It is well known that spending time in nature is beneficial for children (Chawla, 2015). However, in Britain, children now spend less time outside than previous generations (Moss, 2012), which has been exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic (Natural England, 2021). Furthermore, inequalities in nature access disproportionately affects those from poorer backgrounds and ethnic minority populations, with many losing out due to a lack of quality local provision or societal barriers (Holland, 2021). Children may now, therefore, be particularly dependent on their access to nature being facilitated by educational and childcare settings, but these opportunities may be distributed inequitably.

‘Children may now be particularly dependent on their access to nature being facilitated by educational and childcare settings, but these opportunities may be distributed inequitably.’

My doctoral study investigates how children aged three to seven are enabled to access nature within early and primary educational contexts. Drawing on a phenomenological tradition, the work uses a social constructionist approach to explore the value placed on nature and any potential constraints or freedoms experienced by children in state and privately funded schools and nurseries. My study places children’s voices at the heart of the research, using key elements of the creative methodology Photovoice (Wang & Burris, 1997). During fieldwork, child participants took photographs of outside spaces at their schools and nurseries, using printouts of the images to facilitate discussion on the meanings that those spaces held for them. Transcriptions of talk during the photography exercise and subsequent discussions were analysed using a Reflexive Thematic Analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2022), to develop three major themes.

The first theme explores how there is both structure and agency in children’s interactions with the outdoors. Children expressed feelings of being impeded in their access, through talk of optimal weather conditions or access being restricted by the demands of school life.

‘We don’t come here much. Because when you’re in Year 2 you have more time of work.’ – Year 2 child, Private School

Dichotomously, however, children also demonstrated a sense of stewardship, agency and the means of creating change, disrupting socially constructed concepts of ‘suitable conditions’ for accessing the outdoors, by enjoying ‘bad’ weather and having a fascination with dirt and poo.

‘You get to slide down it … slide down it and it’s already wet.’ ‘And I also like splashing in puddles and I also got a coat that covers my bum so I can just go in the wet!’ – Pre-school children, Private Nursery

The second theme explores how meaning-making for children in these outdoor spaces is deeply connected to the self, home and significant others. The ‘micro-systems’ (Bronfenbrenner, 1977) of gardens at home were particularly prevalent in their talk about nature and the secure base of family provided children with a lens through which to imbue natural environments at school or nursery with emotional significance.

‘I like this one, like, my dad wants to really know about mushrooms and I just want to know about mushrooms because he had a mushroom book.’ – Year 1 child, State School
Children across settings created a personal connection with nature through self-representation in their photographic depictions.

‘[I like it] because it has my shoe there … my lace there. Because I’m stepping on mud.’ – Pre-school child, Play Centre

The final theme explores how outside spaces allow children opportunities for social, cultural and academic learning. Material items facilitated challenging exercise and socialising, while more natural spaces allowed children to be captivated by nearby and ‘small’ nature.

‘That’s snow! It’s a snowflake! [Quietly, in awe] Oh wow.’ – Pre-school child, Private Nursery

‘The flower’s grown! The flower’s grown, look!’ – Year 1 child, State School

Practitioners were also interviewed, and I hope to add further nuance by exploring how they value these same spaces, reflecting on how children’s agency, institutional policies and practitioners’ personal values intersect to impact children’s access to the outdoors.

Anna Ridgewell received the BERA Annual Conference 2023 Best ePoster Prize for the paper ‘Growing up green: What value is placed on accessing outdoor environments across different childcare and educational settings? A doctoral study-in-progress’.

References

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. Sage.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32(7), 513–531. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513 

Chawla, L. (2015). Benefits of nature contact for children. Journal of Planning Literature, 30(4), 433–452. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412215595441  

Holland, F. (2021). Out of bounds: Equity in access to urban nature. Groundwork UK. https://www.groundwork.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Out-of-Bounds-equity-in-access-to-urban-nature.pdf 

Moss, S. (2012). Natural childhood. The National Trust. http://www.friendsofhaileypark.org.uk/uploads/1/9/5/1/1951271/naturalchildhood_stephenmoss_nationaltrust.pdf

Natural England. (2021). The people and nature survey for England: Children’s survey. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/the-people-and-nature-survey-for-england-child-data-wave-1-experimental-statistics/the-people-and-nature-survey-for-england-childrens-survey-experimental-statistics

Wang, C., & Burris, M. A., (1997). Photovoice: Concept, methodology, and use for participatory needs assessment. Health Education & Behavior, 24(3), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1177/109019819702400309