Jorrrrd o~&l~~ironntenfnl Pqchology t 1996) 16. 235-267 0272-4944/96/030236+23$12.00/0 u’ 1995 Acndwnic Prcsa Limited ~ENVIRONMENTAL &Y~HOLOGV WHITHER ENVIRONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY? THE TRANSPERSONAL ECOPSYCHOLOGY CROSSROADS

JOSEPH P. RESER Department of Psychology and Sociology, James Cook University of North Queensland, Australia

Abstract

This paper considers the nature, status and direction of ‘ecopsychology’ and its relationship to psychology and environmental psychology. A brief historical perspective is provided, along with an examination of what is currently encompassed by the term, and by whom, with a particular focus on the writings of Roszak (1992). An attempt is made to separate social movement from changing social representation and to distinguish psychological content and focus from ideology, individual and societal change agenda, and popular culture. The paper gives particular attention to the nature and role of ‘self as ultimate target and agent of meaningful change, both in the context of conservation initiatives and with respect to therapeutic encounter/intervention. The nature and expression of ecopsychology in Australia are also briefly explored, as are the representations of indigenous ‘earth wisdom’ and spirituality as touchstone for ecosystem ‘sanity’. Three final questions are posed and discussed in the paper. What does ecopsychology offer psychology? What does psychology have to offer ecopsychology? Can environmental psychology encompass ecopsychology? The prognosis for environmen- tal psychology and the greening of psychology is explored.

0 1995 Academic Press Limited

Introduction these: is this an area of psychology? What are some concerns and cautions worth noting? What does . . . listen ecopsychology have to offer to interested psychol- This living flowing land ogists, particularly environmental psychologists? is all there is, forever What, if anything, does psychology have to offer to ecopsychology? What about environmental psy- We are it chology? Will it, can it, encompass ecopsychology? it sings through us . . . Gary Snyder

What position should psychologists take with What is Ecopsychology? respect to ecopsychology, a very visible, popular and political representation of psychology vis-a-vis the Theodore Roszak is arguably the individual most environment? I would like to offer the perspective of closely associated with the contemporary popular an environmental psychologist, asking whether this articulation of what ecopsychology is. His treatment is a road that psychology, and in particular environ- is that of a historian/activist, steeped in the history mental psychology, should take. My perspective is of ideas and social movements of which he has been that of an academic and researcher, further dis- both participant recorder and protagonist. The work tanced by long-term residence in Australia. It is for which he is best known, The Making of a Coun- motivated by genuine interest in as well as some terculture (1969), traced the popular disenchant- genuine concerns with ‘ecopsychology’. After briefly ment and disillusionment with government, the war outlining what ecopsychology appears to be, a num- in Vietnam, and the then salient environmental ber of questions are posed. They are essentially degradation of the 60s. His most recent book. The 235 236 J. P. Reser

Voice of the Earth: An exploration of ecopsychology inherent sense of environmental reciprocity that lies within the ecological unconscious. Other ther- (19921, traces the intertwined roots of psychiatry, apies seek to heal the alienation between person psychology and environmental consciousness. and person, person and family, person and society. Roszak is specifically interested in ‘connecting’ Ecopsychology seeks to heal the more fundamental with psychologists. alienation between the person and the natural environment. I’m working between two main audiences- (4) For ecopsychology, as for other therapies, the environmentalists and psychologists-with a view crucial stage of development is the life of the child. to establishing some valuable common ground. I The ecological unconscious is regenerated, as if it have long felt that the ecologists need more psycho- were a gift, in the newborn’s enchanted sense of the logical sensitivity in the way they present them- world. Ecopsychology seeks to recover the child’s selves and their demanding agenda to the public. innately animistic quality of experience in func- On the other hand, the psychotherapists who might tionally ‘sane’ adults. To do this, it turns to many provide more sawy about such matters have had sources, among them the traditional healing tech- little to offer where environmental values are con- niques of primary people, nature mysticism as cerned. These two communities need each other, expressed in religion and art, the experience of but they are not yet on speaking terms (Roszak, wildness, the insights of Deep Ecology. It adapts 1992b, p. 18). these to the goal of creating the ecological ego. What is ecopsychology? Roszak offers the following (5) The ecological ego matures toward a sense of comment: ethical responsibility with the planet that is as viv- idly experienced as our ethical responsibility to This is an essay in ecopsychology. Its goal is to other people. It seeks to weave that responsibility bridge our culture’s long-standing, historical gulf into the fabric of social relations and political between the psychological and ecological, to see the decisions. needs of the planet and the person as continuum. In (6) Among the therapeutic projects most important search of a greater sanity, it begins where many to ecopsychology is the re-evaluation of certain com- might say sanity leaves off: at the threshold of the pulsively ‘masculine’ character traits that permeate nonhuman world. In a sense that weaves science our structures of political power and which drive us and psychiatry, poetry and politics together, the to dominate nature as if it were an alien and right- ecological priorities of the planet are coming to be less realm. In this regard, ecopsychology draws sig- expressed through our most private spiritual tra- nificantly on some (not all) of the insights of ecofem- vail. The Earth’s cry for rescue from the punishing inism and Feminist Spirituality with a view to weight of the industrial system we have created is demystifying the sexual stereotypes. our own cry for a scale and quality of life that will (7) Whatever contributes to small scale social forms free each of us to become the complete person we and personal empowerment nourishes the ecological were born to be. (1992a, p. 14). ego. Whatever strives for large-scale domination In the epilogue of The Voice of the Earth Roszak and the suppression of personhood undermines the ecological ego. Ecopsychology therefore deeply ques- articulates a set of principles which provide context tions the essential sanity of our gargantuan urban- and closure, a guide for listening to ‘the Self that industrial culture, whether capitalistic or collective speaks through the self. These principles provide a in its organisation. But it does so without necess- convenient window and frame of reference for dis- arily rejecting the technological genius of our spec- cussing ecopsychology. ies or some life-enhancing measure of the industrial power we have assembled. Ecopsychology is post- (1) The core of the mind is the ecological uncon- industrial not anti-industrial in its social orien- scious. For ecopsychology, repression of the ecologi- tation. cal unconscious is the deepest root of collusive mad- (8) Ecopsychology holds that there is a synergistic ness in industrial society; open access to the interplay between planetary and personal well- ecological unconscious is the path to sanity. being. The term ‘synergy’ is chosen deliberately for (21 The contents of the ecological unconscious rep- its traditional theological connotation, which once resent, in some degree, at some level of mentality, taught that the human and divine are cooperatively the living record of cosmic evolution, tracing back to linked in the quest for salvation. The contemporary distant initial conditions in the history of time. Con- ecological translation of the term might be: the temporary studies in the ordered complexity of needs of the planet are the needs of person, the nature tell us that life and mind emerge from this rights of the person are the rights of the planet evolutionary tale as culminating natural systems (Roszak, 1992a, pp. 320-321). within the unfolding sequence of physical, biologi- cal, mental and cultural systems we know as ‘the Roszak’s voice is not a lone cry. Many contemporary universe’. Ecopsychology draws upon these findings natural and social scientists, philosophers, theo- of the new cosmology, striving to make them real to logians, politicians and poets are writing about how experience. (3) Just as it has been the goal of previous therap- we think and feel about the earth, how we ies to recover the repressed contents of the uncon- construct-and in turn experience and value-the scious, so the goal of ecopsychology is to awaken the nature of the relationship between ourself and the Whither Environmental Psychology? 237 planet (e.g. Snyder, 1969, 1990; Dubos, 1972; mothers and fathers who made all the bad insti- Shepard, 1973, 1982; White, 1973; Naess, 1983; tutions. Within the framework of an ecopsychology, we raise the question: how did a psyche that was Devall & Sessions, 1985; Myers, 1985, 1990; Berry, once symbiotically rooted in the planetary ecosys- 1988, 1990; Goldsmith, 1988; Seed et al., 1988; tem produce the environmental crisis we now con- Ehrlich, 1990; Gore, 1992; Stern, 1992; Rapoport, front? (p. 306) 1993; Suzuki, 1993; Zimmerman et al., 1993). My argument, like Abraham Maslow’s, holds that It is difficult to know how to respond, as a psy- there is a psychological dimension to the problem that must be addressed if one is to find a graceful chologist, to Roszak’s ‘guide’. Few would contest the way to connect the mind and the world. How clearly proposition that to know ourselves truly we need to we understand the world depends on the emotional examine our connections, past and present, to the tone with which we confront the world. Care, trust, larger biological and cultural life-support and and love determine that tone, as they do our meaning systems of which we are part and product. relationship to another person (p. 41). Our phenotype is clearly an exquisite design The language of Roszak and others unfortunately solution to life in terms of phylogenetic learning and never quite specifies what is meant by psychology, collective experiential programming, and a constitu- and referents are encompassing and confusing; at ent, part of this web of life. The conscious accessi- times, however, the clear referent is the profession bility of this collective experience, across species and practice of psychology. and time, is more difficult to accept, however, as is There is continual reference throughout Roszak’s the natural ‘sanity’ and Wordsworthian clarity and writings to insanity and madness, both on a collec- wisdom of childhood vision. It is, however, worth tive level and scale, with respect to what we have setting prejudices aside to explore an alternative done and are doing to the environment,, and with framing of the roots of the ecological crisis-and respect to an individual malaise and distortion of what is wrong with psychology. Many obviously feel the spirit. His comments help us to understand the that Roszak has distilled the essence of the problem larger context in which his statements about and given voice to the planet. psychology and self are formed. It is also of interest Powerful, compelling, extraordinary. We need to consider what ‘psychology’ and ‘madness’ urgently to heal our relationship with our life-giv- encompass in this discourse. ing planet and feel deeply the intimate connection with nature Roszak so beautifully describes. (Al In our hearts we know there is something maniacal Gore, from the jacket cover of The Voice of the about the way we are abusing the planetary Earth 1 environment. The extinction of species, the depletion of the ozone, the annihilation of the rain- forests . . . how often do we read reports of the dev- Representations ofpsychology astation and say ‘That’s crazy!’ We use the word, but in this context ‘crazy’ has no professional status, no theoretical depth. Our There are many questions that come to mind at this instinctive sense of environmental anxiety is little point. What is meant by ‘psychology’ in this context? more than an ‘ouch!’ that does not tell us why we Are we talking about psychotherapy, the discipline, hurt or how to heal the wound. We look to psy- lay psychology, or a more encompassing, humanistic chiatrists to teach us the meaning of madness, but notion premised on what psychology might or our dominant schools of psychotherapy are them- selves creations of the same scientific and industrial should be? Again, Roszak’s own statements are culture that now weighs so brutally on the planet. illuminating: Even those who dissent from Freudian orthodoxy At its deepest level, psychology is the search for remain narrowly focused on what Jung called sanity. And sanity at its deepest level is the health ‘urban neurosis’. They ignore the greater ecological of the soul. In these respects, psychology, whatever realities that surround the psyche-as if the soul techniques it may use, is necessarily a philosophical might be saved while the biosphere crumbles. The pursuit, a critical examination of ethical conduct, context of psychiatry stops at the city limits; the moral purpose, and the meaning of life. Every major nonhuman world that lies beyond is as great a mys- philosophical and religious system of the past has tery as the depths of the soul. grounded itself in a psychology, seeking to heal the Where do we turn to find a standard of sanity soul of its wounds and guide it to salvation. (p. 51) that comprehends our environmental condition? Psychology, like theology, must eventually come to (Roszak, 1992, p 19) terms with original sin. Both madness and sin pre- While I have chosen to focus the argument on suppose a preexisting state of grace. At some point, the healthy animals we once were, if only for some Roszak, there are many who have advanced a simi- split second of prenatal or postnatal time, lost that lar argument (e.g. Hillman, 1975/1992; Shepard, primal sanity and grew up to become the bad 1982; Seed et al., 1988; Mack, 1990). Hillman’s writ- 238 J. P. Reser ings, in particular, have achieved renewed popu- reverse destructive trends. Once the interaction larity if not currency (Hillman & Ventura, 1992). between human psychology and environmental destruction is better understood, environmental The prospect of general, culturally-ratified, distor- groups will have the information needed to design tions of childhood, of massive disablement of and evaluate interventions that effectiuely encour- ontogeny as the basis of irrational and self-destruc- age humanity to address unprecedented, yet often tive attitudes toward the natural environment is invisible, threats. . . . How has human nature con- the prospect to which I now turn. (ix) . . . the conten- tributed to environmental problems? How does tion of this book-that there are profound psychic Western industrialised culture compound these dislocations at the root of modern society (xii). . . . problems? How have psychology and its assump- Our species once did (and in some small groups still tions about human nature contributed to these mal- does) live in stable harmony with the natural adaptive psychological and social trends? What environment. That was not because men were would new conceptual models and practices that incapable of changing. . . (Hillman, 1975, pp. 3-4). lead to achieving a sustainable environment look like? How could a revamped discipline of psychology In many ways the ecopsychology argument of help change the collective and institutional behav- Roszak, Hillman and others is more of a latterday iour that threatens the planet? (Synopsis of panel critique of psychiatry-along with a reconsideration discussion on ‘Psychology as if the whole earth mat- of what psychoanalysis offered and can offer-than tered’, Center Review, 1990, p. 1). it is a detailed prospectus of a new discipline or The argument that people must be insane to be field. It at the same time characterizes past and behaving the way they are with respect to the contemporary individual and societal transactions environment is no different than similar arguments with the environment as insane, and requiring with respect to smoking, war or the nuclear threat. therapeutic intervention. There is also a clear impli- Clearly these are all instances in which both short- cation that psychology itself is badly distorted and and long-term self and collective interest is rad- distorting-of individuals and cultures. ically compromised by ongoing behaviour. To say Do the tenets of individualism-based as they are that such behaviour is ‘insane’ is, at best, psycho- on classical psychology-still hold true for us today? logically naive. Such behaviours are arguably Or, perhaps, as he [Hillman] posits, the psycho- irrational, illogical and ultimately life and planet logical model of individuality/individualism/ individuation has led us to more isolation, fragmen- threatening, but they are quintessentially human tation, and loss of purpose, for individuals and for and psycho-logical, and in their own way ‘adaptive’ society as a whole. Hillman explains further by in terms of psychological reality and managed using a case study to illustrate his ideas: ‘The case ignorance (Reser & Smithson, 1988). derives from the pathology of culture rather than from the pathology of the individual, in order to pointedly free psychopathology from its enclosure in the individual self. . . . If we of this society seek Historical and cultural perspectives ways to connect psychotherapy with social change to release depth psychology from its confines in Ecopsychology must be situated in the sea change of buman personality and return to a study of soul . . . events which took place in North America and we must draw our cases from pathologies in the cul- indeed the world in the 1960s. It is, in part, an epi- ture . . .’ It is Hillman’s conclusion that psychology’s attribution of a private, individual self is delusional. phenomenon of this socio-geo-political context and a . . . In connecting self-identity to communal action part of the ensuing social movement which arguably and experience, Hillman is truly re-visioning psy- started with the first Earth Day on 22 April 1970. chology, and embodying it as a mode of social Its more immediate roots are at Esalen, Woodstock, change. (Editorial summary of speech by James Nimbin and Taos, in the Civil Rights movement and Hillman appearing in Newsletter of the Centre for Psychology and Social Change, Feb 94). Vietnam, in Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring (19621, and in the path of bulldozers in threatened environ- Again, it is difficult to understand clearly what ‘psy- ments the world over. Its cultural and intellectual chology’ encompasses in these discussions, as refer- beginnings undoubtedly go back to the Romantic ence skips from why and how people behave as they movement. Naturphilosoplzie in Europe (Arkes & do, to the discipline and practice of psychology, as Garske, 19821, transcendentalism, the organismic institutional face of Western culture. phenomenology of the Gestalt movement (e.g. Given that the environmental crisis has been cre- Goldstein, 1939, 19401, and reflects the more gen- ated by an accumulation of human actions and eral evolutionary leitmotif that infused the writings inventions, and not by ‘act of God’, it is surprising that so little attention has been directed to the role of James, Freud and Jung. Many, including of that human nature and psychology play in per- course Roszak (1969, 19791, have been charting its petuating this crisis and in hindering efforts to course (e.g. Gale, 1972; Stallings, 1973; Albrecht, Whither Environmental Psychology? 239

