Abstracts Health Sciences

Understanding neglected connections between nature, conservation, and mental health

by Thomas Pienkowski

The role of natural systems in physical health is increasingly well documented. But, relationships between nature and mental illness – a leading cause of disease and a global public health priority – are comparatively poorly understood. Much of the evidence connecting these areas focuses on an important but limited set of linkages, such as the psychological benefits of green space exposure. Moreover, most of this research has concentrated on urban Global North populations, potentially poorly representing the experiences of the three billion people in the rural Global South. In this thesis, I aim to provide evidence of overlooked connections between nature, its conservation, and mental health. Chapters 2 and 3 combine qualitative interviews, scenario-based questionnaires, and statistical modelling to understand how local people in a rural Ugandan case study perceive the relationship between socio-ecological systems and their management and the social determinants of mental illness. Observational results suggest that commercial agricultural expansion is believed to benefit wealthier households but exacerbate poverty and food insecurity, and thus psychological distress among poorer ones. Equally, conserved forests reportedly have important safety net functions that appear to alleviate distress, but crop-raiding wildlife may indirectly exacerbate it. Furthermore, scenario and modelling analysis suggested that future expansion of commercial farming and tightening of conservation rules may increase depression risk among vulnerable groups. These findings highlight a risk that sustainable development policies and practices that restrict natural resource access may undermine progress toward mental health goals. Chapters 4 to 7 use self-reported data to explore conservationists’ mental health, satisfaction with goal progress, and expectations about the future and discuss corresponding implications for collective conservation efforts. For example, many responding to my global internet survey emphasised the difficulties of making a living in the conservation sector. Moreover, one in four conservationists participating in this survey reported moderate or severe distress. Personal (e.g., gender and career stage) and workplace (e.g., being overworked or feelings of contributing to conservation) factors were important predictors of distress risk. There appears to be scope for better supporting conservationists’ mental health and motivation, but further evidence, including from experimental studies, is required to evaluate potential interventions. Nevertheless, this research suggests that failing to account for the mental health impacts of conservation and sustainable development policies might undermine global mental health efforts. Equally, it suggests important avenues that could be explored to simultaneously support mental health and nature conservation goals, such as improving conservationists’ working conditions.