Camping – What’s the Minimum Effective Dose?

We all have an innate understanding that camping is good for us.

However, not all camping trips are equal in their benefit.

Much like abusing codeine, there’s a minimum effective dose required, below which the existential dread does not wash away.

If the endeavour is to remove the existential dread, the frenetic worrying of day to life, and to restore a sense of calm – preferably without narcotics – what then is the minimum effective dose for camping? What even is the dose – is it the duration? Does generic vs brand matter – i.e. are all types of camping equal in their effectiveness?

Let’s see if we can answer these questions.

Are All Camping Styles Equal? Probably Not.

Returning to the idea that we innately know camping to be beneficial for us, I think we have a natural understanding of what aligns with our deeper human needs. I have always maintained the opinion that satellite TV in a caravan, while parked up at a caravan park is not camping and is simply just bringing the suburbs with you.

Walking across the desert for months, with nothing but what you can carry, is going to be impactful and profound. But also, rather prohibitive and quite unlikely to occur. On the other end of the spectrum, breezing through a few scenic sites over a few days using a private jet and an army of servants to cater to your every whim, is not going to be profound or impactful on a level that touches the depths of your own psyche.

Somewhere between those two extremes, there is hopefully a line. A line that distinguishes between beneficial endeavours and pointless ones. All the while, hopefully being more accessible than acting like a wannabe Moses.

I have often said that 3 days is the bare minimum when it comes to shaking off the withdrawal that comes with being addicted to constant motion and incessant thought – (we all are addicted to such things). The first 3 days is uncomfortable, after which slipping into the groove becomes possible. I have also often maintained that connection to the outside world, through the means of internet and social media, undermines this almost completely. I have been very opinionated about these two assumptions, so it is about time that I tested them with something more empirical than my own intuition.

The Best Camping Styles – According to Research

The first problem facing us, is who the researchers are. The vast majority of existing literature, seems to conflate camping with camping-like accommodation providers¹. Are we even able to utilise research to determine best camping styles, if the researchers believe that parking up in a designated camp-ground is the only form of camping? While my first instinct is to loudly proclaim that lab-dwelling suburbanites are incapable of giving us the answers, it seems I may be wrong. The fact that there are a lot of studies and some meta-analyses demonstrating the benefits of “developed camping”² contains the answer indirectly: These studies show many positive benefits, even when constrained to these homogenised styles of camping, which suggest that the bar is lower than I first thought. It seems the “some is better than nothing” approach may have merit.

So, as much as it pains me to write this, “developed camping” does seem to be at or above the minimum effective dose, in terms of the type of camping undertaken. Most of the relevant studies are American, but their idea of “developed camping” is similar to what we would experience in an average Australian national park, where there are designated camp sites with minimal facilities such as a toilet and possibly some gas barbecues.

Okay, so I’ll accept that developed camping meets the minimum effective dose, but ask someone who’s just had back surgery whether they want the bare minimum level of pain medication? I digress…

We must reframe the question. The spectrum no longer includes a pilgrimage across the desert by foot, but now asks where the line is between a designated camp site in a national park (or similar), and between staying in a $200,000 caravan with air conditioning, Star Link and Netflix while being parked up in a caravan park.

The literature again seems to provide no definitive answer. Some of the most relevant data comes from a study conducted by a professor of management³, which again leaves us looking to someone who may not even understand the broader concept of camping (no academics were harmed in the writing of this article). However, what that study does uncover is that there is an objective relationship with the benefits derived from camping and how one camps and that it is not strictly relative to that persons expectations, perceptions and values. In lay terms: Just because you think you’re camping “properly”, does not mean you’ll get the same benefits as someone who is.

So, we have established that there are objectively more impactful ways of camping. The question is still, what and how?

The closest thing to an answer that I have found is buried deep within one study⁴. This study looks at the interplay between camping and the capitalistic models that have resulted from humanity’s seemingly unwavering desire to go wandering off into the bush. In essence, the contradictions between the spirit of camping and the tourism industry.

The study doesn’t directly address the question of which camping style is best, however it does consider that humanity has evolved alongside nomadic means of living. It also describes that camping as a pursuit, tends to be a reflex against our modern way of living which is not in sympathy to how we have evolved. In short, forgetting the paleo argument of whether or not potatoes are actually trying to kill us, our post-agricultural-revolution way of living is static and accumulative. Two things we were not, for most of humanity’s history.

The nomadic link is quite self explanatory. We evolved to wander, but now we don’t. This creates restlessness. The accumulation of material goods, is perhaps a less obvious aberration compared to our development. If we evolved as nomads, we must consequently have evolved alongside a lifestyle that warranted we could only own what we could carry. There’s no shortage of blogs; books; opinions; or research about minimalism, so I won’t address it here, other than to say that it’s good for us. However, it is pretty bloody hard to achieve in the modern world. This is why we feel the need to go camping, because our lives are out of sync with our development, but to live in sympathy with our human needs would put us at odds with society. So, we seem to resort to camping as a means of achieving a physiological return to normality, so we can once again take on the modern world.

What these researchers have touched on – and what I think is the core concept for us – is that camping is about returning to a primal way of living. And what this requires, is that we act in a way that is similar to a nomadic people who own only what they can carry. Essentially, to achieve what we need from camping, we need to act like minimalists.

Caravan, Camper, Tent or Swag

Caravans are out. They are an extension of our modern, accumulation-based lives and an attempt to always keep endless comfort and amenity with us. The lack of comfort when camping, is part of the process.

In his book Antifragile, Nassim Nicholas Taleb discusses that when we remove friction from processes, we’re often and unknowingly removing the very friction that create the growth and learning processes that we’re seeking. Camping is no different. You can optimise camping all the way to the point where it no longer optimises us.

