found and by protecting and improving their habitat. Educating the public about butterflies is an important pillar of the organization because awareness is crucial for conservation. The foundation also coordinates the national monitoring of butterflies, moths and dragonflies, based almost entirely on citizen science. The Dutch Butterfly Conservation foundation started butterfly monitoring with Statistics Netherlands (CBS) in 1990, dragonfly monitoring in 1998 and moth monitoring in 2012. Statistics Netherlands checks and analyses the citizen science data, identifies national and provincial trends, provides information for the WWF Living Planet Report and reports to meet the requirements of the EU Bird and Habitat Directive (Article 17). Furthermore, butterfly data are combined with (citizen science) data on other species groups to calculate indicators then presented by Environmental Data Compendium Netherlands.5 Currently, citizen scientists monitor all Dutch butterfly species along 800 transects across the Netherlands and moths at 800 points using LED-buckets (see below).
Citizen scientists that work with the Dutch Butterfly Conservation foundation use a variety of methods and technologies that have or have not been specifically developed for this purpose. Day-active butterflies and dragonflies are monitored along transects with a specific protocol which specifies details such as the length of the transect, required weather conditions and the frequency of monitoring. Transect-monitoring requires a substantial time investment and a relatively high level of species-knowledge and expertise of the volunteer. The citizen scientist that walks a particular transect does not use technology specifically developed for this purpose (although binoculars may be used to identify butterflies from a distance). Data are collected on an online platform and participants have the option to submit their records in one of three ways: on paper forms, through the website or with an app on their mobile phones.
Monitoring of macro-moths is also done by registered volunteers, using LED- buckets (large buckets fitted with a specific light) to attract these insects during the night. The LED-buckets are set once every two weeks. Moths that enter the bucket are counted and identified the next morning. This approach requires a high level of expertise on the part of the citizen scientists because there are many more moth than butterfly species in the Netherlands and they are more difficult to identify. Moth monitoring with LED-buckets is also done by approximately 100 farmers on their own farmland. In this case, volunteers submit photographs to the Dutch Butterfly Conservation foundation, which then uses automatic image recognition for species identification. Automatic image recognition is relatively well developed for this group of insects and difficult cases are checked by experts of the Dutch Butterfly Conservation foundation. Participating farmers can also use the app Obsidentify6 to easily identify moths.
Flexible counting is a more user friendly and less time-consuming option than transect walks or systematic moth monitoring. It allows people to occasionally monitor butterflies along transects using a specific app. ButterflyCount7 is a European app that can be used for occasional counts of all butterfly species over 15-minute periods or for observations of a specific species, such as the wall brown (Lasiommata megera or argusvlinder in Dutch) or the dragonfly Stylurus flavipes (river clubtail or rivierrombout in Dutch).
These different approaches to citizen science require different levels of (individual) participation and levels of expertise from the volunteers. These levels relate to the planned primary outcomes of the citizen science, ranging from data collection to education or awareness. On the one hand, expert volunteers contribute important data on butterflies, moths and dragonflies that feeds directly into the Netwerk Ecologische Monitoring (NEM â Dutch Ecological Monitoring Network),8 which is the backbone of terrestrial biodiversity data informing policy in the Netherlands. Thus, these citizen scientists participate at the consultation level because the data that they collect may influence political decisions. On the other hand, anyone can report their incidental findings of these insects on the website of the Dutch Butterfly Conservation foundation. While these citizen science efforts are mostly individual, the Dutch Butterfly Conservation encourages or invites participants to monitor together with other people, either as an organised workgroup or with friends or colleagues. They also offer to help in connecting participants with other volunteers that are active in the same region.
In the case of the Dutch Butterfly Conservation foundation, there appears to be a trade-off between the level of expertise required for the different citizen science approaches and the technology required and also between the level of citizen participation and the technology required. Today, the citizen science data, the data that are most important in informing policy and in influencing decision-making, are those collected by the most experienced citizen scientists who use methods that require the least technology (transects of butterflies and point measurements of moths, where technology is only used in the data collection platform but not by the citizen scientist). Nevertheless, technology enables the involvement of a wider, less-experienced, group of people as citizen scientists. In this case, technology can be important in helping people to become more connected to nature and to start climbing the citizen participation ladder by becoming more educated and informed on how citizen science data may influence policy.
We see several possibilities for how participating in citizen science may influence HNC (Table 7.3). At the cognitive level, participants may vary as described above, but almost all citizen scientists will gain knowledge of species (recognition) and possibly also of measures for species conservation or nature restoration. This gain may possibly extend to philosophical HNC where participation influences participantsâ thinking about our role in protecting instead of exploiting nature. Experiential HNC is automatically influenced because citizen scientists spend time outside and careful observation is inherent to the activity. Finally, it is important to consider emotional HNC because participants may report pessimistic thoughts (see Peter et al., 2021).
