Zoonotic Diseases and Our Troubled Relationship With Nature

A consulting room with a view: Psychotherapy and the ecological context

BACKGROUND

The field of psychotherapy is witnessing a lively debate today. The literature on the efficacy of psychological interventions has grown exponentially, but the assumptions of the prevailing research paradigms have been criticised from many points of view. One of the main concerns is that of a too often simplistic conception of psychotherapy, viewed as a set of specific methods for the treatment of point-like problems or symptoms.

LITERATURE REVIEW ON MENTAL HEALTH AND THE ECOLOGICAL CONTEXT

Instead, emerging perspectives are trying to promote a more complex view on psychotherapy, as a process based on the therapeutic potential of relationships, which takes place in relevant social and cultural contexts. Even the ecological context is taken in greater consideration, as growing evidence exists about the detrimental effects of ecological threats-such as climate change and other environmental challenges-on mental health.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychotherapists and psychotherapy associations are now paying due attention to such issues, as well as to social justice and other dimensions that no longer can be thought of as mere elements of the scenario in which psychotherapy is practiced. Rather they are dimensions that exert a strong influence on psychological well-being, and thus must be properly acknowledged and assessed to connect clinical work with the communities and ecological contexts in which people live.

Low Level of Concern Among European Society About Zoonotic Diseases

Zoonotic emerging diseases (ZEDs) are increasing and may deeply impact human wellbeing, but our recent survey of public opinion in six European countries (n = 2415 participants) suggests a low concern among Europeans about the risk associated with ZEDs. This contrasts with Europeans' high awareness of climate change risks, which was confirmed by our survey. Given the increasing risk of ZEDs, it is therefore essential to increase Europeans' awareness of their impacts. In addition, our study suggests that Europeans may be more likely to support sustainable environmental policies that would reduce the risk associated with ZEDs, consequently improving the human wellbeing.

Beyond rural vs urban differences: A close match in european preferences in some basic wildlife management and conservation principles

The EU biodiversity strategy for 2030 sets out a framework of commitments and actions to tackle the main drivers of biodiversity loss. Such framework needs to be built on a whole-of-society approach to biodiversity protection, mobilizing private and public funding. In this context, our goal was estimating societal support and preferences about some basic wildlife management principles, which may be useful to inform EU decision-makers about societal priorities and other additional funding sources for wildlife conservation. A discrete choice experiment was conducted by 2415 inhabitants in six European countries (Spain, France, Italy, UK, Germany, Sweden), including residents in both rural (47% of respondents) and urban areas. Our findings reveal a clear pattern across western Europe with similar trends along the studied countries, and even between rural and urban citizens, on some basic wildlife management principles. According to our survey, payments for environmental services contribute to achieving a higher well-being from European citizens in any of the prospective wildlife programs considered, which suggests it is an acceptable tool to share out funds for biodiversity conservation. In addition, managing scarce species is preferred over managing too abundant species; management in forest, agricultural and aquatic habitats is prioritized over that in urban landscapes; and management in protected areas is preferred over management in non-protected ones. These findings suggest that there is a common culture in Europe related to the management of wildlife even when considering citizens with contrasted ways of life: rural vs urban citizens from northern to southwestern Europe. Overall, this study may help in the design of wildlife management policies that maximize societal acceptability and gather higher support.