See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/287327035

Improving Wellbeing and Environmental Stewardship Through Volunteering

in Nature

Article in EcoHealth · December 2015

DOI: 10.1007/s10393-015-1089-1

CITATIONS READS

40 921

2 authors:

Robyn Molsher Mardie Townsend

SA Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources Deakin University
16 PUBLICATIONS 769 CITATIONS 70 PUBLICATIONS 4,740 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Robyn Molsher on 18 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

EcoHealth
DOI: 10.1007/s10393-015-1089-1

 2015 International Association for Ecology and Health

Short Communication

Improving Wellbeing and Environmental Stewardship

Through Volunteering in Nature

Robyn Molsher1 and Mardie Townsend2

1
Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, 35 Dauncey Street, Kingscote, Kangaroo Island, SA 5223, Australia
2
School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Highway, Burwood, VIC 3125, Australia

Abstract: Environmental volunteering (EV) can provide a unique way to optimise the wellbeing of partici-
pants while fostering environmental stewardship. However, the potential of EV to create human health benefits
remains an under-researched area. This study provides evidence for improved wellbeing and mood state for 32
participants from diverse backgrounds undertaking EV activities. Most participants also reported improved
environmental stewardship with a greatly improved understanding of the environment and the need to con-
serve it. Other benefits included: 31% of those seeking work obtained it; and 50% joined a volunteer group at
program completion. EV provides a unique mechanism to enhance the wellbeing of the participants, while
conserving the environment.

Keywords: environmental, volunteering, nature, wellbeing

INTRODUCTION ENVIRONMENTAL VOLUNTEERING (EV) AND

The importance of the natural environment for human
health is undervalued (Maller et al. 2008). While evidence
has accumulated for health benefits from sport and recre-
ation activities, evidence for health benefits from contact
with nature (e.g. improved psychological wellbeing, cog-
nitive ability and social cohesion) is relatively new and still
growing (see Maller et al. 2008; Keniger et al. 2013). Also,
relatively new is the evidence that volunteering in nature
(environmental volunteering), in particular, offers a unique
way of optimising the wellbeing of participants (O’Brien
et al. 2010; O’Brien et al. 2011) while conserving the
environment (Moore et al. 2007).
Correspondence to: Robyn Molsher, e-mail: robyn.molsher@sa.gov.au
STEWARDSHIP
In South Australia, 60,000 people volunteer each year on
natural resource management (NRM) projects and, as
budgets reduce in the environment sector, the importance
of community involvement in caring for the environment
has increased (DEWNR Corporate Plan 2014–2015). De-
spite the need and demonstrated benefits, barriers to vol-
unteering still exist such as lack of time, information,
money, transport and motivation, as well as depression and
social isolation (O’Brien et al. 2010). People who volunteer
in the environment sector are typically male and of higher
socio-economic status (Low et al. 2007 as cited by O’Brien
et al. 2010). Marginalised people, such as the long-term
unemployed, or those with mental or physical health
problems, are less likely to participate in EV (O’Brien et al.
2011). EV, however, has the capacity to involve margin-
R. Molsher, M. Townsend
alised members of a community (Moore et al. 2007) and
encourage environmental stewardship (i.e. an attitude that
protecting the natural environment is important) in the
wider community. Recent studies have shown that volun-
teer involvement in conservation projects can enhance
learning and awareness of conservation issues (Asah and
Blahna 2012) and can lead to attitudinal shifts and im-
proved stewardship (Dresner and Fischer 2013).
HEALTH BENEFITS OF EV
While environmental volunteer groups primarily seek to
protect the environment, involvement in these activities
can also produce health and wellbeing benefits for com-
munities and individuals with a range of differing abilities
and from different socio-economic backgrounds (Moore
et al. 2007; Maller et al. 2008; O’Brien et al. 2010; Keniger
et al. 2013). Health-related benefits are wide ranging and
include social capital, social inclusion, general health and
wellbeing, physical health, cognitive performance and skill
development (Maller et al. 2008; O’Brien et al. 2010; Ke-
niger et al. 2013). Aligning the characteristics of EV with a
broad model of wellbeing indicates that EV potentially
addresses all factors that are considered necessary for
wellbeing: (1) nature contact, (2) satisfactory human rela-
tionships, (3) meaningful occupation, (4) opportunities for
creative expression and (5) making a positive contribution
to human society (Furnass 1996).
CASE STUDY: DOES ENVIRONMENTAL
VOLUNTEERING IMPROVE WELLBEING AND
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP?
This case study provides evidence that environmental vol-
unteering can improve the wellbeing of individuals and
foster environmental stewardship in a rural community on
Kangaroo Island (KI), South Australia. The project was a
joint initiative between key agencies on Kangaroo Island
(including the Environment and Health departments and
employment and regional development agencies), that
sought to create a sense of ownership and community
cohesion in improving wellbeing through conserving the
environment.
Three 9–10 week ‘‘Get dirty feel good’’ programs were
conducted between October 2013 and July 2014. Each
program involved one five-hour session per week with
8–13 participants per program. The program was open to
all residents >18 years of age (unless referred by the
school) but most participants were referred by mental
health or employment service providers. Each session
provided participants with training and information on
environmental issues, environmental volunteering, well-
being and skill development and included practical and
theoretical components. The Environment department
provided the natural resource training and specialists
provided other training e.g. wellbeing, healthy eating,
photography and first aid. Taster sessions also showcased
a range of existing volunteer activities and groups avail-
able on the island so that participants could join these at
program completion and maintain any benefits incurred.
More detailed methods are provided in Molsher and
Townsend (2014).
A total of 32 people (16 male; 16 female) ranging in age
from 14 to 71 (average age 42) participated in the three
programs. Of these, 78% were considered ‘‘marginalised’’
and included long-term unemployed >12 months (n =
10), those with mental health difficulties (ie anxiety and
depression) (n = 5), emotional or behavioural difficulties
(n = 4), physical health problems (n = 3), learning diffi-
culties or mild intellectual disabilities (n = 2), or were
offenders (n = 1). One person identified as Aboriginal.
Participants undertook 1015 h of volunteering and
training. Of this, 520 h was spent in on-ground delivery of a
range of NRM projects such as glossy black-cockatoo
recovery, koala management, seagrass monitoring, dolphin
surveys, sea lion conservation, marine debris collection and
weed management. Of the 32 participants, 34% had done
EV before, 12% had done it in the last 12 months and 9%
were currently members of an EV group or participated in
EV regularly. At the completion of the program, 32% re-
ported they had joined an EV group and a further 18% had
joined an ‘‘other volunteer’’ group (total 50%). Three
months later, only one additional individual had joined a
volunteer group but the same individuals had joined more
groups. Of the participants who were looking for work,
31% obtained employment and 37% underwent training
within three months of program completion. Service pro-
viders commented that the program ‘‘improved their clients’
self-esteem and confidence and provided a good first step for
those who had been socially excluded to then go on to
something else like further training’’ and ‘‘people were out of
their comfort zones and were more able to cope with new
situations and meeting new people’’.

