Environmental stewardship and a strong human-nature relationship are vital in the context of global environmental challenges. Environmental stewardship involves collective actions by individuals, groups, or networks to responsibly protect, manage, and utilize the environment for environmental and social good (Bennett et al., 2018). This includes activities like conservation efforts, reforestation, pollution reduction, and sustainable resource use, implemented across various scales. Such stewardship will likely play an increasingly critical role in addressing the pressing issue of climate change.

Contemporary societies strongly emphasize wealth growth and materialism, often overshadowing the importance of the human-nature relationship and its impact on environmental stewardship and nature integration. Financial wealth can act as a temporary buffer against the impacts of climate change, with financially affluent individuals and nations often possessing the resources to adapt to such change (Asfaw et al., 2019; Nauges et al., 2021). Adaptations might include installing air-conditioning or building flood defenses, which reduce immediate environmental impact and psychological stressors. However, this financial affluence is often linked with higher levels of consumption and, consequently, a larger carbon footprint (Mi et al., 2020; Barros and Wilk, 2021; Chancel, 2022), presenting a paradox. The very groups that contribute most significantly to climate change often have the means to shield themselves from its direct effects. This dichotomy highlights the need for a broader and more inclusive approach to environmental stewardship, transcending economic status and focusing on sustainable practices at all levels of society.

The prevalent focus on financial wealth and material comfort in modern societies and subsequent ignorance of the human-nature relationship has implications for pro-environmental behavior. Materialistic values have been shown to negatively impact such behavior (Ahlström et al., 2020; Kelly et al., 2021), leading to increased environmental degradation. For example, populations in the lower 50% income bracket in the USA and some European countries are close to or already achieving 2030 per-capita emission targets (Chancel, 2022). By contrast, populations in the top 10% income bracket must reduce emissions by over 80% to meet these targets. Wealth may also contribute to an estrangement from nature, as material comforts and unsustainable consumption displace the desire for natural experiences (Bogert et al., 2022). A societal shift toward valuing the human-nature relationship alongside material success could benefit both the environment and human wellbeing.

In financially affluent Western societies, there is increasing isolation from the natural environment, with individuals experiencing nature less frequently and in lesser quality (Cazalis et al., 2023). This estrangement, a phenomenon where humans view themselves as separate from or outside of nature, has been instrumental in environmental neglect and degradation (Lokhorst et al., 2014; Marczak and Sorokowski, 2018; Tam, 2019; Bogert et al., 2022). Such neglect has contributed to today’s environmental crisis, exacerbating climate change, and detrimentally affecting mental health (Hayward and Ayeb-Karlsson, 2021; Thoma et al., 2021). The escalation of climate change-related events, such as severe weather events and bushfires, is directly linked to a range of mental health disorders, including anxiety, depression, PTSD, eco-anxiety, and poor mental wellbeing (Dodgen et al., 2016; Clayton et al., 2017; Cianconi et al., 2020; Palinkas and Wong, 2020; Hayward and Ayeb-Karlsson, 2021; Thoma et al., 2021). These mental health implications, especially among vulnerable populations, indicate that climate change is a substantial public health concern (Verplanken et al., 2020; Parry et al., 2022).

The estrangement from nature is not an isolated phenomenon; it is linked to societal values, consumerist behaviors, and policy decisions (Everard et al., 2016; Sharma and Jha, 2017; Dong et al., 2020; Molinario et al., 2020; Bogert et al., 2022). The degradation of the environment negatively impacts human mental health (Dodgen et al., 2016; Cianconi et al., 2020), with poor mental health adversely affecting decision-making and behavior (Kung et al., 2018). In other words, the relationship between the degradation of the environment and mental health represents a vicious downward spiral.

Biophobia contributes to the detachment from nature in contemporary societies (Soga et al., 2023). This concept, contrasting with the biophilia hypothesis of an innate human affinity for nature, refers to negative emotions like fear and disgust toward natural elements (Simaika and Samways, 2010). Biophobia can present as a specific fear, for example, of insects, spiders, or snakes (Soga and Gaston, 2022a). It is thought to be more prevalent and intense in urbanized societies, with exposure to negative information about nature, parental influences, and media portrayals potentially intensifying these negative emotions (Zhang et al., 2014; Soga et al., 2020; Fukano and Soga, 2021; Vanderstock et al., 2022). The unpleasant feelings associated with biophobia (Bhaumik et al., 2020) can lead to avoidance of nature and, consequently, further disconnection from the natural environment. This detachment impacts biodiversity conservation (Sumner et al., 2018; Castillo-Huitrón et al., 2020) and deprives individuals of the mental health benefits provided by nature (Buxton et al., 2021; Maes et al., 2021; Marselle et al., 2021; Soga and Gaston, 2022b).