1976; O’Riordan, 1981; Buttel, 1987; Christensen, behaviourists also saw themselves as playing a 1990; Dunlap & Mertig 1992; Gottlieb, 1993). It is critical part. noteworthy that the origins of the environmental During the late 1960s the lOO-year-old conser- movement and the human potential movement vation movement in the United States began to take were intertwined at many levels, and shared spoke- on a new identity. There was a growing realization spersons and celebrities, as well as many values that merely conserving wildlife and natural settings and venues, e.g. Esalen (Shaffer, 1978). Environ- was not enough; environmental quality itself was under attack. It became evident that ecosystems mentalism became political ideology and quasi- and natural resources that serve as humankind’s religion for many, with environmentalists and life-support systems are being jeopardized by ‘greenies’ collectively changing personal and depletion of natural resources, pollution, and over- societal values and understandings. The ‘New population. During this period, the conservation Environmental Paradigm’ bridged ecological science movement evolved into the environmental move- ment and psychology, especially applied behaviour and Eastern philosophy (Dunlap & Van Liere, 1978; analysis, joined in an effort to seek solutions to Catton & Dunlap, 19801. these problems. There was a developing awareness All of this was slowly and inexorably changing that the decreasing environmental quality was social representations dealing with the relation- caused by human behaviour . . . Clearly, mainten- ships between beings and the natural environment, ance of environmental quality requires the large scale modification of human behaviours (Dwyer et a basic and enduring preoccupation of human al., 1993, pp. 275-276). cultures across the millennia (Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck, 1961). For many, and for society as a The ecopsychology movement must also be con- whole, the very nature and definition of who one sidered in the larger context of postmodernity and was, of personhood, was changing-in part the the cultural search for substance, meaning, and rel- product of a postmodern and critical self-reflection evance beyond the Dominant Western Paradigm and an accompanying hard look at the nature of (Grossberg et al., 1993). interrelationships, interconnections and interde- pendencies, personal and global (Bateson, 1979; The Australian context Heelas & Lock, 1981; Geertz, 1983; Sampson, 1989; Gergen, 1992; Kvale, 1992). The emphasis on self- In Australia there are many expressions of ecopsy- encounter which characterized this period was also, chology, from popular magazines (Simply Living, essentially and critically, an exploration of sensory Nature, Southern Crossings, Tread Lightly, Whole awareness and connections with our natural world Person) to itinerant workshops (The Council of all (Schutz, 1967; Csaky, 1979). Other metaphoric, if Beings, Red Rock Cherishing Retreat, Sacred not paradigmatic, notions that were changing how Mountain Vision Quests, Awakening Woman), to we think and feel-or at least reflecting such educational and growth centres (Centre for changes-were the anthropic principle (Barrow & Planetary Education, Rainforest Information Tipler, 1986), unified general theory, and the Gaia Centre, Sacred Site Within Healing Centre, Touch hypothesis (Lovelock, 1972). The Gaia hypothesis in the Gentle Earth). There has, of course, been con- particular, Lovelock’s view of the earth as a coher- siderable commerce with North America in terms of ent, self-regulating, self-changing system of life, a people and ideas, and a number of Australian indi- living planet (1979, 1988) is an essential starting viduals stand out as particularly noteworthy point in understanding what ecopsychology is all environmental icons: Helen Caldicott, Peter Garret, about. John Seed-as has the Australian continent itself The specific role of psychology as discipline in all and its indigenous peoples. It is also the case that a of this is a matter of some debate. Psychologist par- number of Australian philosophers and deep ecol- ticipants were not all from the human potential ogy theorists have been influential spokespersons movement. Many came from university laboratories on behalf of ecopsychology (e.g. David Bennett, and lecture theatres, as well as from psychothera- Robyn Eckersley, Warwick Fox, Patsy Hallen, peutic practice. Certainly many ‘environmental psy- Freya Matthews, Richard Sylvan). Perhaps the chologists’, i.e. those academic researchers who most significant national focus on ecopsychological were later to identify as environmental psychol- issues took place in Canberra in 1989 and 1990 ogists, saw themselves as being caught up by a under the aegis of the Fundamental Questions Pro- changing consciousness of the nature and magni- gram, an Australian initiative following from the tude of environmental problems (Altman & World Commission on Environment and Develop- Christensen, 1990). It is interesting that many ment Report, Our Common Future. This pro- 240 J. P. Reser gramme, hosted at the Centre for Resource and writing about the ‘psychology’ of human survival Environmental Studies of the Australian National are themselves psychiatrists, not psychologists, University, sought to engender and inform public which gives a very different character to the dis- discussion of the implications for Australian society course (Frank, 1968; Lifton, 1968, 1979; Walsh, of the need for long-term ecological sustainability 1989; Mack, 1990,19921. (Boyden et al., 1990). Those papers most directly An example of a clearly psychological perspective addressing ecopsychological themes and issues is found in the writings of Sarah Conn (e.g. 1990, included that of Bennett (19901, on deep environ- 19921, a clinical psychologist and research associate mental ethics, and that of Cock (19911, on values for of the centre for Psychology and Social Change at sustainability-the necessity of transcendence and the Harvard Medical School, who teaches a course the sacred. on the self-world connection, ‘The psychology of global awareness and social responsibility’. Her per- spective weds the threat of eco-collapse to thera- Is Ecopsychology Psychology? peutic intervention and social action. We all know that massive threats to security, jus- Is ecopsychology psychology? It is clear that it is not tice and ecological sustainability still exist and in in any professional, disciplinary sense, but this begs fact are increasing in the world . . . information is some important issues. While some of the language not enough. We need to develop new ways to per- and notions sound ‘psychological’ they often have ceive, organize and respond to the information very different referents and meanings, and draw available to us, so that information leads to true change. That kind of change is what we are refer- from a popular discourse and culture which is quite ring to as transformation. For the past nine years, distinct from the assumptions, methods and prac- Center researchers have been working in a variety tice of psychology as a discipline. ‘Psychology’ after of arenas to develop aspects of an interdisciplinary, all, is an integral part of contemporary Western cul- systemic understanding of human psychological ture and thought, and both informs the discourse processes which promote global responsibility-or the ability to respond creatively and constructively and provides requisite symbols, icons and meta- to the whole range of issues threatening the earth phors across a vast spectrum of public preoccu- and its inhabitants. A central part of this work has pations and concerns. What is perhaps problematic been to promote better relationships-both in the present context, however, is that the use of human-human and human-Earth relationships. the term psychology does confer a certain pro- . . . My own work-organized around teaching a course on the self-world connection and its impli- fessional legitimacy to what is essentially a social cations for an ecologically responsible mental movement, with its own values, agenda, and frame health and psychotherapy-has focused in part on of reference. Given that one of the larger metaphors questioning and transforming how we see the self here is one of healing and therapy, and given that in relationship to the world (Corm, 1992, p. 2). there is a rather indiscriminate and unqualified use Conn’s distinction between information and knowl- of ‘ecopsychology’ in both mental health and edge, and ultimate action, addresses fundamental environmental contexts, there are dangers. behaviour change issues. We do not have a That few ecopsychologists have credentials in the language or models that well-capture how infor- discipline of psychology is hardly damning, but it mation translates to knowledge, or the essence of does suggest that we should consider the impli- genuine ‘concern’. It is noteworthy that Conn’s tech- cations of a movement which purports to be setting niques derive directly from the despair and a new agenda for psychology, and providing a new empowerment workshops of Joanna Macy (19831, framework for considering ‘self, psychopathology created to counter the ‘psychic numbing’ of the and intervention. It is interesting to note that those nuclear threat, and which rely on guided imagery, few psychologists who are writing in the area are experiential learning, emotional flooding and group not environmental psychologists; they would almost support. It is also clear that the objective of Conn all identify strongly as humanist psychologist and others is behaviour change-indeed radical and/or psychotherapists. There would also appear to societal change-with the logic and strategies for be considerable affinity between Jungian theorists this change deriving from psychotherapy. and analysts and ecopsychology (e.g. Hillman, 1975, 1992; Estes, 1992; Gilbert, 1992). This makes con- The basic challenge of an ecologically responsible psychotherapy, or ecotherapy, is to look at therapy siderable sense if one understands the collective as a place where the personal problems brought by unconscious as an analogue for the genotypic collec- clients, the so-called personal stories, can be seen tive experience of a species. Finally, many of those not only in their vivid particularities but also as Whither Environmental Psychology? 241

