“I would have to say that we absolutely should be looking at ecological determinants of health. If our aim is to improve the health and well-being of children and youth in the region, we would be making a tremendous mistake by not considering this domain. My definition of the environmental domain of health includes all environments in which we live, learn, work, play and care for each other. This includes both natural and built environments. Without the environment we have nothing, so it should be paramount in our thinking. I assumed that was why we had an environmental domain in the wellness wheel already….Was that not the intention?”
And, an answer:
“Absolutely, yes. Environment as in: home environment; built environment; access to nature; and… ecological environment.
But here’s where we get into the blind-spots that silos create: for people whose focus has been social systems (including education, child protection, youth justice, all of us in family/youth serving community-based organizations, etc.), the ‘environment’ has only extended to social systems (& by extension, direct environments, such as housing & schools).
Weird, right? Major blind spot~!”
(This post includes 2 versions of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model, as an illustration.)
“…For many of us, it’s radical to consider ‘ecological ecology’ when we are attempting to create social change, because up until now we’ve primarily been concerned with ‘social ecologies’, and there has been a conceptual divide between those who focus on social justice & those who work on on ecological justice.”
What is obvious to some, is paradigm altering for others~.
That’s why we need Collective Impact, to cross-pollinate between sectors ( & silos) so we can make these connections.