Reinvigorating a sense of connection or being part of nature is not merely a return to sustainable living but a fundamental shift in the approach to mental health and environmental policy. It is also a fundamental shift in how we understand psychology and, as a result, mental health. The reinvigoration of the human-nature relationship—essential to addressing the intertwined challenges of mental health and environmental sustainability—is a foundation for future research and policy initiatives. Reinvigoration promises to foster pro-environmental behavior and catalyze a shift toward environmentally responsible policies, creating a virtuous cycle that enhances both the environment and human wellbeing.

Eco-anxiety can occur in response to ecological crises and climate change, characterized by worry, existential distress, and feelings of uncertainty, lack of control, and being overwhelmed (Panu, 2020). It encompasses a spectrum of reactions, from mild anxiety to severe impacts similar to depression and PTSD. While it can be paralyzing, eco-anxiety may also motivate individuals to reassess their lifestyles and environmental behaviors. Although some authorities advocate the use of psychological therapies for the management of eco-anxiety, such as building resilience and hope (Usher et al., 2019), eco-anxiety is not irrational. That is, there are often sound reasons for people to be concerned about climate change. Psychological therapies to build resilience to climate change and environmental issues may also have an untoward effect by reducing pro-environmental behaviors (Shao and Yu, 2023).

Engaging in pro-environmental behaviors offers dual benefits. Such behaviors contribute to environmental sustainability by reducing waste, conserving resources, and mitigating the impacts of climate change. There is also evidence of a positive association between pro-environmental behaviors and mental wellbeing (Zawadzki et al., 2020), possibly by building resilience, which mitigates the psychological stressors induced by climate change. This association is significant given the high prevalence and economic burden of mental health disorders globally (Arias et al., 2022).

Pro-environmental behaviors can also serve as a coping mechanism. By taking actionable steps to address environmental issues, individuals may experience a sense of agency and control, which is beneficial for mental health (Innocenti et al., 2023). Therefore, pro-environmental behavior transcends ethical obligation, serving as a pragmatic strategy to enhance environmental and mental health outcomes.

Intrinsic motivation for pro-environmental behavior, driven by a fundamental understanding that humans are part of nature, can lead to broader adoption of sustainable practices and support for environmentally friendly policies (Maki et al., 2019; Liu et al., 2022). Whether we acknowledge it or not, humans rely on nature to survive. From habitat, food production, climate regulation, and experiential mental health effects, nature provides human with the essential ingredients to support their existence (Brauman et al., 2020). Unfortunately, many ecosystems that provide these essential ingredients are being neglected or destroyed. So, although humans are heavily dependent on nature, they are often estranged from nature, sometimes to the extent of ignoring or being oblivious to the importance of nature. A reintegration with nature offers multiple benefits: highlighting nature’s importance for human existence, fostering mental resilience against climate-induced stressors, and catalyzing pro-environmental behaviors. These outcomes are critical to pursuing a more sustainable and mentally resilient society.

Integrating insights from environmental and ecological psychology provides a robust theoretical basis for understanding the human-nature connection. Environmental psychology emphasizes the role of natural environments in influencing human behavior and wellbeing, including how green spaces enhance mental health, reduce stress, and support cognitive function (Kaplan and Kaplan, 1989). Ecological psychology complements environmental psychology by focusing on the reciprocal relationship between individuals and their environment, where behavior is shaped by the perception of environmental affordances (Gibson, 1979). Environmental psychology investigates interactions between humans and their surroundings, whereas ecopsychology focuses on the emotional ties and dynamics between human psychology and nature, seeking to promote a sustainable and balanced relationship (Doherty, 2010). Together, these perspectives underscore the importance of human connection with nature in promoting mental health, sustainable behaviors, and resilience against environmental challenges. This approach demonstrates how natural environments provide essential psychological benefits and actively shape human interactions with the world, fostering a deeper, more meaningful engagement with nature.

Acknowledging the significant role of environmental education in promoting a deeper connection between individuals and the natural world is crucial. Environmental education fosters pro-environmental behaviors and enhances subjective wellbeing by nurturing intrinsic motivation, increasing environmental hope, and strengthening nature connectedness (Kerret et al., 2016, 2020). Through targeted educational programs, hope and wellbeing can be boosted, improving knowledge, awareness, and encouraging collective action, fostering a strong sense of community and place attachment.

Facilitating a reintegration with nature goes beyond simple outdoor activities; it involves a deeper emotional, psychological, and philosophical engagement with the natural world (Ives et al., 2018). This form of engagement is essential to promoting tangible societal changes in sustainability (Abson et al., 2017; Ives et al., 2018). Advocating reintegration with nature does not suggest a return to a primitive, sustainable way of living but rather a fundamental shift in our approach to mental health and environmental policy. This approach is beneficial and essential, serving as a cornerstone for future research and policy initiatives addressing mental health and environmental sustainability challenges.