microcosms of the larger whole, of what is hap- Overall these concerns relate to an uncritical ref- pening in the larger world. This may be called the erence to and incorporation of both academic and ‘canary in the mine shaft view’ of psychotherapy. The world is sick; it needs healing; it is speaking popular psychology, with few distinctions, qualifi- through us . . . As we develop a way of connecting cations, or caveats with respect to arguments, evi- the self and the world, then the goals of therapy dence or expertise. In fairness, this is probably become not just personal release but also partici- understandable for a social movement cum shifting pation in and contribution to the healing of the societal consciousness; it is, however, less reason- world. Our models of psychological health must begin to include reconnection with, reentry into able for a more serious and focused group of people nature. We can begin to see that therapy must who are attempting to establish a credible set of enable clients to find themselves in relation to the alternatives in terms of framing and implementing larger system, to find their niche, to actively occupy a human and environmental agenda and an individ- it in ways that contribute to the healing of both self ual level therapeutic model of intervention. and earth (Corm, 1992, pp. 3-4). Conn sees herself as doing pioneering work in ‘global psychotherapy’ and feels that examining the Understandings and representations of ‘psychology’ global context of one’s life ‘expands the space’ in which to look for solutions to personal problems. Clearly a basic problem has to do with varying con- Her ‘provocative thesis is that, but for our inhi- structions and representations of psychology. The bitions and isolation, concern about global issues argument presented here is, at one level, a concern would naturally galvanize every one of us into with the way in which commonsense understand- action in the interest of our collective survival and ings of psychology are being presented and accepted would help us to find greater personal clarity and as ‘accurate’ characterizations of the discipline peace in the process’ (Everett, 1990, p. 4). and/or professional psychology in the context and discourse of ‘ecopsychology’. This is, admittedly, a somewhat precious concern, given the classic diffi- culty of specifying what psychology is or should be Some Concerns and Cautions (e.g. Koch, 1993): There are clearly some communication and rep- . . . psychology is misconceived when seen as a resentation problems which must be addressed if coherent science or as any kind of coherent disci- pline devoted to the empirical study of human ecopsychology is going to be taken seriously by psy- beings. The 19th century belief that psychology can chology and the larger research and academic com- be an integral discipline, which led to its insti- munity. Ecopsychology is, in the minds of many, tutionalisation as an independent science, has been synonymous with new age pseudo-science and the disconfirmed on every day of the 112 years since its alternative environmental and therapeutic fringe. presumptive founding (p. 902). However powerful and cogent its arguments and its and the reality of ‘psychology’ being an integral part Western and non-Western intellectual history, and of popular culture. Yet the genuine danger here is however critical the problems it is addressing, there that the assumptions which attend popular miscon- remains, for a variety of reasons, a substantial ceptions of psychology as a profession and discipline credibility gap. may well lead to continued misperceptions, The concerns which are perhaps most salient in unrealistic expectations, and ethically problematic the present context include the identification of representations of ecopsychological-based therapies ecopsychology as psychology, the representation of and ecopsychological therapists as psychology and ecopsychologists as psychologists, the legitimacy psychologists. The understanding of and represen- and credibility this confers to practitioners, the tation of psychology by writers such as Roszak also seeming uncritical borrowing of constructs and differ, in some respect, from popular notions. He theory from psychology, the explicitly political and fellow ecopsychology proponents clearly view nature and stated objectives of ecopsychology, the psychology in a mental health frame, assuming that application of ecopsychology to the clinical context, its practitioners are primarily mental health prac- the quasi-religious-and often explicitly religious- titioners and psychoanalytic in orientation. Psy- character of the discourse, the confounding of levels chology is, at points, treated as synonymous with of analysis and metaphor with reality, the shifting psychiatry, and at other junctures as a promising anthropomorphism and anthroexclusion which alternative perspective. The expression ‘ecopsychol- often characterizes the debate, and the seeming ogy’ of course creates further confusion in that it is close alignment with new age popular ‘psychology’. very similar to ecological psychology, which rep- 242 J. P. Reser resents a very different orientation and frame of ref- ecopsychology. The rhetoric is of spiritual con- erence with respect to environmental analysis (e.g. necting and transformation, there is a clear quest Brunswick, 1956; Barker, 1968; Gibson, 1979; for the sacred and use of ritual, frequent reference Kaminsky, 19931. to earth magic and animism/transcendentalism, etc. Indeed ‘deep ecology’ ‘goes beyond a limited piece- meal shallow approach to environmental problems Morality and madness: psychology or religion? and attempts to articulate a comprehensive religious and philosophical world view’ (Devall & Related to this continual reference to indigenous Sessions, 1985, p. 651. Again, this is not ‘damning’ and earth wisdom is an implicit ethical stance and in itself. Psychotherapy has been viewed by many argument which constitutes a leitmotif in the eco- as the new religion of today’s psychological society, psychological literature. with therapists its new priests, and many areas of What the new cosmology lacks is the moral consen- commonality, including sociohistorical context, sus that philosophers and artists once bestowed membership, underlying deep structure and com- upon the Newtonian worldview. That consensus mon functions (Hillman, 1975/1992; Robbins & held for as long as science grounded itself in divine authority and vouched for the importance of human Anthony, 1978; Kilbourne & Richardson, 1984). If reason. Nothing has been more futile than our effort such functional equivalencies exist between ecopsy- over the past few centuries to establish values and chology and religion, with respect to how people define sanity within a cultural context that finds no attempt to satisfy similar needs for identity, mean- place for the sacred and views life as a marginal ing, community and support in dealing with shared anomaly in the universe. The cosmology that gave us that picture of the human condition has now anxieties and fears, and if this meaning system and faded from the scene. The time is ripe for a new dia- societal change agenda is essentially driven by the logue between scientific intellect and human need threat of ecocollapse and moral argument, this (Roszak, 1992, p. 181. would seem to constitute an operational definition I suggest that there is a very widespread urge for a of a ‘religious’ as well as social movement. This new global ethic which will unite people in the kind of moral community which is capable of dealing sense of mission is strengthened by the suggested with the current environment crisis. . . . There is a use of psychotherapy to heal society and the planet strong sense of the transcendent value of co-operat- through environmental action. ive effort expressed in many of these books . . . Part of the problem, or confusion, is that many (Rapoport, 1993, p. 173). view the natural world, and indeed life itself as This constitutes a sequenced set of problems and ‘sacred’. Such conceptions, particularly in the con- confusions for social scientific inquiry. The con- text of indigenous world views, encompass the inter- founding of ecological ‘immorality’ with mental ill- connections between living beings, the well being of ness is a particularly problematic example. This, the whole, and a prescribed moral order. This without qualification, is reminiscent of Elizabethan language of the ‘sacred’ and ‘spiritual’ can suggest understandings of mental illness as resulting from much more than awe, respect, and species humility, moral depravity. The inter-relationships between in a Western cultural context it conveys organized ethics, morality, and environmental responsibility religion, ideology and-some would argue-a fright- and management present further conceptual prob- ening legacy, both with respect to the environment lems, though clearly important ones (Fox, 1985; White, 1973) and in terms of man’s inhumanity to Stone, 1987; Nash, 1990). The suggestion of a self- man. There would seem to be considerable wisdom evident moral order, immanent in the biosphere, is in retaining a more assumption-free language for thought-provoking but problematic. Are we being discussing the integrity and well being of the bios- presented with a proposed new moral order-or phere and/or specific ecosystems. It is still very being re-aquainted with a very old one by ecopsych- possible to convey the sense that all decisions and ologists? Is this moral order inherent in the natural thinking about environmental transactions must world or is it an artefact of contemporary cultural make reference to the absolute essentialness of eco- and social problem construction (e.g. Daniels, 1988; system integrity and the critical value of all living Robinson, 1992)? systems. The ethical issues, indeed dilemmas, posed by It is also important to distinguish the ‘spiritual’ contemporary societies and ecosystem threats, and character and impact of any genuine contemplation the critical need of effective legislative/totalitarian of nature with the use of ‘religious’ discourse and and/or moral sanctions (Hardin & Baden, 1977; Fox, appeals in the service of political and social influ- 1985) raises the question of the ‘religious’ status of ence ends. There are many cultural traditions Whither Environmental Psychology? 243 which acknowledge the awe-inspiring majesty of the tivity. Many literally understand Gaia as a sentient natural world, a response which is evoked in such intelligent life form with whom they can, indeed, notions as the ‘sublime’ in Western European liter- empathize and identify with, as well as fear. ary and aesthetic criticism. This may not differ sub- I use the name Gaia not to propose a human femi- stantively from the ‘sacred’ character of many nine goddess, but to encompass the idea that the indigenous understandings of the natural world. entire living pelt of our planet, its thin green rind of The perceived spiritual character of the natural life, is actually one single life-form with sense, intel- ligence and the power to act. . . . the life process world and life itself, is, however, different from the around us is driven by an intelligence which is fully evangelical proselytizing for a new political and capable of recognizing and repairing damage done social order which characterizes ecopsychological to itself. . . . It is my main thesis that a new revol- writing and the radical ecology discourse in general. utionary has awakened, beside whom human pre- This is not say that the global ecosystem’s salvation tenders to the role are as children. This entity is the most determined and dangerous opponent ever to will not require a new construction of the world, the face us . . . It possesses ancient wisdom, is wholly ‘sacred’, and humankind’s place within this whole. integrated in its purpose and cannot be defeated, What would appear to be needed is ‘the develop- but only joined (Pedler, 1991, p. 10, p. 12). ment of a global ethic as a system of cultural values This is dangerous ground in terms of achieving a motivating peoples’ behaviour on a widespread clear and informed understanding of global environ- basis’ (Rapoport, 1993, p. 181). As Rapoport points mental problems and possible solutions. out, however, this is a far more complex and unex- The anthropomorphism evident in Gaian under- plored matter than is the call for a refocusing on standings of the biosphere is linked to an extended values by corporate and academic organizations and partly-metaphoric analogy between the human spokespersons. body as complex microsystem and the life support system of the planet. This partakes of an inter- Metaphors, representations and applied social woven cultural symbolic heritage and contemporary science links with modernity and representation (Lock, 1993). This Gaian perspective subtly outlines and There is an aspect of the ecopsychology discourse suggests the experiential learning and ‘connecting’ which is particularly confusing, often disorienting which characterizes ecopsychology workshops. Not and arguably very anthropocentric. The language, unrelated to this extended anthropomorphism and analogies and metaphors used have created a spec- body symbolism (e.g. Douglas, 1970; Johnson, 1987; trum of powerful images. Featherstone et al., 1991; Lock, 1993; Scott & Morgan, 1993) is the ‘notion’ that we are connected The most beautiful object I have ever seen in a to the planet not only in terms of a biological, bio- photograph, in all my life, is the planet Earth seen from the distance of the moon, hanging there in chemical interface, but in terms of consciousness space, obviously alive. Although it seems at first itself. glance to be made up of innumerable separate spec- The spirit of the living earth is difficult to define. ies of living things, on closer examination every one And the search for words to describe it calls upon of its working parts, including us, is interdepen- each of us to reach deep into the intuitive experi- dently connected to all other working parts. It is, to ences of our own lives (Samuels & Bennett, 1983, put it one way, the only truly closed ecosystem any p. 661. of us knows about. To put it another way, it is an organism. It came alive, I shall guess, 3.8 billion The cause for concern in all of this can be over- years ago today, and I wish it a happy birthday and stated. It is certainly the case that we can feel very a long life ahead, for our children and their grand- attuned to and ‘connected’ to the larger natural children and theirs and theirs (Thomas, 19851. world of which we are a part. This phenomenologi- The most pervasive analogy is that of the Gaia cal reality is positive, healthy and undoubtedly hypothesis, the ‘notion’ that earth’s encompassing leads to a greater ecological awareness and sensi- ecosystem and atmosphere is not dissimilar to a tivity. As well the evolution of human consciousness living, sentient being (Lovelock, 1972; Margulis & suggests the inherent tension which accompanied Lovelock, 1974). This is a notion which has con- the development of a self-reflective awareness and siderable appeal and which is in many ways useful, central importance of a self-world referencing sys- in attempting to communicate, the interrelatedness tem (Crook, 1980; Ornstein, 19911. Problems begin, and interdependencies of global ecosystems, as well, however, when we begin to use and equate this of course, as the possible ‘mortality’ of such systems sense of connectedness to the planet as the bar- given the magnitude of human ecosystem insensi- ometer and sine qua non of mental health. While it 244 J. P. Reser is true that in many cultures the integrity and qual- indeed convictions about the objective reality of ity of one’s relationships with one’s physical and ‘self. It is interesting that from an Eastern, Buddh- social world are viewed as essential determinants of ist, perspective, the ‘self is very much an illusion well being (e.g. Reser, 19911, one can envision a (Yoshinori, 1993). The constructionist perspective Western and quite sane consciousness of self as a (Gergen, 1985; Shore, 1991) on ‘self and ‘reality’ is a separate, self-regulating, relatively autonomous valuable one for considering how we frame the eco- individual. While it could be argued that this is a logical crisis and the role of individual behaviour problematic cultural self-awareness and conscious- and must at least be addressed. ness, it need not be seen as pathological or ecologi- cally destructive. Indigenous touchstones and earth wisdom The complex set of confounds and confusions which appears to permeate the ecopsychology litera- There are other features of ecopsychology which are ture arguably stem from Western cultural con- problematic for a critically thinking academic audi- structs and conceits concerning ‘the self and per- ence. One such problem is the extent of which pro- sonhood. The implicit contradictions inherent in the ponents of this view appear to appropriate and rep- damning of individualism while investing heavily in resent uncritically the nature of indigenous beliefs, a very ego-centred psychoanalytic view of individual ritual and experience with respect to the ‘natural’ health and well-being is a sobering case in point. world. In The Voice of the Earth, as in many other Clearly, however, ecopsychology has invested recent ecopsychology publications, considerable heavily in the power of metaphor and myth. There store is placed on the essential harmony and inter- is also no question but that these are very effective connectedness with all species found in indigenous vehicles for shaping human understanding and cultures and in pre-industrialized Western society. behaviour (Bateson, 1972; 1979; Lakoff & Johnson, Throughout history there have been legends 1980; van der Geest & White, 1989; Engel, 1993; describing Earth as a living being, ‘Mother Earth’, Ortony, 1993)-computer ‘desktops’ and infor- an entity which nurtures and sustains us. For milli- mation ‘superhighways’, ‘windows’ and ‘trashcans’ ons of years people believed that all animals and provide a compelling example. It is, however, ques- plants, even rocks, mountains and the sky, evolved tionable whether such metaphoric use well serves from a single source. Within this system of think- ing, people viewed themselves as intimately connec- analytic clarity or real progress in problem concep- ted to everything around them, from the tiniest tualization and solution. Some metaphors can also insect or pebble to the greatest constellations in the be deadly. heavens. Human life was not separate from other forms. Everything was related; everything was kin. Indeed, this view of earth as a dead object, an insen- Each member of the universal community sup- sate piece of rock so dominates the thought of our ported each other in perfect harmony (Samuels & day that even such original thinkers as Buckmins- Bennett, 1983, p. 3). ter Fuller have compared the Earth to a spaceship, and have extrapolated from this metaphor that the The Australian aborigine reflects the capacity of solutions to the Earth’s problems are comparable to indigenous peoples to remain at one with both their repairing our automobiles or our television sets. natural world and their spiritual world. As Laurens From this we might suppose that keeping the earth van de Post has written of the bushmen of the healthy and habitable would be like sweeping out Kalahari, and equally applicable to many indigen- the spaceship and polishing its hull regularly. ous peoples: ‘The whole of the cosmos was a family. Unfortunately this vision of our world has not They had an extraordinary feeling of kinship that served us well in the past few decades. The failure burned like a flame and kept them on course, that lies in the metaphor; the Earth is not a spaceship, it kept them warm and full of meaning. In the mod- is much more than that (Samuels & Bennett, 1983, ern world we have become so engaged in doing that p. 4). we have become divorced from the aspect of our- Finally, there is a more encompassing metaphor, selves which gives meaning’ (Myers, 1990, p. 47). myth, and construction that ecopsychology has not Understanding the universe was a matter of listen- come to terms with-the metaphor of self (Epstein, ing, having the ears to hear the music of the 1972; Gergen 15%Davis, 1985; Daniels, 1988; spheres, the voice of the Earth. Wisdom meant con- Cushman, 1992; Semin & Rubini, 1992). While one necting (Roszak, 19926, p. 261. might argue that ecopsychologists have in fact Particular reference is often made to Native stressed the untenability of an individual, disem- Americans and Australian Aboriginals. In a similar bodied self in contrast to the experiential and bio- vein the more popular scientific literature fre- logical reality of relational self, the larger narrative quently suggests that contemporary industrialized is premised on some very strong assumptions and nations can learn valuable lessons on living with Whither Environmental Psychology? 245 nature from native peoples (Udall, 1963; Posey, remain extremely popular accounts of ‘connecting’ 1985; Bunyard, 1989; Knudtson 8z Suzuki, 19921. with this more spiritual relationship with the The nature, value, sensitivity, and applicability of world. There are countless other sources and ‘paths’ such indigenous knowledge and ecological con- (e.g. Mindell, 1984, 1993; King, 1990; Villoldo & sciousness is at least debateable (Alvard, 19931, pre- Jendrensen, 1990; Arrien, 1993). suming that the emit perspective, cultural assump- The point is that this new age appreciation of tions, and environmental management practices of other culture wisdom and self/world views is typi- the indigenous culture in question are genuinely cally based on popularized and often distorting communicated and understood by others. Such dis- accounts rather than authoritative sources, and in cussions of indigenous earth wisdom can be charac- any case does not and should not equate with a con- terized by considerable naivete, misunderstanding sidered psychological or anthropological perspective and ethnocentrism (Brody, 1983; Cronon, 1983; on self and natural environment awareness, con- Riddington, 1988; Rose, 1988; Weatherford, 1988; sciousness, or construction. Nor does it provide, out Versluis, 1992; Alvard, 19931. It is important to of cultural context, a very defensible psychothera- appreciate that ‘indigenous spirituality’ has itself peutic or behaviour change model (Atkinson, 19921. become cultural product and counter-cultural move- The within-culture phenomenological reality of a ment (e.g. Hultkrantz, 1990). profound and experienced connectedness to place Book of the Hopi and a whole series of other similar and land, and often other species, by indigenous types of writings are expressions of an accumu- peoples is not disputed. This is a quintessential fea- lation of eclectic bits of information, pulled out of ture of Australian Aboriginal cultural assumptions their cultural contexts, and used to reinforce a and totemic belief systems (Elkin, 1938; Berndt & holistic world view, presently called ‘New Age’, Berndt, 1964; Charlesworth et al., 1984; Eliade, which perceives the multifaceted world and its problems in a highly stereotyped manner. This 1987; Rowse, 1992) and is certainly the case for ‘grass-roots’ philosophy is no longer the search for most Native American cultures (Versluis, 1992). understanding . . . but a totalitarian and fundamen- The ‘spiritual’ nature of this cultural construction talist alternative to technocratic greed and sloth. and shared meaning system in an Australian The need to check the excesses of technocracy is Aboriginal cultural context is, however, poorly necessary of course. But the baby has been thrown out with the bathwater . . . if one criticizes the harm understood by many who refer to this connection done to the Hopis, one is in reality criticizing an (e.g. Hamilton, 1984, 1990; Rose, 1988; Anderson, integrated world view, a world view characterized 1989; Morton, 1991; Rowse, 1993; Reser, 1994). The by its own exponents as an ‘amorphous cultural ‘natural’ environment of many Aboriginal communi- transition’ without creed, dogma or leaders, but ties can be the source of considerable fear and anxi- which integrates such concerns as ‘environmen- talism, holistic health, women’s rights, social ety, in a cultural context in which malevolent beings responsibility, and personal spirituality’. My quar- and spirits, sorcery, causality and cosmological rel is with the way native peoples, who have had uncertainty are located within the natural environ- little or no part in these issues, are used by pro- ment. As well, what particularly characterizes ponents on both sides of the issues. The overly Aboriginal cosmology is a pervasive anthropomor- romanticized and nostalgic view of American Indi- phizing of the natural world, and its dependence on ans as noble savages, born with an environmen- talist temperament, is just as harmful as the view human ritual and management for continuance and proposed by industrialist tyrants laying pipelines life itself. Finally, Aboriginal world views are on the lands of those same supposedly backward inherently and ubiquitously social as well as savages. Each group has a vision of its own which human; while it is true that there is often an almost has little to do with Hopi reality (Geertz, 1990, 132-133). literal identification with place, for example, through conception linearity, this identification is There is, of course, the new age fascination with perhaps more accurately understood as an ontologi- earth magic, shamanism and indigenous healing cal and kinship marker in a pervasively social land- practices, and an accompanying belief that there scape of meaning. exists a body of sacred lore which can be easily This socially constructed character of culturally tapped and which opens the doors of perception and shared understandings of people-land connections is earth wisdom (e.g. Neihardt, 1932; Waters, 1963; not a recent ‘constructivist’ notion (Eliade, 1959; Storm, 1972; Bear & Wabun, 1980; Wolfe, 19881. Kluckhohn & Strodbeck, 19611 and it certainly Such books as Castaneda’s The Teachings of Don applies to Australian Aboriginal cultures. Juan (1970) and A Separate Reqlity (19711, and Harner’s The Way of the Shaman (1980) were and . . . we are as yet only beginning to understand that 246 J. P. Reser

