 |
Woodleywonderworks/NASA. (1972). Earth. Retrieved from http://images.cdn.fotopedia.com/flickr-2222548359-original.jpg |
During a quick glance through New Zealand psychology curricula at university level, I found one taught postgraduate paper named ‘environmental psychology’ (a special topic) at Victoria University of Wellington. Aotearoa is known internationally for its reputation on advocating for environmental issues and for the work among Maori organisations on addressing issues of natural resource sustainability and ecological protection (e.g., Te Whaiti Nui-a-Toi, 2001). Would it make sense to have a more explicit focus, specifically from a New Zealand perspective, in the teaching and research of environmental psychology?
Perhaps it’s not that surprising that New Zealand’s universities don’t appear to have that many environmental psychology papers and/or programmes. Geography and sociology would (at least stereotypically) have more in common with researching environmental issues than psychology. As an undergraduate student studying sociology and geography, I never gave a passing thought that psychology would have something to offer on the investigation of environmental issues.
Surprise, surprise: environmental psychological research and teaching does exist in some universities ... it’s just not under the identity of ‘environmental psychology’. Massey University has the Joint Centre for Disaster Research in the School of Psychology where psychology academics are involved in interdisciplinary teaching and applied research on environmental disasters and emergency management. Academics in the Faculty of Environment, Society and Design at Lincoln University have also conducted some research in environmental psychology.
Does psychology have something unique to offer on human-environment relationships? Well, it seems to be in a unique position to examine the relationships between human behaviour and natural and human-made environments, and to assess and change human interaction in relation to environments. As environmental psychology emerged, it had a major stake in examining such relationships (Wohlwill, 1970) – at least, initially...
Since the 1970s, environmental psychology expanded its research scope as the number of studies on behaviour-environment relationships increased. This growth produced studies that examined environmental and personal factors affecting behaviour (Stokols, 1995). From the 1980s onwards, environmental psychologists shifted to examining more complex, contextual interdependencies between people and the environment, and the experiences and meanings produced from environmental-people interactions (e.g., Dixon & Durrheim, 2000; Seamon, 1982; Uzzell & Räthzel, 2009; Williams & Patterson, 1995). However this growth (in the United States, particularly) also resulted in diffusing (and dissolving) the disciplinary identity of environmental psychology across many areas of psychology (e.g., cognitive, behavioural, industrial/organisational, social, community, etc; Evans, 1996; Stokols, 1995).
‘Environment’ is also a concept that is produced through a diversity of geographically specific meanings and contexts. The meanings of ‘environment’ are spatially diverse and vary across the specific interactions between people and natural and human-made phenomena. As the University of Surrey’s (UK) environmental psychology programme states, the environment can be understood as many things.
Is it time to consider the worth of making environmental psychology more salient in New Zealand? Should we bring together some of the complex inter-relationships and issues between people and the environment, from a New Zealand perspective, into a specific teaching and research focus in environmental psychology? Would this erode or strengthen environmental psychology’s diverse and diffuse identity? Should there be more emphasis on identifying and teaching environmental psychology as a specific module, paper or programme of study in Aotearoa? Would there be student interest in studying it? Would environmental psychology add different perspectives to the existing mix of research in the social and environmental sciences to help address issues of environmental sustainability, hazards and catastrophic events ... and in understanding people-environment relationships? Any thoughts?
References
Dixon, J., & Durrheim, K. (2000). Displacing place-identity: A discursive approach to locating self and other. British Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 27–44.
Evans, G. W. (1996). Current trends in environmental psychology. International Association of Applied Psychology (IAAP) Newsletter, 8(2). Retrieved from http://www.ucm.es/info/Psyap/iaap/evans.htm
Seamon, D. (1982). The phenomenological contribution to environmental psychology. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 2, 119–140.
Stokols, D. (1995). The paradox of environmental psychology. American Psychologist, 50, 821–837.
Te Whaiti Nui-a-Toi. (2001). Kaitiakitanga. Retrieved from http://www.kaitiakitanga.net/index.htm
Uzzell, D., & Räthzel, N. (2009). Transforming environmental psychology. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 340–350.
Williams, D. R., & Patterson, M. E. (1995). Environmental meaning and ecosystem management: Perspectives from environmental psychology and human geography. Society & Natural Resources, 9, 507–521.
Wohlwill, J. F. (1970). The emerging discipline of environmental psychology. American Psychologist, 25, 303–312.