HUMAN HEALTH BENEFITS
General wellbeing of participants was measured using a
scale comprising 18 questions (Fahey et al. 2005). Wellbe-
ing scores were significantly higher at the end (mean 68.4)
of the program compared to the start (mean = 56.8) (P <
.001, df = 27). Most participants scored in the ‘‘distress’’
category at the start of the program and in the ‘‘positive
wellbeing’’ category at the end and three months later
(Fig. 1). However, three months later (mean= 66.5, n = 25)
there was no significant difference in wellbeing compared
to the end of the program (mean = 66.6, n= 25) (P >.05, df
= 24). General wellbeing tended to remain high three
months after program completion if the person had joined
an existing volunteer group or obtained work.
Mood state was measured before and after each session
using an ‘‘Emotional State Scale’’ (ESS) questionnaire
adapted from the Osgood Semantic Differential Scale
(Tyerman and Humphrey 1984 and used by Townsend and
Ebden 2006). The scale indicates changes in emotional state
across twelve parameters e.g. bored/interested, happy/un-
happy. Overall, participants experienced a positive emo-
tional shift during the activities with more than 60% of
mood parameters improved on average (Fig. 2). No
marked differences were detected between males and fe-
males. Unlike other studies (e.g. Mackerron and Mourato
2013), mood state did not appear to be influenced by
nature contact and was more likely influenced by group
dynamics. This may be due to the group in this study being
facilitated each week, with time spent on group cohesion
such that any problems in the group or behaviour of par-
ticipants may have influenced the participants’ mood more
Environmental Volunteering Improves Wellbeing
than external factors such as the nature of the activity and
weather.
When questioned in an exit interview, 86% of partic-
ipants felt their wellbeing had improved at the end of the
program while 14% did not report an improvement, either
because they already felt good or because for personal
reasons that could not be attributed to the program their
wellbeing had declined. Comments were as follows:
Yes. Getting out and meeting new people and
sharing experiences.
It lifts your awareness of the environment…it’s so
delicate and pristine…
It showed me that even though I haven’t got lots of
skills I can contribute
Confidence and self-esteem, interacting with other
people, learning about the different volunteer
organisations and hearing all the different things
people get out of volunteering
When questioned in the exit interview as to what as-
pects of the program were of most benefit, most people
(61%) highlighted the social aspect of the group, followed
by learning about the environment (36%). As has been
found in other studies, participants of EV groups gain a
wide variety of benefits from their involvement, including
the social aspects associated with membership of a group,
mental and physical benefits and the knowledge that their
contribution is helping to conserve the environment
(Townsend and Marsh 2004; Moore et al. 2007). This study
shows that when engaging marginalised people in caring for
the environment it is important to provide a space within
which they can build social connections and relationships.
Figure 1. General wellbeing scores
in each category at start, end and
three months after program com-
pletion.
R. Molsher, M. Townsend
Figure 2. Mean change in mood state for the three programs.
ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP
When participants were asked to rate their level of com-
mitment to environmental stewardship, no significant
difference was detected between the start and end of the
program (P > .05, df = 27). Most participants thought
that conserving the environment was very important at
the start of the program (75%, mean = 1.44) as well as at
the end (81%, mean = 1.46) (where 1 is very important
and 5 is not important). Similarly, when participants were
asked to rate their level of environmental awareness, no
significant change was found at the end (mean = 2.66)
compared with the start of the program (mean = 2.39) (P
> .05, df = 26) (where 1 is excellent and 5 is poor
knowledge). It is possible that participants may rate their
awareness of the environment lower at the end as they are
more aware of how much there is to know. However,
when asked directly if the program had improved their
understanding of the environment or the need to conserve
it, most felt that it had (mean = 4.22, where 0 is not at all
and 5 is a great deal). More comprehensive measures of
changes in environmental awareness and stewardship
would provide a better understanding of changes resulting
from the program.
CONCLUSION
This study provides evidence to support the claims of hu-
man health and environmental benefits of volunteering in
nature. EV not only actively assists in conserving the
environment but provides an opportunity for participants
to learn about conservation issues and to understand the
importance of conserving the environment. EV can im-
prove wellbeing of individuals and social connectedness in
a rural community. Based on the findings of this study,
engaging socially excluded members of the community
could be promoted by describing the social and health
benefits of EV and creating the space for these to occur.
Partnerships between Health and Environment Depart-
ments in particular provide the ideal platform for obtaining
wide ranging benefits from environmental volunteering.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This Project was funded by a State Natural Resource
Management community Grant and Building Skills in the
Region Grant with in-kind support from Natural Resources
KI, KI Health Service, Regional Development Australia,