people’s intimacy with the ‘natural’ world is not were intertwined themes in early psychoanalytic itself somehow ‘natural’. Scholars such as Jane cultural discourse, just as they were an integral Goodale and Rhys Jones have shown with consider- able sophistication that intimacy is achieved strand of romanticism and transcendentalism. through cultural constructions of the environment the oceanic feeling was a sensation of the individ- based on close observations accumulated through ual’s identity with his surroundings, of his sublime time. There is a great deal to be learnt about ‘the connection to objects, to one’s entire self, and to the facts’ that Aboriginal people have observed, and universe as an indivisible whole (Fisher, 1991, more to be learnt from their managerial strategies. p. 112). There is even more to be learnt of the cultural con- struction of the environment, for it is through moral Such privileging of the experiential is under- and ontological systems that Aboriginal people have standable, and indeed constitutes a powerful tool of achieved and sustained their skilled ecological man- behaviour change, but it does totally disregard the agement strategies (Rose, 1988, p. 384). complexity of self-schemas, self-awareness, and self-attributions following behaviour change, and A Focus on Self: The real work the multiplicity of ways in which our construction of reality is adroitly manipulated in service of self- Much of ecopsychology writing is about direct action related information processing needs. and social change. The nature and magnitude of There appears to be little understanding that the global environmental problems requires a radical, exercise in critical self-reflection on self, culture, the political, social change agenda. This is made very environmental crisis, and psychology has been clear in the ‘Deep Ecology’ literature, which is a call occurring on a much wider front than ecopsychology for new tactics as well as a new way of thinking (Harre, 1984; Gergen & Davis, 1985; Parker, 1989; about effective individual and societal change. What Shotter & Gergen, 1989; Sampson, 1989, 1993; is fascinating is the remarkably clear-eyed focus on Parker & Shotter, 1990; Stigler et al., 1990; self as change target and agent. Shweder, 1991; Kvale, 1992). One might hazard that this is because ecopsychologists are coming We need a way to view the self, a new experience of from a more clinical, psychiatric, and culture-bound our place in the whole, to develop true ecological responsibility. In the course I teach at the Center, frame of reference. This, however, raises a further we are exploring ways to develop a more connected, and perhaps more challenging conflict than that creative, ecological experience of the self through between Western individualism and ecological self. readings in deep ecology and the development of The cross-cultural evidence clearly suggests that ecological identity (Corm, 1992, p. 5). Western individualism is a cultural anomaly and The terminology may be different, and the database that while self construction varies enormously is largely experiential, but there is a serious around the globe, it is typically more collective or attempt to critically view the nature and dynamic of interdependent (Heelas & Lock, 1981; Geertz, 1983; self systems, and how self and world encounters can Markus & Kitayama, 1990; Stigler et al., 1990). substantively change self construction and behav- Even in the cultural context of North America, it is iour. The real work is working on ourselves; direct axiomatic that attitudinal change must take into action and political change logically and appropri- account the normative, social context of change, and ately follow. There is considerable reference in the that differences between individualism and collec- deep ecology literature to personal experience and tivism across cultures must be understood to exist transformation, typically in the context of natural at individual difference and collective levels, for environment or workshop-mediated encounter. example the ‘ensembled individualism’ of the East Part of the problem-and part of the promise- (Sampson, 1988). What are the behaviour change derives from the fact that ecopsychologists are argu- implications at a global level when cultural ing from their own and others’ experience of ‘con- constructions and experience of self are so necting’, of being in touch with the planet, of feeling diverse-and different-from the western cultural earth’s pain, hearing earths cries. ‘Moreover, deep assumptions undergirding ecopsychology? ecology has become a ‘practice’ aimed at directly experiencing connectedness with nature’ (Callicott, 1983, p. 4). This is, from a critical perspective, a What does Ecopsychology have to Offer to naive phenomenology which gives primacy to direct Interested Psychologists, Particularly experience at the expense of a more objective Environmental Psychologists? account of the nature of such experiences. It is interesting to note that separation and connection There are many things that come to mind here. A Whither Environmental Psychology? 247 number of particularly valuable touchstones, like tribution of environmental psychology to the eco-relevance; a temporal, biological, multi-disci- environmental social problem arena has been very plinary, cultural perspective; human experience; the modest, with some exceptions, e.g., social dilemmas, primacy of feelings; the need to focus and channel risk assessment, and behavioural perspectives on individual energies and competencies for effective energy and water conservation and littering, and and enduring change; and, most importantly, the these areas of research and application are not magnitude and critical nature of the task. There is widely known. To be fair these latter areas are of as well something that goes beyond the self-evident major importance, but as Einstein notes, they have caring and concern that characterize the ecopsych- not changed the way we think-and this is ulti- ology movement-there is a consciousness of the mately what is required (Zimmerman, 1985; past, the future, and the nature-and meaning-of Zimbardo & Leippe, 1991). One reads the conclud- human connections in this greater web of life. This ing, problem-focused chapters of recent textbooks in is of immense value to a discipline which is osten- the area (Gifford, 1987; Bell et al., 1990; McAndrew, sibly concerned with the human condition and the 1993) with some dismay, and a realization that the quality of human experience. There are, in short, enormity and critical status of the global crisis has some very valuable and challenging possibilities not-and perhaps cannot-galvanize the academic here, in terms of moving people toward more eco- imagination. On the other hand, the available serial logically sensitive behaviours and policies, in terms compilations of environmental psychological writ- of how we construct human and ecosystem intercon- ings which exist, for example, the Human Behav- nections, in terms of how we construct psychology iour and Environment Series (Plenum) are of par- as well as self. On a more practical and positive ticular value. level, ecopsychology is, intentionally or not, throw- What psychology can offer are ways of framing ing out a challenge to psychology as a discipline and issues of central interest and concern to ecopsychol- profession to get involved with ‘the real work’, in ogists and a substantial and relevant corpus of Gary Snyder’s words: research evidence. The nature, status and import- what we really do. And what our lives are. To make ance of self is a good example. While one can only be the world as real as it is and to find ourselves as impressed by the way in which a changing-the-self real as we are within it (1980, p. 81). focus character&es the ecopsychology literature, there appears to be no clear conceptual framework which informs the reader as to how and why such What does Psychology Have to Offer to strategies work, how it is that changing the self Ecopsychology? changes everything else. Psychology is in a position to offer some clear wisdom as well as research Psychology has clearly impacted on the ecopsychol- findings here, deriving from attitude and behaviour ogy movement, albeit largely unintentionally and research (e.g. Eagley & Chaiken, 1993) and social inadvertently. There is an obvious and strong cognition (e.g. Fiske & Taylor, 1991), as well as from psychoanalytic and analytic character to dis- personality theory (e.g. Carver & Scheier, 1992) and cussions of separation, anxiety, conflict, and uncon- the social and cross-cultural psychology of ‘self (e.g. scious, often interwoven with the critical theory of Gergen & Davis, 1985; Shotter & Gergen, 1989). postmodernism and feminism. Perhaps the next Ecopyschology’s focus on self, while aligned with most important contributions have been the experi- psychotherapy as well as the human potential ential, self-reflective and critical perspectives of movement, is very compatible with the Lewinian humanistic psychology, and the ‘how to bring about tradition of change from within, and the use of effective individual and group change’ perspectives small groups and communities as agents of change of Lewinian social psychology (1947) and com- (e.g. Sampson, 1976; Bargal et al., 1992). There are munity psychology (e.g. Orford, 1992). These a number of other aspects of this focus on self- domains of individual growth, self and other con- understanding that are very sympathetic with a sciousness, and effective change strategies have more contemporary social cognition understanding percolated through popular culture and institutions of ‘self (Epstein, 1972; Markus & Wurf, 1987; to the point where they substantially inform our Fiske & Taylor, 1991). The multiple self-schemas ways of thinking and problem-solving. The aware- posited by Gergen (1982) and Markus and Nurius ness level with respect to social and environmental (1986) suggest a number of options in terms of psychology in the ecopsychology discourse, however, domain-specific salience and ‘possible selves’. is virtually nonexistent. Sadly, the substantive con- Recent social psychological research on attitude 248 J. P. Reser change in an environmental context is suggesting, changing social representations and belief systems, contrary to the assumptions of paradigmatic models with changing values and priorities, in a post-mod- (e.g. Ajzen & Fishbein, 19881, that self-identity ern context of massive cultural change and political independently and powerfully influences behav- and ideological flux. A social and political psycho- ioural intentions, and possibly makes salient par- logical perspective is of enormous value here, and ticular ethical and emotional orientations (e.g. while it can only complement the perceptive insight Biddle et al., 1987; Charng et al., 1988; Sparks & of historians such as Roszak, it offers clear concep- Shepherd, 19921. The more classic attitude change tual links between individual and collectivity, works on ego involvement and value relevance (e.g. between attitudes, beliefs, and cultural assump- Katz, 1960; Ostrom & Brock, 1968; Johnson & tions. An excellent example of how a more classic Eagley, 1989, 19901 remain relatively unexplored attitude change model is squarely addressing issues but very promising avenues for better understand- of genuine behaviour change is found in Ajzen’s ing the interrelationships between self and environ- extended model of reasoned action, the theory of mental perceptions (Zimbardo & Leippe, 1991; planned behaviour (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1984; Ajzen, Eagley & Chaiken, 19931. It is quite possible that 19911. In addition to intentions and subjective environmental ‘concern’ is in fact a functionally norms, the theory builds in both actual and per- interdependent composite of self-involvement and ceived behavioural control. Clearly, beliefs about value salience. The record of behavioural inter- control are central to the concerns of ecopsychology vention is impressive (e.g. Geller, 1987; Dwyer et as well as to applied social psychology. There is also al., 19931; even here the possibilities of self-con- reasonable prospect that the ubiquitous issue of struction are receiving serious consideration, not information knowledge can be better understood in only with respect to self-regulation and self efficacy terms of information integration theory (Anderson, but also including ‘the processes by which “environ- 19911, which separately weights meaning and rel- mental ethics” become internalized so as to produce evance in the valuation of incoming information, lifelong behaviours . . . Only then can behaviour sci- and underscores the processes by which information ence meaningfully contribute to saving planet earth becomes integrated with what we already know and (Dwyer et al., 1993, p. 317, p. 319). Finally, framing value. If psychology is going to make a genuine con- the issue in terms of social constructions (Gergen, tribution to changing how people think-about the 19851, social problem construction (Schneider, 1985; environment or human nature-they are going to Hilgartner & Bosk, 19881 or social representations have to address squarely such conceptually vexing (van Cranach et al., 1992; Farr, 1993) would open issues as values and beliefs and the nature of con- the door to some different and useful concepts and cern, and very different cultural assumptions about research avenues. The social representation of the human-biosphere interdependencies (Stern & nature of the ‘connection’ between ‘person’ and Oskamp, 1987; Schwartz et al., 1992; Stern, 1992) ‘natural environment’ is an obvious candidate for and how these relate to cultural meaning systems serious investigation, as are the social represen- and social change (Saegert, 1987; Bruner, 1990; tations of ‘psychology’ and ‘ecopsychology’. Sloan, 1990; Shweder, 1991). While considerable store is being placed by ecop- It is noteworthy that references to environmental sychologists on small group and community-level threats in the ecopsychology literature are largely processes, there appears to be no articulated wis- in the context of anxiety, fear and ‘psychic numb- dom with respect to how and why such groups can ing’. This is the discourse of the antiwar movement, be such powerful facilitators of enduring change. and it is noteworthy that many ecopsychologists Again, psychology is in a real position to offer valu- were central figures in this movement and wrote able and useful wisdom here with respect to facili- extensively on human response to the nuclear tating change from within, and using-not threat, for example, Johanna Macy and John Mack. fighting-group sanctions and norms (e.g. O’Keefe, There also exists a focused psychological literature 1990). Social comparison and normative conduct addressing the psychological aspects of nuclear war have long been held to mediate environmentally (e.g. Thompson, 19851, though what was never responsible behaviour; recent research reviews adequately dealt with were the psychological conse- underscore the importance but multiplicity and quence of living under the shadow of nuclear war, situational specificity of such norms (Cialdini et al., the psychological ‘reality’ of such a scenario, or the 1991). motivational or behaviour change implications of It is clear that one of the dynamics of change at the nuclear threat (Reser, 19801. There is much of an individual and collective level has to do with value in the now extensive literature on human Whither Environmental Psychology? 249 response to environmental threat (e.g. Fischhoff et in the Times. The unconscious collected images of al., 1987; Cvetkovich & Earle, 1992) and the funda- dying otters, oil-slicked fish eggs and tite black- ened rocks and beach pebbles. The signs turned into mental issue of future orientation and psychological sings and their meanings became unclear; like dis- representation (Kaplan, 1972; Reser & Smithson, cordant melodies that never end, never stop long 1988; Ornstein & Ehrlich, 1990). One might also enough to be examined or analyzed. Signifyers rose well mention what cumulative wisdom we have above signifieds and floated across the surface of with respect such phenomenon as learned helpless- our skin until they settled like leaves on a pond and made their descent into our bodies and murky ness, desensitization, burnout, risk assessment and dreams. Inside our bodies suffering otters turned decision-making, conflict resolution, and coping. into painful utters, the body is a cavern vulnerable These overlapping literatures are, of course, exten- to pollution and helplessness (Bluhm, 1992, sive. Unfortunately, we do not have a clear concep- pp. 2391-392). tual model or measurement tool for ‘environmental The more psychological of these explorations of concern’, which could arguably be ecological, altru- place meaning (Kaplan, 1978; Csikszentmihalyi & istic, egoistic or religious/ideological. How these con- Rochberg-Halton, 1981; Proshansky et al., 1983; cern orientations toward the environment are Hormuth, 1990; Altman & Low, 1992; Lalli, 1992; acquired and transmitted may be a critical factor Matthews, 1992; Mazumdar & Mazumdar, 1993) and proximate cause in determining the pace of glo- have clearly demonstrated that connections to bal environmental change (Stern, 1992; Stern et al., dwelling, neighbourhood, and local ecosystem are 1993). an integral component of identity, environmental A particularly valuable perspective from environ- quality and ‘environmental competence’ (Gifford, mental psychology is the psychology of place and 1987). The work on house symbolism is of particular place identity (e.g. Kaplan & Kaplan; 1978; relevance to an understanding of how ‘body’ and Altman & Werner, 1985; Altman & Low, 1992). ‘dwelling’ have become metaphors for the earth Over the past two decades there has been a sporadic itself (Synder, 1969, 1986; Cooper, 1976; Marcus, and interdisciplinary attempt to understand better 1990). These perspectives in many ways mine the meaning and symbolic character of place attach- James’ notion of the ‘material self as well as sug- ment (Rainwater, 1966; Relph, 1966; Tuan, 1974, gest that how we frame and experience our relation- 1977; Cooper, 1976; Proshansky, 1978; Rapoport, ship to our lived environment determines the archi- 1982; Proshansky et al., 1983). This has ranged tectural, social and linguistic forms we employ to from the writings of naturalists (Leopold, 1949; articulate this relationship, actually and metaphor- Shepard, 19731, to the literary genre wherein the ically. This in turn determines our experience and exploration of self and a particular natural setting shapes our lives (Hall, 1966; Bell et al., 1990). More are interwoven (Dillard, 1975; Mathiesson, 1978; recent work on place identity (Lalli, 1992) argues Lopez, 1979; McPhee, 1979; Snyder, 1986 Berry, that place identity must be specified with respect to 19901, to dislocations of self when moving or made particular spatial-psychological areas, such as one’s homeless (Hormuth, 1990; Goehring & Stager, home town or city, as a necessary condition for 19911, to more anthropological accounts of place meaningful empirical investigation, and that two meaning and identity (Brady, 1983; Benterrak et experience-based processes have to be included in al., 1984). The area of cultural studies has offered any psychologically meaningful scale, individual some particularly valuable perspectives on cul- behavioural involvement in an environment and the turally reproduced landscapes of meaning, and the shared social construction of this environment. contemporary wedding of local to global, temporal to Giulani and Feldman (1993) further argue that spatial, and personal to collectivity in an infinite place attachment, while invaluable as a heuristic, variety of cultural and geographic juxtapositions and a valuable consideration with respect to (Williams, 1981; Hall, 1990; Shore, 1991; Grossberg environmental meaning and transactions, has not et al., 1992; Massey, 1993). This self-reflective world really provided much analytic clarity as to the of images and representations, and changing ident- nature and dynamic of this bonding process, nor ities, values, and cultural meaning systems is in how it differs from related phenomena, e.g. root- many ways central to the concerns of ecopsychology. edness, homesickness. The insight for ecopsychology is perhaps that con- The front page news was particularly vivid on 24 necting with the planet must also, somehow, take March 1989. It conveyed the signs that launched a thousand ships of associations, or a thousand thou- place at a local level, and that attachment, meaning sand gallons of crude oil into the crystalline mind of and identity, while of core importance, are related Prince William’s Sound. ‘It’s a sign of the times’, it’s to behaviour in complex ways which are not necess- 250 J. P. Reser arily elucidated by psychoanalytic or Jungian agenda is to improve understanding of how human exegesis. The impact of the ecological crisis and systems produce the proximate causes, how changes in human systems might change the rate motivational imperatives may need to be experi- at which people alter the environment, how people enced at a local level and must register on one’s cog- perceive changes in the global environment, how nitive, emotional, and personal map of the world people respond to the anticipation of global environ- (Seamon & Mugerauer, 1985; Reser & Smithson, mental change and are affected by experienced 1988; Ornstein & Ehrlich, 1990). This emphasis on change, and how changes in the human systems might make people less susceptible to the effects of the importance of ‘connecting’ with one’s local, global environmental change. The role of psy- known, traversed, natural environment is a recur- chology is to improve the understanding of the func- rent theme in the ‘natural history’ literature which tion of individual and interpersonal behaviour in all undergirds ecopsychology sentiments (e.g. Synder, of these human-environment relationships (Stern, 1986, 1990; Berry, 1988, 1990). The necessary 1992, p. 271, p 272). caveat here is that locally ‘connected’ selves or ‘bioregional personal narratives’ run the danger of Concluding Observations local self-interest and the ‘blood and soil’ morality that has haunted deep ecology ethical consideration It is difficult to know whether environmental psy- (e.g. Cheney, 1989; Michael, 1992). chology will take a turning at the transpersonal It is unfortunate that there is such little reference ecopsychology crossroads. Those psychologists who in the ecopsychology literature to either environ- are genuinely involved in the environmental/ mental psychology or contemporary social psycho- conservation movement may well move in a more logical perspectives on the self. This suggests an political direction. This may or may not involve psy- unfortunately narrow understanding of applied chology as a discipline. Those who are particularly social science as contrasted with more psychoana- interested in self and self-environment construc- lytic and psychiatric formulations. Ecopsychologists tions may pursue these interests in a personality or might be surprised at what concerned social and clinical area, or find sustenance in the reconstituted environmental psychologists have to say about areas of social/personality or cultural psychology. environmental issues. There is a very useful role for social psychologists in Clearly social influence techniques can be applied to documenting this social movement, in documenting changing the environmental behaviours of individ- the changing social construction of people-planet uals. But what about the environmentally destruc- interrelationships and the ‘indigenous psychology’ tive behaviours that occur to sustain the global and postmodern underpinnings of this changing economic system? What about the pollution and destruction caused by the ways we produce, distrib- societal consciousness. Gardner (1992) suggests ute, and consume goods? . . . it is the big environ- that social psychology itself may become a part of mental problems that are most prone to out-of- the broader field of cultural studies. While environ- sight, out-of-mind mentality. . . . The solution to mental psychology has yet to situate itself in this what many believe is a global environmental crisis discourse and find a voice, Michael’s analysis (1992) rests in passionately nurturing pro-environmental attitudes and beliefs throughout the culture. Future of the role of the ‘natural’ in the constitution of a executives and political leaders must be environ- postmodern identity provides an intriguing prospec- mentalists through and through. This is a very hard tus with respect to where a social psychology of task, but it can be done. There is evidence that edu- postmodernism might take us in the environmental cational programmes beginning in early childhood arena and with respect to a marriage of social and that ‘immerse’ students in environmental con- sciousness-raising may lead to pro-environment biological science (Caporeal & Brewer, 1991). Many attitudes that people are willing to act on. This humanistic psychologists will continue to explore involves more than an ‘ecology section’ of a science attachment metaphors with respect to person- course. Children must directly experience nature planet constructions, and psychotherapy may under the guidance of teachers who can reveal its increasingly address ecosystem anxieties. Hopefully beauties and teach the consequences of environ- mental abuse in enough vivid detail to create a the more encompassing, multidisciplinary, ecologi- sharp contrast with this beauty. The ecology ‘out cal and ecosystem approaches which have been sug- there’ must get internalised as starting ‘in here’, gested (e.g. Stern, 1992; Stokols, 1992) will succeed within each of us (Zimbardo & Leippe, 1991, in marrying applied wisdom to critical problems. pp. 339-340). Should psychology, can environmental psy- Psychology is relevant to global environmental change because the current changes are largely chology, embrace the agenda and concerns of ecop- anthropogenic in origin. . . . The role of social and sychology? It is worth coming back to Roszak’s own behavioural science in the global-change research objectives with respect to ecopsychology: Whither Environmental Psychology? 251

