Climate Change and Happiness

image credit | Shane Rounce

In this episode, Panu and Thomas are joined by Finnish therapists Sanni Saarimäki and Taneli Saari to discuss the Finnish “scene” around eco-anxiety and climate emotions. After discussing their own paths towards working with climate emotions, Sanni and Taneli introduce both the Finnish National Project and Tunne ry (an organization focusing on eco-emotions), whose work is apparently the first such project funded at a national level in the world. Together the four discuss the Shouting Man project as a unique and cathartic way to express climate emotions and also explore the role of therapy methods such as Acceptance and Commitment Therapy in a climate and environmental context. 

• Tunne ry

• About the National Project in English and More widely

• The Shouting Man Project

• MIELI - Mental Health Finland

  • Climate Anxiety report by Panu (2019), published by MIELI 

• Nyyti ry - Mental Wellbeing for Students

• Acceptance and Commitment Therapy

  • Season 1, Episode 4: Acceptance, Commitment and Climate with Guest Karine St. Jean

• Primal Scream Therapy - Dr. Arthur Janov

• Edvard Munch’s The Scream

  • In Popular Culture

  • From a Meteorological and Climate Perspective 

  • A Young Climate Activist’s Perspective on The Scream

• “The Waking Up Syndrome” essay (2008) by Sarah Edwards & Linda Buzzell 

Season 1, Episode 12: Eco-Anxiety in Finland and the Shouting Man

Transcript edited for clarity and brevity. 

[music: “CC&H theme music”]

Introduction voice: Welcome to Climate Change and Happiness (CC&H), an international podcast that explores the personal side of climate change. Your feelings, what the crisis means to you, and how to cope and thrive. And now, your hosts, Thomas Doherty and Panu Pihkala.

Thomas Doherty: Hello, I'm Thomas Doherty. 

Panu Pihkala: And I am Panu Pihkala. 

Doherty: Welcome to Climate Change and Happiness. Our podcast, the show for people around the globe who are thinking and feeling deeply about climate change. And the personal side of climate change and other environmental issues. And we have two special guests joining Panu and I today from Finland: And I'll let them introduce themselves.

Sanni Saarimäki: Hey. Hi everybody. My name is Sanni Saarimäki.

Taneli Saari: Hi everyone. I'm Taneli Saari.

Pihkala: Warmly welcome, Taneli and Sanni. Lämpimästi tervetuloa, in Finnish. It's a great joy to have you join us. And Thomas has some roots in Europe. But, of course, his family has been living in North America for a while. So we want to engage in European conversation. And, of course, we three, Sanni, Taneli and I, know each other from many years back. Finland is a rather small country. Five million people. With quite [a] large land area compared to many other European countries. 

The public discussion on eco-emotions and climate anxiety and other issues related to that [in Finland] really gained more prominence in 2017. And we three have been in many ways connected with that public discussion. And we have sometimes been running workshops together, but we don't work together on a day to day basis. So that's some of the background. And there's a lot to talk about [regarding] various things going on in Finland, and your own journeys towards this topic. And that's something that we'd like to begin with. So could you tell us something about how you end[ed] up [in] this area of eco-emotions and the rest of the stuff? And could you, Sanni, start, for example?

Saarimäki: Yeah, sure. Thank you. And thank you for inviting us to speak with you today. So I am a psychologist from my educational background, and also a history teacher. But I haven't done that in many years. My journey towards eco-emotions started from my own experience. My own personal experience. I had been working in a University of Applied Sciences as a study psychologist for some time. And that's where I also met Taneli. And then after those couple of years I was working there, my contract ended. And it was a bit of a surprise for me. It sometimes happens that [you] may have to change jobs and things like that. But for me, it was a very huge experience to be unemployed. And I have been - before I had been thinking that my role in this whole global situation is to be there for the students. And help them to deal with their own emotions. And then find their own place and go and save the world. So that would be my thing. And I didn't have that anymore at that point when I became unemployed. 

And it was a very rainy summer here in Finland. And all I had was time. And I was reading a lot about climate change and other environmental issues when I had too much time. And too much time to also realize how serious the situation was with the climate change. And kind of that eco-anxiety I had hidden inside me somewhere, came through the surface. And at the same time when I was experiencing this eco-anxiety myself, I also thought of a few of my students. They did not come to the study psychologist to talk about climate anxiety, no, but also underneath their situations, there might be climate anxiety or other global threats that they are thinking [about] how that's gonna affect the future. 

I had a lot of time and I was thinking: where do they then go if I, as a psychologist, don't know where to go and who to talk to about these issues? So where would they go? And then I was lucky to start a new job as a study psychologist, once again. Now in Aalto University. And I thought first that the eco-anxiety would go away and I would continue my normal job. I would be working as a psychologist once again with stress and motivation issues and things like that. But the eco-anxiety did not go away. It was there. 

I was also lucky [at] that point that my colleagues, many colleagues, said that they don't know what to do with this, but if I want to do something with this, they would support me. They would try to help me to do something. And they said, the students are—actually it's hidden there, but they do have these same [kinds of] fears and emotions. And there is not much yet that we could do, but let's experience this together and do something. 

And I started to pilot climate anxiety groups. And at the same time, I was keeping contact with Taneli. And he was one of those persons who would actually understand that I'm not—my climate anxiety is not something as a cover. It's a real thing. It's not covering my personal issues or anything like that. But it's there. And we also decided that when these pilot groups were doing quite well in Aalto, that maybe something similar would be needed outside. And we then founded Tunne. Our organization. And now it's been—this is now our fifth year. Yeah. 

And along the way, I also got a lot of help from Panu. Especially at the beginning, when I was thinking [about] where to go and who to contact. And there was this article [in Helsingin Sanomat] about Panu's book. And one of my colleagues said that hey, you should write to Panu and ask. Yeah, it has been—then the years have gone by quite fast.

Pihkala: They have indeed. Thanks so much, Sanni, for sharing about this journey. And it's been a transformative journey I'd say. Listening to you and knowing this. And this tunne word means emotion in [the] Finnish language. In the podcast, we've often spoken about different languages. And so we use that word in Finnish, both for emotion and feeling. We don't do any separation for that in the Finnish language. 

And this transformative journey of Sanni's and Taneli's and others then led to an NGO organization which focuses really on eco-emotions and climate emotions. But Thomas, you have some common things in your work. You know, listening to people. Even though you don't work at a university anymore. Or [as] a study psychologist. But you see people who have issues that they talk about. And issues that are underneath what they talk about. So what resonates with you when listening to Sanni's story this far?

Doherty: Well, yeah. I think Sanni's story is very universal. I can identify with it. People that really had these—again, it starts personally. There's this idea of having an environmental waking up and awareness. And it's troubling. And [it's been called] a “Waking up Syndrome”. And then people want to do something about it. 

And, you know, I know well the challenge of getting this done in the institution. In the US, we would think about [it] in our university counseling centers. And psychologists and counselors are working with students in universities. Yeah, so I've actually done that work. And I could see that. And it really does take some people that just believe in the idea to get it started. And then once you scratch the surface, many people identify with it. It is really under the surface, like you say. No, I think it's great. And it just takes a pathfinder. It takes someone to start. And then people follow along. So yeah. I think many listeners can identify with Sanni.

Pihkala: Yeah, thanks Thomas for reflecting on that. And now, in addition to this NGO where Taneli is also being very active—and I'll very soon ask Taneli about his journey—then there's the National Finnish Social and Health Sector Eco-Anxiety Project. And, again, we all three have been involved in that [on] the advisory board and in various strategic positions. But Taneli has actually been working there. And Sanni is the chairperson of Tunne NGO. Which is one of the three organizations working for the National Project. So just for the listeners,  there's several organizational manifestations of this work that we are talking about. But please Taneli, you've been listening to us patiently, as suits your character strengths. But could you share something about your journey?

Saari: Yeah. Thanks Panu. And hi everyone. It's nice to be on this podcast. I'm a longtime listener and a first time guest. Well, I have a professional background in social services and [a] degree as well. And I have had this kind of thirst to experience a lot of different fields. And my first job was - I started as a kindergarten teacher. And moved from there to Child Protective Services. And I was still doing that job part time when I was studying. And I was in my early 20s, and faced some really serious situations of my clients. Like sexual abuse. And that kind of stuff that really stops you and makes you think about what we're doing to each other. To ourselves. 

And from there, the years went on. And I've worked with people with substance abuse problems. Even prisoners. Then with families, again. With children and their parents and so on. And, like Sanni said, it was in 2014 when I also switched to this University of Applied Sciences. And my job title was a Study Wellbeing Advisor. And both Sanni and me—students came to see us one-on-one. And then we guided these different peer groups. For example, tension and a fear of performing in front of people was one of those topics. 

And we had these really interesting coffee break discussions. I have to thank Sanni for those. It was people who believed what you're saying and thinking. It is really meaningful. Yeah. So we had these coffee break talks. And talked about what kind of services our social and healthcare sector should provide in the future. And we had this discussion back then. Like seven [or] eight years ago. That there's no place to go if you want to talk [about] how much climate change or other aspects of environmental crisis[es] affect you. And, in that sense, we were kind of right. And also, that's what Panu's book in 2017 [Päin helvettiä? Ympäristöahdistus ja toivo] mentioned. And I moved to this NGO side of [the] work later on. And then I had some experience [about] how to run an association and what is needed. And, like Sanni told, then we decided that we should form this Tunne. And we have started doing these workshops and different kinds of trainings since 2018. 

