Why the study was done
Previous research has found nature connection — described here as the part of a person's self-concept that identifies with the natural world — to predict pro-environmental attitudes and behaviours, and to be associated with wellbeing. The authors note that efforts made in childhood appear more durable than those made with adults. Earlier reviews focused either on broad coverage or specifically on interventions; this review instead asks which factors are associated with children's nature connection, so that practitioners can act on the ones they can influence.
How it was done
The authors searched Web of Science and PsycINFO with no date limits, identifying 634 records. After screening, 28 articles were included. Inclusion required peer-reviewed publication, English language, a previously validated measure of nature connection, and participants aged 18 or under. Only quantitative studies were considered. Findings were combined using thematic synthesis (a method of grouping findings into descriptive themes), carried out by the first author and discussed with the second. Included studies varied widely in size, from 11 participants to around 5,500, and spanned many countries and settings.
What the review found
The authors group findings into six themes, spanning "internal" factors (within the child) and "external" ones:
1. Demographic — Several studies found girls reporting higher nature connection than boys, and one study found age inversely related to connection. However, at least one study found no significant differences by sex or ethnicity, so the evidence is mixed.
2. Dispositional — Perceptual sensitivity was weakly but consistently linked to connection in one study; another found associations with innovative and holistic thinking styles.
3. Familial — One study found parental nature connection predicted children's connection over and above whether the child attended a nature preschool. Family values towards nature and household socio-economic status were also implicated.
4. Environmental — Rural residence and neighbourhood vegetation were positively associated in several studies, though one large English study found the opposite. Greener schoolyards were linked to higher connection, but the greenest school also ran a garden-based learning programme, so the two effects cannot be separated.
5. Experiential — Time outdoors was linked to connection in some studies, but frequency of visits did not predict it in a large English sample, leading the authors to stress quality over quantity. Solitary activities predicted connection more strongly than social ones; longer environmental education programmes had larger effects than short ones; and using a mobile app on a park tour was as effective as a paper map or an educator. Several programmes showed no significant effect, possibly because of ceiling effects in measurement.
6. Affective — A programme combining sensory activities with emotion-mapping and artistic reflection showed significantly increased connection.
What this means for practice
The authors recommend designing interventions at family level rather than for individual children; planning for weather, including shelter and clothing, since disruptive conditions appeared to reduce programme impact; deliberately shaping programmes for groups who may benefit most, such as boys and older children; and building in activities that generate enjoyment and positive emotion. They also argue for equity of access to high-quality nature experiences.
The Bottom Line
The authors searched two academic databases, screened 634 records, and synthesised 28 quantitative studies of children aged 18 or under, drawn from countries including the UK, USA, Turkey, Mexico, Israel, Sweden and Portugal. They grouped the factors associated with nature connection into six themes — demographic, dispositional, affective, familial, environmental and experiential — and argue that these interact rather than operating separately. The synthesis indicates that parental nature connection, the quality (rather than simply the quantity) of outdoor experiences, opportunities for reflection and creative expression, and even weather conditions are all associated with how strongly children connect with nature. The authors argue that programmes targeting individual children may be less effective than those involving whole families.