On Nature and Meaning: A Conversation with Holli-Anne Passmore, PhD

photo used with permission from Holli-anne PassMORE

Whether walking home from work on that first warm spring day or taking a trip to a national park, being in nature just feels right. Although environmental psychology has been around for half a century and people have mused over the feelings and experiences of being in nature for even longer, in many ways, positive psychology has only relatively recently ventured into the nature conversation. With the proposed third wave of positive psychology and Mike Steger’s (2025) call for a regenerative positive psychology, more and more of us are considering the role of nature in well-being, especially in this time of climate collapse and environmental degradation.  

A core figure in the conversation is Holli-Anne Passmore, a well-being researcher whose intervention of choice is nature. On Earth Day of all days, I had the opportunity to have a conversation with her, and we dove into the research that connects nature to meaning, positive emotions, and more. I was once again energized and inspired by the power of our natural environment to lift us all up, and I hope you are too. 

MAPP Magazine (MM): Will you please share a bit about yourself, your work, and how you’re applying positive psychology?

Holli-Anne Passmore (HA): I'm Dr. Holli-Anne Passmore. Lots of people just call me H!A!. I'm an associate professor and department chair at Concordia University of Edmonton. I also direct a multi-university, actually multinational, lab—Nature—Meaning in Life (NMIL) Research Lab, where I collaborate with a number of people from different countries and universities. I’m also the science representative for the Spirituality and Meaning Division of the International Positive Psychology Association (IPPA). 

As a well-being researcher, I'm using positive psychology in a number of different ways. I'm starting research on play and meaning in life. I look at meaning in life interventions, and I’m starting research with Tim Lomas on different kinds of love and meaning in life.

More pertinent to this topic of nature, I've been working in this field for 14 years. With the nature research, I look at how nature, and in particular, everyday kinds of nature can impact different aspects of well-being. That includes meaning in life, as well as, of course, subjective well-being, so positive affect, negative affect, satisfaction with life. I look at transcendent connectedness, which is feeling connected to everything and everybody—to other people, to nature, and to the world in general. 

I also look at the composite emotion of elevation. Interestingly, when elevation is studied generally in psychology, it's always called moral elevation. My concern with that is that what we're talking about is an emotion that has, up to this point, only been tested with people watching videos of other people doing morally good things, and hence it's always been thought of as moral elevation. However, the way it's measured is exactly the same way that I'm measuring it. Elevation is a composite emotion comprising feeling spiritually elevated, morally uplifted, profoundly moved, a sense of gratitude, feeling deeply touched, feeling connected. It's all of these emotions together. In my intervention research, noticing everday nature has a powerful impact on transcendent connectedness and elevation. 

One important aspect in nature–well-being research is the construct of nature connectedness. Nature connectedness and time in nature are things that people continually conflate and get confused. Connecting with nature, spending time in nature, exposure to nature, those are verbs. Those are actions. Nature connectedness is a construct. And yes, of course, they're positively correlated, but they're different. Just like how height and weight are very highly correlated, but they're different constructs. 

One of the best ways to describe this, and I borrow this from John Zelenski, is to think of a social relationship. If I ask you how much time you spend with other people, that might tell me something about you, but that tells me absolutely nothing about whether you feel connected to the people you spend time with. You can spend a lot of time with people and not be connected to them at all, and actually feel quite lonely. You can spend not very much time with a person, but feel very connected to them. And so it's just like a social relationship. 

Nature connectedness, or nature relatedness, is the quality of your relationship with nature. It's a cognitive, emotional, and, yes, it has some behavioral aspects as well. But it's not the same thing as time in nature. 

I look at interventions to enhance well-being, such as the Noticing Nature Intervention. The NNI is a very basic intervention that involves simply paying attention to the nature around you and how it makes you feel. It’s important to note the “how it makes you feel” aspect. The first time I ran the intervention in a study, I had people also taking photos. But in all the subsequent replications, I haven’t (and don’t) include the photo aspect. The active ingredient, what the NNI is, is noticing how nature makes you feel.

I’m also working with Ryan Niemic and Ryan Lumber on using character strengths to connect with nature and to enhance pro-nature behavior. We’ve just had a paper on this come out in the Journal of Happiness Studies on our first two interventions in this line. (More to come!) 