And that year, also, from our perspective, was a turning point. The IPCC report that was about the 1.5 Celsius degree warming made a real big splash. And, for example, the media and public awareness exploded after that. And also the demand for our workshops and what we do. People were really interested after that. And luckily—we did this work in our free time as 100% volunteers. We didn't raise a penny or  didn't get paid at all. And didn't want to. And from [the] start of 2020, we got this grant from this funding center for social and health organizations in Finland. And that funding center has a background in - or all the grants that they give to organizations, they are signed by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. So that's a nationally funded project. 

And there we have three different organizations. Mieli, which is, I think, the oldest mental health organization in the world, as well as in Finland. And they are in charge of the project management. And then there are two like specialist organizations. We from Tunne ry. And then Nyyti ry which focuses on students' wellbeing. And so there are three specialists who work [on] that project. 

And we have three areas which we focus on. One is we provide support for people who experience environmental or eco-emotions. We organize these workshops, and these peer groups from three to five times. Then we have these like open webinars and so on. Panu is a frequent speaker in those. And then, besides providing support and places for people who are, for example, eco-anxious, then we also train professionals. And people who meet people who go through eco-emotions. That means that we have trained teachers, therapists, social and health sector workers, [and] people who work with young people, for example. 

That's one of the key findings that we have seen in the past three years now. That people who meet people, who go through these things, they are really interested now [in] hearing more about what we know. So professionals are waking up to the topic more and more. I think that even in one year, I've seen a slight increase in the amount of interest. Yeah. And the third area is then we tried to raise the public awareness about the mental health aspects of climate change and [the] environmental crisis, and so on.

Pihkala: Thanks Taneli for sharing all that. I think that the third area—raising awareness both among the general public and also amongst various professionals—has led to some of the developments that you mentioned. And this is an example also of the fact that regardless of what your background is, there is something that you can do. This is, of course, different for many people depending on the context. But here we also have a person from the Social Sciences and Social Work. One person from the study psychology field. And one person who did a dissertation of environmental theology way back, for example. So it's an interesting mix of people. And there's something for each one to do. But what about you, Thomas? What came to your mind when listening to the story that Taneli shared with us? 

Doherty: Well, I'm just really impressed. I think listeners can—I'm imagining if there's listeners that are in a policy position, or in some sort of institutional position, it's neat to see the story. And how this actually came about. So it was kind of, like a lot of these things, it's organic. Right? You know, it takes some personal relationships. And personal interests and people being honest about their own eco-anxiety and environmental concerns. It seems to me part of this work is we're working in the system. And then we're working outside the system, right? And we need to have that partnership. So the new ideas might come in from outside the system, but we need the help from the mainstream mental health support organizations and society as well. So I think that models that really well. 

I'm really impressed by that—and I'll have to do more research about Mieli being the oldest mental health program in the world. I'm not surprised about that, you know, from a government standpoint. There's a perception in the US that there's nothing being done in our government around climate change or things. And that's not true. There are people within our government doing a lot of things. But obviously there's a lot of gridlock and a lot of counter forces at play. I don't know, personally, of any national or even state level organization addressing the idea of eco-anxiety itself. But I don't want to assume that there's not a listener out there that's not doing that somewhere. So if you are doing it, let us know, because I'd love to share the information. 

But then I go into the question. And I don't know, Panu, you might have the same question. But like what I think listeners might be curious about [is] what exactly happens in some of the workshops. And like, what does some of the work look like? That's where I would go with the conversation. I'd like to talk about the Shouting Man Program. I know that's one of the programs. But on a more interpersonal level, like what happens in some of these groups or workshops?

Pihkala: Would you like to start Sanni, for example? And if you want to share some of the methodology that you are using, please feel free. So we'll try to stay away from a very nuanced discussion of various psychological and therapeutic stances, but I know that you've been using Acceptance Commitment Therapy and mindfulness, for example. Which are very interesting. And we've briefly touched upon that in some previous episodes. So please feel free to talk also about that if you want.

Saarimäki: Yeah, thank you. Yeah. I do use—when I meet people individually in my daily job, or if I'm doing workshops with Tunne I do use Acceptance and Commitment methods. And also contemplative methods like mindfulness. And lately I've also been very interested in radical self-compassion. And how to kind of take care of yourself. And giving those tools. 

And the reason why these methods came to my work is because they were there already before. And those were pretty much the main psychological methods I had. And I didn't know what to do with climate anxiety or eco-anxiety. But I was wondering if I could use these methods I already know. And I would already have some tools. And that was kind of a big leap for me to kind of accept that yeah, I don't need to first get another degree or something else to start working. 

And, to me, it's about preventive work. So I don't do clinical healthcare. I meet students, or in Tunne I meet those people who are in need of having those discussions. But I don't do health care. Or I don't diagnose anything. So I have kind of free hands there. We talk about values. What is important for the person. How to deal with your own self-critic. And how to take care of yourself. How to act and especially how to act based on your values. And step by step choosing your own path. And also when not to act. Like sometimes it's needed to protect yourself or protect something else that you are “not acting,” right now, but you should be choosing the time [to act] and choosing the battles as well. 

And then we talk about a lot of acceptance. And that “bad” emotions and feelings come to very crucial roles. How to accept these emotions as part of the process, and [as] travel partners and messengers. And they are not the enemy. How to be with them, and how to get also energized from them. And all of those emotions, they are there for a reason. And many times the reason is not what they are shouting to get your attention. But you have to be able to listen to them and see what actually brings them there. And then they will help you. And also anyone to help to go to that path according to your values. If you take them as travel partners. And mindfulness is about pausing and noticing emotions and feelings. And what's happening around you as well. So I use mindfulness exercises.

Doherty: Very well said. That's a great primer on eco-anxiety support. I really appreciate that. Emotions as “travel partners.” That's a nice term. Yeah.

Saari: That's one of the things that sticks to people. And they kind of pay attention to that one. And that topic comes to discussion. If I could continue with, for example, when we have this, like five time peer group that meets. Well, the first time people get to know each other. They kind of interview each other. What's their trip with eco emotions. When have they kind of woken up to what's going on. And the seriousness and how it has changed during the years and so on. 

The second time is kind of like information-based. Then we usually talk [about] how these environmental changes are going to affect or are already affecting people mentally, physically. Or what it does to us as people who live in groups. And then after we kind of then digest the information as well together. Kind of like these are like, hard and difficult things. Sad things. Huge things that are happening to us. 

And then the third time, we start to focus on coping. What kind[s] of ways there are to adjust your own emotions. And make yourself feel more relaxed or less anxious and so on. And we kind of get to try together to do different exercises. And kind of give home exercises for people to do as well and so on. 

And then the fourth meeting. That focuses on the support of communities. What benefits there are when people come together. And how they can also share thoughts and emotions. But they can also achieve this by doing some sort of action. 

And then the fifth time it also kind of rounds up the meeting. And we say goodbye to each other, but before that we talk about the future. And usually we do this for some kind of exercise that makes people kind of start to envision this utopia or pro topias. Futures that are kind of like wanted in a way.

Doherty: Yeah, I'm taking some notes here. This really dovetails a lot with how I work with people. So I really appreciate that.

Saari: And then here we are, of course, like, I have to give credit to - Panu's work [on group methods to encounter eco-emotions; there was a Finnish pilot project on that led by Panu] has been like [a] tremendous support here. And then we are aware of these models. For example, Carbon Conversations [Ro Randall and others, started in Britain]. And other things that have been going on outside Finland before we started our work. There have been some heroes for us as well. Or some models to do.

Pihkala: Yeah, this Mieli. Mental Health Finland. The previous title was Mental Health Finland. It's been the sort of main mental health organization in Finland. And they realized the possibility of climate anxiety around 2018, I would say, on a more official level. And there one of their leaders, especially, was sensitive to the topic. And they published a report on climate anxiety, which I wrote for them in 2019. And it's been very influential, I think, that such a respectable organization in a society says that, you know, this is something that we should think about and feel about. 

And, of course, it's a bit easier in Finland. You know, a country of five million. It's like a small state in the US. And the bigger the country or nation is it gets more tricky. But still, there's been some benefits. And one of the efforts has been to make use of the ecotherapy and ecopsychology resources, partly developed by Thomas and colleagues, also for the Finnish scene. 

Now COVID-19 has greatly affected the national project, of course. And I know that Taneli, you have had to move many activities online, for example, because of the impossibility of live meetings. There's been cooperation also with some marketing offices for the public awareness, part of things. So sort of normal parts of organizational work. And from that came one special thing that Thomas was also interested about is the Shouting Man Campaign. Would you like to share something about that? That gained some international attention to Britt Wray's newsletter, also.

Saari: Yeah. I think the Shouting Man. He was like a good character at that time and was interested. I think he was taking part in some TV contest, right? So he had gained some leverage and had some followers on social media and so on. But he as a person was also interested, of course, in what's going on in this field. And so he thought our work is important and he took part in that campaign. And yeah. It was a good “trick” in a way. 

We also, at the same time, had prepared this like declaration of a climate health emergency in Finland. It was signed by a lot of mental health associations. Also, some [trade] unions, if I remember correctly. So we kind of published that one. There was this event where the Shouting Man told people how to express their eco-emotions, by shouting, of course. Yeah. And the national TV and so on picked [it] up. That was [a] good thing. I don't think it's a special Finnish characteristic or anything to shout out emotions. I see some level of humor there because I think generally we’re considered [to be] like a little bit emotionally restricted people. So like, shouting goes to the other end, right away. And it's like a funny way to express what you say, if you otherwise are a little bit hesitant.

Doherty: Yeah, I'd encourage listeners to—we'll have links to [the Shouting Man]. And we'll wrap up here in a moment. And we can go a little over our time because we have extra guests and things. But we'll have links to all these programs in our show notes. The formal programs in Finland so people can learn about these. And also the Shouting Man. It's nice to see this person. And we all need a little bit of a shouting man in our lives. You know, this catharsis. 

