This work explores experiences of resourcefulness as a means of reminding us of the interconnectedness of life here + now. Resourcefulness requires us to engage with our inner resources whilst strengthening our capacity to be present with the life around us, and in this ongoing exchange we experience the inseparable nature of life. Through the lens of resourcefulness the relationship between human and beyond-human wellbeing is inseparable, so when we care for earth we cannot help but care for ourselves. How we resource ourselves seems to relate to this capacity to be in the here + now with that we are inseparably connected with. Feeling resourced involves feeling soothed and supported here + now, and is the antithesis to the drive for more more more which fuels unnecessary harm to life via consumption and waste.

This work aims to address the pervasive yet seemingly covert impact of the false notion of separation, i.e. that there is a dividing line between what is inside + out of: environment, of human, life beyond human, of individual and community etc. The artifice involved in viewing human/environment/resource as separate (Phillips et al. 2022; Jeffrey. 2022; Ives et.al.  2018, Panelli & Tipa. 2007) is part of Imperialism and Colonialism (Tuhiwai Smith, 2012) and is based on a sense of human superiority (de Oliveira, 2021). These views conflict with indigenous realities and have thus caused pervasive harm (Tuhiwai Smith, 2012, de Oliveira, 2021).

This notion of separation appears a key factor in the failed pursuit of material resource to soothe the ever-increasing drive of our ‘reward’ circuitry for more more more, and the compulsion to soothe the ever-increasing discomfort of our overactive ‘threat’ response. Working in a health system it is clear that material consumption is not successful in meeting needs for wellbeing, but it is successful in increasing the presence of addiction, disconnection, instant gratification, reduced tolerance and attention amongst many of us, and in causing significant change to the biosphere. Even so it seems challenging to admit that this heavily relied upon strategy of consumption isn’t working.

So this work considers what truly resources us, especially as pākehā raised in a culture of colonisation as the norm. What does it mean to face this false separation and challenge this myth as a failed strategy of our ancestors?

In this work, the artificial human-made separation between humans & Earth is viewed as a separation so fundamentally flawed it is inherently dissociative. The American Psychiatric Association (2000) defines clinical dissociation as a “disruption in the usually integrated functions of consciousness, memory, identity, or perception. Dissociative symptoms include derealization/depersonalization, absorption, and amnesia. These experiences can cause a loss of control over mental processes, including memory and attention.” which this could be argued aptly describes the depth of disconnection between human & the planet on which we depend.

Ecologist Timothy Morton (2017) in Humankind named this dissociation ‘The Severing’  to describe “a foundational, traumatic fissure between, to put it in stark Lacunian terms, reality (the human-correlated world) and the real (ecological symbiosis of human and nonhuman parts of the biosphere).”

The root word ‘resource’ originates from the Latin resurgere, meaning to “rise again” (Merriam-Webster, n.d.). This origin seems to refer to Morton’s notion of “the real” in it’s attribution of life, i.e. that a resource has within it the potential to ‘rise again’ and thus holds aliveness, life force or mauri. This appears in stark contrast to the common yet inaccurate usage of resource as “a natural source of wealth or revenue” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary, n.d.) which defines the resource by it’s value or utility rather than it’s aliveness.

It is intended that this view questions colonial & imperial othering of material resources as disposable matter for consumption. This is especially urgent given “the most pressing global challenge of climate change driven by material consumption patterns…will require new habits and behaviours to be taken up by whole populations, particularly those that encourage non-material consumption over material goods” (Pretty & Barton, 2020, p.16).

There are a multitude of other ways of viewing resourcefulness, including Tim Hayward’s (2006) description of resourcefulness as “an “inner” quality whose “outward” manifestation is particularly relevant in an ecologi­cal context. If a major vice of environmentally harmful practices is the profligate use of resources, and render­ing into ‘mere resources’ items which should be con­sidered to be of inherent value, then the countervailing virtue can be characterised as “resourcefulness”. Re­sourcefulness involves the development and exercise of human capacities, and thus fulfils part of the sub­stance of a good human life; it also eases pressure on finite natural phenomena that are needed as resources in (roughly) inverse proportion to resourcefulness.’ (p.442).

Resourcefulness has also long been considered a set of psychological qualities (Meichenbaum, 1977; Rosenbaum, M. & Jaffe, Y. 1983; Rossetti & Zlomke, 2021) involving personal and social resourcefulness (Zauszniewski, 2016). It is also “a process-based, place-based, and relational approach to community health promotion” (Peters et al. 2022 p.5) and alternative to notions of community resilience (Driscoll Derickson, 2016; Carr, & Gibson, 2016; MacKinnon & Driscoll Derickson, 2013).

On this basis, this body of work is concerned with questioning how we resource ourselves here + now and with what drives the compulsion for more more more that involves separating inside + out to overlook, avoid or ‘other’ that which we do not accept or value.

More more more The instinctual anticipatory drive and future-orientation, which untempered means we never feel we have enough. Sparked by dopamine this drive rewards us when we consume, have what others have, compete and compare. This hard-wired drive is an evolutionary hangover in part to ensure survival by avoiding scarcity and the rejection of not belonging. Not belonging or being accepted was life-threatening amongst our ancient ancestors and still actually is for many people marginalised by dominant cultures. This compulsion of more more more or not having or being enough, confuses our sense of identity so that we might feel who we are is what we have. This drive also impacts our capacity to be in the here + now, to sense and be present with what we do have. This compulsion is addiction in many guises, some more socially acceptable than others. So conditioned by this drive it is uncomfortable to pause as this often involves judging what we have or are, and so the comfort of consumption continues.

