Table of Contents
Connecting is a central theme in both mindfulness-based ecotherapy and eco-spirituality, yet the two approaches are often conflated or treated as interchangeable. While they share common ground, they differ in intention, structure, and therapeutic application. Understanding how connection functions within mindfulness-based ecotherapy compared to eco-spirituality can help clinicians, educators, and clients engage with these approaches more intentionally and ethically.
At the Mindful Ecotherapy Center, Charlton Hall, MMFT, PhD, approaches connecting as a clinically grounded process that supports psychological flexibility, nervous system regulation, and values-based living. Ecospirituality, by contrast, often emphasizes meaning-making, transcendence, and a sacred relationship with the natural world. Both can be deeply meaningful, but they are not the same.
This article explores six key ways connecting shows up in mindfulness-based ecotherapy and eco-spirituality, highlighting where they overlap and where they meaningfully diverge.
1. The Purpose of Connecting
In mindfulness-based ecotherapy, connecting serves a therapeutic function. Its primary goal is to help people develop awareness of their internal experiences while engaging with the external environment in a way that supports emotional regulation and psychological health. Connection is used to reduce experiential avoidance, increase presence, and develop resilience.
Eco-spirituality, on the other hand, often frames connecting as an end in itself. The purpose may be to experience unity, sacredness, or belonging within the natural world. It is about a transcendent sense of oneness. While this can be healing, it is not necessarily structured around clinical goals or measurable outcomes.
2. Clinical Framework Versus Personal Belief
Mindfulness-based ecotherapy is grounded in evidence-informed practices and commonly integrates modalities such as Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT), and solution-focused therapy. Connecting is approached as a skill that can be practiced, refined, and adapted to the patient’s needs.
Ecospirituality is more personal and belief-driven. It may draw from religious traditions, indigenous wisdom, or individual spiritual frameworks. While deeply meaningful for many, ecospiritual connection is not inherently clinical and may not be appropriate for all clients or therapeutic settings.
3. Connecting With Nature Versus Connecting Through Nature
A subtle but important distinction lies in how nature is engaged. Mindfulness-based ecotherapy emphasizes connecting through nature. The natural environment becomes a medium for observing thoughts, emotions, and bodily sensations. Nature supports mindfulness rather than replacing it.
Ecospirituality often emphasizes connecting with nature as a relational or sacred entity. Nature may be personified, revered, anthropomorphized, or experienced as spiritually alive. This can be powerful, but it introduces elements that require careful ethical consideration in clinical work.
4. Inclusivity and Client Autonomy
Mindfulness-based ecotherapy prioritizes inclusivity. Connecting practices are offered without requiring spiritual language or belief. People are encouraged to interpret their experiences in ways that align with their values and cultural background.
Ecospirituality may resonate strongly with some people but feel alienating to others. Patients who do not identify as spiritual, religious, or nature-oriented may struggle with approaches that implicitly assume shared beliefs. Ethical ecotherapy requires honoring client autonomy and avoiding imposition of meaning.
5. Regulation Before Revelation
In mindfulness-based ecotherapy, connecting is first and foremost about regulation. Before insight, transformation, or meaning-making can occur, the nervous system must feel safe. Practices often focus on grounding, sensory awareness, and present-moment attention.
Ecospiritual approaches may prioritize insight, transcendence, or connection to something larger than the self. While these experiences can be meaningful, they may be destabilizing for individuals with trauma histories or high anxiety if not approached carefully. This is especially true if the source of the trauma was based on religion and religious abuse.
6. Therapeutic Outcomes Versus Existential Exploration
Mindfulness-based ecotherapy evaluates connecting in terms of its impact on well-being, functioning, and values-consistent action. The question is not “Was the experience profound?” but rather “Did this connection support psychological flexibility and meaningful change?”
Ecospirituality often invites existential exploration without the same emphasis on outcome measurement. This difference does not diminish its value, but it highlights why clarity of intent matters, especially in professional settings.
Integrating With Care and Intention
Connecting is a powerful human need, and both mindfulness-based ecotherapy and eco-spirituality offer pathways toward it. The distinction lies in how connection is framed, facilitated, and applied. At the Mindful Ecotherapy Center, Charlton Hall, MMFT, PhD, emphasizes mindfulness-based ecotherapy as a flexible, ethical, and person-centered approach that allows connection to emerge naturally, without prescribing meaning or belief.
When used thoughtfully, mindfulness-based ecotherapy honors the healing potential of nature while remaining grounded in psychological science and respect for individual differences.
Share Your Thoughts on Connecting and Ecospirituality!
What do you think? Share your thoughts in the comments below! And don’t forget to subscribe to our newsletter!