I was thinking of primal scream therapy. The old therapy that was developed in the 70s in the—I don't know where. Maybe in the US with Arthur Janov. That was kind of known. A lot of musicians and artists have done primal scream. And that's not surprising, you know. Expressive people will gravitate to that. But it's the idea of catharsis. It’s letting it all out. The band Tears for Fears, have an old song called Shout [“Shout, shout, let it all out.”] They were actually influenced by primal scream therapy. It's a little trivia point. 

As I think about this, now, I think about where I'm going to use this in the future. And when I talk about this in our groups, there is always someone that's going to be the “shouting man” in any group. And sometimes we're the shouting man. Or sometimes other people are. But we have to honor the shouting man or the shouting woman, I guess is one way to take this going forward. It is kind of a spectacular thing that draws attention. And, you know, kind of a media thing. But it is also pretty primal. And so I think—I mean I might be wrong, but I think a lot of listeners have felt like that over time. They just want to scream. So I think we should make a place for that. Yeah. This is great. Yeah.

Pihkala: Yeah, we can link the famous Norwegian painting by Edvard Munch, The Scream, also with episode notes. And that's constantly popular as an internet meme. Also, because you can link with that expression. I think that's related to what Thomas is saying. It's such a primitive and stable part of us that sometimes we would really need to do that. 

But that also brings us nicely to an important topic that we might close this slightly extended episode with which is coping with matters. And I know from our earlier history, that Taneli you, for example, do music, personally, also. Not just listening, but also doing it. I'm also doing it not as prominently externally, but still. But perhaps giving the floor first to Sanni. Would you like to say something about the ways that you use for coping with both, you know, the stress that your work also sometimes brings. Even though it's also rewarding, I know. But, you know, with eco-emotions in general. So would you like to speak a bit about that?

Saarimäki: Yeah. To me personally. And also many of my students and other people I meet in these issues, it's about connecting. And feeling the real connection with ourselves, of course, but to other people as well. And nature. Finding ways to also see your own important part there. Even though sometimes it might be very small. But it's still vitally important. And my own eco- and climate anxiety has gotten better in these past five years. When I've been actually feeling that I do something. And I do something meaningful. And I'm part of something meaningful. And I do something according to my values. And I don't need to be perfect in it. But it's enough what I do now. And yeah. It gives me a lot of joy. So connection. And also that self compassion there.

Saari: I can also. I feel really good when I see new people come and join Tunne ry's activity, for example. There are these really bright, young up and coming psychologists, for example, who will do these things a lot better than me and Sanni have already. And it's really nice to see that there's a platform that you have been a part of creating. And then there's new people [who] are willing to join that. And they have ideas. And that feels really good. And one thing that came to my mind about the shouting part still. And Panu also referred to music. I have a background in music. I used to listen to a lot of punk and rap music when I grew up. And I played, for example, in hardcore punk bands, which are all about screaming. So I know how much it helps when you think about everything that's wrong. Yeah. So it's very helpful.

Pihkala: Thanks for sharing. That's very profound. And I hear that you have both found meaning in  these activities. Perhaps even purpose if we use that word. But that's up for the listeners. And sort of holistic or embodied methods. This is, of course, something that Thomas has been writing and talking about also for many years.

Doherty: Yeah, so this is great. This has been a great conversation. So we're talking about community and, you know, all the work that Sanni and Taneli [are] doing is really about bringing people together so they're not isolated. The students are not isolated. And these groups are not isolated. And so there's a community aspect. And then, you know, our emotions. And bringing out emotions into ourselves. And being close with our emotions. and then taking our actions, you know, as we can. And then channeling our nervous system and giving ourselves an outlet. Either through our own shouting or listening to music or viewing art that illustrates that catharsis. 

So this is a really nice, beautiful picture that we painted today. Well, thanks again. I will again share our information. We'll share all the information about this program. And I hope this can inspire more work in Finland and also around the world. And I know there are other people doing these kinds of things in the world. So do reach out. You can find us at climatechangeandhappiness.com. And if we hear about more programs around the world, we'll be happy to share that information. But I'm really pleased with our talk today. Thank you so much. Panu, do you have any last thoughts or anyone else have any last thoughts?

Pihkala: Kiitos paljon [thank you very much], Taneli ja Sanni. 

Saarimäki: Thank you.

Saari: Thank you, Panu.

Doherty: Take care, everyone. Be well and thank you for listening.

image credit | Oliver Hotakainen

Reflecting on the recent self-immolation of climate activist Wynn Bruce as a protest and call to action in the face of climate change, Thomas and Panu discuss the importance of bearing witness to emotionally difficult events. In the teaching of systems thinker, Joanna Macy, they acknowledge both the difficulty and value of staying open to the world even when it is painful and seemingly impossible. Inspired by the writings of Daniel Sherrell in his book Warmth, they reflect on the importance of not reducing all of our climate feelings “into their utility for the movement,” but rather allowing some to exist solely unto themselves. 

• Coming Back to Life: Practices to Reconnect Our Lives, Our World, Joanna Macy & Molly Young Brown / The Work That Reconnects

• Warmth, Daniel Sherrell

• Brueghel Children’s Games

• Zen Peacemakers

• Terror Management Theory and Climate Change 

• Viktor Frankl timeline

• Wiley 2019 The Site of an Environmentalist’s Deadly Act of Protest

• Schrimer 2021 Post-dramatic activism:  “Whether it is the fleeting image of a better world or the stark illustration of a world in dire need of change, activist performance is about allowing, or forcing, its audience to bear witness to one particular vision of the world.”

• Talkoot is a Finnish expression for a gathering of friends and neighbors organized to accomplish a task. Among many visions of communal work worldwide.

• Panu’s suggestions of statements for therapists to use: 

  • “You know, this feels awful, but I want to stay with this with you.” 

  • “I don't exactly know how to react to this, except I'm convinced that life has meaning and should not be thrown away, even for as important a purpose as this.”

Season 1, Episode 11: Bearing Witness to the Acts of Wynn Bruce and David Buckel

Transcript edited for clarity and brevity. 

[music: “CC&H theme music”]

Introduction voice: Welcome to Climate Change and Happiness (CC&H), an international podcast that explores the personal side of climate change. Your feelings, what the crisis means to you, and how to cope and thrive. And now, your hosts, Thomas Doherty and Panu Pihkala.

Thomas Doherty: Well, hello. I am Thomas Doherty. 

Panu Pihkala: And I am Panu Pihkala. 

Doherty: And welcome to Climate Change and Happiness. Our podcast. A show for people around the world [who are] thinking and feeling deeply about climate change—personal reactions and how climate change affects them in their daily life with their family and with their friends. 

And Panu, you know, we've been talking about this general theme of being open to the world. You know, “open heart, open mind.” And taking in the world. Not shutting down. Closing down. And so we were going to talk about this in general. And recently there's been a lot of troubling—even more than typical—troubling news. You know, here when we're recording, about politics and war. 

And, you know, recently a person ended their life by burning themselves to death as a protest regarding climate change. Wynn Bruce. And it's been in the news slightly. And it brought up a similar event that happened a few years ago with David Buckel in New York City. And so we were really wrestling about whether we should talk about this. This climate, what I would, call self-sacrifice. The self-immolation. And we decided to move forward into talking about [it] because I think we both think it's important. So, Panu, what's the first thing that comes into your mind when we're thinking about this? Or where do you begin with this kind of thing?

Pihkala: Yeah. You mentioned, Thomas, [that] it's very disturbing and difficult. And, in my mind, it links with many things. One thing is my early history. In my previous work life, I sometimes met people who had very dark thoughts and sometimes also suicidal ideation. But then, again, we have to remember that there are many issues at play here. There's very determined acts of self-sacrifice. Or thinking about things like self-immolation as a strategy for making some kind of impact in climate matters. And then there is the topic of having dark moods or feelings of meaninglessness and that kind of territory. 

And in general, as you said, this links strongly also in my mind with the difficulty and importance of staying open to the world. That's something that I've been engaging with for a long time. And Joanna Macy's work has been important for me in that regard. And also local[ly] several others. And then, finally, the very also complex topic of relations between death awareness and environmental awareness. And there's a different viewpoint into that, also including the so-called Terror Management Theory. So there's a lot. And we'll be unpacking at least some of these in this discussion, but I wanted to bring several elements onto the table now.

Doherty: Yeah. And I think we're going to kind of move between some philosophy and psychology and just some human experience here. As I was telling Panu earlier, my thoughts about the death of Wynn Bruce or David Buckel or others (perhaps we don't know about those who have done similar actions). If Panu was walking with his family. Or if I was walking with my daughter in our town and we saw someone who had done this act. Who had burned themselves to death. And then we didn't talk about it. We pretended that it didn't happen. Or we didn't see it. That would be really strange. And if we live in a world where we don't stop and feel these things. Because I don't think that's the world that we want. And so I think we do need to be open to this. 

We were talking about social justice. And I think some of the philosophizing about this is, you know, when white people do this kind of; white privileged people do this kind of stuff, you know, we don't know how to understand it. But obviously people die every day. And people have been burned in climate related disasters and in wars all the time. And so when brown lives, black and brown lives are lost, sometimes this doesn't get the same kind of press. So we want to keep all this kind of stuff. 

And I think practically therapists and mental health people are unsure how to bring this up. Because well, first of all, they're not trained to think about this. And then also, there's a concern that there might be some sort of contagion effect. Where more people will do this. And we don't want to encourage this kind of behavior. And that's a realistic concern, as well. And so we need to name that. But I don't know that there's really evidence of so-called copycat activities with this kind of thing for various reasons. It's a really extreme act to do. It would take a lot for anyone to do this. 