Caravans serve a purpose, they can be a great way to travel. Travel is immensely beneficial but brings a different set of benefits to camping. You can achieve both, but not with a caravan.

I’m not the biggest fan of camper trailers, but I do think they avoid many of the pitfalls of caravans. Primarily that it is harder to take too many things with you.

Tents vs swags is then largely just a matter of personal preference. I prefer to look at the stars through an open swag, but tents are much more convenient for families.

Music or Silence

This is perhaps simply an argument about dopamine. I don’t like to try and tackle anything trendy, and dopamine detoxes are certainly trendy at the moment, but I think that’s for good reason: At a societal level, we have reached a tipping point of mass physiological stimulation and consequent desensitisation.

I’m not saying we need to do yoga every morning that we camp and follow this with Vipassana meditation, but we do need to be wary about wasting our only opportunities for re-sensitisation (if that could possibly be used as a word) and the resultant reconnection with the natural world around us.

If you’re never sitting in silence, it is probably something you require.

Cal Newport’s work in Slow Productivity and Deep Work are excellent places to start when looking at the importance of “boredom” and having moments without stimulation or distraction.

TV or Isolation?

Read a damn book.

Starlink – Yes or No?

No.

Social media is an addiction. If you feel like something bad is going to happen because you’re not connected to the internet for a few days, that is an addiction response. That’s fine, we’ve all been there and we’re all susceptible. But it issa sign that you do need time away from the internet.

If you’re on the internet, you’re not camping.

And for those of us who are self-employed or business owners: If it can’t run without you for a few days, it’s not a business, you’re a freelancer. This is the perfect excuse to develop systems that will allow you to be offline without your “business” imploding. The E-Myth and the Four Hour Work Week are both great books that cover this topic.

If you’re insulted by what I said about not having a business, I’m criticising society, not you. For whatever reason, society is geared to try and keep us connected and always moving and even those of us who think we’ve escaped most of it through business or self-employment are still subject to these pressures. Camping is a temporary rejection of modern society, but that doesn’t mean that some aspects of it can’t be permanently rejected.

Minimum Duration to Benefit From Camping | A Weekend is Not Enough?

Any amount of time camping is better than nothing, but only in a limited sense.

Many studies have shown that as little as 120 minutes in nature has many mental health benefits, and one has even shown that outdoors physical activity improves confidence⁵.

Great. Go for a hike and then drive home.

Studies have shown that camping helps restore natural circadian rhythms for a better sleep/wake cycle, but these benefits are generally shown at the week mark⁶.

All this suggests that there is a reasonable gap between the benefits derived simply from experiencing nature, and those from camping.

So again, the question is what’s the minimum effective dose, for duration of camping?

To answer this, I think we need to look at how long it takes for ruminations and compulsively wanting to check in on things, to fade away. In my own experience and my brief surveys of others, it’s 3 days. Day 3, is when the mind finally seems to slow down. This to me suggests that most of the benefits are derived from day 3 onwards and if you’re limiting yourself to three days, you’re cutting the experience short, just when it’s becoming beneficial.

There seems to be no relevant literature here, so we need to rely on observation as well as taking ideas from different fields. Studies regarding “digital detoxes” and smartphone addiction are dealing with a lot of the same concepts that apply to us.

24 hours with smart phone notifications turned off, actually increased anxiety⁷. This would suggest that this is not long enough to make it past the withdrawal stage.

Another study on social media detoxing, found that three days was when most of the acute withdrawal started to wane⁸. If we remember that social media and smartphones are essentially just subsets of the broader behavioural/addiction problems associated with modern-day life, it’s easy to see how even these seemingly esoteric studies can apply to the problem we’re trying to overcome.

It does seem, like 3 days is the minimum effective dose for camping. So to play it safe, aim for at least three nights and you should hit the target.

References

I don’t use any referencing style. I’m sure you can still figure out what’s what.

1. Clark, R. N., Hendee, J. C., & Campbell, F. L. (1971). Values, Behavior, and Conflict in Modern Camping Culture. Journal of Leisure Research, 3(3), 143–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.1971.11970026
   
2. Garst, B. A., Williams, D. R., & Roggenbuck, J. W. (2009). Exploring Early Twenty-First Century Developed Forest Camping Experiences and Meanings. Leisure Sciences, 32(1), 90–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400903430905
   
3. Dorfman, P. W. (1979). Measurement and Meaning of Recreation Satisfaction: A Case Study in Camping. Environment and Behavior, 11(4), 483-510. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916579114004
   
4. Rantala, O., & Varley, P. (2019). Wild camping and the weight of tourism. Tourist Studies, 19(3), 295-312. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468797619832308
   
5. Lawton, Emma et al. “The Relationship between the Physical Activity Environment, Nature Relatedness, Anxiety, and the Psychological Well-being Benefits of Regular Exercisers.” Frontiers in psychology 8 1058. 26 Jun. 2017, doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01058
6. Circadian Entrainment to the Natural Light-Dark Cycle across Seasons and the Weekend. Stothard, Ellen R. et al. Current Biology, Volume 27, Issue 4, 508 – 51
7. https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.02314
   
8. Coyne P, Woodruff SJ. Taking a Break: The Effects of Partaking in a Two-Week Social Media Digital Detox on Problematic Smartphone and Social Media Use, and Other Health-Related Outcomes among Young Adults. Behav Sci (Basel). 2023 Dec 8;13(12):1004. doi: 10.3390/bs13121004. PMID: 38131860; PMCID: PMC10740995.

Books Mentioned

• Antifragile – Nassim Nicholas Taleb
• Deep Work – Cal Newport
• Slow Productivity – Cal Newport
• E Myth – Michael Gerber
• Four Hour Work Week – Tim Ferriss