My effort has been to connect as tightly as possible points, to be underscoring a more interdependent, with psychology, especially professional psychology collectivist sense of self, though there is an evident in order to bring its great public influence into the tension with the more individualist set of premises service of the environmental movement. I have tried to use references to the ‘spiritual’ sparingly; on which this quasi-psychiatric model is based. It is the term creates awkward, New Age connotations unfortunate that there is so little reference to cross- in the United States and might take off in odd, sec- cultural psychological discussions of interdependent tarian directions. Since my goal is to bring ecopsy- versus individualistic selves (Markus & Kitayama, chology into the mainstream, I have been trying to 1990; Triandis, 1990; Oyserman, 19931, and the cleave to psychology rather than spirituality. I admit this is, at a certain point, a matter of arbi- role of culture in constructing such self represen- trary rhetoric; I personally find the psychological tations and self-environment interdependencies blends into the spiritual along an extensive frontier. (Shweder & Levine, 1984; Sampson, 1989; Bruner, But for the purposes of public outreach, I find psy- 1990). To pursue a political and behaviour change chotherapy easier to work with. (Personal corre- agenda without reference to this merging under- spondence, September, 1993.) standing of the motivational and personal responsi- Roszak has also strongly endorsed the need for bility dynamics of culturally embedded self con- programmes of ecopsychological studies and strual is self-handicapping and remarkably remiss. educational outreach programmes for practising Western culture itself is and has been undergoing professionals, especially psychologists and environ- profound changes, one of the most important of mentalists. The rationale for such programmes, these changes being with respect to cultural con- according to Roszak, ‘includes the absence at any structions of self and personhood (Gergen & Davis, psychology curricula that include an introduction to 1985; Shotter & Gergen, 1989). At the same time the environmental sciences adapted to the pro- that there is a crescendo call for psychology to come fessional needs of psychotherapists’, and the up with new theoretical understandings of per- absence of ‘curricula in environmental studies that sonhood which have some construct validity with include a basic understanding of human motiv- respect to where contemporary society is at ations, addiction of psychotherapy’ (proposed Pro- (Sampson, 1989, 19931, ecopsychologists are gramme for Ecopsychological Studies). attempting to refashion ‘self and society on the Ecopsychologists have clearly understood that basis of rather tired constructions of self which may effective and enduring change comes from no longer map onto any meaningful social reality or within-but this must come from within communi- subjective experience. The hope is that a truly eco- ties and societies as well as individuals. They would logical self construction will meaningfully incorpor- also appear to be effectively using group processes ate the individual and cultural ‘other’ as well as the and norms, and public commitment, to move atti- ecosphere. This may require the jettisoning of con- tudes, beliefs, and values in the direction of ecologi- siderable baggage. cal concern. They have not understood well, how- From a conventional psychological perspective ever, that there exists considerable wisdom with what is needed is a cogent analysis of how individ- respect to individual and social change within social ual behaviour interfaces with global and localized psychology, as well as psychotherapy, and that self environmental problems, and an adequate, multile- schemas, self constructions and self encounter are vel assessment of the determinants of individual as central to their enterprise as is sensitivity train- and collective behaviour. Such analyses have been ing with respect to the natural environment and recently attempted (e.g. Stern & Oskamp, 1987; ecosystem threats. There is also, ironically, a very Stern, 1992; Stern et al., 1993) and allow for a more individualistic character to discussions of the eco- meaningful consideration of the nature and role of logical self in terms of psychoanalytic assumptions, self-construal, and how this in turn influences ultimate self-interest, psychotherapy as behaviour beliefs, values, and ultimately ecosystem concern change intervention, and self actualization via and individual behaviour. It is, of course, probable environmental action (e.g. Daniels, 1988; Bradford, that culturally produced and shared understand- 1993). A number of social and cross-cultural psy- ings of self and personhood substantially influence chologists have been arguing for some time that collective behaviours and in turn influence self-con- psychology needs a new concept of self, a global, struction (Gergen, 1991). Indeed the biggest chal- postmodern self that dovetails with postmodern lenge is probably to understand better the cultural social reality and individual experience (Sampson, landscapes of meaning and the politics of space, 1989; Gergen, 1991,1992X , race and planet which increasingly inform the dis- The discourse on ecopsychology would seem, at course of culture theorists (e.g. Berland, 1992; 252 J. P. Reser