There's another larger conversation about politics and political action and self sacrifice in terms of hunger strikes and various things. You know, I know a little bit about the Irish hunger strikers in Northern Ireland and things like that. So there's a lot of — [I] suggest for the listeners, like, you know, we're making this up as we go as well. We are just thinking through this ourselves. But I think it's important to be open. And to be candid with our feelings. I think, Panu, what you were talking about with me about work from Joanna Macy and Molly Young Brown. Coming Back to Life. Their book. But, you know, the costs of not being open to the world. And what causes not being open to the world. Do you think that would be helpful to talk about a little bit right now? Just to give us some context.

Pihkala: Yeah, I think so. And for those of you who haven't heard of Joanna Macy, she's a systems thinker and a social environmental activist who has been pioneering many methods for encountering difficult emotions related to the state of the world. So already in the 1980s, related to the threat of nuclear war and fallout. And later, even more explicitly with the ecological crises. She is still alive while we are recording this. She’s of great age and considered a sage in this territory by  many. 

And together with colleagues such as Molly Young Brown, she has been developing what they call The Work That Reconnects. A method of trying to stay open to the state of the world and to increase people's resources. So: Coming from gratitude; Honoring our pain for the world; Seeing with new eyes; and Going forth. These are the names of the rough steps. And now the second step, Honoring our pain for the world, is very much related to what we are talking about today. 

And the sort of widest manual to their work is this book Coming Back to Life as a second edition from roughly 2014. And it has an excellent chapter number two, which discusses the various reasons why it's very understandable that people want to block out at least some aspects of reality. Because it can be so painful. It can cause some social disturbance. And people are thinking about—do I really want to make changes in my social settings, for example? How will others think of me if I start to engage with these issues more? So, many different kinds of costs. 

And then, also [in the book], a great discussion about the various impacts. Impeded cognitive functioning is one. So if we are not as well in touch with our emotions, that also has an effect on our cognition. But then also, the impact on imagination, for example. Our connection with the world. They go on to discuss some pretty deep stuff related to our connections with the world. And that's, of course, also strongly related to the challenges of inviting people to stay open to the ecological crisis and environmental activism. So if people know that that's going to bring some pain. Because you see others suffering and know much about the troubles in the world, so is there also something to gain? 

And I think this idea of when you are able to stay open to the world, it will be more painful than numbing, but it will also be a much richer life, when you can actually feel the joy and feel the sadness and other other emotions. And of course, it's easier to contribute for the common good, if you are able to stay open to the reality. But it's not easy. And they are very realistic about that. But I know, Thomas, that you have been engaging with their work and the work of other ecopsychologists in this regard for a long time. So well, what's your thoughts about that?

Doherty: Well, yeah. I think this is just, Panu, is just a great example. People have been working on this for years. And like I'm always coming back to this idea. We're not alone. And there's people doing this. And I think the loneliness is one of the worst problems here. Trying to cope with this alone. Whereas coping with the community is different. And I think it's really great. 

Even though I know this work, it's helpful for me to be reminded, again, that there are costs of not opening to the world. Like we don't think as well. We're not creative. We're kind of shut down. Our imagination is limited. Even in our body, you know, it's kind of like a learned helplessness kind of thing. And, you know, we're kind of numb. And then, you know, when someone's numb, you can poke at them and hit them. And they don't feel it because they're numb. And so that numbing is a self protective, you know, strategy. But it isn't helpful for social change, or working in a system. So we're more vibrant. We're more passionate. You know, we have more fire if we're more open. And so I think, again, it's sort of like, how open do we get? 

Then that's the other side of it. It’s like, if we're too open, then we're flooded and overwhelmed and angry and dangerous. And things like that. So it's all of us finding our kind of right level of openness at any given time. And, you know, getting over like you say, the major blocks. Like is it guilt? Is it grief? You know, is it inadequacy? Some of these blocks, like, why we can't. I don't want to talk about this person that ended their life regarding climate change, because I'm not doing enough myself. And I don't have anything to say. Or their action is a reproach to me, you know. But I think that's something—that's a block to move forward to. I don't think that's what they're doing these acts for. I don't really know what's in people's minds, but I think they want people to come together. And so I think having a compassionate place is a good start.

Pihkala: Yeah, definitely. And as much as I know about Wynn Bruce and David Buckel, they wanted to encourage people to take mass level civil action for climate justice. And for mitigation of climate change. So they were not wanting people to get desperate and do more self immolation. But they really wanted to wake people up even more to the great urgency of the crisis. And then there's lots of [published] discussion, especially now, of course, of the Buckel case, because it's been a couple of years [since it], and people have had more time to write in-depth writings about it. But increasingly, I think, also related to this very recent case. And we will put some links to the podcast website, for those of you who want to take a deeper look. And it's quite a complicated issue. And then in these cases, I'm speaking, especially with the Buckel case, they resist any binary categorization. So I think it's quite complex indeed. 

And when I was speaking about the Joanna Macy stuff earlier, I think that's closely related to the difficulty that many people are having with connecting to these issues. Because the topic[s] of the ecological crisis and climate crisis is already threatening enough. And then when it becomes linked with death and self immolation, it can simply become too much for many people. Including, I presume, many therapists. But as you say Thomas, it would be totally weird if we wouldn't discuss this. And that would turn into [a] quite absurd situation. This, of course, is also the opening of a great book by Daniel Sherrell called Warmth. 

Doherty: Yeah. 

Pihkala: That's a book that we both have been engaging with. And it starts exactly with this absurdity of knowing about the self immolation of David Buckel. And then the author sees personally that life is going on as normal in the park. Even, you know, right after these events. 

Doherty: Yeah. Yeah, so, you know, for therapists and for people. You know, there's these statements. You know, Panu would come up with some actual statements for therapists to use: “You know, this feels awful, but I want to stay with this with you.” [Or:] “I don't exactly know how to react to this, except I'm convinced that life has meaning and should not be thrown away, even for as important a purpose as this.” And so that, you know, we get to say what our belief is about life and what we think. But we don't have to have all the answers. 

It is, yeah, the Sherrell book, Warmth, is a  great book. It's a great example of a very deeply written, you know, self examination of climate grief and climate despair. I like some of the things that Sherrell talks about. He talks about this idea of a Bruegel painting. Like one of these old paintings that's a broad tapestry of life in a town. And you see all the different people. And you have to spend a lot of time looking at the painting to see all the different figures and what they're doing. And there's a lot in the painting that you don't see unless you look very closely at all the sections of it. 

And so, you know, Bruegel has a painting called Children's Games. Which is just a broad, you know, community square with all the different activities. But that's what our life is like. We have a park. Where some people are running. And some people are meditating. And another person is burning themselves to death all at the same time. And that's kind of a powerful metaphor, you know, for the world. But, you know, we'd say to our listeners too, you know, this feels awful, but we want to stay with you. With this. 

Tip from me. When you're reading books like Warmth. Or David Wallace Wells, The Uninhabitable Earth. You know, with Warmth it's best to start at the end. And start in the last several pages because that's where Sherrell brings his argument together. Similar to David Wallace Wells. If you start at the beginning of these books, I think sometimes people don't have the wherewithal to get through it. Because it's such a hard slog. You know, going through the writer's pain. And the writers, you know, either the statistics about the dangers and all the, you know, the cataclysms. Or also the personal pain. But when you get to the end, you know, starting at the end sometimes is a little helpful, because that's where the author is kind of coming together with their thinking. 

And I really liked what Sherrell said about how your feelings are not reducible to their utility in the movement. He's a climate movement person. And so your feelings are not reducible to the movement. You know, fear and sadness are tools, but they're also things unto themselves. So that's another point to say that we don't have to translate every single emotion into action. That leads to this guilt and inadequacy. I'm not doing enough. But none of us is doing enough. I mean, we can only do what we can do. And what we do is enough. Like what we're doing is enough we can get. We can try to get better at what we're doing. But as you're dealing with this I think we have to be careful of translating all of our emotions into action. And so some of this is just being with the emotions.

Pihkala: Yeah, I think that's a very important point and links with the things we discussed in our ‘feelings of inadequacy’ episode also. Some months back. And Macy and Young Brown use two words, “stamina” and “buoyancy,” to describe some of the things that are needed. And those came to my mind, also, when hearing you speak about Sherrell's book. And I've had it for at least half a year on my shelf. I've done some reading of it. But now, because of the self immolation thing, I picked it up again and gave it more careful reading. And also for me, even though I've been working with related issues for a long time, partly perhaps because of that, but also, despite it, it's not easy stuff. You know, these books that really go into the heart of the matter. 

So I think we need to be honest about that. It's difficult. And one needs to find also things to balance these kinds of engagements which are, then again, very much needed. And Sherrell has a long history with climate activism, also, in the sort of efforts to make structural change. So not just the individual consumer behavior. But trying to work for structural change. So that's a special feature of the book, also. So deep self-reflection about the dark emotions, but also about action. 

Doherty: Yeah. Yeah. I love that. Stamina and buoyancy. That's just something to really sit with. Now for some people that might be a stretch. What I call a stretch feeling, you know, from where you are feeling in this moment. To have a sense of stamina. A sense of stamina means strength and ability, capacity, and buoyancy. You know, light lightness. Able to kind of rise above. That's something I'm going to take away from our episode today, firstly, is, you know, that these. They're stretch feelings, though, so I might not feel them right now. But if I put my mind onto them. And I put them on my feelings list. My feelings vocabulary list. I might notice moments when I feel these things. Because we do feel all these things at different times. 

