Biophilia and Social Work: Advancing Nature-based Health and Healing Perspectives in Social Work Practice and Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The human connection with Nature is rooted in a symbiotic relationship that fosters harmony and balance. Humans have an innate need to be in contact with Nature, relying on it for essential resources such as food, shelter, medicines, and overall well-being. In return, it is the responsibility of humans to become stewards and caretakers of Nature. This reciprocal relationship between living beings and the non-living environment is captured by the concept of biophilia. In social work, biophilia is emerging as a promising approach to mental health practice. This article aims to explore the significance of biophilic health and healing practices in mental and physical well-being. We established inclusion and exclusion criteria and systematically searched for articles in databases published between 2010–2022. Twenty-three articles met the inclusion criteria and were used for in-depth analysis. The findings highlight that nature-based health and healing practices effectively address a range of mental and physical health challenges. These approaches also promote equity and justice within healthcare systems, particularly benefiting Indigenous populations worldwide. Integrating Indigenous knowledge and practices—such as nature-based interventions, green therapy, and traditional healing methods—into social work education can better prepare students to collaborate with Indigenous communities and individuals from diverse ethnic and racial backgrounds across all areas of social work practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".