Children living in rich biodiverse environments tend to have a more positive and integrated view of the human-nature relationship than children living in urbanized settings

This study investigated how children from two dramatically different backgrounds perceive and value nature. One group -- 91 children from the Indigenous society of Tupinambá in Brazil -- lived in a rich biodiverse environment. The other group – 54 children from New York City – lived in a highly-urbanized setting. Children in each group were between six and 14 years of age.

All of the children completed drawings illustrating their ideas of nature and of nature around them. They then participated in one-on-one interviews during which they were asked to talk about their drawings. They were also asked to share ideas about (a) what they found good and bad in nature, (b) the usefulness of nature, and (c) the human-nature relationship. A quantitative analysis of the children’s drawings focused on the amount of detail included in the illustrations.  A qualitative analysis focused on the amount of Liveliness and Animism depicted in the drawings. Levels of Liveliness (None, Some, or A Lot) were based on the extent to which the drawing showed that elements are actively interconnected and that “something is happening” in the picture.  Animism scores were based on the presence of facial features in non-human and non-animal figures. Interview responses were organized into categories emerging from the data. These categories included “good feelings,” “bad feelings,” “resources,” “ethical and environmental concern,” “human well-being,” “environmental problems,” “anthropocentric,” “eco-centric,” and “biocentric.”

Drawings and interview responses indicated that how children viewed and valued nature differed by group. The Tupinambá children’s drawings reflected more liveliness and animism than those of the New York group. While these differences applied to both the younger (9 and under) and older (10 and older) children, the differences were more pronounced with the older group. The biggest difference between the Tupinambá and the New York group related to animism.  While over 45% of the Tupinambá drawings included animism, less than 4% of the New York drawings contained animism. Differences between the two groups were also evident in the extent to which the children depicted and/or talked about different plant and animal species. While the Tupinambá children cited a total of 30 different plant species and 43 different animal species, the New York children cited only 12 plant species and 22 animal species. The New York children seemed to be more concerned about the negative environmental effects of human behavior than the Tupinambá children. Additionally, while the Tupinambá children tended to see human and non-human elements as integrated, the New York children tended to view nature as separate from humans. Most of Tupinambá children referred to nature as “good” without any mention of its usefulness to humans. The New York children, on the other hand, tended to focus on the human benefits of natural resources. Most of the Tupinambá children found nothing bad in nature; most of the New York children identified animals, plants, and natural disasters as being bad.

These findings indicate that children living in rich biodiverse environments tend to have a more positive and integrated view of the human and natural environment relationship than children living in urbanized settings.