Case study 2, citizen science organized by the Dutch Butterfly Conservation foundation. Buckets with LED-light are used by citizen scientists to record moths in the Netherlands, while butterflies may be recorded along transects.
Ways in which the different types of HNC may be influenced in the three case studies
7.3.3 IJsselstein case: fruit trees in the public green space
There is an active citizensâ initiative in IJsselstein â Climate Neutral IJsselstein (KNIJ â Klimaatneutraal IJsselstein).9 The initiative provides a range of activities related to climate, public greenery and the living environment. This case study focuses on fruit in public spaces. IJsselstein has a unique collection of fruit trees in public spaces. The former city landscape architect planted all the apple, pear and hazelnut varieties known to him in alphabetical order in the new residential areas of IJsselstein. The municipality of course knows this but was not aware of the uniqueness of the collection. The collection is fun, but is also complicated because every tree is unique and the falling fruit causes a nuisance (insects, dirty sidewalks, throwing by young people â common problems with fruit in public spaces).
KNIJ wants to achieve several goals with these fruit trees: (1) Preservation and strengthening of the cultural-historical and ecological value of public space in IJsselstein, and (2) Strengthening of the bond between residents and the fruit in the public space. They want to achieve this by: (1) Having volunteers manage the fruit trees, (2) Making agreements about the use of the fruit, (3) Documenting the locations of the different varieties. In order to achieve the last goal, a website has been created with a GIS application. This is not a static map. It can be updated with new knowledge about the varieties. With these activities and goals, all types of HNC can be addressed or reached (Table 7.3).
Case study 3, IJsselstein is a municipality in the Netherlands with a large collection of fruit trees in the public green space. Technology, including a website and GIS application, provides insight into the uniqueness of this collection and helps to coordinate activities associated with it.
Citizensâ initiatives are often said to be unreliable (Hassink et al., 2016), in the sense that they often change composition and that their timelines are flexible. In this case, however, the situation appears to be reversed. In just a few years, the citizensâ initiative had to deal with as many as fifteen civil servants who were responsible for the fruit trees in public spaces. The citizensâ initiative had to explain the value of the fruit again and again. The species website was a powerful tool (power through knowledge) indicating that the citizensâ group knew what they were talking about. The technology (website) therefore ensured participation. The map also has an internal function, because it makes it easier to make agreements about management and use: it helps to organize activities.
In addition, the website was also a very useful way to inform residents of how special the fruit collection was. This, together with information boards, e-mails, lectures and conversations in the field, led to a better understanding by the residents of how the fruit can be used (material level, see Ives et al., 2018) and what is needed to manage it (experiential, other level). Now that the fruit is being used, the nuisance is also less. In other words, technology helped to get from the participation level information (government sending information to citizens) to consultation (two-way relationship) and also, already, to some level of engagement.
Igalla et al. (2019) state that the three most important factors for the success of a citizensâ initiative are: a diverse network, organizational capacity, and government support. The digital map helps with all three. The digital map is used in discussions with other parties and the municipality, it also helps internal coordination. Naturally, the reverse also applies: a citizensâ initiative must already have a certain degree of organization in order to be able to create such a digital map.
7.3.4 How is technology mediating citizen participation and humanânature connectedness?
In general, technology reduces HNC because the STES that forms the current society, tends to favour technology that widens the gap between man and nature. When people do not feel connected to nature, they are also not much inclined to take care of nature, leading to more loss of biodiversity. This results in a negative feedback-loop because the distance to nature increases, and its quality deteriorates further as is evident from the current biodiversity crisis. Restoring or reinventing HNC is considered crucial in the transition to a sustainable STES (see, for example, Riechers et al., 2021).
Interestingly, our case study descriptions show that digital technology can play a role in restoring HNC. The walking apps primarily stimulate experiential and cognitive connectedness. These aspects may be further enhanced by digital technology such as gamification. For example, Laato et al. (2022) show that location-based games can benefit people who go to the forest but also benefit forest owners and even the forestry industry. Treasure hunts that make use of GIS locations, also called geocaches,10 present another example of technology that can increase experiential HNC in a wide range of people. Citizen science mostly increases cognitive connectedness but may also contribute to experiential connectedness. Here, technology may play a role especially in addressing a group of people that have less expertise and who, through participation, will look at nature more intensively and precisely. By using competitive elements and challenges, nature-oriented apps such as ObsIdentify (by, for example, awarding badges when data are entered for specific groups of animals or plants) can draw an even wider audience. In the case study of fruit trees in IJsselstein (KNIJ) four types of HNC are addressed (Table 7.3). Connecting with fruit trees and nature in their direct neighbourhood can also contribute to the sense-of-place of citizens, which is an important leverage point in reconnecting with nature (Riechers et al., 2021).
