We live in a society in which few things remain untouched by technology. It is increasingly difficult to escape from screens and the hyperconnectivity they entail, even for the youngest generations. We live in an Onlife world where children are getting used to live in artificial and online environments from very early ages. New generations spend more a more time connected to the internet (Auxier et al., 2020; Murciano-Hueso et al., 2022). Meanwhile, the literature shows that children and adolescents are increasingly experimenting the so called Nature Deficit Disorder, understanding as the suffering of a range of physical, psychological and behavioral problems due to our lack of contact with nature (De Tapia-Martín & Salvado, 2021; Louv, 2005).

For western children, contact with nature decreases even more as they grow, showing a similar pattern in countries such as the United Kingdom (Hughes, 2019), Germany (Lefländer et al., 2013) or Canada (Crawford et al., 2017). There are studies that relate the Nature Deficit Disorder with the urban lifestyle (Collado y Corraliza, 2016). Even current studies show that many children, despite having natural environments in their city, do not visit them due to the lack of security perceived by their parents (Chawla, 2020). That is why this future generation has already been called “backseat generation” and “bubble-wrap generation” (Chawla, 2020; Novotny, et al., 2021).

It is a fact that contact with nature from childhood influences the construction of our ecological identity (Fretwell & Greig, 2019), even the contact with nature is related with mental, physical and spiritual health benefits (Broom, 2017; Berrera-Hernández et al., 2014). For example, some studies have shown that contact with nature significantly reduces symptoms of ADHD and obesity (Mygind et al., 2021). Human beings perceived the world through our five senses and it is precisely the contact with nature that allows us to smell, see, touch, taste and hear. By contrary, screens and digital devices are only able to show us the world through visual and sound stimuli (Kilbey, 2018). This new reality poses a challenge for educational arena. We need to study how this generation is connected with nature in a digitized world and provide answers on how to educate the new generations in ecological awareness.

In line with the above we present the first results of two national projects called “NATEC-ID. Analysis of the processes of (dis-re) connection with NAture and TEchnology when building a child's IDentity”  and “NaturTEC-Kids. Disruptive technology as a catalyst for the ecological transition from environmental education. Study and design of techno-educational solutions from NaturTEC Kids Living Lab”. The study sets out from the idea that we need to embrace the benefits and potential of digital technologies to generate solutions that allow us to (re)connect the new generations with nature environment. That is why this project seeks the development of a technological solution for learning in natural environments. Three objectives are pursued: 1) To analyze the main indicators that allow children and adolescents to learn and connect with nature. 2) To create the NaturTEC-Kids Living Lab, and 3) To design a technological solution with the participation of children and adolescents. For this purpose, we present the first results from a qualitative study. The results obtained so far have allowed us to obtain a first assessment of the mechanisms that facilitate the nature-technology binomial.

The research followed a qualitative design, carried out during 2022 and framed within a Participatory Action Research study. The participating sample was formed by 360 children and adolescents, between 10 and 15 years old, who participated in a program of nature and technology leisure activities (two weekend trips to natural environments and six urban activities) The program of activities was intentionally designed by the group of researchers. Participants were classified into three groups based on technology use: A. Intensive use, B: Moderate use, C: Minimal use. Using techniques of ethnography, all data was obtained through a direct observation method (Arborio & Fournier, 2015). The researchers recorded data related to the behavior, attitudes and interpersonal relationships shown by children and adolescents in the natural space, and the use they give to technology when they are in this type of space. Data analysis was carried out using the Nvivo12 software. The data was analyzed through an inductive categorical approach (Packer, 2017), carried out by the researchers and structured in three dimensions: resources used, ways of resource usage, ways of occupying time and space. Ethical and data protection criteria relevant to this type of research was always followed (BERA, 2018).

Data collected in this first research phase shows us that children and adolescents from group A (intensive use of technology) try to make use of screens whenever they were given the opportunity , even in the natural environment. This group of participants was less likely to participate in group activities and showed little connection with natural elements and environment. Regarding group B (moderate use of technology), the participants showed positive attitude towards the use of technology, but seeking greater contact and participation with their peer group. Also they showed some awareness and connection with the natural environment. Finally, the participants belonging to group C (minimum use of technology), made less use of digital technology in the natural environment, also they showed greater contact and participation with their peer group. Although this group showed a very positive connection with natural environment, they were more enthusiastic about the use of digital technology in the activities. This could be due to restrictions on the use of digital technologies in their homes, which made them want to use screens as something new and attractive. In conclusion, the first results of this study provide data of pedagogical interest to address the nature-technology binomial. In this sense, we believe that education should work on the development of technological solutions that promote the development of ecological awareness as well as contact with the natural environment of future generations.

Arborio, A.M. & Fournier, P. (2015). L’observation directe. Armand Colin. Auxier, B., Anderson, M., Perrin, A. & Turner, E. (2020). Children’s engagement with digital devices, screen time. Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. Retrieved from: https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2020/07/28/childrens-engagement-with-digital-devices-screen-time/ Berrera, L. F., Sotelo, M. A., Echeverría, S. B., & Tapia, C. O. (2020). Connectedness to Nature: Its Impact on Sustainable Behaviors and Happiness in Children. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. BERA. (2018). Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research (4thed.). Broom, C. (2017). Exploring the Relations Between Childhood Experiences in Nature and Young Adults’ Environmental Attitudes and Behaviours. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 33(1), 34-47. Collado, S., y Corraliza, J.A. (2016). Conciencia ecológica y bienestar en la infancia. Efectos de la relación con la naturaleza. Editorial CCS Chawla, L. (2020). Childhood nature connection and constructive hope: a review of research on connecting with nature and coping with environmental loss. People and Nature, 2 (3), 619-642. Chawla, L. (2015). Benefits of nature contact for children. Journal of Planning Literature, 30(4), 433–452. Crawford,MR., Holder,M.D., & O'Connor,B.P. (2017). Using mobile technology to engage children with nature. Environment and Behavior, 49 (9), 959–984. De Tapia-Martín, R. & Salvado Muñoz, M. (2021). From a Deficit of Nature to a Surplus of Technology: the search for Compatibility in Education. In Muñoz-Rodríguez, J.M. Identity in a Hyperconnected Society. Springer. pp185-199. Fretwell, K., & Greig, A. (2019). Towards a better understanding of the relationship between individual's self-reported connection to nature, personal well-being and environmental awareness. Sustainability, 11(5). Kilbey, E. (2017). Unplugged parenting. Headline Liefländer, A. K., Fröhlich, G., Bogner, F. X., & Schultz, P. W. (2013). Promoting connectedness with nature through environmental education. Environmental Education Research, 19(3), 370–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2012.697545 Louv, R. (2005). Last child in the woods. Algonquin books on chapel hill. Mygind,L., Kjeldsted,E., Hartmeyer,R., Mygind,E., Stevenson,M.P., Quintana,D.S., & Bentsen,P. (2021). Effects of Public Green Space on Acute Psychophysiological Stress Response: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Evidence. Environment and Behavior, 53(2), 184–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916519873376 Murciano-Hueso, A., Gutiérrez-Pérez, B., Martín-Lucas, J. & Huete, A. (2022). Onlife youth: a study of young people’s user profile and their online behaviour. RELIEVE, 28 (2). https://doi.org/10.30827/relieve.v28i2.26158 Novotny,P., Zimová,E., Mazouchová,A., y Šorgo,A. (2021). Are children actually losing contact with nature, or is it that their experiences differ from those of 12 years ago? Environment and Behavior, 53(9), 931-952. Packer, M.M. (2017). The science of qualitative research. Cambridge University Press