Skip to main content
Free AccessOriginal Articles and Reviews

Five Roles for Psychologists in Addressing Climate Change, and How They Are Informed by Responses to the COVID-19 Outbreak

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000435

Abstract

Abstract. This paper discusses five areas where psychologists have roles in helping to address climate change, its effects on the planet and human beings, these five areas are as follows: (1) Changing human behaviors that are causing climate change. (2) Increasing human connection with nature in positive ways to heal both the planet and human beings. (3) Advising and assisting on leadership for good governance to protect the planet. (4) Providing support and psychological interventions for those affected by climate change. (5) Preparing for bad outcomes and helping adaptation and survival should these occur. This paper considers the Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak and how responses to it give insights for responses to climate change.

Changing Human Behaviors That Are Causing Climate Change

Climate change is evident from global temperature rise, warming oceans, shrinking ice sheets, glacial retreat, decreased snow cover, sea-level rise, declining arctic sea ice, extreme events, and ocean acidification (NASA, n.d.). The executive summary of the Climate Science Special Report (CSSR; 2017) concludes from multiple sources of evidence indicate that: “it is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. For the warming over the last century, there is no convincing alternative explanation supported by the extent of the observational evidence.” (CSSR, 2017, p. 35). This is the result of the emissions of greenhouse gasses that reflect back heat to the planet rather than it escaping into space, and the human activities that create these gases, these being the burning of fossil fuels, deforestation, nitrogen fertilizers, and fluorinated gases (European Commission, n.d.). If human activities significantly contribute to Climate Change humans can also stop it. However, to do so will require changes to beliefs and behavior.

Psychology being the science of the human mind and behavior is the science ideally placed to help alter beliefs and behaviors towards activity to reduce climate change. While scientists from other disciplines develop the technologies to mitigate the effects of climate change, psychologists have a role in persuading people to adapt to activity and use new technologies. Fielding et al. (2014) state: “We do not make the claim that social psychology has all the answers but rather that the theories, models and research methods of social psychology can provide a powerful arsenal to complement the approaches of other disciplines” (Fielding et al., 2014, p. 413).

Stern (2011) believes that the theories of psychological science can be used to change consumer behavior; reduce energy significant behaviors and reduce household carbon emissions. Consumer behavior needs to change through more recycling and reusing, reducing meat in the diet, driving, and flying less, using clean energy and water conservation. Psychology research suggests a range of approaches to change beliefs to motivate people to make the changes including reinforcing social norms (Biel & Thogersen, 2007), increasing a sense of cooperation (Brewer & Kramer, 1986), and offering rewards and sanctions (Balliet et al., 2011).

However, changing attitudes do not necessarily lead to changes in behavior, a phenomenon that has been explored in relation to concern for the environment by Blake (1999), Barr (2004), and Retallack et al. (2007). Blake (1999) identified a series of barriers to change which are as follows: that the person does not see it as their responsibility, that they do not trust the government’s intentions, or that practically pro-environment decisions are hard to put into practice. Blake considers that changing attitudes is not enough and policy has to tackle these barriers. Psychologists can help in finding how to persuade people that they are the kind of person who makes environmentally responsible decisions, that lack of trust in the government should not stop them from acting pro-environment. In addition, psychologists can advise policymakers on how to make the environmentally virtuous decision the easiest one to make.

Psychological theory can be used to address psychological barriers in order to persuade doubters that climate change is occurring, is largely man-made, and that we all, including them, need to take action now. Psychologists are aware of how people use procrastination to manage anxiety (Pychyl & Sirois, 2016), and how people can defend against emotionally difficult material with defenses (Freud, 1937). They also have the knowledge of how to move people to more effective approaches that actually address the problem rather than managing the difficult emotions associated with it instead. There is still work to be done, as a poll in 2019 of 28 countries demonstrates the variance between nations, for example, 71% of the participants from India believed that climate change is occurring and that humans are mainly responsible, whereas in Norway only 35% believed this. Broadly speaking, the findings on a range of questions showed a “noticeable difference” between the global East and West in beliefs about climate change (YouGov, 2019). Psychologists can explore the reasons for this variance, how factors such as the direct experience of climate change and culture have an impact.