One of the interesting things about all of my nature-based intervention research—actually every single piece of research that I have done with a nature intervention where we’ve randomly assigned people to the NNI (to notice nature and how it makes them feel) or these new ones of using character strength to enhance connection with nature—whatever it is, compared to control groups, in not one intervention has there actually been a significant difference in the time people spent in nature. These boosts to various aspects of well-being and their relatively big effect sizes are not because people have spent more time in nature. It's because they noticed it. They engaged with it. They noticed how it made them feel. And that I think is a really important aspect.

I'm all for people spending that time in nature. Of course, I want people to spend more time in nature! It's just that it’s not necessarily the be-all and end-all. Think about somebody who's spending time walking through the river valley on their way to work, and they're noticing the nature around them, compared to a person sitting under a tree watching a slasher horror movie on their phone. Who do you think is going to get more benefit out of the nature around them?

In my opinion, people who are distracted in nature are going to be better off than those who spend no time in nature. But the people who are engaged in nature, that’s the important part. 

I also look at what interventions can connect people with nature and give back to nature—to engage in environmental and pro-nature behaviors. Particularly in light of Mike Steger’s regenerative positive psychology, which I think is going to be the next big thing.

Those are two different things, by the way: Pro-environmental behavior tends to be thought of as reducing your carbon footprint. Proconservation or pro-nature behavior is things like not raking your leaves. That's a pretty important thing for all the little bugs and creatures, and in the UK, for hedgehogs and stuff. Proconservation behavior is actively doing something for the environment, not just not damaging it.

MM: That's fantastic. I wanted to ask about your personal journey. What brought you to start exploring and researching this relationship between nature and well-being?

HA: I did all of my academics old. I did my undergrad from when I was about 41 to 50. It took me nine years because I was working full-time for the federal government as well. Then I did my Master’s, then my PhD, and then I got hired tenure track. And I became associate professor and department chair at 60. So I don't have a normal journey in academia, and I'm well aware of that. 

A lot of people ask me this, and it really started with a sore neck. I used to get to campus early and go swimming, and I don't know what I did to my neck, but I really hurt it. So I thought, I really can't go swimming today, which meant that I ran into Ross Powell, who was the head of the psych department at MacEwan University for a long time. He was always trying to get me to quit my job and go to school full-time. We started talking, and he suggested that I talk to Andrew Howell, the well-being researcher. 

I ended up meeting with Andrew, and at some point we were talking and he said, "I'm doing research on a connection between mindfulness and nature connectedness. And there's a book by E.O. Wilson." And, at the same time, we both said “biophilia hypothesis.” I had read that years before, and I had a copy of it. So we just clicked, and that incident is what got me interested from a research perspective. 

I had full intentions of going for a degree in clinical psychology. But the summer before applying, I was talking to people that I wanted to apply with as a graduate student. Every single person said that I light up when I talk about research. 

I also met with Marc Berman, who is now the department chair of psychology at University of Chicago, who has done seminal research on cognitive restoration and nature, and he said, “Do you want to work with a certain group of people and have that research apply to them, or do you want to do research and have it apply to many different people?”

I said, "I want to do the research and have it apply to a bunch of people." And he said, “Well, that's not a clinical degree.” That's what made me see the light, so to speak, and get a degree in psych science, but focusing on well-being and, in particular, on nature connectedness and well-being. That's kind of how I went down this path. 

My next goal is to do research with practitioners and these simple nature interventions, like the noticing nature one, and now the character strengths intervention. These are easy wins for practitioners to boost the well-being of their clients. 

Long term, my goal has always been that when a clinical or counseling psychologist does their intake with a client, the intake includes nature connectedness, because it's such a powerful thing. I believe that it is part of who we are as human beings that there is an inherent appeal to connecting with nature. While that's decades away before that happens, it's part of my upcoming talk at the Canadian Psychological Association (CPA).

MM: This is great. Thank you. Going back to the topics of nature and meaning in life as you see it, what are the connections between the two?

HA: I think there are a bunch of different connections. We know that nature connectedness is strongly correlated with meaning in life. My student, Ashley Krause, a PhD student at the University of Florida, and I have a paper that came out [in 2023] about that, looking at all the ways that nature enhances and is connected with meaning in life. This paper was basically a big literature review, and we looked at the tripartite model of meaning—purpose, coherence, and significance.  

