I am not sure if there is such a thing as the "most correct" definition, as definitions by are almost always contested (and Environmental History has certainly changed as a field of study over the past few decades). But the Dictionary of Human Geography does offer a relatively neat and encompassing definition "Environmental Histories reflect a basic desire to understand relations between people and nature through time" (2009)

How do you define "correct" ?

I simplified the question. How do you define what is environmental history?

These are the definition that I usually use:

- environmental history refers to the mutual interactions between humans and

the natural world (Mcneill JR (2003) Observations on the nature and culture of environmental history. History and Theory, 42: 5-43.)

- it tries to understand how humans have integrated the natural world into their living style through the changes brought by time (Hughes JD (2006) What is Environmental History? Polity Press, UK.)

- it offers a multidisciplinary and long term research approach to anthropogenic interactions with the environment (Bolster WJ (2006) Opportunities in marine environmental history. Environmental History, 11: 567-597.)

The most simple definition of environmental history is: "environmental history is studying the interaction between humans and the environment in the past". This interaction is a two way affair and not just humans impacting on the environment.

In 2009 the Exploring Environmental History Podcast explored the question of what environmental history is interviewing three scholars working in the field: Donald Worster, Paul Warde and Marc Hall. In my own contribution I explore environmental history as an applied science. You can find the episodes (22-25) at http://www.eh-resources.org/podcast/podcast2009.html. I hope this is useful for in your quest for defining what EH is.

As a historical geographer, I have defined environmental history as a specific discipline focused on the study of environmental change. Of course,  this plain definition leads to a full disciplinary program. To begin with, it includes the assumption that environment is a synthetic concept that roughly refers to the nature as transformed by human action; namely, environment includes all the productive/extractive, cognitive and perceptual/symbolic relations/dimensions human beings can establish with nature. The centrality of the environment avoids any likely confussión with other related fields -such as ecological history and natural history. In addition, depending on the specific focus of interest, actors/factors/processes can be identified, either in urban or rural areas. Further, what really leads to the core of environmental history is change, because it includes a multidimensional concept that involves definining at least a specific period of time, the initial and final stages of change, and a development stage. Further, this definition perfectly matches a regional/local/global view of environmental history since environmental change can be adapted/adopted to all possible study scales. 

I forgot to mention that environmental history as the study of environmental change fits the kind of "science with consciousness" that global problems are demanding; further, this definition also reinforces the profile of a "militant science" that the current society is demanding to the applied environmental sciences, vis a vis the outdated positivistic sciences, including anthropocentric history. The proposed definition is that it also meets the current demand for inter-, trans- and multidisciplinary work -suited skills/competences for the global professional market- that of an open discipline like environmental history can contribute, without competing/replacing long-established environmental fields; instead, enriching/complementing with its findings/methods/theories the cummulative knowledge being produced by all environmental sciences. In sum, environmental history can also create the disciplinary synergies with cognate fields in order to increase with this dialogic/synergetic view our current knowledge on complex environmental issues.

A wide-ranging collection of definitions for environmental history can be found in Benjamin Daley's PhD thesis ('Changes in the Great Barrier Reef Since European Settlement', 2005, James Cook University) at the link below on pages 23-25. He divides perspectives on environmental history from various authors into three categories: environmental history as an academic sub-discipline, the study of human -nature relationships, or a dialogue/narrative.

http://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/1312/2/02chapters1-4.pdf

Dear David, could you please upload the whole Daley´s Ph. D. dissertation, so we could download it for complete revisión and proper citation? As you say, Daley writes a thorough review of most common definitions of environmental history. Of course, he demostrates what all environmental historians know: that EH is an academic, interdisciplinary field in construction with plenty of room for all interested in the past of how society and nature have related through time.

Full citation details for Benjamin Daley's PhD thesis with downloadable chapters are available here:

http://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/1312/

Thanks David!

best,

Miguel

Thank you very much Jan. This is quite helpful. For each recommend Exploring Environmental History Podcast. I put all episodes on iTunes and every day I listen one episode and really enjoy.

Thanks also to David for the PhD thesis.

Thank you Miguel for your view from the historical geography.

Jan's answer is on target:  "The most simple definition of environmental history is: "environmental history is studying the interaction between humans and the environment in the past". This interaction is a two way affair and not just humans impacting on the environment."

I agree with Joel. Further, this "interaction" -"influences"/"impacts", my words, not Jan´s- implies an "epidermic" relationship between humans and the environment in the past. In my opinion, we should go deeper as to consider this relationship as constitutive of new realities, so that both humans and the environment change together after this process. Precisely, this is what "environmental change" is made of. Of course, translating this approach into an operative methodology is a big challenge for environmental historians.