It is important to acknowledge that if everyone changed their behavior to reduce the carbon emissions of their households it would not be sufficient unless there is a change in the actions of corporations and governments, The Carbon Majors Report (2017) states that 70% of the world’s CO2 emissions can be traced back to just 100 companies, therefore leverage needs to be applied to these companies. In addition, businesses need to influence one another by establishing norms for actions to reduce climate change, and to in turn influence governments (Schendler, 2009). Psychologists need to work with economists, environmental scientists, business leaders, and politicians to achieve this change.

The COVID-19 outbreak gives insight into how people respond to change at a time of crisis and how science can inform how government communications shape responses. Lunn et al. (2020) conducted a multidisciplinary search of 100 papers from behavioral science for interventions to change behavior in a crisis, such as how to encourage public-spiritedness through messages of collectivism and how to present risk through numbers showing ranges to describe uncertainty. In addition, research shows that in their communications: “Authorities need to show empathy in communications and demonstrate that they understand how people feel.” (Lunn et al., 2020, p. 8).

At the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, panic buying occurred in some countries. However, according to Mawson (2005), though it might be assumed that panic and social discord would be the common response in a crisis, reassuringly mutual aid is more likely, as social attachment theory suggests that human beings are essentially gregarious animals where attachments are primary. It is important for the mass and social media to reflect this and not place biased salience on panic behavior which may both encourage them and dispirit others.

Responses to the COVID-19 outbreak in the UK support Lunn et al. (2020) that a sense of shared collectivism was important for adherence to restrictive changes in lifestyles. This is likely to be also the case with climate change with lifestyle adaptations needing to be shared. Guan et al. (2020) state that in response to the COVID-19 outbreak cultural factors were important in understanding responses, at both an individual and a national level, with cultural psychology having important insights to offer. Cultural psychologists can also assist in how cultural factors affect responses to climate change.

During the COVID-19 outbreak, behavioral scientists advised some governments on how to manage the crisis, as it was accepted that until vaccines were developed, altering human behavior would be crucial in reducing deaths. The effectiveness of this involvement may affect public response to the communication of scientists in relation to climate change. The development of vaccines may cause a boost in public perceptions of the importance of science.

Increasing Human Connection With Nature in Positive Ways to Heal Both the Planet and Themselves

In countries that have seen large scale industrialization and urbanization there has been a negative impact on the relationship between human beings and the natural environment, as Soga and Gaston (2015) state: “that the loss of interactions with nature does not just diminish a remarkable range of health and well-being advantages, but also discourages people’s positive emotions, attitudes, and behavior with regard to the environment, implying a cycle of disaffection towards nature” (Soga & Gaston, 2015, p. 2). Psychologists have demonstrated this disconnect in a number of ways, for example, Kesebir and Kesebir (2017) found evidence in cultural products, such as reduced references to nature in fiction books, film storylines, and song lyrics, from the 1950s onward. They believe that this may socialize people into a lack of curiously, respect, and concern for nature echoing the views of Soga and Gaston (2015). The sense of being interconnected to the planet has diminished leads to an increased likelihood that people will act in ways that take less regard for their environmental impact. In addition, there are benefits for humans as: “we are just beginning to appreciate the wealth of human health benefits that stem from experiencing nature and biodiversity” (Sandifer et al., 2015, p. 1).

Increased connection with nature and having a sense of being part of its ecosystems has been demonstrated to be beneficial to human well-being, in healing the planet, this connection may heal people too. Green environments have been demonstrated to have beneficial effects on mental health (Sarkar et al., 2018). In a large-scale survey study (n = 19,608) of people’s engagement with nature White et al. (2019) found that 120 min or more engaged with nature was associated with good health and well-being. Nature-based activities can take many forms, for example, Soga and Gaston (2017) through a meta-analysis demonstrated a range of health benefits of gardening, and they concluded that: “A regular dose of gardening can improve public health” (Soga & Gaston, 2017, p. 92).

Psychologists have researched how the connection can be restored and whether this does affect concern for climate change. Clayton et al. (2013) in a study of 7,000 visitors to a zoo and aquarium found that feeling connected to the zoo animals was associated with cognitive and emotional responses to climate change as well as social group affiliation. There is a role for researchers in the area of environmental psychology to find the messages that can both remake those connections and to also activate more self-interest driven motivators. Marshall et al. (2019) in a survey into responses to changes to the Great Barrier Reef found that effective communications about climate change include messages that target altruism and biosphere, together with messages that target egotism through appeals to the health and well-being impact for humans of maintaining a healthy planet.