If we look at coherence, that aspect of meaning of does the world make sense, we get a lot of that from nature. Even in this weird time of climate destruction, the sun still rises in the east, and it sets in the west every single day. It's spring, summer, winter, fall— they're screwed up right now, but it's still that pattern. There are these grand patterns of stability that we look to that give us this inherent sense of coherence, and that's an aspect of meaning. 

The essence of meaning in life is connection. When you feel connected to nature, it's the ultimate kind of connection in a way because you're part of this huge system in the world, and you're a significant part of it. You matter in that world.

There's interesting research looking at where people choose to self-reflect and think about their purpose, and people tend to choose natural environments. If you flip that around, when people are in natural environments, it's much easier to self-reflect, and I think that's one avenue towards purpose. Of course, there's also the aspect of giving back to nature, of pro-nature behavior, which gives many people a strong sense of purpose. 

There's a brilliant paper by Kim et al. that explores experiential appreciation as a new aspect of meaning in life. We talk about that in our paper as well, how, when being in nature, people tend to appreciate the moment. You tend to have this greater appreciation of the experience around you.

I think the other thing to add to that is—and this was quite a long time ago in 2014—I had this paper, called ‘Ecoexistential Positive Psychology’, built off of Paul Wong’s existential positive psychology. That paper looked at how enhancing our biophilic tendencies and cultivating our relationship with nature met these existential anxieties.

Existential anxieties are issues that we deal with by virtue of being human. There are six existential anxieties: identity, happiness, isolation, meaning in life, freedom, and death. Four of those are from Irvin Yalom, the existentialist dude. And two of those, Paul Wong added as a positive psychology kind of aspect. In our paper, we go through how connecting with nature can help address those anxieties. 

A couple of years ago, we flipped that around and looked at eco-anxiety and how the degradation of our natural world, the loss of biodiversity, and the major climate collapse are impacting each of those existential anxieties.

MM: Can you talk more about the concept of eco-anxiety? I would love to hear about that and any research you've done around that and what you found is a good way to combat those feelings.

HA: The first thing I would say is we don't want to combat them. We don't want to get rid of eco-anxiety. If somebody's in a burning house, why would anybody not want that person to be anxious? We don't want it to be paralyzing, and we don't want it to become a pathology, but it's just like any emotion, right? Why would we combat sadness? Why would we get rid of sadness? It does all kinds of things for us. It's a great superpower that we have as human beings. That's the first thing I think is important. 

I personally like the term eco-anxiety. I think one of the issues with the field at the moment is that it's all over the map with what to call this and how we're measuring it. Some people are looking at climate anxiety or climate grief, but I'm not a fan of those terms because they say nothing about biodiversity loss. Whereas eco-anxiety is the whole picture, and I think climate is only one part of that. 

I've done some work with John Zelenski (one of the leaders in the field of nature connectedness and positive psychology, of course), Paul Lutz (who was a student of mine when I was a graduate student), and my undergraduate supervisor, Andrew Howell. We looked at this nomological web of eco-anxiety and how it relates to well-being and nature connectedness. It’s an evolving field, but we know that higher levels of nature connectedness are positively correlated with eco-anxiety; the more connected you are to nature, the higher your level of eco-anxiety, which makes sense. You hurt where your heart is. That's what Andrew Howell always says. 

There's more research coming out all the time, so I'm pretty cautious about saying that eco-anxiety is necessarily negatively correlated with well-being. It's not necessarily correlated with anxiety disorders. It's a normal, healthy reaction to a situation. And that's something that I think is really important that people understand. 

One thing colleagues and I have suggested in our research is to first acknowledge it. It kind of relates to acceptance and commitment therapy. You have to realize that you feel this way, and you need to talk about it. It tends to be an isolating emotion because it's also politically charged, particularly now in the United States. 

People sometimes also won't talk about it because they don't want to upset their kids or other loved ones. But your four-year olds are already feeling this. Your four-year old has already heard all this stuff. Acknowledge it. Talk about this. 

The second one, of course, is being able to do something, and you don't have to save the world. One single individual is never going to be able to save the world. However, everybody can do something. I've had this discussion with colleagues where people are on the opposite side of the fence, that it's a systemic problem rather than an individual issue. They think that nothing's going to change unless the system changes. 