Massey, 1993). This reflective and critical consider- Anderson, C. (1989). Aborigines and conservationism: the ation of culture and cultural understandings is at Daintree-Bloomfield road. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 24,214-227. the heart of culture theory, cultural studies, and Anderson, N. H. (Ed.) (1991). Contributions to infor- cultural psychology. It is noteworthy in this regard mation integration theory (Vols 1, 2, & 3). Hillsdale, that the most frequent and current reference made NJ: Erlbaum. by ecopsychologists to more encompassing cultural Arkes, H. R. & Garske, J. P. (1982). Psychological Theor- assumptions and understandings is Freud’s reflec- ies of Human Motivation (2nd Edn.) Monterey: Brooks/Cole. tions on human nature and human destiny in Ciuil- Atkinson, J. M. (1992). Shamanisms today. Annual k&ion and Its Discontents (e.g. Roszak, 1992, Review ofAnthropology, 21,307-330. 1993). Howard notes, in his review of The Voice of Bargal, D., Gold, M. & Lewin, M. (Eds) (1992). The heri- the Earth (19931, that while there is much to admire cage of Kurt Lewin: theory, research and practice. Journal of Social Issues, 48, l-206. in the book, the case Roszak makes for the pervas- Barker, R. G. (1968). Ecological Psychology. Stanford: ive ecopathology of the human spirit is premised Stanford University Press. almost exclusively on Freudian and neo-Freudian Barrow, J. D. & Tipler, F. J. (1986). The Anthropic Cos- sources, straining the resonance of an otherwise mological Principle. Oxford: Oxford University Press. sympathetic readership. This, and the unqualified Bell, P. A., Fisher, J. D., Baum, A. & Greene, T. E. (1990). anti-positivist, often anti-psychological stance of Environmental Psychology, (3rd Edn.) Sydney: Holt, Rinehart &Winston. ecopsychology generally does not augur well for a Berland, J. (1992). Angels dancing: cultural technologies meeting of minds and purpose. and the production of space. In L. Grossberg, C. Can environmental psychology, qua psychology, Nelson & P. A. Treichler, Eds., Cultural Studies. New encompass ecopsychology-as social movement, York: Routledge, pp. 38-65. societal conscience, and therapeutic behaviour Berry, T. (1988). The Dream of the Earth. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books. change intervention? Probably, and sadly, not, for Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an Ecology of Mind. New many of the reasons canvassed in this paper. If York: Random House. environmental psychologists do not consider and Bateson, G. (1972). Mind and Nature: A necessary unity. address the spectrum of issues raised by ecopsychol- New York: Bantam. ogists, however, seriously and urgently, they will Bennett, D. (1990). Ecological sustainability, deep environmental ethics and Tao: a preliminary conjunc- have truly lost their way as well as their credibility. tion. Paper in the Fundamental Questions Paper While I continue to have some problems with ecop- Series. Canberra: Australian National University, sychology as a lucid, convincing and useful concep- CRES. tual platform, I have no problem with their mission Benterrak, K., Muecke, S. & Roe, P. (1984). Reading statement or passionate concern. the Country. Freemantle: Freemantle Arts Centre Press. Berndt, R. M. & Berndt, C. H. (1964/1977). The World of the First Australians. Sydney: Ure Smith. References Berry, T. (1988). The Dream of the Earth. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organiz- Berry, W. (1990). Word and flesh. Whole Earth Revieio, ational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 66,68-71. 179-211. Biddle, B. J., Bank, B. J. & Slavings, R. L. (1987). Norms, Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding Attitudes preferences, identities and retention decisions. Social and Predicting Social Behaviour. Englewood Cliffs, Pscyhology Quarterly, 50,322-327. NJ: Prentice-Hall. Blnhm, C. (1992). Where otters exist as utters: beauty, Albrecht, S. L. (1976). Legacy of the environmental move- love and truth in the postmodern world. Theory & ment. Environment and Behavior, 8, 147-168. Psychology, 2,391-396. Altman, I. & Christensen, K. (Eds) (1990). Human Behav- Boyden, S., Dovers, S. & Shirlow, M. (1990). Our iour and Environment, Vol. 11. Environment and Biosphere under Threat: Ecological realities and Behavior Studies: Emergence of intellectual traditions. Australia’s opportunities. Melbourne: Oxford Univer- New York: Plenum Press. sity Press. Altman, I. & Low, M. (Eds) (1992). Human Behaviour Bradford, G. (1993). Toward a deep social ecology. In M. and Environment, Vol. 12. Place attachment. New E. Zimmerman, B. Callicott, G. Sessions, K. J. York: Plenum Press. Warren, & J. Clark, Eds., Environmental Philosophy: Altman, I. & Werner, C. M. (1985). Human Behaviour From animal rights to radical ecology. Englewood and Environment, Vol. 8. Home environments. New Cliffs: Prentice Hall, pp. 418-437. York: Plenum Press. Brody, H. (1983). Maps and Dreams. Ringwood, Victoria: Alvard, M. S. (1993). Testing the ‘ecologically noble Penguin. savage’ hypothesis: interspecific prey choice by Piro Bruner, J. S. (1990). Acts of Meaning. Cambridge: hunters of Amazonian Peru. Human Ecology, 21, Harvard University Press. 355-387. Brunswik, E. (1956). Perception and the Representative Whither Environmental Psychology? 253

