A neuro-scientific approach to environment care

  1. J. Puigdefábregas 1
  2. M. Pérez-García 2
  1. 1 Estación Experimental de Zonas Áridas
    info

    Estación Experimental de Zonas Áridas

    Almería, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01hq59z49

  2. 2 Universidad de Granada
    info

    Universidad de Granada

    Granada, España

    ROR https://ror.org/04njjy449

Revista:
Cuadernos de investigación geográfica: Geographical Research Letters

ISSN: 0211-6820,  1697-9540

Año de publicación: 2019

Volumen: 45

Número: 1

Páginas: 19-31

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.18172/CIG.3585 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: Cuadernos de investigación geográfica: Geographical Research Letters

Resumen

La retroalimentación “grass-root” para las políticas de los organismos públicos que tienen como objetivo enfrentarse a las amenazas del cambio global es pobre y reactiva. Al mismo tiempo, la población humana se vuelve más urbana, aislada de la naturaleza e incapaz de tomar decisiones personales al respecto. Por lo tanto, ayudar a la participación social y al comportamiento proactivo hacia la naturaleza es en la actualidad un desafío crucial. Este artículo intenta explorar el papel de las emociones en apoyo de una interacción positiva entre los sistemas humanos/ambientales, con el objeto de evaluar sus cambios evolutivos y caminar finalmente hacia una reorientación de su tendencia. Con este propósito, se aplican las últimas conclusiones neurocientíficas para desentrañar el impacto de la naturaleza en el sistema emocional humano, comparando las actitudes de las personas actuales con las de las culturas preagrarias. Este conocimiento permite diseñar pautas que mejoren la preocupación de las personas por el cuidado del medio ambiente.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Arsenyev, V. 1923/2004. Dersu Uzalá. University Press of the Pacific. Honolulu.
  • Biesele, M. 1978. Sapience and scarce resources: Communication systems of the !Kung and other foragers. Social Science Information 17 (6), 921-947 https://doi.org/10.1177/053901847801700607.
  • Bird-David, N. 1990. The giving environment: Another perspective on the economic system of gatherer-hunters. Current Anthropology 31 (2), 189-196. https://doi.org/10.1086/203825.
  • Bullier, J. 2001. Integrated model of visual processing. Brain Research Reviews 36 (2-3), 96-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0173(01)00085-6.
  • Cloquell-Ballester, V.A., Torres-Sibille, A.C., Cloquell-Ballester, V.A., Santamarina-Siurana M.C. 2012. Human alteration of the rural landscape: Variations in visual perception. Environmental Assessment Review 32, 50-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2011.03.002.
  • Damasio, A. 1996.The somatic marker hypothesis and the possible functions of the prefrontal cortex. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 351, 1413-1420. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1996.0125.
  • Dixon, T. 2012. “Emotion”: The history of a keyword in crisis. Emotion Review 4 (4), 338-334. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073912445814.
  • González Bernáldez, F., Gallardo, D., Abello, R.P. 1987. Children’s landscape preferences: From rejection to attraction. Journal of Environmental Psychology 7 (2), 169-176. https://doi. org/10.1016/S0272-4944(87)80024-5.
  • Hartig, T., van der Berg, A.E., Hagerhall, C.M., Tomalak, M., Bauer, N., Hansmann, R., Ojala, A., Syngollitou, E., Carrus, G., van der Herzele, A., Bell, S., Camilleri Podesta, M.T., Waaseth, G. 2011. Health benefits of nature experience: psychological, social and cultural processes. In: K. Nilsson, M. Sangster, C. Gallis, T. Hartig, S. de Vries, K. Seeland, J. Schipperijn (Eds.), Forests, Trees and Human Health, Springer Science, 427 pp. htpps://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9806-1_5.
  • Hoffman, M.L. 2000. Empathy and moral development: Implications for caring and justice. Cambrige Univesity Press, New York, 325 pp.
  • Ingold, T. 2000. The perception of the environment. Routledge, London, 465 pp.
  • Izard, C. 2009. Emotion theory and research highlights, unanswered questions and emerging issues. Annual Review of Psychology 60, 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev. psych.60.110707.163539.