On one hand, I agree. This is a systemic problem. There are many things at a systemic level that have to happen. At the same time, as individuals, we are part of the system, and I think oftentimes, it's a lazy copout to say that the system has to change. Everything you do, you're part of the system, and you're modeling that behavior. I'm not saying you have to go and change the world, but you know what? One day a week, eat less meat. Think about it when you go to the store. For me, I want that chocolate cake, but it comes in a big plastic container, so do I really want it that bad? Probably not. It's those kinds of things that are important. 

The last one is the relatedness aspect of self-determination theory, which includes autonomy, competence, and relatedness. The relatedness aspect is that you need to stay connected to nature. I listened to an interview with environmentalist Naomi Klein, and while she never uses the word ‘hope’ when she's talking about the environment, one of the things she says is that it is vital that we interact with the natural world in ways that are not all about peril. We know that interacting with nature and building that relationship boosts our well-being, and we have to find ways to keep doing that.  

Those are the ways we can manage our eco-anxiety and turn it into eco-concern, and being active. So to me, it's those three elements.

MM: That's great. I've loved so many aspects of what you were saying just now. Thank you so much for sharing all of that. It's easy for both of us to think why this all matters, but for those people who may not be as interested in nature or the environment, why does this matter to them? How is this work relevant?

HA: We know that, and this probably needs to be replicated many times, but we know that people tend to underestimate the well-being impact of connecting with nature. I always think that if you really couldn’t care less about nature, but you're going to do some positive psych intervention to boost your well-being, why don't you try the NNI? It’s not going to add time to your day, and it’s easy, free, and accessible. It doesn't have to be about nature. It can simply be that this is an easy way to boost your well-being. 

I'm a well-being researcher who happens to use nature as a pathway to well-being. I'm not an environmental psychologist. My main goal is well-being. I have now expanded that to include pro-nature behavior because of regenerative positive psychology. Many people have talked about this as well before that paper came out. For example, Marié Wessing, Tim Lomas, and a bunch of people have looked at this systems idea, that we also need to give back to the systems that boost our well-being.

But I do think that for people who don't really care, this is just a way to make yourself happy. This is a really easy way to boost your own well-being, and it happens to have a lot of side benefits that are good for many other people besides just the individual.

MM: Thank you. How can readers learn more about your work?

HA: I think the first thing is to go to my website. I'm pretty good at keeping it updated, and I have links to my media interviews. There are recordings of talks I've given, journal articles, book chapters, and a bunch of links to other stuff. Everything I teach is there as well. Of course, please just email me. Generally, I tell people if it's been 48 hours and I haven't responded, send the email again. I'm always happy to chat to learn about what others are doing and to collaborate. 

MM: Fantastic. Thank you so much.

About the expert | Holli-Anne Passmore, PhD is the director of the multi-university Nature-Meaning in Life (NMIL) Research lab. Her primary research interest is in developing and validating practical interventions to enhance well-being and meaning in life. She focuses on easy-to-implement––but evidence based and effective––practices that lead to not only greater happiness, but also to greater contentment, connectedness, elevation, and meaning in life. Holli-Anne collaborates with researchers around the globe examining, in particular, the beneficial impact that noticing every day nature has on our well-being. Her Noticing Nature Intervention is featured in The Greater Good Toolkit as one of 30 science-based practices for a meaningful life, and she is a co-developer of the free online course on Nature Connectedness out of the University of Derby. As a well-being expert and leading researcher on nature's impact on our well being, her research has been featured in various media including The Guardian, WebMD, and CBC, as well as in books, textbooks, and of course published in numerous peer-reviewed journals and  publications. She regularly presents her research at national and international conferences. 

Passmore is also an Associate Professor and Department Chair of Psychology at Concordia University of  Edmonton (CUE) in Alberta, Canada, an Editor of the International Journal of Wellbeing, and Science Representative of the Spirituality and Meaning Division of the International Positive Psychology  Association.  

Often referred to as "Dr H!A!", reflecting her general enthusiasm and passion, she loves spending time in nature, be that the river valley in her hometown of Edmonton, or her  favorite place in the world, the mountains of Jasper National Park in Alberta, Canada.

You can email her at Holli-Anne.Passmore@concordia.ab.ca or hap@nmil.ca.