And so, again, there's the feeling where we are. You know, whatever that happens to be. And trying to be really clear. Even again about this issue with these people ending their lives. And the self-sacrifice for this political act. Or suicide. Or however you want to call it. I'm thinking of it as a political act. Like a hunger strike or something like that. You know, I might feel confused. I might feel curious. Surprised. Again, there's an off putting sense of all this sort of stuff. It's fearful. It's disgusting. It's unspeakable. But, you know, we can also be present with it. We can be aware. We can be self-loving. And, you know, being vulnerable to sit with these feelings. And then from the vulnerability of the presence. You know, the stamina and the buoyancy isn't as far away. And so, we all have our versions of this kind of stuff in our lives.

Pihkala: Yeah. Very much resonating with that. And in some of my work, four years ago, five years ago, the concept of hope was very central. But even then, my main angle into hope was meaning or meaningfulness. And I think that the issue of stamina is very closely related to that. And, of course, you know, if we talk about those dark moods, where you don't go for self-immolation as a political act, but getting into danger of self-harming behaviors. Then having some kind of meaning or experiencing enough meaning in your life can be even life-saving. 

But, of course, that's not just continuing a feeling of always feeling meaningfulness; sometimes it really requires stamina. And sort of walking on. And meaning will present itself. But lots of social support is also needed. So, again, this is not the sort of heroic individual task. Even though the individuals can do many things. But a communal task of also providing support for each other. Clinging onto meaning. Some of the best existential literature in the 20th century, for example, has been written in very dark circumstances. And still the folks like Viktor Frankl explicitly talk about meaning.

Doherty: Yeah. Yeah, we didn't chat about this, Panu. But I was reading about the Zen Peacekeeper movements. And they have their three tenants of [1] not knowing, letting go of fixed ideas about yourself and the world and the universe and [2] bearing witness to the joy and suffering of the world. And then, you know, [3] taking action that arises from this not knowing and this bearing witness. So again, there are people that have been doing this kind of work in various ways. And peacekeepers will go to different war zones. Or go to the sites from the Holocaust and sit and be present to bear witness. So there's a bearing witness. When in doubt, bear witness I would say. Bear witness to the thing and the actions will start to arise from the bearing witness. And from the not knowing. 

It's interesting. This Bruegel painting that Sherrell talks about. And I was Googling a bunch of these Pieter Bruegel The Elder artworks from the 1500s. And might encourage listeners to Google some images because they're these elaborate paintings. But it gives us his image of life at all its varied complexities. That it's happening. The teeming multitude of life and activities. 

I think that can also bring us to the present moment. And to the news that's in our town. And that's in our community right around us. Because like, as I say, when we get too caught up in the electronic media news, we actually don't know what's going on right around us. And that leads to that isolation. And that anomie. And sense of existential despair. But, you know, the world is happening all around us. 

I know we've got to close out this particular talk. The world's happening all around. The listeners, you know, who are in their lives. I'm just starting my day here. Panu, you're finishing your day in Finland. You had shared with me an interesting word earlier, Panu. Another great Finnish word. Communal work. And it was coming up around your life. Do you want to share a little bit about that for the listeners?

Pihkala: Yeah, it's part of this great fabric of life seen in the Bruegel paintings, for example. And this word in Finnish, talkoot, means that you get together with others—You don't get paid for the work, but you do something for the common good. One might say, it might be related in the earlier times, to the needs of one farm. For example, the need to build a roof together. The single family just couldn't do it. So the system was that you offered people some food and drink and then people came together and did the work. And, of course, that then led to reciprocity. People helping each other out. And well, the 21th century has sometimes been hard on this culture of talkoot. But luckily it still exists.

And in the place where I'm living, there’s today these “yard talkoot”, “pihatalkoot” now. Which is a tradition that inhabitants come together outside. And, you know, raking the fallen leaves. We don't rake our forests, contrary to some misguided political opinions. But we do rake our yards. And then there's some grilling of sausages. They even have vegan sausages so our kids can eat it also. And doing sort of maintenance things that need to be done. So there's this very nice social element also of socializing and having fun together. So that's a good antidote to spendings hours reading about these subjects.

Doherty: Yeah. And it's all the one. Right, Panu? I mean your job is to sit with this. And work on this. And also you have a family. And they're somewhere nearby. Where you are people are raking and children are running around and food is being prepared for the community. When we have that energy, you know, in the US with community cleanups and various things. And, again, that's a piece of this that we need to add to our mix as we sit with all of this heavy stuff. 

So, you know, reconnecting with life in various forms. So yes, you know, I definitely have a lot of respect for Wynn Bruce and David Buckel and their family and their friends. And we're doing this episode out of respect for them. And not knowing the whole story. And just bearing witness, you know, to this. Bearing witness to these events. 

You know, we're inadequate, but we're not guilty of a conspiracy of silence. And I feel really good about that. We're not being silent and we're not splitting. Yes, Panu well enjoy the evening there in Finland. And I hope that you can get your back into the work outside. And help out with people. With all the raking and the yard work. Or enjoy some time with your children and your family and your community this evening.

Pihkala: Thank you, Thomas. I hope you have a nice work day ahead of you. And your daughter is also coming home at some point in the afternoon. And also for all you listeners to take care. In this time we spend the great fabric of life shows many colors. 

Doherty: Yes, it's strained and worn, but it's also beautiful. So we'll end today. Climate Change and Happiness. You can find us at climatechangeandhappiness.com. We're producing episodes every two weeks. And we really enjoy your presence. And we wish you all well. Take care.

image credit | Intricate Explorer

Dark times for dark emotions. In this episode recorded near the end of 2021, Thomas and Panu open the door to the feeling of cynicism and its “friends” apathy, shame, melancholia, “learned helplessness” disillusionment, and misanthropy [dislike of humankind]. They discuss how to be compassionate to ourselves and accept these feelings as inevitable reactions during our current political and environmental crises. They explore cynicism as a way of being realistic about the world, as a protective feeling or style, and from a philosophical perspective as living well in difficult situations, eschewing the trappings of the world and seeking one’s own path of virtue. Thomas discusses how his misanthropy tends to be directed at unjust human systems rather than human nature. Panu highlights a number of thinkers and artists that offer ways to understand and work through our doubt and despair. Is it possible to discover a “post-cynical” position in our deep adaptation to climate change? What is the role of self-sacrifice as an option? Listen in and see what you feel and think. 

Note: This episode is a lead-in to a frank discussion of the actions of Wynn Bruce and David Buckel coming in Episode 11. 

• Mieli maassa? : Ympäristötunteet, Panu Pihkala (in English, see the article on Taxonomy of Climate Emotions)

• Mika Waltari: The Egyptian 

• Joanna Macy : Working Through Environmental Despair

• Renee Lertzman: Environmental Melancholia: Psychoanalytic dimensions of engagement

• Kari Norgaard (on socialized denial of climate issues): Living in Denial 

• Learned Helpless Research

• Ressentiment

• Nadine Andrews and Paul Hoggett: Facing up to Ecological Crisis: A Psychosocial Perspective from Climate Psychology

• Pentti Linkola: Can Life Prevail?

• Deep Adaptation / Dark Mountain

• CCH Episodes with Jade Sasser and Britt Wray

• Krzysztof Kieślowski: Three Colors: White

• Tim Lomas: The Positive Power of Negative Emotions 

• Theodore Roethke Poem: In a Dark Time

Season 1, Episode 10: In Praise of Cynicism

Transcript edited for clarity and brevity. 

[music: “CC&H theme music”]

Introduction voice: Welcome to Climate Change and Happiness (CC&H), an international podcast that explores the personal side of climate change. Your feelings, what the crisis means to you, and how to cope and thrive. And now, your hosts, Thomas Doherty and Panu Pihkala.

Thomas Doherty: Hello, I'm Thomas Doherty. 

Panu Pihkala: And I am Panu Pihkala. 

Doherty: And welcome to Climate Change and Happiness. The show for people around the globe who are thinking and feeling deeply about climate change, and the personal side of climate change: Emotional responses and feelings and how this lands in our hearts and in our bodies as well as in our minds. And for Panu and I, we're recording this [episode] toward the solstice time of the year [2021] in the northern hemisphere. Although you might be listening to this later. 

Anyway, Panu, …  this is an episode I'm looking forward to. This cynicism episode. “In praise of cynicism.” I tend to joke that I am a cynical person. And I know many of our listeners might consider themselves to be cynical in various ways too. And so I wanted to surface this in our discussion about climate feelings and climate emotions. So I want to open the door and have cynicism and all its cousins and friends — apathy and misanthropy — We're going to have a party with these feelings. And I'm gonna bring them in and talk about them a little bit. In a compassionate and in a healthy way, I think. So, I know you and I've chatted a little bit, but where does this go for you Panu?

Pihkala: Yeah. That's very suitable for the season. You know, [a] dark feelings special episode. It's been very dark physically in Helsinki, during the last week. So [I’m] really looking forward for the solstice. And this ties in with my work, also. In the Finnish book about eco emotions that I published in 2019, I have a section about these sorts of dark and malevolent feelings. And that's something that I very rarely talk about because it's such a topic that usually nobody wants to really talk about it. So this gives an opportunity for that.

Doherty: Yeah.  And listeners can help with different words in languages outside of English for cynicism and misanthropy. Because I know, there are concepts in many cultures. All of my searching seemed to lead me back to the Greeks, of course. The Greeks and the Romans. You know, so we've got cynicism as a general belief that people are selfish and dishonest. You know, is a common way of thinking about it. And, you know, I think sometimes that's being realistic about the world. And being open to this as [an] expectable response given how things are going in the world. 

But of course, there's that deeper philosophical piece about living well in difficult situations. And eschewing the trappings of the world. And going toward virtue. So within cynicism, there's this more virtuous core. So we might talk about that. But yeah, what comes up for you personally? What concepts or personal feelings come up around, cynicism, and some of these feelings?

Pihkala:  Yeah. that's kyynisyys in [the] Finnish language. So that also comes from the Greek. And it reminds me of the philosophical stuff, also. And some of the great novels, both in world literature and in Finnish literature. We have a very prominent 20th century writer called Mika Waltari. Many of his historical novels have actually been translated into many languages, including English. The Egyptian [was] made into a Hollywood movie even way back in the 50s, or 60s. And those are interesting because he read a lot of philosophy. And it's often characters who really go out and see the world and encounter all kinds of suffering and joy and all the shades of life. And there's deep engagement with cynicism in those books. And I read a lot of them during my high school years. So that's been [a] foundational influence for me. 

But in the ecological crisis and climate crisis, of course, this brings up the whole question about despair, for example. And so-called apathy. Is it really apathy? Or is it masking deep suffering that people are experiencing? Joanna Macy the ecopsychologist has written about this. And Renée Lertzman, also, with her concept of “environmental melancholia”. I think it's a really important topic. And also a complex one. So what one sees on people's faces and bodies may not be the whole set of emotions that they have.

Doherty: Yeah, so let's just flag some of these things for now. Or for later. You know, this idea of - Kari Norgaard is another person that's written around socialized denial. Renée Lertzman and Joanna Macy. So yeah, there's the idea that there's more under the surface. There's a potential “learned helplessness” phenomenon – where people become apathetic because they have no options. And it's a poignant story, the learned helplessness research, where they'd have, you know, dogs, you know, in some sort of laboratory where they would get shocks. And they wouldn't be able to resist and leave from getting the shocks. And so they would eventually just lay down and endure the shocks, you know. And that's where that, you know, that's a kind of barbaric kind of research that I hope isn't happening right now. But I think we feel that way. I think sometimes. And I know some of our listeners do. I know I have felt that way sometimes. You just kind of lay down and endure. 

So anyway, the point being is there's a lot under this. So it isn't necessarily what we think. I have to say I embrace, I mean, I feel like I was born cynical. Or I grew up cynical. I think about where I was from, Buffalo, New York. Which is kind of what we call in the US, a “rust belt” kind of town. You know, an old city that was really great in the past. And  when I grew up in the 70s and 80s, it was pretty dark times for that city. There was not much economic growth. They had not yet learned to celebrate their architecture and all their history. So it was just a lot of rusting kind of buildings and hulks of old steel plants and things like that. My family background is working class. And so I think, you know, one of the catchphrases was “City of No Illusions” is what they call Buffalo. So I had that coming in. 

And then of course, I had my own family dynamics. You know, my parents had a tough marriage. And [it] wasn't very happy. And we had alcoholism and stuff like that. So I was kind of primed for a cynical outlook. So in many ways, as an adult, I've kind of learned to be “post-cynical” a bit. You know, like, I'm still alive. So what's left. I might as well try some other things. And then growing up in the 80s, you know, right in the Reagan Era. And the Sex Pistols were teaching me, that there was “no future,” you know. So I had a very much of that kind of 1984 thing growing up. So anyway, every generation has their kind of their stamp. And then our personal family, you know. And even our psychology and our neuropsychology. We've talked a little bit about seasonal depression, and you know, having low mood during the season. So -

Pihkala: Yeah, that's interesting to hear, Thomas. Thanks for sharing. I didn't know the Buffalo part. And I can imagine the sort of disillusionment. That's one emotion word that I've been exploring in relation to the ecological crisis also. And we've often been including some special words of the day. And perhaps the old word of “ressentiment.” Resentment almost, but written slightly different[ly]. That could be one because in many uses that refers to periods where people think that there is not going to be progress. And the past appears as more golden than the future. And it's difficult during those times. 

The concept of ressentiment is linked with 1920s Germany, for example. And then it can of course, give rise to many sorts of social troubles that happened during that time. Some of the psychosocial climate scholars. I don't want to get too academic here. But Nadine Andrews and Paul Hoggett have been writing about this threat in relation to the climate crisis. Because if it starts to happen that there's more and more economic troubles also, because of the pressures given by the limits imposed on us by the more than human world, it may be that these feelings of disillusionment start to spread in many places. And I think there are already signs of that in many areas. 

Doherty: Yeah. I'm searching for the title of a book I saw in MIT Press. It was - I'll see if I can find it. It was roughly about “how bad can it get,” I think that is the title. 

So looming around our feeling discussion is a context of this ressentiment and how it informed past cultures. Certainly in the US there's a strong strain of this. And so we've got a context to our feelings. They don't exist in isolation from the world. So there's that ecology. We are part of the world. There is that inter being. So, you know, again, underneath this, there are these kind of beautiful things that we're all connected. And, you know, these are real, real feelings. Yeah. And, you know, there's different species of this. You know, I was getting into the whole idea of misanthropy and sort of either hating humans or negative views toward humans. And I think we need to air that a little bit. That's kind of a taboo-ish topic in some areas. But, you know, it's again, how could we not have some of this, you know, concerns about human behavior, and quote, unquote, "human nature". 

But I think personally, it's really more around the human systems that we have created that are not [just]. None of the systems that we have came from magic. They all were created by people and they can be changed. So I think when we get into a bad system, that's where it brings out the worst in people. So my misanthropy is around human systems personally. And some of the things that we create. That's how I come at it versus internal to the people. Because I know there's good people. I've met good people, even in bad systems. 

Pihkala: Yeah, exactly. I very much resonate with that. And, of course, there's a certain path dependency here. That if you and your group go down a certain road far enough, then it easily becomes sort of self-enhancing. But I really also emphasize this structural dimension around these issues. And related to so-called environmentalism, which is, of course, a tricky thing that in public discourse, it sometimes gets portrayed as an identity group. Even though a vast number of people [are] interested about what we call environmental values. But the discourse about whether environmentalists are misanthropic that's, of course, a very old or discourse also. And it's been quite prominent in Finland, too. We have some special figures in Finnish environmentalism who have sometimes had quite misanthropic views. And then it's been lots of debates and so on. 

One interesting thing about that is that sometimes in the behind is such strong caring and love for the more-than-human world, that it then becomes so difficult to see those places and creatures damaged or destroyed. And that sort of then leads to some misanthropic comments which may not be completely logical, either. That was also seen in some of these Finnish environmentalists, like Pentti Linkola, for example. So then bitterness and being hurt are some of the emotional tones behind something some misanthropic environmentalist comments, I think.

Doherty: Yeah. And I think we need to open our hearts and bring this stuff in. I know. I think it's a developmental task for us to go through these feelings. I know when I was younger, I wrestled with all of these things too. And is it worth living? Is it worth adding to the problems? 

I was talking to a young man recently in my psychology work who said something very poignant. He's involved in the Sunrise Movement and climate work and various other things. And really struggling with bringing out his views. And how that might affect his relationships with his family around some areas. And, you know, I made a reference to that, well, there's landmines in every direction, no matter what direction you go, there are these. And he said something along the lines of well, the best path is the one that destroys myself or something like that. You know, in the sense that he was really thinking that it would be safest just to destroy himself, you know, than to destroy his family relationships or these other things. So really, we take this in and we sometimes come to even a sacrifice, a self-sacrifice level here.

Pihkala: Thanks for sharing and sharing that. I know that's very important for many people. And while I'm not a therapist, I've met in workshops some young people who have roughly similar takes on life. And [are]  feeling those pressures. And it seems that it can be linked with feelings of shame also. And the so-called species shame is one dimension of this. Tim Jensen, in his book about Ecologies of Guilt in Environmental Rhetorics, discusses these for example. And the troubling questions related to what humanity is doing. And then the possibility to feel a sort of species level shame. Which then can lead also to self-loathing, and sometimes even in self-harming behavior. And that's been an important point for me. I often emphasize that what we call eco-anxiety is fundamentally very adaptive, because it shows that people are paying attention to what's happening in the world. And there's motivation to do something for the problems. But of course, one part of this broad spectrum is self-harming and even self-destructive behavior. So it can kind of get really hard.

Doherty: Yeah. Yeah, and let's stay with this. If you're listening, you know, these are heavy topics. But we can bear these. That's the thing. That we can take these in, because, you know, we're humans. And we can know what other humans feel. And we, you know, we can bring these into our hearts. And we don't have to be collapsed by them. You know, we can have [the] capacity to take these in a little bit. 

I mean, obviously, you know, this goes in many, many directions. As I've mentioned, you know, in our conversations, how, you know, opening to different ways that people approach climate change. There's the “deep adaptation” group. And the “dark mountain” group. And the various people that are embracing different forms of just, “let's be open about the reality of this.” And the darkness. And, you know, I come back to, you know, when I'm teaching or when I'm advising counselors or whatever. You know, one way to think about it is three basic tasks here with this environmental stuff. There's expression, description and prescription right? There's how do I feel about it? How do I understand it? And what should we do about it? And so we're really [in this podcast] in the how do I feel about it? And that's an open territory. And so we want to bring in people. Then when you can, you know, and our descriptions obviously often are, you know, related to how we feel about things. So people are going to describe things differently. But, you know, we want to work together. We want to support each other.

Pihkala: Exactly. And trying to avoid overly binary interpretations. Even though that's a very human temptation in distressing times, this phenomenon, which is sometimes called hopium or reverse hopium. Referring to the pressure to either cling on to optimism, or then clinging on to very strong collapse beliefs, for example. Believing that in the next couple of years, it will all go down. Which is not very science-based either. Then there are difficult questions to be discussed in relation to scientific estimates and various downfalls or collapses and that sort of thing. But anyway, sometimes it's easy to see catastrophizing in these narratives.

Doherty: So Panu, “hopium.” Is that the term that you used? Hopium? Like opium?

Pihkala: Yeah. I don't know who first came up with it. It's playing with this term related to a drug and, for example, Jack Adam Weber from the West Coast of the US is using both of these terms to refer to the temptation of either strong optimism or strong collapse beliefs.

Doherty: Okay. I've never heard that term before. So that's a new one. Hopium or reverse hopium. 

Pihkala: Reverse hopium. 

Doherty: Yeah. So yeah, we get these terms. Schadenfreude. You know, this idea of, you know, and then you have this cassandrafreude. You know, like “I told you so.” You know, so people feel that - so we feel a lot of these kinds of things.

Pihkala: Yeah, that's true. And in a manuscript that I'm hoping to get published soon [note: published in Jan 2022 as Toward a Taxonomy of Climate Emotions], I'm discussing various climate emotions and feelings, and schadenfreude as one of them. You know, this joy when something goes down with some other with whom you have a special [envious or hateful] relationship. And there's been discussion about American politics and certain divides. And for example, certain feelings of schadenfreude that people may have in relation to climate issues. And that, of course, can be quite toxic. 

Doherty: Yeah. And there is some joy. And when some aspect of a negative system tends to go down. Or there was almost a relief, I think, in some forms during the pandemic. The early height of the pandemic, when things were shut down, in some ways. I don't want to get too superficial about the pandemic. But yeah, there were certain parts of it that, you know, I know, people felt things were simplified. And it was easier. And there were no planes in the sky. It was a quiet, beautiful sky. And there were a lot of things there. So again, these are all feelings that we want to just open up to. And recognize in other people. We don't have to agree with them. We don't have to, you know, feel them all ourselves, but they are a part of the situation. 

And again, I was talking to another person — another in my psychology work. He was bemoaning the fact that, you know, people aren't taking more action around climate change. And he was comparing this to World War II in the United States when people were really motivated to recycle. And to conserve. And to do Victory Gardens. Their own gardens to grow their own food to support the war effort. And he was bemoaning the fact that people don't do that now. And that, again, was a lead into that cynicism and misanthropy that people are lazy. Or, you know, consumerism and things. But I had to really think that, you know, during World War II, the government here in the US was mobilized. And was mobilizing the entire economy to address this. Changing all the car factories to make airplanes. And, you know, so the government was mobilized. And on top of that had asked people to do more. Asked people to go an extra mile. That's not what we've been seeing in the US. The government has not been mobilized. It's been sort of shifted to the individuals. And so it's not necessarily a good comparison in some way. So that brings me back to my systems piece here. You know, don't blame the victim. You know, don't blame the victim of the people. That's just my personal [opinion].

Pihkala: Yeah. I've often been saying to people that one of the complexities of the situation is that we are kind of [both] victims and perpetrators. All of us in various proportions. But the problems are structural. So I very much resonate with your concept of climate hostages. Thomas, for example. 

Doherty: Yes. Yeah. 

Pihkala: Then, for me, it seems that if we go very far into either end of this. You know, having just a victim position, or just a guilty perpetrator position, then we end up into even bigger trouble. Of course, one's social and economic context shapes very much the situation. But speaking about, for example, roughly middle class people in industrialized countries, I think it's important to avoid both of the extreme ends. 

Doherty: Yes, exactly. Exactly. And, you know, in my work that I know, you're involved in around training counselors, I know, we talked about the front line. And there's a front line of action that people have to decide where they want to place themselves in terms of taking action. In this case, for some people, apathy is not an option. You know, it's a luxury that they can't afford to have. Because they are on the front line every day. And so that's where I think we get some of that kind of middle class or American, you know, upper class shaming. Like, well, you can afford to be apathetic, but I'm just surviving here. 

So, but yes, there are people that are listening that are on the front lines that are acting and they have no choice. You know, as I say, you know, “some are born on the front lines. Some achieve the front lines. And some have the front lines thrust upon them,” to paraphrase Shakespeare. But, you know, so there's people out there that are like, okay, sure, you can sit somewhere and be apathetic, but I'm out there right now, making a difference. Because I have no choice. It's my own survival. My family. My community. So again, that's another energy to tap into here.

Pihkala: Exactly. And there's [a] real reason for bitterness, for many people. And then it goes to sort of existential and spiritual matters also. And those very deeply human tasks. Are we able to avoid the worst in us even in very troublesome conditions? And I think there's lots of compassion and human understanding needed. And then very strong voices coming from places of suffering, where they also see the task of humanity to try and to not become too toxic, even though the situations can be very horrible.

Doherty: Yeah. And I just want to, you know, we won't get into it today. But, you know, we've been talking to people like, Jade Sasser and Britt Wray about people's, you know, thoughts about having children. And that's an angle on this. And the idea should we bring in new people into the world? And that's something that people, you know, wrestle with, regarding some of these issues. And we've got some other programming that we're getting at that. 

And then, of course, the spiritual piece about for listeners that have more of a, either a stoic outlook or a Buddhist outlook. You know, there's the idea that, you know, we try to work on our virtue and despite whatever the situation is. You know, I don't know a lot. I mean, I'm no expert on Buddhism myself. I mean, I'm inspired by these ideas, but the idea of a bodhisattva. You know, the idea that I know how difficult the world is and I am enlightened. But then I choose to go into it. I choose to come back into it to help others. And to help in the liberation of other beings. So I think there's a — I know, that's some piece of that helps to buoy me. You know, that I'm still alive. You know, it's like the old Monty Python [comedy routine], you know, “I'm not dead yet.” You know, and so, I'm still here. You know, I've been through this Sex Pistols of the no future phase for a long time. What's left here?

Pihkala: Yeah, that reminds me of a great European movie from the Polish [film] director Krzysztof Kieślowski. He's got these films, Three Colors. Trois couleurs. Where the main idea in the second film is that a person has become so pessimistic and despairing that he wants to die. And asks his friend to do that. But this is sort of spoiling - sorry for this for that — but in the end the friend fires a gun with a bit of false bullets. And so the man really thinks that he's gonna die. But then when he doesn't, he ends up realizing the existential value of life. It ends with celebrating. That's one one take on the sort of ancient ancient issue on despair and pessimism and still finding life valuable in the midst of that. So opposing nihilism, but being very honest and open about despair and even hopelessness at points. I think that's very important. 

Doherty: Yeah. And so I think we have both characters, you know, inside ourselves. You know, all the time. Yeah. And then, as we move toward the end, you had a thought about a person that we tend to refer to a lot. Tim Lomas. And some of his work on happiness and cross cultural, you know, words. But I'm trying to get my head around this idea of the good side of envy. Could you say more about that?

Pihkala: Yeah. Lomas's book called The Positive Power of Negative Emotions is a very interesting read. And I liked the way that Lomas categorizes two kinds of envy. There's the vicious one, where you sort of want to take from somebody something. And then there's what he calls empathetic envy, which comes close to admiration. And goes to the constructive potentials in envy. 

So this idea of trying to stay open to the various emotions and feelings we have, even though they may be on the dark side. Something that our societies and ourselves wouldn't like to accept in ourselves. But if we can encounter them, then there's also the possibility to try to work so that we could channel them constructively. For example, try to modify our envy into a more empathetic envy and admiration side. And that's, of course, one force that has really led things forward in the world. Even environmental matters. You know, there's lots of people in Finland who are complaining about climate matters. But then, when your neighbor installs solar panels, and says how much money he saved, then there's quickly spreading of panels on the neighborhood.

Doherty: Yeah. So again, we can play around these emotions. They have kind of shadow sides. And also odd sides. Unexpected sides. I think that's a good exercise for me. And I'm going to try that today. Is to think about people that I do respect and admire. And see about having some of themselves in my psyche. And I might encourage our listeners to think about that as well. 

Yeah, we've got to wrap up here in a moment. I am going to deepen in some poems, as well for my therapy training group around arts. And I've got this poem by Theodore Roethke. In a Dark Time. Which is something that [I] was thinking about for today. You know, and he has some beautiful lines about “in a dark time, the eye begins to see.” You know, “I meet my shadow in the deepening shade.” He has some beautiful lines. “What's madness but nobility of soul at odds with circumstance.” He says “the day is on fire. I know the purity of pure despair, my shadow pinned against the sweating wall, the place among the rocks, is it a cave or a winding path? The edge is what I have.” You know, he has some of these great lines in the poem. I'll share the poem with you. And we'll put it in a link. But, you know, so I think we want to express this stuff. And, you know, bring it in, and remember that there's more to the story.

Pihkala: Exactly. I'm gonna look at that poem. Thanks for sharing. And thanks to all the listeners for being with us on this sort of journey during dark times; the souls descend in the terrain of many dark emotional tones, which then may have some secrets in them.

Doherty: So it's either a cave or a winding path. I'm not sure. And you can help - we can all help decide about that. So, Panu, good luck with your coping with the darkness here in Finland. And I'll do the same. 

Pihkala: Thank you. 

Doherty: And I'll talk to you again soon. Take care everyone. 

Pihkala: Take care.

image credit | Tyler Nix

This episode is part two of Climate Change and Happiness’s series focusing on childbearing decisions in a time of climate disruption. Science journalist and Gen Dread creator Britt Wray joins Thomas and Panu. Britt describes her “long and winding road” through climate emotions, inspired by her own journey toward having a child. She and Panu reminisce about their earlier conversations about grief and survivorship when Britt was beginning her research. Britt notes her personal shift from “asking is it okay to have a child, to what's required to have a child today? How do we support children in this world?” Thomas noted how Britt’s public exploration of her parenting decisions through her Gen Dread newsletter has filled a void for prospective parents as therapists and mental health continue to become schooled in addressing climate concerns. Wray offers a look into her forthcoming book Generation Dread that compiles her insights about coping and meaning-making amid the climate crisis. Britt reminds us that making decisions about having a child, or not, does not mean that feelings about the climate crisis fade away, and she normalizes how we all can find ourselves toggling between “disaster mode” and quiet contemplation of the cosmos. Join us for a rich and intimate conversation. 