The COVID-19 outbreak gave a stark warning of how ecosystems connect, and that human beings are part of them. The same warning was present in the Nipah virus in Malaysia where man-made deforestation added to draught, the 1997/8 El Niño Southern Oscillation event, leading to a reduction in fruiting and flowering forest fruit trees for fruit bats to feed on, and this led to a migration of fruit bats to orchards where pigs were kept. There the pigs ate apples contaminated by bat feces and they caught the virus and when humans ate the pigs they too caught the virus (Chua et al., 2002). Perhaps after the COVID-19 outbreak, there will be a better appreciation that humans are part of nature and our actions have repercussions for the planet and ourselves.

One of the themes of the lockdowns that were put in place to deal with the COVID-19 outbreak was a greater appreciation of nature, including observing how nature responds with reduced human activity, how the planet starts to heal and how nature reclaims our spaces. In the UK the annual Wildlife Trusts Thirty Days Wild campaign, which occurs in June, there was a significant increase in interest in 2020 compared to previous years (Barkham, 2020). The health, well-being, and environmental benefits of this could be long-lasting if Richardson and McEwan (2018) are correct, their analysis of the 2017 campaign indicated sustained effects in nature connection, health, happiness, and conservation behaviors.

Informing on the Type of Leadership and Good Governance That Protects the Planet

The responses of individuals to climate change will not be sufficient, countries and large global corporations have good leadership and governance to act as well. Climate change needs to concern governments from the left to the right of the political spectrum. However, climate change and action to address it are associated with the wider environmentalist, Green movement, and progressive politics. Acceptance of the reality of climate change is influenced by political position; in a survey in the USA in 2017, 92% of Democrat voters believed that there is solid evidence that the temperature of the planet is warming which contrasts to only 52% of Republican voters (Pew Research Centre, 2017). This difference may impair politicians associated with the political right to embrace the need for change. There is a need to address this in order to connect with the values of people of all political persuasions. Psychologists with a specialist interests in communications and politics could work together to find dialectics that bridge the divides of political orientation to find unity to address climate change.

The COVID-19 outbreak has demonstrated how different leadership approaches may have different outcomes when people are faced with a challenge that is environmentally based rather than from other human beings. Different leaderships have varied in their concordance with the advice from social scientists on how to communicate and change behavior in a crisis: “German Chancellor Angela Merkel embraces science. Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro rejects it. The U.S. President Donald Trump’s daily briefings are a circus-like spectacle, while Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi holds no regular briefings at all, even as he locks down 1.3 billion people.” (Friedman, 2020). The leadership of the Prime minister of New Zealand has come in for particular praise, as it demonstrated both standing with her people, collectivism, and empathy. However, her approach would not be embraced by all.

The COVID-19 outbreak showed the need for cultural sensitivity, as core values for some can be triggered to lead them to oppose the actions needed to deal with the crisis. This was seen in the response around the world from those who saw the lockdown as an attack on their values and civil rights (Ward, 2020). In addition to cultural value, there was fear that tackling the COVID-19 outbreak would trigger an economic crisis. These cultural and economic factors also affect the response to climate change and here cultural and economic psychologists can inform strategy and communication to assist global adherence to the actions needed to reduce climate change.

Providing Support and Psychological Interventions for Those Affected by Climate Change

The effects of climate change have already impacted the lives of many people in the world, who are facing hardships, displacement from their homes, and trauma. In the USA and Mexico, the evidence shows that climate change is affecting the psychological well-being of rural communities, with an increase in temperature associated with more suicides (Burke et al., 2018). This replicates findings from India, where Carlton (2017) found that in the last three decades climate change lead to crop failure that was responsible for 59,000 suicides of farmers and farmworkers. Psychologists have a role in working out the pathways from climate change and crop failure to farmer and farmworker suicide, together with establishing inventions to mitigate the effects and prevent suicides; how rural communities can be made supportive so that crop failure is not interpreted as a personal failure and the farmer considers themselves as a community provider, not a burden.

