Page - 141 - in Biodiversity and Health in the Face of Climate Change

141 These emotional and behavioural responses to stimuli in the natural environment, such as the fear/avoidance response to snakes or to approach response to clean water sources, contribute to survival. This is called biologically prepared learning, in which, through evolution, humans have retained quick emotional and behavioural responses to specific natural stimuli (Ulrich 1993). These emotional outcomes and concomitant behavioural responses (approach vs. avoid) from natural stimuli are then transmitted through culture (e.g. the cultural symbolism of a snake as danger- ous) (Wilson 1993). Biologically prepared learning to avoid certain natural stimuli is called biophobia (Ulrich 1993). Criticisms of Biophilia exist (Kahn 1997; Joye and de Block 2011). First, the Biophilia Hypothesis is considered so general that any research studies on the rela- tionship between human beings and natural environments  – from human communi- cation, cognitive and mental development, and aesthetic appreciation, to companion animals, learning survival skills, and environmental ethics  – are considered as evi- dence for testing the Biophilia Hypothesis, even if the researcher is testing other theories (Kellert 1993, p.  22). Furthermore, the Biophilia Hypothesis is argued to be more of a general concept, rather than a theory with testable hypotheses (Joye and de Block 2011, p.  193); there is no model describing how connection to plants, ani- mals and landscapes influences human communication, cognitive and mental devel- opment, and aesthetic appreciation. Whilst learning theory (Wilson 1993; Ulrich 1993) is proposed as a mechanism, it is unclear if learning theory can account for all outcomes, or if additional mediators are required. Additional criticisms are whether biophilia is innate (Kahn 1997; Joye and de Block 2011), and if biophobia contra- dicts the Biophilia Hypothesis (Kahn 1997). 7.2.4.1 Connection to  Biodiversity in  the  Biophilia Hypothesis The Biophilia Hypothesis emphasises human beings’ positive response to nature, which can be manifest as a preference for animals, plants and natural landscapes. Furthermore, the Biophilia Hypothesis also considers the impacts to health and well-being due to biodiversity loss (Wilson 1993; Ulrich 1993). Unfortunately, the Biophilia Hypothesis does not specify which species or landscape types best fulfil people’s biophilic needs (Sundli Tveit et  al. 2013). The strongest work on Biophilia Hypothesis is on its converse, biophobia (Hartig et  al. 2011). Empirical support for Biophilia largely comes from studies investigating biodi- versity and preference relationships. People prefer more biodiversity (Lindemann- Matthies et  al. 2010). Hedblom et  al. (2014) found preference was greater for birdsong from seven different species of birds than for birdsong from one bird spe- cies. Cracknell et  al. (2017) found that people preferred viewing an aquarium with a high number of different species of fish/crustaceans, compared to the viewing an aquarium with a low number of different species. Johansson et  al. (2014) explored the effect of three different levels of biodiversity (low, medium and high) in forest biotopes on preference ratings. An inverted U-shape was found for preference; the medium biotope was the most preferred followed by the high biotope and the low biotope (Johansson et  al. 2014). This suggests that more biodiversity may be pre- 7 Theoretical Foundations of  Biodiversity and  Mental Well-being Relationships