"Environment is surrounding atmosphere/ condition for existence" - "Environment is an essential natural process or an outcome of occurrence" – "Environment is of two types, one is negative and the other is positive":
Environment is generator: creation of life form is because of environment. Sun/moon, sea/ earth, hot/ cold and forests/ desert etc; they together made an environment that is fit for our existence. There are two different environments one is positive and the other one is negative, life forms in both namely, pests, insects and others are cold blooded have different conditions which suits them to survive that may not be suitable to us, both have own identities. Most important factor is that negative positive factors have to join together to form an environment for example mother/ father for birth of a child, negative/ positive of energy for electricity. In the system of environment, both have integral role to play. Where negative dominates outlines its systems and where positive dominates forms its own.
Environment motivates to react: We are miserable when are in desert and delighted when we are in lush garden. In a hospital we are in different mood and in disco different. Environment motivates us to change our mood and reaction is in accordance.
We also generate/alter environment in our surroundings by our practice: Depends on the behavior of the individuals. Positive thinkers have positive feelings and negative thinkers it is negative, creates environment accordingly. This process turns to evolutionary system when a group of people have same thinking that initiates others to follow. Human lust and excessive usage of natural wood causing deforestation, pollution heating temperature is NEGATIVE environment for us.
 Environmental History
"Theories of Environmental History." Environmental Review 11 (special issue, Winter 1987): 251-305.
Cronon, William. "A Place for Stories: Nature, History, and Narrative." Journal of American History 78 (March 1992): 1347-1376.
Cronon, William. "The Uses of Environmental History." Environmental History Review 17 (Fall 1993): 1-22.
Crosby, Alfred W. "The Past and Present of Environmental History." American Historical Review 100, no. 4 (October 1995): 1177-1190.
Hays, Samuel P. Explorations in Environmental History. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1998.
Hughes, J. Donald. "Ecology and Development as Narrative Themes of World History." Environmental History Review 19 (Spring 1995): 1-16.
Jamieson, Duncan R. "American Environmental History." CHOICE 32, no. 1 (September 1994): 49-60.
Kline, Benjamin. First Along the River: A Brief History of the U.S. Environmental Movement. 2nd edition. San Francisco, CA: Acada Books, 2000.
Leibhardt, Barbara. "Interpretation and Causal Analysis: Theories in Environmental History." Environmental Review 12 no. 1 (1988): 23-36.
Lewis, Chris H. "Telling Stories About the Future: Environmental History and Apocalyptic Science." Environmental History Review 17 (Fall 1993): 43-60.
O'Connor, James. "What is Environmental History? Why Environmental History?" Capitalism, Nature, Socialism 8, no.2 (June 1997): 1-27.
Russell, Emily Wyndham Barnett. People and the Land Through Time: Linking Ecology and History. New Haven : Yale University Press, 1997.
Simmons, I.G. Environmental History: A Concise Introduction. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1993.
Stewart, Mart A. "Environmental History: Profile of a Developing Field." History Teacher 31 (May 1998): 351-68.
Stine, Jeffry K., and Joel A. Tarr. "At the Intersection of Histories: Technology and the Environment." Technology and Culture 39 (October 1998): 601-40.
Worster, Donald, ed. The Ends of the Earth: Perspectives on Modern Environmental History. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
Worster, Donald, et al. "A Roundtable: Environmental History." Journal of American History 74, no. 4 (March 1990): 1087-1147.
Worster, Donald. "Nature and the Disorder of History." Environmental History Review 18 (Summer 1994): 1-15.
 Environment Movement
It is difficult to date precisely the commencement of the contemporary environment movement. A number of periods have been identified (Lowe and Goyder, 1983). The period between the late 1800s and the early 1900s was the most relevant as it included events and circumstances of this time that foreshadowed the existence of the current movement.
This period, sometimes referred to as the Resource Conservation period, arose from the ideas of the epoch that became known as the Enlightenment and a corresponding utilitarian position which called for the sensible use of natural resources. The Enlightenment, was an era where it was thought that man (sic) was capable of manipulating and improving nature and it was therefore his duty to do so through exercises of his reason by means of science and technology. It was believed that homo sapiens were the sole species to have the unique characteristics of intellectual capacity, language, organization and culture. By virtue of possessing these qualities, humans were then able to adapt nature to human ends rather than having to adapt humans to the natural environment.
What was to become known as Romanticism developed during this period in opposition to this popular and therefore powerful line of thought. Intellectuals were weary of the optimism of economic liberalism and its pronouncement of social and economic advancement through laissez-faire capitalism. They condemned the materialist society and the conformist obsession with technology, and were alarmed with the destructive capacity of post-Newtonian science. Particularly pertinent to the environment was the industrial threat to ecological systems or the environmental consequences of imperialism. An environmental utopianism arose with the formation of such groups as the Sierra Club, formed in 1892 in the U.S.. Henry Thoreau advocated a back-to-nature way of life, and Peter Kropotkin proposed an anarchist solution of a communitarian existence (Pepper, 1990). This was the rise of Wilderness Preservation which involved a less pragmatic commitment to the environment, instead advocating a more spiritual attitude towards nature. Yet this view was still anthropocentric since it regarded the spiritual utility in relation to humans, that is, only humans were entitled to moral consideration (Mathews, 1987). See more Click here