Großbritannien ist eines der am wenigsten „naturverbundenen“ Länder der Welt – Nepal am stärksten
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/nov/01/britain-one-of-least-nature-connected-nations-in-world-with-nepal-the-most
Von bcoolhead
Großbritannien ist eines der am wenigsten „naturverbundenen“ Länder der Welt – Nepal am stärksten
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/nov/01/britain-one-of-least-nature-connected-nations-in-world-with-nepal-the-most
Von bcoolhead
12 Kommentare
Bullshit – London is one of the greenest cities in the world having more greenspace than many others and sadiq khans policies are encouraging more eco friendly and sustainable environments . Oxbridge invest in greenery and we have so many national parks and protected areas
Two good books on this topic are „Caliban and the Witch“ about how the enclosures prevented people to have access to wild land. Another book is Agri- Culture by Jules Pretty. The industrial revolution really messed with British peoples‘ connection to the land.
Luckily we still do have lots of green spaces to walk about in but that’s not really a true connection with nature.
Only six per cent of all land in national parks is being managed effectively for nature.
https://greenallianceblog.org.uk/2024/04/16/why-is-nature-in-our-national-parks-doing-even-worse-than-nature-elsewhere/
More than a quarter of UK mammals face extinction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49892209
Being
With them wanting to build new build estates on green land and people opposing it being called ‚NIMBYs‘ or whatever I am not shocked
Not surprising we are a small country with a growing population its hard to say on one hand we need to build more affordable homes and on the other we shouldn’t build so much as its destroying nature.
Two solution come to mind aquire more land or slow down population growth. That would solve both problems.
Don’t worry we are busy building new homes and solar farms on the remaining nature now
That’s clearly nonsense. We have more green spaces and natural areas than most developed countries.
In fact, wouldn’t this whole list just be in order of what percentage of the population lives in rural areas.
You really can’t have it both ways. We have a better country than Nepal, much of this progress coming at the cost of natural spaces. Ultimately, if the land weren’t as it is now, we probably wouldn’t be here, so there is no point in ruing it.
Reading the article its not exactly clear how they measured this, but its not based on how much people want to protect nature or enjoy spending time in it but about nebulous concepts around spirituality which in my experience most Brits don’t buy into.
If a survey or interviewer asked me if I felt a spiritual connection to nature or other species I would absolutely say no. If they asked me if I felt it was important and good for mental and physical health and needed protecting then I’d be an enthusiastic yes.
If we build lots and lots of midrise flats then we can use less land but NIMBYs hate flats too.
The study’s methodology is deeply flawed, particularly in its ranking of Japan among the world’s least “nature-connected” nations. Japan is over 68% forested (one of the highest proportions in the developed world) and has an extensive system of national parks and satoyama landscapes integrating human life and biodiversity. Concepts like *shinrin-yoku* (forest bathing), seasonal observances such as *hanami* and *momijigari* and the animist foundations of Shintō all reflect an enduring cultural intimacy with nature. Yet, because the study relies on a handful of self-reported psychological questions about feeling “part of nature,” it misreads this cultural embeddedness as disconnection. The result reveals more about how survey instruments fail across languages and contexts than about any genuine distinction between Japanese society and the natural world.
Makes sense given that we’re in the bottom 5% of countries in terms of nature depletion and the worst in Europe. Hard to connect to what doesn’t properly exist.