It is not only violence to self that increases with climate change but violence to others does as well. Ranson (2014) modeled the effects of a warming temperature and crime by looking at USA records from 1960 to 2009 and established a strong relationship between temperature and violent crime. The prediction is that with global warming there will be an additional 3,500 murders and 216,000 rapes between 2010 and 2099 in the USA. These statistical associations fit with what we know about how changes in temperature affect human behavior, Anderson and colleagues in a series of laboratory studies (Anderson & Anderson, 1984; Anderson et al., 2000) demonstrated how an uncomfortable air temperature increases aggression. In addition, climate change leads to crop failure and a lack of resources that can cause conflicts and violence over what remains. This has been demonstrated by a study by Butler and Gates (2012) which examined the effects of weather changes on East Africa cattle farmers. Further, because climate change disproportionately affects the poor it can lead to a feeling of injustice and be a recruiting sergeant for terrorists. Psychologists can have roles in intervening to provide advice on the impact of temperature, to explain the process of intergroup conflict, and to find ways that people can direct their sense of injustice in more productive directions.

Evidence from the UK suggests that those affected by severe weather events such as storms and flooding have an increased likelihood of psychological problems (Environmental Agency, 2020). Psychologists have a role in helping those affected and who are marginalized from the decision-making process. Climate change disproportionately affects women, as Habtezion states: “Climate change is not gender-neutral” (2013, p .2) as a result of structural inequalities being more likely to experience poverty and having less socioeconomic power; with a particular vulnerability in developing countries with their income tied to natural resources. Yet women have far less ability to influence because of inequalities and their structural disempowerment globally (UN Women, 2018). In the UK the evidence from the Environmental Agency (2020) suggests that people of low incomes are eight times more likely to be living on land that has a tendency to flood. Psychologists can work actively using their research and interviewing skills to help those who are marginalized yet most affected to have a voice.

People who have yet to experience climate change in physically adverse ways are experiencing increased levels of anxiety about climate change. The term eco-anxiety is now used where anxiety is impairing the person’s ability to function. Anxiety about climate change is particularly prevalent for young people, a survey for the UK Children’s television program Newsround (2020) found that climate change was important to 80% of children, 73% worried about the state of the world now, 58% worried about the effect of climate change on their futures, and 17% said they worry was affecting their eating and sleeping. A survey for Friends of the Earth (2020) indicates an increase in anxiety in 18- to 24-year-olds with 70% more worried about climate change than they were last year. Psychologists have already begun to start to address this, for example, workshops for young people run by Kennedy-Williams (Taylor & Murray, 2020).

Climate scientists who produce and communicate information on climate change are experiencing increased stress affecting their emotional well-being (Gilford et al., 2009), caused by the difficult and complex nature of the material, and that it is open to misinterpretation and misuse. Psychologists have a role in supporting climate scientists to maintain their psychological well-being and hope, to not become dispirited, to avoiding burn out and to remain confident in speaking truth to power.

The COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (2020) conducted a survey that indicates the COVID-19 outbreak led to an increase in depression and anxiety across the UK population. In the USA, Twenge and Joiner (2020) found in representative samples of USA citizens in April 2020 participants were eight times more likely to meet the criteria for a serious mental illness than in 2018. An increase in mental health problems in the future is predicted (Holmes et al., 2020). From this, it is reasonable to predict that as the effects of climate change become stronger then there will be an increase in anxiety-related to it. One of the similarities between the COVID-19 outbreak and climate change is that for psychologists working to help other people deal with the psychological consequences, they too are living through the same experience and may experience the same negative effects.

Preparing for a Bad Outcome and Helping Adaptation and Survival if This Occurs

It is far from certain that significant climate change will be averted, and the impact may threaten the survival of many species of plants and animals across the planet including human beings. Strategies will be needed to maximize species survival of all species including human beings.

Psychologists can have an important role in providing coaching and training for individuals and communities in adapting to climate change. Helping people to identify their risks and vulnerabilities, to prepare for events so if they occur they have a series of prepared responses which should hopefully lead to better decision making in a crisis, give a sense of mastery, and reduce anxiety. This work may be direct, in collaboration with colleagues from other disciplines, or indirectly through preparing manuals that can be worked through in training and coaching.