Perhaps the case studies we discussed also influence the philosophical HNC, but we could not assess that. However, we note that feedback loops exist between the types of HNC. More cognitive connectedness often means more emotional connectedness and vice versa. A high score on material, experiential, emotional and cognitive connectedness often leads to a feeling of partnership with nature and hence philosophical connectedness. This means that it may not matter where you start when you want to increase HNC in a population. However, the effects will be largest when several interacting aspects of HNC are addressed together. For example, by providing experience of the environment, a certain emotional bond can develop. When material, experiential, emotional and cognitive HNC develop, there is a chance that the philosophical position will be taken that nature is a partner. Riechers et al. (2021) also recognize the importance of interconnection between various leverage points in restoring HNC.
In the three case studies that we discussed, we see that participation in the sense of organization and counterpower is an important element of the development of technology that increases HNC. The Dutch Butterfly Conservation foundation and KNIJ organized the expertise of many people to be able to develop this (moral) technology and to make it meaningful in terms of actual citizen participation. Here, digital technology can also help citizens climb the participation ladder. Gaming elements, such as challenges and sharing information can help people to take the first step by making them feel part of a group. Hence, we suggest that technology can be used to change the existing system (STES) in a more nature-inclusive and sustainable way.
7.4 Outlook to the symbiocene
The symbiocene is a future vision of how humans may interact with the planet in a non-destructive way. This term was introduced by Albrecht in 2011 and is based on the word symbiosis, which means organisms of different species living together. If humans are to live in harmony with all other beings, we need to be connected with nature. To restore HNC with the help of technology, we suggest two things need to happen. The first is that technology that supports HNC should be promoted, as the citizen science example of the Dutch Butterfly Conservation foundation shows. Digital technology can attract new groups of people because the technology helps to detect the insects and thus helps people look at their ecological environment in a new way (see also Table 7.4). The second is that we should strive for the moral design of technology. This means that HNC choices are integrated as a design principle as we described in the example of the walking apps. The success factors of the walking app, for instance the game element, could be expanded to explore the surrounding, for example by adding a geocaching element as described above. Such game elements have at least two effects: (1) they urge people to study the surroundings, and (2) they create a greater urge to continue.
To reinvent our connection with nature and move towards a sustainable future, people and/or organizations are needed to create technology such as apps with which they can direct others (participate) towards a connection with nature (via technology). To make this happen, a counterforce is needed. Civil society groups can help to build this counterforce, either by participating in government programmes or through self-organization, as the example of IJsselstein shows. These civil society groups can also use technology to reach their goals, including a stronger HNC. They can also promote technology that supports HNC. They often do that already, but using other arguments (for example, reduction of pollution). We suggest that they can add the argument of HNC to their repertoire.
Changes on a larger scale must take place if we want to establish substantial changes in HNC (Table 7.4). These changes support the realization of the visions of a sustainable world. So, the optimistic message is that, if we walk the path of greening our world, HNC will increase in the future. (see table 7.5 for a future perspective). The pessimistic message is that greening of the world needs an a priori stronger HNC. Maybe the realistic message is that both elements need each other in order to grow. In the end, this can lead to a completely new STES with moral technology and (subsequently) a larger place for ecology. Importantly, it has not yet been stated that when technology leads to more humanânature connectedness, this also leads to nature inclusive behaviour. However, the literature claims that there is a positive relationship between these two (Richardson, 2020). New technology should, therefore, try to include incentives to act, as well as the incentives to connect on a sensory and emotional level.
The potential role of technology in the symbiocene
References
Altrudi, S., 2021. Connecting to nature through tech? The case of the iNaturalist app. Convergence, 27(1), 124â141. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856520933064.
Arnstein, S.R., 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Planning Association 35(4), 216â224.
Balázsi, Ã., Riechers, M., Hartel, T., Julia Leventon, J. and Joern Fischer, J., 2019. The impacts of social-ecological system change on human-nature connectedness: a case study from Transylvania, Romania. Land use policy, 89, 104232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104232.
Baum, H.S., 2001. Citizen participation. In: International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences.
Beery, T., Stahl Olafsson, A., Gentin, S., Maurer, M., StÃ¥lhammar, S., Albert, Ch., Bieling, C., Buijs, A., Fagerholm, N., Garcia-Martin, M., Plieninger, T. and Raymond, Ch.M., 2023. Disconnection from nature: expanding our understanding of humanânature relations. People and nature, 2023:470â488. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10451.
