This report synthesises two research papers from Lund University, the University of Zurich, and Loughborough University, revealing a critical disconnect between human biology and the modern environment. These studies highlight a dual crisis: our bodies are failing in urban settings, and our minds are increasingly rejecting the very nature built to sustain us.

 

 

 

The research, led by Colin Shaw of the University of Zurich and Daniel Longman of Loughborough University, was published in Biological Reviews. It explores the "environmental mismatch hypothesis"—the idea that our physiology, which evolved over hundreds of thousands of years for a hunter-gatherer existence, is fundamentally at odds with the artificial environments we have constructed in just the last few centuries.

 

Our physiology evolved to handle acute stress (short bursts of danger, like escaping a predator). Modern life, however, is characterised by chronic stress (traffic, noise pollution, work pressure) that activates the same hormonal pathways without the necessary recovery. The body constantly reacts as if it is facing danger, leading to system failure.

 

This chronic mismatch is implicated in the global rise of chronic inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, as well as worrying trends like declining global fertility rates. The modern environment—filled with pollution, microplastics, and sedentary demands—is placing biological stress our evolution never prepared for.

 

The study emphasises that we cannot wait for evolution to solve the problem. Biological adaptation takes tens to hundreds of thousands of years, while our technological environment changes nearly every decade. Instead, the authors argue for a proactive redesign of our living spaces and culture. They advocate for city planning that prioritises green spaces and reduces harmful sensory inputs like excessive noise and artificial light. By treating nature not just as a luxury but as a critical component of public health, societies can mitigate the chronic stress of the industrial world.

 

Lund University researchers have published a systematic review that challenges the long-held assumption of an innate human affinity for nature (biophilia). The study highlights a growing, yet often overlooked, negative relationship with nature, a phenomenon they call biophobia—marked by feelings of fear, discomfort, or even disgust toward the natural world.

 

Led by researcher Johan Kjellberg Jensen, the comprehensive review synthesises findings from nearly 200 scientific articles to create a unified framework for understanding, predicting, and mitigating this rising global trend.

 

As urbanisation increases, children have less direct, positive contact with nature. This lack of exposure prevents them from developing the knowledge needed to distinguish between danger and safety. The aversion is extending beyond classically dangerous animals (spiders, snakes) to include harmless and beneficial urban species (insects, certain reptiles) and even unmanaged wild environments perceived as risky or dirty.

 

This avoidance has serious implications for public health (missing out on nature’s stress-reducing benefits) and conservation efforts (reduced public will to protect natural spaces and wildlife). The researchers emphasise that reversing the biophobia trend requires a multifaceted strategy focused on creating positive, early-life experiences with nature.

 

According to Jensen, a key strategy is to increase exposure and reduce points of conflict between humans and nature.

  

 

 

The consensus from both research teams is clear: the solution cannot wait for slow biological adaptation. Active societal and environmental redesign is necessary to bridge this widening human-nature gap.

 

 

By consciously adapting our modern environments to better suit our ancient biology, we can begin to heal the human-nature paradox and secure a healthier future for both people and the planet.