Climate change, if not stopped, will lead to large migrations of people from areas severely affected to those less so, putting a strain on migrants and impacting on people in the area they migrate to. Myers (2002) predicts that 200 million people could be climate refugees by the middle of the century. Migration as climate refugees is an adaptive response, but may well not be viewed as such by some people in the areas they migrate to. Migrations in recent years have led to hostility from some. Berg and Fiddian-Qasmiyeh (2018) believe there is a need for a collaboration of scholars, practitioners, and activists from the humanities, arts, and social scientists from the global north and south to reduce the negative effects of migration.

Reducing prejudice is a growing area of research where psychologists have played an important role, for example, the anti-racism approach of Duckitt (1992) that synthesizes the findings of social psychology research into prejudice and racism. If the children of today are taught to be low on prejudice and racism then they will be better placed to be tolerant and kind towards climate refugees in the future. In reducing prejudice, the behavior of parents will be crucial, as demonstrated by Degner and Dalege’s (2013) whose meta-analysis of 143 studies covering 43,000 child-parent dyads, unequivocally demonstrated the relationship between parent and child intergroup attitudes through childhood and adolescence.

For migrants their experience has profound psychosocial effects on them, challenging their sense of identity, heritage, ability to maintain traditions together with a decline in community health, and an increase in community aggression due to stress (Hayes et al., 2018). There is a role for community psychologists to work with migrant communities to reduce the impact of psychosocial stressors on their psychological well-being. Preparation work involving psychologists can increase community resources for those facing the worst effects of climate change. Stain et al. (2011) in a study of Australian drought found that when faced with severe drought the psychological effects were mitigated by having a personal sense of hopefulness. Psychologists can help those implementing change policies at these times to build in a sense of hopefulness in their strategies and communications. In addition, communities can be worked with to build their resilience, including both physical and psychological health care systems being made climate change resilient.

The COVID-19 outbreak demonstrated how when a crisis deepens rapidly it is possible for the responses of decision-makers to become more confusing as they manage different agendas including both managing the crisis as well as their own political survival. There will be a role for psychologists in advising on good leadership and governance for the benefit of as many people as is possible together with our fellow species and the planet.

As the COVID-19 outbreak progressed people delivering various services and providing health care had to adapt to the changing circumstances and to embrace changes that they had not thought possible or had resisted. For example, there was a movement for psychologists from working face to face in a room to working remotely. A survey by Pierce et al. (2020) of 2,619 licensed psychologists in the USA found that though pre-pandemic only 7.07% of the work was teletherapy during the pandemic it had gone up to 85.53% and that post-pandemic they expected to remain at 34.96% of their work to remain as teletherapy. This forced rapid change and helped overcome prejudices against teletherapy. Other health care providers made a similar transition were possible. This was an evidence move in addition to being a risk management one. A systematic review of Monaghesh and Hajizadeh (2020) concluded that “The use of telehealth improves the provision of health services. Therefore, telehealth should be an important tool in caring services while keeping patients and health providers safe during COVID-19 outbreak” (Monaghesh & Hajizadeh, 2020, p. 1). In terms of climate change, it helped reduced health providers’ carbon-footprint. Moving to the new normal demonstrated to everyone how if required change to a new normal is possible. However, adaptation was more stressful for some than others. Psychologists have an important role in identifying what helps adaptation and coaching those who find it difficult, and this also applies to making the changes to prevent further Climate and adapting to the now inevitable effects.

Conclusion

The paper identified five roles for psychologists in helping to reduce climate change, roles informed by the COVID-19 experience. Firstly, overcoming barriers to pro-environment behavioral change and advising governments how to communicate messages about climate change and the actions needed. Secondly, demonstrating and promoting the value of people reconnecting with nature and our interdependence. Thirdly, informing on effective leadership for governments to tackle a natural crisis with cultural sensitivity. Fourthly, a psychologist can help people with the effects of climate change, managing anxiety, and a potential increase in violence. Fifthly, a psychologist can help prepare people for bad outcomes, helping adaptation, reducing the negative effects of migration, and reducing prejudice. It is hoped that this paper provides a useful overview and organizational framework for how psychologists can intervene positively in climate change, with five key areas identified. In addition, some observations and insights from the COVID-19 pandemic have been presented for how they can inform the ongoing response to the far greater challenge of climate change.

Stuart Whomsley (PhD) is a clinical psychologist who has worked in the NHS for over 20 years. He works in adult mental health. He has been involved in the writing of professional guidelines on a number of topics for psychologists in the UK. He regularly publishes reviews and theoretical papers.

References