Junction Australia, Eco-action KI and Finding Workable
Solutions. We thank the participants and the Project
working group that facilitated the Project.
REFERENCES
Asah ST, Blahna DJ (2012) Motivational functionalism and urban
conservation stewardship: implications for volunteer involve-
ment. Conservation Letters 5:470–477
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (2014) Cor-
porate Plan 2014–2015
Dresner M, Fischer KA (2013) Environmental stewardship out-
comes from year-long invasive species restoration projects in
middle school. Invasive Plant Science and Management
6(3):444–448
Fahey TD, Insel PM, Roth WT (2005) Fit and Well. 6th ed., The
McGraw-Hill Companies. Cited in National Center for Health
Statistics. General Well-being Scale (GWBS)
Furnass B (1996) Introduction. In: Survival, health and wellbeing
into the twenty first century—proceedings of a conference held at
The Australian National University, November 30–December 1,
1995. Furnass, B, Whyte J, Harris J, Baker A (editors), Canberra:
Nature and Society Forum, pp 5–6
Keniger LE, Gaston KJ, Irvine KN, Fuller RA (2013) What are the
benefits of interacting with nature? International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health 10:913–935
MacKerron G, Mourato S (2013) Happiness is greater in natural
environments. Global Environmental Change 23:992–1000
View publication stats
Environmental Volunteering Improves Wellbeing
Maller C, Townsend M, St Leger L, Henderson-Wilson C, Pryor A,
Prosser L, Moore M (2008) Healthy Parks, Healthy People: The
Health Benefits of Contact with Nature in a Park Context, Bur-
wood, Melbourne: Deakin University and Parks Victoria
Molsher RL, Townsend M (2014) Ecosystem and human health
benefits of environmental volunteering on Kangaroo Island, SA.
Final Report. Natural Resources Kangaroo Island, SA
Moore M, Townsend M, Oldroyd J (2007) Linking human and
ecosystem health: the benefits of community involvement in
conservation groups. Ecohealth 3:255–261
O’Brien L, Townsend M, Ebden M (2010) ‘Doing something
positive’: volunteers’ experiences of the well-being benefits de-
rived from practical conservation activities in nature. Voluntas
21:525–545
O’Brien L, Burls A, Townsend M, Ebden M (2011) ‘Volunteering
in nature as a way of enabling people to reintegrate into society.
Perspectives in public health 131(2):71–80
Townsend M, Ebden M (2006) Feel blue, touch green. Final report
of a project undertaken by Deakin University, Barwon health,
Parks Victoria, Alcoa Anglesea, ANGAIR and Surf Coast Shire.
Melbourne: Deakin University
Townsend M, Marsh R (2004) Exploration of the Health and
Wellbeing Benefits of membership of Truganina Explosives Reserve
Preservation Society, Burwood, Australia: School of Health and
Social Development, Deakin University
Tyerman A, Humphrey M (1984) Changes in self-concept fol-
lowing severe head injury. International Journal of Rehabilitation
Research 7:11–23