  • Johnson, A.W., Earle, T. 2000. The evolution of human societies. Stanford University Press, 440 pp.
  • Kaplan, R., Kaplan, S., Brown, T. 1989. Environmental preference: A comparison of four models of predictors. Environment and Behavior 21 (5), 509-530. https://doi. org/10.1177/0013916589215001.
  • Kaplan, S. 1988. Perception and landscape: conceptions and misconceptions. In: J.L. Nasar (Ed.), Environmental aesthetics: Theory, research, and application, Cambridge University Press, pp. 45-55.
  • Kim, T. H., Jeong, G.W., Baek, H.S., Kim, G.W., Sundaram, T., Kang, H.K., Lee, S.W., Kim, H.J., Song, J.K. 2010. Human brain activation in response to visual stimulation with rural and urban scenery pictures: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Science of the Total Environment 408 (12), 2600-2607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.02.025.
  • Krasny, M.E., Tidball, K.G. 2012. Civic Ecology: a pathway for Earth Stewardship in cities. Frontiers in Ecology of the Environment 10 (5), 267-273. https://doi.org/10.1890/110230. Langer, S.K. 1967/1982. Mind: An essay of human feeling. Johns Hopkins University Press. Baltimore, 422 pp.
  • Margalef, R. 1997. Our Biosphere. In: O. Kinne (Ed.), Excellence in Ecology. Ecology Institute, Olendorf/Luhe. https://doi.org/10.1002/iroh.19970820411.
  • Petersen, S.E., Posner, M.I. 2012. The attention system of the human brain: 20 years after. Annual Review of Neuroscience 35, 73-89. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-neuro-062111-150525. Proffitt, D.R. 2006. Embodied perception and the economy of action. Perspectives on Psychological Science 1 (2). http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00008.x.
  • Puigdefábregas, J., Pérez García, M. 2014. Landscape as a central experience in the interaction between humans and their natural environment. In: J. Arnáez, P. González-Sampériz, T. Lasanta, B. Valero-Garcés, B. (Eds.), Geología, cambio ambiental y paisaje: Homenaje al Prof. J. M. García Ruiz. Universidad de la Rioja, Logroño, pp. 451-460.
  • Russell, A., Etienne-Cummings, R. 2012. Perceptual organization, attention and object recognition: closing the loop. 46th Annual Conference on Information Sciences and Systems (CISS), IEEE, Princeton. https://doi/org/10.1109/CISS.2012.6310919.
  • Salk, J. 1985.The Anatomy of Reality. Merging of Intuition and Reality. Praeger Publishers Inc., New York, pp. 1-160.
  • Singh, S.N., Donavan, D.T., Mishra, S., Little, T.D. 2008. The latent structure of landscape perception: A mean and covariance structure modeling approach. Journal of Environmental Psychology 28 (4), 339-352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.03.004.
  • Tang, Y.Y., Rothbart, M.K., Posner, M.I. 2012. Neural correlates of establishing, maintaining and switching brain states. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 16 (6), 330-337. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.05.001.
  • Tschakert, P., Tutu, R., Alcaro, A. 2013. Embodied experiences of environmental and climatic changes in landscapes everyday life in Ghana. Emotion, Space and Society 7, 13-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emospa.2011.11.001.
  • Wagemans, J., Elder, J.H., Kubov, S., Palme, S.E., Mary, A., Peterson, M.A., Singh, M., von der Heydt, R. 2012a. A century of gestalt psychology in visual perception I. Perceptual grouping and figure-ground organization. Psychological Bulletin 138 (6), 1172-1217. https://doi. org/10.1037/a0029333.
  • Wagemans, J., Feldman, J., Gepshtein, S., Kimchi, R., Pomerantz, J.R, van der Helm, P.A., van Leeuwen, C. 2012b. A century of gestalt psychology in visual perception II. Conceptual and theoretical foundations. Psychological Bulletin 138 (6), 1218-1252. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029334.
  • Zhang, N.R., von der Heydt, R. 2010. Analysis of the context integration mechanisms underlying figure-ground organization in the visual cortex. The Journal of Neuroscience 30 (19), 6482-6496. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5168-09.201.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet