aspx
Home
Help
Log In
Cart (0)
Leadership
News & Events
Awards
Interest Areas
Publications
Membership
About
Home // Division 34 // Publications of the Society for... // Newsletters // Ecopsychology and...
In this issue
Ecopsychology
It was within this context of having the right tools at our disposal, that I discussed
Ecopsychology. From my perspective, ecopsychology can be seen as a worldview and diverse
social movement that recognizes a synergy between human mental health and well-being and
the health and ecological integrity of the natural environment. This is a perennial idea that has
gained new currency and a sense of urgency in the modern environmental movement,
particularly in its "deep ecology" wing (e.g., Naess, 2008). In plain language, the mission of
ecopsychology, as proposed by Roszak (1992) was to validate that an emotional connection to
nature is normal and healthy, and in doing so, to help the environmental movement to be more
effective by appealing to these positive ecological bonds rather than promoting conservation
based on messages of fear or shame. As Ecopsychology has evolved it continued from page
5has retained some of its popular movement aspects while also influencing a number of
academic disciplines, health care practices and policy, and the arts.
Allowing for its varied manifestations, and for the purposes of our discussions in Div. 34,
Ecopsychology can be differentiated from other psychologies of the natural environment by
its focus on the holistic, embodied, and existential aspects of humans' connectedness and
inter-being with the rest of nature and a characteristic therapeutic response to the emotional
impacts of issues like species extinction or global climate change. Further, Ecopsychology can
be differentiated between what could be called "Conventional Ecopsychology" (e.g., a focus
on environmental perspectives in health care and on the therapeutic aspects of environmental
issues (see Frumkin, in press; Faber Taylor & Kuo, 2009 & Randall; 2009) and "Radical
Ecopsychology" (e.g., Fisher, 2002 & Kidner, 2001) that challenges the Cartesian Dualism
underlying western science (including psychology); advocates the application of Critical
Theory, Ecofeminism, and Deep Ecology; and envisions ecological lifeways founded on
social and environmental justice. As a field of study, Ecopsychology obviously overlaps with
other environmentally focused initiatives in psychological science particularly Environmental
Psychology and the interdisciplinary areas of Conservation Psychology and Environmental
Health. (It should be noted that, presently, terms like "Ecopsychology" and "Ecopsychologist"
are not linked with any one field or credential and are open to all--as in the case with terms
like "Environmental Psychology" or "Conservation Psychology.")
My primary training in professional psychology focused on the roles of clinician,
diagnostician, counselor and group leader, outcomes researcher, supervisor, and consultant.
For myself, I feel most grounded approaching environmentally-focused psychology from the
perspective of a practitioner. Since I am knowledgeable and comfortable facilitating groups,
helping individuals manage difficult emotions and navigate questions of identity and
development, and assessing pathology and fostering well-being, an affinity with the
Ecopsychology tradition is a natural fit.
Primarily an area of theory and research area exploring questions and constructs (e.g.,
affordances) that date to the origin of psychology as a discipline;
Environmental Psychology
Study of phenomenon associated with human population and population density, including
health and social factors;
Ecopsychology
Therapeutic, holistic, and critical initiatives in psychology that recognize a synergy between
human mental health and well-being and the health and ecological integrity of the natural
environment;
Conservation Psychology
or "Just Sustainability" (to use Agyeman and colleagues' term, see Agyeman, Bullard, &
Evans, 2003) -- I also imagine this as an interdisciplinary focus area drawing researchers and
practitioners interested in foregrounding diversity and social justice.
Looking ahead, there is potential for other definable content and interest areas within SEPCP
including:
The Science of Human-Environment Interactions (e.g., members who see their work
as advancing basic science);
The Psychology of Fostering Sustain- ability (this may or may not overlap with
"General Conservation Psychology" in my scheme);
A Caveat
I don't want to underestimate the challenge in such a comprehensive and pluralistic turn for
Environmental Psychology. De- bates over names and labels are not just academic, in the
sense of being theoretical or hypothetical. They link to job titles and hence to things like
professional identity, tenure, and livelihood. Further, emotions associated with our Division's
discussions and debates are also likely tied to members' own environmental identities and
potentially, to their self worth, self actualization, and ultimately their meaning making in an
existential and spiritual sense. I look forward to further dialog on these matters.
Recommendations
Diversification and Specialization in Div. 34.
From a mentoring standpoint, elders in Div. 34 can help members understand and articulate
their contribution to environmentally-focused psychology and thus speak from a place of
authority and competence. This may be as scientist, researcher, consultant, educator, healer,
ecologist, activist, advocate, policy-maker or businessperson. Psychologists are likely to
experience discomfort when asked to do things for which they lack training and confidence.
Use of a broad-based toolbox needs to be modeled and trained.
Tolerance and Collaboration in Div. 34
Div. 34 members come from a range of backgrounds and gain their livelihood in a variety of
ways. I have been troubled by hints of intolerance within Div. 34 in the past as well as recent
listserv exchanges that seem to have had a chilling effect on dialogue. I strongly recommend
that the division foster dialogue on diversity among its membership. Diversity and difference
regarding one's primary approach to understanding human-environment interactions and interbeing can manifest on a number of levels. These can include Ecological vs. Human
Exceptionalist Paradigms (Dunlap, 2002), engagement in broader Environmental Discourses
(Dryzek, 2005), and use of Conservative vs. Liberal moral value sets (Haidt, 2007).
Interdisciplinary collaboration is highly valued in environmentally-focused psychology
rhetoric. However, it is unclear that SEPCP presents a safe environment for differences within
the membership to be acknowledged and discussed. Take-away: Our Capacity for
Interdisciplinary Practice Begins at Home in Div. 34.
Outreach to Other Divisions of APA
As noted, there are a number of discrete content areas to investigate in Environmentallyfocused Psychology that can be organized around a clear conceptual core and, in some cases,
an established set of competencies. These can further be mapped onto other APA Divisions
and suggest areas of collaboration across the organization. Take-away: SEPCP can provide
leadership and a gathering place for psychologists of all kinds to contribute to our
understanding of human-nature interrelationships and the promotion of ecological well-being
and differences within the membership to be acknowledged and discussed. Take-away: Our
Capacity for Interdisciplinary Practice Begins at Home in Div. 34.
Summary of Take-Aways
In terms of Environmentally-focused Psychologies, use the right tool for the job, and if this is
too much for one person, create a team. Growth and mentoring in SEPCP requires tolerance
and understanding of our own diversity. Our capacity for interdisciplinary practice begins at
home in Div. 34. Our content areas can be mapped onto other APA Divisions and suggest
areas of collaboration across the organization. We can provide resources and leadership to the
organization.
References
Agyeman, J., Bullard, R., & Evans, B. (2003). Just sustainabilities: Development in
an unequal world. London: Earthscan The MIT Press.
Classical foundations, contemporary insights (pp. 329-350). Boulder, CO: Rowman &
Littlefield
Faber Taylor, A. & Kuo, F.E. (2009). Children with attention deficits concentrate
better after walk in the park. Journal of Attention Disorders, 12,402-409.
Frumkin, H. (in press). Building the science base: Ecopsychology meets clinical
epidemiology. In Peter H. Kahn & P. Hasbach (Eds.). Ecopsychology: Science, totems
and the technological species. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Haidt, J. & Graham, J. (2007). When morality opposes justice: Conservatives have
moral intuitions that liberals may not recognize. Social Justice Research. 20, 98-116.
Kahn, P. H. & Hasbach, P. (Eds.) (In Press). Ecopsychology: Science, totems and the
technological species. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Kidner, D. W. (2001). Nature and psyche. Albany, NY: State University of New York
Press.
Naess, A. (2008). Lifestyle trends within the deep ecology movement. In A.Drengson
& B. Devall (Eds.). The ecology of wisdom: Writings by Arne Naess. 140-141.
Berkeley, CA: Counterpoint Press.
Randall, R. (2009). Loss and climate change: The cost of parallel narratives.
Ecopsychology, 1, 118-129.
Roszak, T. (1992). The voice of the earth. New York: Simon & Shuster.