Design of Psychological Experiments. Berkeley: responses to environmental hazards. Journal of University of California Press. Social Issues, 48, whole issue. Bunyard, P. (19891. Guardians of the Amazon. New Scien- Daniels, M. (1988). The myth of self-actualization. Jour- tist, 35, 38-41. nal of Humanistic Psychology, 28,7-38. Buttel, F. H. (1987). New directions in environmental Devall, B. & Sessions, G. (1985). Deep Ecology: Living as sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 12,465-488. if nature mattered. Salt Lake City, Utah: Gibbs M. Callicott, J. B. (1993). Introduction: environmental ethics. Smith. In M. E. Zimmerman, B. Callicott, G. Sessions, K. J. Dillard, A. (1975). Pilgrim at Tinker Creek. New York Warren & J. Clark, Eds., Environmental Philosophy: Bantan. From animal rights to radical ecology. Englewood Douglas, M. (1970). Purity and Danger: An analysis of the Cliffs: Prentice Hall, pp. 3-11. concepts of pollution and taboo. Harmondworth: Caporeal, L. R. & Brewer, M. B. (1991). Journal of Social Penguin. Issues, 47, l-9. Dubos, R. (1972). A God Within. New York: Charles Carson, R. (19621. Silent Spring. Boston: Houghton- Scribner. Mifflin. Dunlap, R. E. & Mertig, A. G. (Edsl (1992). American Carver, C. S. & Scheier, M. F. (1992). Perspectives on Environmentalism: The U.S. environmental move- Personality, (2nd Edn) Boston. Allyn & Bacon. ment, 1970-1990. Catton, W. R., Jr. & Dunlap, R. E. (1980). A new ecologi- Dunlap, R. E. & Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The ‘new cal paradigm for post-exuberant sociology. American environmental paradigm’: A proposed measuring Behavioral Scientist, 24, 15-47. instrument and preliminary results. Journal of Charlesworth, M., Morphy, H., Bell, D. & Maddock, K. Environmental Education, 9, 10-19. (Edsl (19891. Religion in Aboriginal Australia: An Dwyer, W. O., Leeming, F. C., Cobern, M. K., Porter, B. anthology. St. Lucia: University of Queensland Press. E. & Jackson, J. M. (1993). Critical review of Charng, H.-W., Piliavin, J. A. & Callero, P. L. (1988). Role behavioral interventions to preserve the environment. identity and reasoned action in the prediction of Environment and Behavior, 25,275-321. repeated behavior. Social Psychology Quarterly, 51, Eagley, A. H. & Chaiken, A. H. (19931. The Psychology of 303-317. Attitudes. Sydney: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Cheney, J. (1989). Postmodern environmental ethics: Elkin, A. P. (1938/1974). The Australian Aborigines. ethics as bioregional narrative. Environmental Ethics, Sydney: Angus & Robertson. 11,117-134. Eliade, M. (1959/19611. The Sacred and the Profane: The Cialdini, R. B., Kallgren, C. A. & Reno, R. R. (1991). A nature of religion. New York: Harper & Row. focus theory of normative conduct: a theoretical Eliade, M. (1987). The Encyclopedia of Religion. New refinement and reevaluation of the role of norms in York: Macmillan. human behaviour. Advances in Experimental Social Engel, S. (1993). Metaphors and knowledge: a review. Psychology, 24,201-234. New Ideas in Psychology, 11,273-283. Cock, P. (1991). Values for sustainability: the necessity of Epstein, S. (19721. The self concept revisited: or a theory transcendence and sacred realms. Paper in the of a theory. American Psychologist, 301313. Fundamental Questions Paper Series. Canberra: Estes, C. P. (1992). Women who Run with Wolves. Sydney: Australian National University, CRES. Rider. Conn, S. (19921. From information to transformation. Everett, M. (1990). Profile: Sarah A. Corm, Center Center for Psychology and Social Change Forum, 29 Research Associate. Center Review, Fall. Cambridge, September, 1992. Maine: Center for Psychological Studies in the Conn, S. (1990). Protest and thrive; the relationship Nuclear Age. between personal empowerment and global responsi- Featherstone, M., Hepworth, M. & Turner, B. S. (Eds) bility. New England Journal of Public Policy, 6, (1991). The Body: Social process and cultural theory. 163-177. London: Sage. Cooper, C. C. (1976). The house as symbol of self. In H. M. Farr, R. M. (1993). Common sense, science and social rep- Proshansky, W. H. Ittelson & L. G. Rivlin, Eds., resentations. Public Understanding of Science, 2, Environmental Psychology: People and their physical 189-204. settings. New York: Holt: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Fisher, D. J. (1991) Psychoanalytic History and Culture. pp. 435448. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. Cronon, W. (1983). Changes in the Land: Indians, colon- Fischhoff, B., Svenson, 0. & Slavic, P. (19871. Active ists, and the ecology of New England. New York: Hill responses to environmental hazards: Perceptions and and Wang. decision making. In D. Stokols & I. Altman, Eds., Crook, J. H. (1980). The Evolution of Human Conscious- Handbook of Environmental Psychology, Vol 1. New ness. Oxford: Clarendon Press. York: John Wiley, pp. 1089-1133. Csaky, M. (Ed.) (1979). How Does it Feel?: Exploring the Fiske, S. T. & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social Cognition (2nd world of your senses. London: Thames & Hudson. Edn.1 New York: McGraw-Hall. Csikszentmihalyi, M. & Rochberg-Halton, E. (19811. The Fox, W. (1990). Towards a Transpersonal Ecology.: Meaning of Things: Domestic symbols and the self. Developing new foundations for environmentalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Boston: Shambala. Cushman, P. (1990). Why the self is empty: towards a his- Fox, D. R. (1985). Psychology, ideology, utopia and the torically situated psychology. American Psychologist, commons. American Psychologist, 4648-58. 45,599-611. Frank, J. D. (1968). Sanity and Survival. New York: Cvetkovich, G. & Earle, T. C. (Eds) (1992). Public Vintage. 254 J. P. Reser

Gale, R. P. (1972). From sit-in to hike-in: a comparison of and the national imaginary. Australian Cultural the civil rights and environmental movements. In W. History, 9, 14-35. Burch, N. Cheek and L. Taylor, Eds., Social Behau- Hardin, G. & Baden, J. (1977). Managing the Commons. iour, Natural Resources and the Environment. New San Francisco: Freeman. York: Harper and Row. Harner, M. (1980/19901. The Way of the Shaman,. New Gardner, H. (19921. Scientific psychology: should we bury York: Harper/Collins. it or praise it? New Ideas in Psycholog.y, 10, 179-190. Harre, R. (1984). Personal Being. Cambridge, MA: Geller, E. S., Winett, R. A. & Everett Geertz, C. (1983). Harvard University Press, Doubleday. Local Knowledge: Further essays in imerpretive Heelas, P. L. F. & Lock, A. J. (Eds) (19811. Indigenous anthropology. New York: Basic Books. Psychologies: The anthropology of the self. London: Geertz, A. W. (19901. Reflections on the study of Hopi Academic Press. mythology. In C. Vecsey, Ed., Religion in Native North Hilgartner, S. & Bosk, C. L. (19881. The rise and fall of America. Moscow: University of Idaho Press, social problems: a public arenas model. American pp. 119-135. Journal of Sociology, 94,53-78. Geller, E. S. (19871. Environmental psychology and Hillman, J. (1975). Revisioning Psychology. New York: applied behavior analysis: from strange bedfellows to Harper & Row. a productive marriage. In D. Stokols & I. Altman, Hilhnan, J. & Ventura, M. (1992). We’ve had a hundred Eds., Handbook of Environmental Psychology. New years of psychotherapy and the world is getting worse. York: Wiley, pp. 361-388. Policy, 6, 163-175. Gergen, K. J. (1992). The decline and fall of personality. Howard, G. S. (19931. A cry for help. Contemporary Psy- Psychology Today, NovlDec, 59-63. chology, 38,857-858. Gergen, K. J. (19911. The Saturated Self Dilemmas of Hormuth, E. (1990). The Ecology of Self: Relocation and identity in contemporary life. New York: Basic Books. self-concept change. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer- Gergen, K. J. (19851. The social constructionist movement sity Press. in modern psychology. American Psychologist, 40, Hultkrantz, A. (1990). A decade of progress. In C. Vecsey, 266-275. Ed., Religion in Native North America. Moscow: Gergen, K. J. (1982). Towards Transformation in Social University of Idaho Press, pp. 167-191. Knowledge. New York: Springer-Verlag. Johnson, B. T. & Eagley, A. H. (1989). The effects of Gergen, K. J. & Davis, K. E. (19851. The Social Construc- involvement on persuasion: a meta-analysis. Psycho- tion of the Person. New York: Springer-Verlag. logical Bulletin, 106,290-314. Gibson, J. J. (19791. The Ecological Approach to Visual Johnson, B. T. & Eagley, A. H. (19901. Involvement and Perception. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin. persuasion: Types, traditions, and the evidence. Gifford, R. (19871. Environmental Psychology. Sydney: Psychological Bulletin, 107,375-384. Allyn & Bacon. Johnson, M. (1987). The Body in the Mind: The bodily Gilbert, R. K. (19921. Revisiting the psychology of men: basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: Robert Bly and the mytho-poetic movement. Journal University of Chicago Press. of Humanistic Psychology, 32,41-67. Kaminsky, G. (1993). Ecological psychology’s trouble with Giuliani, M. V. & Feldman, R. (1993). Place attachment knowledge: one terrible example. In M. von Cranach, in a developmental and cultural context. Journal of W. Doise & G. Mugny, Eds., Social representations Environmental Psychology, 13,267-274. and the Social Bases of Knowledge. Lewiston, New Goehring, B. & Stager, J. K. (1991). The intrusion of York: Hofgrefe & Huber Publishers, pp. 96-103. industrial time and space into the Inuit lifeworld: Kaplan, S. (1972). The challenge of environmental psy- Changing perceptions and behavior. Environment and chology: a proposal for a new functionalism. American Behavior, 23,666-679. Psychologist, February, 140-143. Goldsmith, E. (19881. The way: an ecological worldview. Kaplan, S. & Kaplan, R. (1978). Humanscape: Enuiron- The Ecologist, 18, 160-185. ments for people. North Scituate, MA: Duxbury Press. Goldstein, K. (1940). Human Nature in the Light of Psy- Katz, D. (19601. The functional approach to the study of chopathology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. attitudes. Public Opinion Quarterly, 24, 163-204. Goldstein, K. (19391. The Organism. New York: American Kilbourne, B. & Richardson, J. T. (1984). Psychotherapy Book Company. and new religions in a pluralistic society. American Gore, A. (1992). Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Psychologist, 39, 237-251. human spirit. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. King, S. K. (1990). Urban Shaman: A handbook for per- Gottlieb, R. (19931. Forcing the Spring: The transform- sonal and planetary transformation based on the ation of the American Environmental movement. Hawaian myth for the adventurer. New York: Island Press. Harper/Collins. Grossberg, L., Nelson, C. & Treichler, P. A. (Eds.1 (1992). Kluckhohn, F. R. & Strodbeck, F. L. (1961). Variations in Cultural Studies. New York: Routledge. value orientations. Evanston, IL: Row-Peterson. Hall, E. Y. (19691. The Hidden Dimension. New York: Knudtson, P. & Suzuki, D. (19921. Wisdom of the Elders. Doubleday. St. Leonards: Allen & Unwin. Hall, S. (1990). The emergence of cultural studies and the Koch, S. (1993). ‘Psychology’ or ‘The Psychological crisis of the humanities, October, 53, 11-90. Studies’? American Psychologist, 48,902-904. Hamilton, A. (19841. Spoon-feeding the lizards: culture Kvale, S. (Ed.) (1992). Psychology and Postmodernism, and contact in Central Australia. Meanjin, 43, Newbury Park: Sage. 363378. Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (19801. Metaph.ors We Live B.y. Hamilton, A. (19901. Fear and desire: Aborigines, Asians Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Whither Environmental Psychology? 255