Here + Now Right here, right now, the reality experienced via our human senses inside + out: sight, smell, taste, touch/pressure, sound, interoception of all bodily sensations, the vestibular system, proprioception, and how this is experienced is shaped by our past. “Here + Now molecules” or “H+Ns” (serotonin, oxytocin, endorphins and endocannabanoids) pause our anticipatory drive and future-orientation by suppressing dopamine (Lieberman + Long, 2018. p.16). Although H+Ns circuits and dopamine circuitry can act simultaneously, mostly they don’t, it is one or the other: here + now or more more more

Inside + out Our identification with ‘what is me’ and ‘what isn’t me’, i.e. that what is inside is only me, and what is outside is ‘other’. Yet really there is always just a ‘we’ as even though our skin provides a boundary and we can feel separate, we are just part of a constantly responsive living world. Our sense of separateness has developed via social conditioning, when in reality our bodies are made up of the food we eat and the air we breathe, which comes from plant life reliant on soil or earth, from all the life that orchestrates this. We are living matter or life inseparable from other life, all alive together. Much of the constant interaction inside + out occurs without our awareness. Our capacity to seperate ourselves from this aliveness, especially in what we consume, is a delusion imposed via the superiority of Imperialism so that we ‘other’ and become superior to much of life. This othering enabled industry to be built on moremoremore and normalisedindividualism. These Imperial norms fuelled Colonialism which marginalised, pathologised, oppressed and criminalised being in the here+now with the inseparable reality of life for many indigenous peoples.

Resource "Etymology: “French ressource, from Old French ressourse relief, resource, from resourdre to relieve, literally, to rise again, from Latin resurgere.'" Merriam Webster Dictionary (MWD).

This body of work involves usage of resource as a re-clarification of reality in the here + now where inside+out are always interconnected. Whatever one might call ‘a resource’ in a physical sense, it is living matter or life, regardless of whether it is deemed to be ‘alive’ or not e.g. a dead rat is full of many alive constituent parts, just as is a rock or oil. Living matter is always a part of this living earth one way or another. Often in the pursuit of more more more resources are not seen as part of this living world, they are instead ascribed an unnatural seperate status outside of life & pursued with singular focus that ignores the fact there is no inside + out in the living system of which they/we are a part.

American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th edition, Text Revision American Psychiatric Press; Washington, D.C.: 2000.

Bennett, J. (2010) Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things, Durham: Duke University Press.

Carr, C., & Gibson, C. (2016). Geographies of making. Progress in Human Geography, 40(3), 297–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132515578775

de Oliveira, V. M. (2021). Hospicing Modernity: Facing Humanity’s Wrongs and the Implications for Social Activism. North Atlantic Books. https://books.google.co.nz/books?id=MFeXzQEACAAJ

Driscoll Derickson,K. (2016) ‘Resilience is Not Enough,’ City, 20, no. 1: 164

Gough, N. (2016). Postparadigmatic materialisms: A “new movement of thought” for outdoor environmental education research? Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 19(2), 51–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03400994

Hayward, T. (2006) ‘Ecological Citizenship: Justice, Rights and the Virtue of Resourcefulness,’ Environmental Politics, 15, no. 3: 442.

Ives, C. D., Abson, D. J., von Wehrden, H., Dorninger, C., Klaniecki, K., & Fischer, J. (2018). Reconnecting with nature for sustainability. Sustainability Science, 13(5), 1389–1397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0542-9

Jeffery, H. (2022). Nature - nurturing health and enhancing sustainability through adventure therapy practices. Contemporary Research Topics, 17.

Lieberman, D. Z., & Long M. E. 2018. The Molecule of More. Dallas, TX: BenBella Books, Inc.

MacKinnon, D. & Driscoll Derickson, K. (2013) ‘From Resilience to Resourcefulness: A Critique of Resilience Policy and Activism,’ Progress in Human Geography, 264.

Mannion, G. (2020). Re-assembling environmental and sustainability education: Orientations from New Materialism. Environmental Education Research, 26(9/10), 1353–1372. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2018.1536926

Meichenbaum, D. (1977). Stress inoculation. In D. Meichenbaum (Ed.), Cognitivebehavior modification: An integrative approach (pp. 143-182). New York, NY: Plenum Press.

Merriam-Webster.(n.d.) Resource. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved July 1 2023 from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/resource

Morton, T. (2017). Humankind: Solidarity with nonhuman people. London ; Brooklyn, NY : Verso, 2017.

Panelli, R., & Tipa, G. (2007). Placing well-being: A Māori case study of cultural and environmental specificity. EcoHealth Journal, 4(4), 445-460.

Pretty, J. & Barton, J. (2020). Nature-Based Interventions and Mind–Body Interventions: Saving Public Health Costs Whilst Increasing Life Satisfaction and Happiness. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(21), 7769. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17217769

Rosenbaum, M. & Jaffe, Y.(1983) ‘Learned Helplessness: The Role of Individual Differences in Learned Resourcefulness,’ British Journal of Social Psychology, 22, no. 3 : 215.

Rossetti, K. G., & Zlomke, K. R. (2021). Resourcefulness revisited: Further psychometric evaluation of resourcefulness scale. Stress & Health: Journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress, 37(4), 631–639. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.302

Tuhiwai Smith, L., (2012). Decolonizing methodologies : research and indigenous peoples. London ; New York : Dunedin : New York :Zed Books ; University of Otago Press. Second edition. 

Zauszniewski, J. A. (2016). Resourcefulness. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 38(12), 1551–1553. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193945916665079