De Bruijn, G., Dallinga, J.M. and Deutekom M., 2021. Predictors of walking app users with comparison of current users, previous users, and informed nonusers in a sample of Dutch adults: questionnaire study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 2021;9:e13391 https://doi.org/10.2196/13391.
Hansen, M.M., Jones, R. and Tocchini, K., 2017. Shinrin-Yoku (forest bathing) and nature therapy: a state-of-the-art review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 14:851 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14080851.
Hassink, J., Salverda, I., Vaandrager, L., Van Dam, R. and Wentink, C., 2016. Relationships between green urban citizensâ initiatives and local governments. Cogent social sciences, 2:1, 1250336, https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2016.1250336.
Igalla, M., Edelenbos, J. and Van Meerkerk, I., 2019. Citizens in action, what do they accomplish? A systematic literature review of citizen initiatives, their main characteristics, outcomes and factors. ISTR, 2019â10, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-019-00129-0.
Ives, C.D., Abson, D.J., Wehrden, H., Dorninger, C., Klaniecki, K. and Fischer, J., 2018. Reconnecting with nature for sustainability. Sustain. Sci. 46, 30.
Kahn, P.H. Jr., 2011. Technological nature: adaptation and the future of human life. Cambridge MA, MIT press.
Kramer, J.N., Künzler, F., Mishra, V., Smit, S.N., Kotz, D., Scholtz, U., Fleisch, E., Kowatsch, T., 2020. Which components of a smartphone walking app help users to reach personalized step goals? Results from an optimization trial. Annals of behavioral medicine, Volume 54, July 2020, Pages 518â528, https://doi.org/10.1093/abm/kaaa002.
Laato, S., Pynnönen, S. and Kangas, A., 2022. Gamification of forest-going: Opportunities for players, landowners and the forest industry CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org), 6th International GamiFIN Conference 2022 (GamiFIN 2022), April 26â29, 2022.
Mattijssen, T.J.M. and I.J. Terluin 2018. Ecologische citizen science. Een weg naar grotere maatschappelijke betrokkenheid bij natuur? WOT-technical report 117, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen.
OECD, 2022. OECD guidelines for citizen participation processes, OECD public governance reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f765caf6-en.
Peter, M., Diekötter, T., Höffner T. and Kremer, K., 2021. Biodiversity citizen science: outcomes for the participating citizens. People & nature 3: 294â311 https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10193.
Richardson, M., Hussain, Z., and Griffiths, M.D., 2018. Problematic smartphone use, nature, connectedness and anxiety. Journal of behavioural addictions, 7, 109â116.
Richardson, M., Dobson, J., Abson, D.J., Lumber, R., Hunt, A., Young, R. and Moorhouse, B., 2020. Applying the pathways to nature connectedness at a societal scale: a leverage points perspective, Ecosystems and people, 16:1, 387â401, https://doi.org/10.1080/26395916.2020.1844296.
Richardson, M., 2023. Reconnection: fixing our broken relationship with nature. Pelagic Publishing, London.
Riechers, M., PÄtru-DuÈe, I.A. and Balázsi A., 2021. Leverage points to foster humanâ nature connectedness in cultural landscapes. Ambio 50:1670â1680. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-021-01504-2.
Rijksoverheid (Dutch Government), n.d. https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/gezondheid-en-preventie/nationaal-preventieakkoord.
Runhaar, H., 2020. Hoe waarderen Nederlanders boerennatuur? Landschap 2020/1, 11â19.
Schooltink, T. and Hippert, B., 2021. 13 beïnvloedingstechnieken die het succes van ommetjes verklaren. https://www.frankwatching.com/archive/2021/03/25/beinfluencestechnologies-ommetje-app-succes/.
Soga, M., and Gaston, K.J., 2016. Extinction of experience: the loss of humanânature interactions. Frontiers in ecology and the environment, 14(2), 94â101.
Soliman, M, Peetz, J. and Davydenko, M., 2017. The impact of immersive technology on nature relatedness and pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of media psychology 29, 8â17.
Taylor, T., 2010. The artificial ape. How technology changed the course of human evolution. St. Martinâs press, New York.
Wernaart, B.F.W., 2022. An introduction to moral design and technology. In: Wernaart, B.F.W. Moral design and technology. Wageningen Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-922-0_1.
Zabini, F., Albanese, L., Becheri, F.R., Gavazzi, G., Giganti, F., Giovanelli, F., Gronchi, G., Guazzini, A., Laurino, M., Li, Q., et al., 2020. Comparative study of the restorative effects of forest and urban videos during COVID-19 lockdown: intrinsic and benchmark values. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 17:8011. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17218011.