Lalli, M. (1992). Urban-related identity: theory, measure- McAndrew, F. T. (1983). Environmental Psychology. ment, and empirical findings. Journal of Environmen- Pacific Grove: Brooks-Cole. tal Psychology, 12, 285-303. McPhee, J. (19791. Coming into the Country. New York: Leopold, A. (19491. A Sand County Almanac. New York: Bantam. Ballantine. Michael, M. (19921. Postmodern subjects: towards a Lewin, K. (19471. Frontiers in group dynamics, I & II. transgressive social psychology. In S. Kvale, Ed., Psy- Human Relations, 5-41, 143-153. chology and Postmodernism, Newbury Park: Sage, Lifton, R. J. (1979). The Broken Connection: On death and pp. 74-87. the continuity of life. New York: Touchstone Books. Mindell, A. (1984). Dreambody: The body’s role in Lifton, R. J. (19681. Death in Life: Survivors of revealing the self. London: Routledge & Kegan. Hiroshima. New York: Basic Books. Mindell, A. (19931. The Shaman’s Body. New York: Lock, M. (1993). Cultivating the body: anthropology and Harper Collins. epistemologies of bodily practice and knowledge. Morton, J. (1991). Black and white totemism: conser- Annual Review ofAnthropology, 22, 133-155. vation, animal symbolism, and human identification Lopez, B. H. (19791. River Notes. New York: Avon. in Australia. In D. B. Croft, Ed., Australian People Lovelock, J. (1988/19901. The Ages of Gaia: A biography of and Animals in Today’s Dreamtime: The role of com- our living earth. New York: Bantam. parative psychology in the management of natural Lovelock, J. (1979). Gaia: A new look at life on earth. New resources. Westport, CN: Praeger, pp. 21-51. York: Oxford University Press. Myers, N. (1985). The Gaia Atlas of Planet Management. Lovelock, J. (1972). Gaia as seen through the atmosphere. Sydney: Pan Books. Atmospheric Environment, 6,579-580. Myers, N. (19901. The Gaia Atlas of Future Worlds. Mack, J. (1994).Abduction. New York: Scribners. Ringwood, Victoria: Penguin. Mack, J. (19901. Changing models of psychotherapy: from Naes, A. (1983). The deep ecological movement: some psychological conflict to human empowerment. philosophical aspects. Philosophical Inquiry, 8, 10-31. Cambridge: Center for Psychological Studies in the Nash, R. (19891. The Rights of Nature. University of Nuclear Age. Harvard Medical School at the Wisconsin Press. Cambridge Hospital. O’Keefe, D. J. (19901. Persuasion: Theory and research. Mack, J. (1992). Inventing a psychology of our relation- Newbury Park: Sage. ship to the earth. In S. Staub & P. Green, Eds., Psy- Orford, J. (1992). Community Psychology: Theory and chology and Social Responsibility: Facing global chal- practice. New York: John Wiley. lenges. New York: New York University Press, G’Riordan, T. (1981). Environmentalism (2nd Edn). pp. 237-247. London: Pion. Macy, J. (19831. Despair and Personal Power in the Ornstein, R. (1991). The Evolution of Human Conscious- Nuclear Age. Philadelphia: New Society Publishers. ness. New York: Simon & Schuster. Marcus, C. C. (1990). From the pragmatic to the spiritual. Ornstein, R. & Ehrlich, P. (1990). New World New Mind. In I. Altman & K. Christensen, Eds., Human Behavior New York: Simon & Schuster. and Environment, Vol. 11. Environment and Behavior Ortony, A. (Ed.) (19931. Metaphor and Thought (2nd Studies: Emergence of intellectual traditions. New Edn). New York: Cambridge University Press. York: Plenum Press, pp. 111-140. Ostrom, T. M. & Brock, T. C. (1968). A cognitive model of Margulis, L. & Lovelock, J. E. (19741. Biological modu- attitudinal involvement. In R. P. Abelson, E. Aronson, lation of the earth’s atmosphere. Icarus, 21,471-489. W. J. McGuire, T. M. Newcomb, M. J. Rosenberg & P. Markus, H. & Kitayama, S. (19901. Culture and the self: H. Tannenbaum, Eds., Theories of Cognitive Consist- implications for cognition, emotion and motivation. ency: A sourcebook. Chicago: Rand McNally, pp. Psychological Review, 98, 224-253. 373-383. Markus, H. & Nurius, P. (19861. Possible selves. Oyserman, D. (19931. The lens of personhood: viewing the American Psychologist, 41, 954-969. self and others in a multicultural society. Journal of Markus, H. & Wurf, E. (19871. The dynamic self-concept: Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 993-1009 social psychological perspective. In M. R. Parker, I. (1989). The Crisis in Modern Social Losenweig & L. W. Porter, Eds., Annual Review of Psychology-and how to end it. London: Routledge. Psychology, Vol 38. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, Parker, I. & Shotter, J. (Eds) (1990). Deconstructing pp. 299-337. Social Psychology. London: Routledge. Massey, D. (1993). A global sense of place. In A. Grey & J. Pedler, K. (1979/1991). The Quest for Gaia. London: McGuigan, Eds., Studying Culture: An irxtroductory Harper Collins. reader. London: Edward Arnold, pp. 232-240. Posey, D. (19851. Native and indigenous guidelines for Mathews, F. (1991). The Ecological Self. London: new Amazonian development strategies: understand- Routledge. ing biodiversity through ethnocology. In J. Hemming, Matthews, M. H. (19921. Making Sense of Place: Ed., Change in the Amazon. Manchester: Manchester Children’s understanding of large-sca.le environments. University Press, pp. 156-181. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Proshansky, H. M. (1978). The city and self-identity. Mathiessen, P. (1978). The Snotu Leopard. New York: Environment and Behavior, 10, 147-169. Viking. Proshansky, H. M., Fabian, A. K. & Kaminoff, R. (1983). Mazumdar, S. & Mazumdar, S. (1993). Sacred space and Place identity: physical world socialization of the self. place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psy- Journal of Environmental Psychology, 3,57-83. chology, 13,231-242. Rainwater, L. (1966). Fear and house-as-haven in the 256 J. P. Reser

lower class. Journal of the American Znstitute of Plan- psychology: globalization and psychology’s theory of ners, 32,23-31. the person. American Psychologist, 33,914-921. Rapoport, R. N. (19931. Environmental values and the Sampson, E. E. (19761. Social Psychology and Contempor- search for a global ethic. Journal of Environmental ary Society. New York: John Wiley. Psychology, 13, 173-182. Samuels, M. D. & Bennett, H. Z. (19831. Well Bod.y, Well Rapoport, A. (19821. Meaning of the Built Environnterxt: A Earth: The Sierra Club environmental health source- non-verbal communication approach.. Beverly Hills: book. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books. Sage. Schutz, W. (1967). Joy. New York: Grove Press. Relph, E. (19761. Place and Placelessness. London: Pion. Scott, S. & Morgan, D. (1993). Body Matters: Essays on Reser, J. P. (1994). Indigenous touchstones in the search the sociology of the body. London. The Falmer Press. for a global ethic: Aboriginal representations and Schneider, J. W. (19851. Social problems: the constuction- representations of Aboriginal self-world connec- ist view. Annual Review of Sociology, 11,209-229. tions. Paper presented at the Symposium on Schwartz, S. H., Roccos, S. & Sagiv, L. (19921. Universals Eco-ethical Thinking in a Cross-cultural Perspective. in the content and structure of values: theoretical Saarbrucken, Germany. July/August. advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Reser, J. P. (19911. Aboriginal mental health: conflicting Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, cultural perspectives. In J. Reid & P. Tromp, Eds., l-65. The Health of Aboriginal Australia. Sydney: Harcourt Seamon, D. & Mugerauer, R. (Edsl (19851. Dwelling, Brace Jovanovich, pp. 218-291. Place and Environment: Toward a phenomenology of Reser, J. P. (19801. The psychological reality of natural person and world. Boston: Dordrecht. disasters. In J. Oliver, Ed., Response to Disaster. Seed, J., Macy, J., Fleming, P. & Naess, A. (1988). Townsville, Queensland: Centre for Disaster Studies Thinking Like a Mountain.: Towards a council of all of James Cook University. beings. Philadephia, PA: New Society Publishers. Reser, J. P. & Scherl, L. M. (19881. Clear and Semin, G. R. & Rubini, M. (1992). Examining the cultural unambiguous feedback: a transactional and motiv- constitution of the category of the person. In M. von ational analysis of environmental challenge and self Cranach, W. Doise & G. Mugny, Eds., Social Rep- encounter. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 8, resentations and the Social Bases of Knowledge. 269-286. Lewiston, New York: Hofgrefe & Huber Publishers, Reser, J. P. & Smithson, M. J. (19881. When ignorance is pp. 189-193. adaptive: not knowing about the nuclear threat. Shaffer, J. B. P. (1978). Humanistic Psychology. Knowledge in Society, 1,7-27. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Riddington, R. (19881. Knowledge, power, and the individ- Shepard, P. (1982). Nature and Madness. San Francisco: ual in subartic hunting societies. American Anthropol- Sierra Club Books. ogist, 90,98-110. Shepard, P. (1973). The Tender Carnivore and the Sacred Robbins, T. & Anthony, D. (1978). New religious move- Game. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. ments and the social system; integration, disinte- Shore, B. (1991). Twice-born, once conceived: meaning gration and transformation. The Annual Review of the construction and cultural cognition. American Anthro- Social Sciences of Religion, 2, l-27. pologist, 93,9-27. Rose, D. B. (19921. Dingo Makes me Human: Life and Shotter, J. & Gergen, K. J. (Eds) (19891. Texts of Identity. land in an Aboriginal Australian culture. Cambridge: Newbury Park: Sage. Cambridge University Press. Shweder, R. A. (19911. Thinking through Cultures. Rose, D. B. (19881. Exploring an Aboriginal land ethic. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Meanjin, 3,378-387. Shweder, R. A. & Levine, R. A. (Eds) (19841. Culture Roszak, T. (1993). Beyond the reality principle. Sierra, Theory: Essays on mind, self and emotion. New York: March, 59-80. Cambridge University Press. Roszak, T. (1992al. The Voice of the Earth: An exploration Sloan, T. S. (19901. Psychology for the third world? Jour- of ecopsychology. New York: Simon & Schuster. nal of Social Issues, 46, l-20. Roszak, T. (1992b). The voice of the earth. Noetic Sciences Snyder, G. (19901. The Practice of the Wild. San Review, Summer, 15-18. Francisco: North Point Press. Roszak, T. (1979). Person/Planet. New York: Doubleday. Snyder, G. (1969). Good, wild, sacred. In A. Kleiner, & S. Roszak, T. (19691. The Making of a Counterculture. Brand, Eds., Ten Years of Co-evolution Quarterly. San Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Francisco: Northpoint Press. Rowse, T. (19931. After Mabo: Interpreting indigenous tra- Snyder, G. (1980). The Real Work. New York: New ditions. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press. Directions. Saegert, S. (19871. Environmental psychology and social Snyder, G. (19861. Earth House Hold. New York: New change. In D. Stokols & I. Altman, Eds., Handbook of Directions. Environmental Psychology, Vol 1. New York: John Sparks, P. & Shepherd, R. (19921. Self-identity and the Wiley, pp. 99-128. theory of planned behavior: assessing the role of Sampson, E. E. (19931. Identity politics: challenges to identification with ‘green consumerism’. Social Psych- psychology’s understanding. American Psychologist, ochology Quarterly, 55,388-399. 48,1219-1230. Stallings, R. A. (1973). Patterns of belief in social move- Sampson, E. E. (1988). Indigenous psychologies of the ments: clarifications from an analysis of environmen- individual and their role in personal and social func- tal groups. The Sociological Quarterly, 14,465-480. tioning. American Psychologist, 43, 15-22. Staub, S. & Green, P. (Edsl(19931. Psychology and Social Sampson, E. E. (19891. The challenge of social change for Responsibility. New York: New York University Press. Whither Environmental Psychology? 257

Stern, P. C. & Oskamp, S. (19871. Managing scarce van der Geest, S. & Whyte, S. R. (1989). The charm of environmental resources. In D. Stokols & I. Altman, medicines: metaphors and metanyms. Medical Eds., Handbook of Environmental Psychology, Vol. 2. Anthropology Quarterly, 3,345-367. New York: Wiley, pp. 1043-1088. Versluis, V. (19921. Sacred Earth: The spiritual landscape Stern, P. C. (1992). Psychological dimensions of global of Native America. Rochester, Vermont: Inner environmental change. Annual Review of Psychology, Traditions. 43,269-302. Villoldo, A. & Jendressen, E. (19901. The Four Winds: A Stern, P. C., Dietz, T. & Kalof, L. (1993). Value shaman’s odyssey into the Amazon. New York: Harper orientations, gender, and environmental concern. and Row. Environment and Behavior, 25,322-348. von Cranach, M., Doise, W. & Mugny, G. (1992). Social Stigler, J. W., Shweder, R. A. & Herdt, G. (Eds) (19901. representations an.d the social bases of knowledge. Cultural Psychology: Essays on comparative human New York: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers. development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Walsh, R. (1989). Towards a psychology of human sur- Press. vival: psychological approaches to contemporary Stokols, D. (1992). Establishing and maintaining healthy human threats. American Journal of Psychotherapy, environments: toward a social ecology of health pro- XLIII, 158-180. motion. American Psychologist, 47,6-22. Weatherford, J. (19881. Indian Givers: How the Indians of Stone, C. D. (1987). Earth and Other Ethics: The case for the Americas transformed the world. New York: moral pluralism. New York: Harper & Row. Crown Publishers. Storm, H. (1972). Seven Arrows. New York: Ballantine. White, L. (1973). The historical roots of our ecological Suzuki, D. (19931. Time to Change. St. Leonards: Allen & crisis. In I. G. Williams, R. (1989), Ed., The Politics of Unwin. Modernism: Against the new Conformists. London: Thomas, L. (19851. In N. Myers, Ed. The Gaia Atlas of Verso, pp. 18-30. Planet Management. Sydney: Pan Books, p. 258. Thompson, J. (1985). Psych.ological Aspects of Nuclear Yoshinori, T. (Ed.) (19931. Buddhist Spirituality. New War. Leicester: British Psychological Society. York: Crossroad. Triandis, H. C. (1990). Cross-cultural studies of individu- Zimbardo, P. G. & Leippe, M. R. (1991). The Psychology of alism and collectivism. In J. J. Berman, Ed., Cross- Attitude Change and Social Influence. New York: Cultural Perspectives: Nebraska symposium on motiv- McGraw-Hill. ation. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebrska Zimmerman, M. E., Callicot, B., Sessions, G., Warren, K. Press, pp. 41-133. J. & Clark, J. (1993). Environmental Philosophy: Tuan, Y. T. (1977). Space and Place: The perspective of From animal rights to radical ecology. Englewood experience. St. Paul, MN: The University of Minnesota Cliffs: Prentice Hall. Press. Zimmerman, M. E. (1985). In D. Seamon & R. Tuan, Y. F. (1974). Topophilia: A study of environmental Mugerauer, Eds., Dwelling, Place and Environment. perception, attitudes and values. Englewood Cliffs: Boston: Dordrecht. Prentice-Hall.