• Gen Dread Newsletter

• Generation Dread: Finding Purpose in an Age of Climate Crisis

• Conversation between Dr. Jade Sasser and Dr. Britt Wray

• Robert J. Lifton - Survivor Mission

• Good Grief Network 

• Emerging research on Matresence (the developmental process of becoming a mother) by Aurelie Athan and Allison Davis

• Thomas Attig - Relearning the World

Season 1, Episode 9: Finding Meaning in “Generation Dread” with Guest Britt Wray

[music: “CC&H theme music”]

Introduction voice: Welcome to Climate Change and Happiness (CC&H), an international podcast that explores the personal side of climate change. Your feelings, what the crisis means to you, and how to cope and thrive. And now, your hosts, Thomas Doherty and Panu Pihkala.

Thomas Doherty: Hello, I'm Thomas Doherty. 

Panu Pihkala: And I am Panu Pihkala. 

Doherty: And welcome to Climate Change and Happiness. This is a podcast for people around the globe who are thinking and feeling deeply about climate change. The personal side of climate change. Particularly their emotional responses. And today we have a guest. 

Britt Wray: Hi, I'm Britt Wray.

Pihkala: Warmly welcome, Britt. We are very glad that you found the time to come to talk with us. We have a certain history over the last couple of years. You and I have been talking about climate emotions and eco anxiety and other stuff several times. And it's been really exciting to follow both the development of your soon coming new book. And, of course, the great newsletter, Gen Dread, that you've been running. So there's plenty of things to talk about related to the topics of our podcast. Which is really about living in the times of the climate crisis and the ecological crisis. But how would you like to describe the standpoint where you're coming [from] Britt? I know plenty of that, but what would you like to share for the beginners?

Wray: Sure. Thanks, Panu. It's true. We met a few years ago now. Due to this work that overlaps, I actually reached out to both of you, both Thomas and Panu, for early interviews in my research for this book I have coming out. Generation Dread. Which is about the psychological underpinnings and impacts and disturbances emotionally that the climate crisis is setting into our lives in different ways – depending on who we are and how we're being exposed to it. 

And I was drawn to do this work because of my own experience with really intense eco anxiety that set in several years ago, 2017-ish when my partner and I started having conversations about trying to get pregnant. And, of course, the climate crisis was nothing new to me. I had studied conservation biology in my undergrad. I had written a book about technologies to try and lessen the blow of the biodiversity crisis. I was very much on the environmental beat. But this dilemma of whether or not we [should] have a child really burst through any defenses I had left for feeling somewhat comfortable in the climate crisis. 

And [it] became an existential emotional issue. Because the question of whether or not you're going to bring life into the world is of that nature, right? Especially life. A person who's not asking to be here and doesn't need to be here. And you're signing them up to witness ecological decline for the rest of their days on this planet. 

And at the time, I felt very alone in those feelings. I didn't see them reflected by anyone around me. It was before this became a huge talking point as it is now. Where we've gotten op-eds about it in all the major newspapers. And we've got polls and surveys from researchers looking into this phenomenon. Then, I felt abject and deviant and strange for even connecting the climate crisis to my reproductive decision making, which made it [a] more difficult experience for me — But also something I was fascinated by and curious about. 

And I thought, okay, if I'm now feeling waves of grief and anxiety, but also a lot of rage. Rage at the idea that the situation has become so bad that people in my generation have to bear the cost of not getting to know our own children. Because of [the] inaction of leaders and people put in power, who are supposed to protect us and make the future a livable place. Wow! What else is this doing to people? And people who are not as privileged and protected as me? — And are much more exposed to the direct effects already. I mean, how is this shaking down? 

And I started to turn over the stones as a science communicator, because that's what I am. A science writer and broadcaster. And then I realized, oh, that's one tiny sliver of the emotional impact that the planetary health crisis is having on people. And we need to talk about this more. And so that's why I came to interview both of you and many, many others from a variety of fields. And develop a sense of how we can cope as individuals with all of this. But also come together collectively in a way of injecting our consciousness with new forms of stability and resilience and awareness for being at this time. And working collectively to try and create a better future than we otherwise expect. 

So, I want to thank you both for being people out there, I could go to at that time who were already thinking about this. And, as you know, the topic has just exploded in the years since then. It's been pretty incredible to watch the relevance among the public at large spike, which we wish it wouldn't have to. But at the same time, there's a lot of momentum around understanding these emotions now, which I think is ultimately a really good thing. 

Doherty: Yeah. Well, that's really well said, Britt. I mean, I was talking to a client I'm working with who's a climate change person [who] has also been doing this for years. And we were saying, you know, some folks have been in the auditorium for a long time working on this stuff, but it's a big auditorium. And now suddenly, the seats are starting to fill. You know, there's other people coming in. And so, yeah, it is .. realizing that even though we're kind of pathfinders, you know, there's a lot of people just coming on to the scene. 

So I wonder, … do you chart a developmental course for yourself, even since this project? You must have come a long way personally, you know, in your thinking. I think that could be one thing we could talk about is how this project changed you. Or what you discovered. It was kind of like a rite of passage or a heroine's journey or something, right? Because I know you've had, do you have a — I don't know much about your family now. We could talk about our families too. … How do you think the project has changed you or what have been some insights, you know, that made you a better person?

Wray: It's been pretty dramatic. In terms of how writing this book has changed my life. It was - now I understand why writers say you should write from pain. You know, you should spin it out into something that you transform into beauty. And that it's this just drive within you that can give a lot. But you really go into the bottom of the U shaped curve. 

I think writing the book both made me more terrified, depressed, enraged, anxious than I've ever been in my life. But also, as it broke my heart open, it also healed it. And brought me the most robust and radical forms of coping. And transforming myself into a better way of being able to deal with what's going on than I could have possibly thought of accessing before. So it holds that tension. But really, by exploring the existential fears and insecurities of many different people through the book, and reflecting on my own situation. That insight. The urgency. It really, you know, there's a moral clarity involved with paying attention to these issues, which is incredibly motivating and purposeful. And it gives a lot of meaning. 

It's a meaning focused coping approach. And it brushes the bullshit aside in terms of other distractions. And things to spend one's time and energies on. And then you start getting on that soul level with other people. And meeting them. Being able to stand in the fire with them on issues that are so important. And that they might not feel like they have people to talk to about. Which then becomes this kind of social glue for repairing the social fabric in an amazingly potent way. And that injected my work with new meaning. 

I realized, okay, there's a lot of people hurting out there. There's a lot of people at a loss for how to handle these emotions. We need to pay attention to how we are supporting each other and ourselves with this, so that we don't maladaptively cope. So that we don't fall into immobilizing forms of paralysis around the crisis. So that we don't, you know, ascribe to doomism, and believe it's too late to make any actions that could make a difference and be worthwhile. But that are motivating and strengthening and ways of finding new forms of connection and trust within the human species for being here at this time. I mean, all these really, it sounds so grandiose, but really, that's what this crisis does to you. 

And, all of that was incredibly powerful for me such that I just finished my PhD in a totally different subject. In science communication with a focus on synthetic biology. Newly minted doctorate. Dropped that. Abandoned that. Moved into this field as a non clinician, non psychologist, non psychiatrist. You know, but did the grunt work to basically try and get another PhD level of knowledge in it. And then eventually be able to apply to do this postdoc I'm now doing at Stanford University in the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine where I research the mental health impacts of the climate crisis on emerging adults. So that I can, you know, try and contribute with all the amazing people who are doing this work now to create mental health protection and promotion strategies for this globally distributed vulnerable population that we know is feeling really anxious about the climate crisis in ways that are debilitating for many. 

And then also, through finding the coping mechanisms with my research, I was able to no longer be so rattled. Not, you know, have these over-pourings of dark visions about everything that were rubbing off on the people around me, like my partner, for example. I just, I had found myself in a place where I couldn't talk about the future without overlaying a filter of apocalyptic possibility. And, you know, so I needed to find my balance. I needed to make meaning from what's going on. And I did so in a way that the original dilemma that got me into this feeling like oh, my gosh, I can't bring a kid into the situation, no longer at all became my story. 

And I shifted from asking is it okay to have a child to what's required to have a child today? How do we support children in this world? And I now have a six month old who brings me tons of joy. So that wouldn't have happened without the book, I don't think. And without making new colleagues like you, and so many others that are creating avenues of radical hope in this situation. And, yeah, so long windy answer to your question. I think it changed me personally, and my family and professionally in terms of what I'm not focused on.

Pihkala: Thanks so much, Britt, for sharing that. That's very rich and profound. And [a] long and winding road might be a very apt metaphor. And what I hear you describe is a sort of existential process or a process of transformation. And, of course, I'm very glad about the end results. That after what I reckon, are many fluctuations along the way and many curves on the road. You've reached better coping skills and social connections and sort of giving yourself permission to feel all kinds of feelings. That's what this podcast is also, much about. 

And then the child is here, too, which is a great source of gladness. And there's so many things to discuss here. But one that I want to ask because it's close to myself, also. I did this book about eco anxiety and hope in Finnish in 2017. And that got me into a lot of media stuff in Finland. I do remember those times that it's sometimes tricky that sort of people are looking up to you. That what should we do about this thing? And it's so huge and complex. And did you ever have, you know, feelings of the so-called impostor syndrome, or that kind of? How did you manage that part of the process where many people started asking you about what should we do about this?

Wray: Oh, gosh, yeah. That's just a normal part of my reality now. Because, you know, I have a newsletter, which explores these topics, much like your podcast does. And I have really engaged [with] readers who are amazing. And sometimes my inbox gets filled with their nightmares, you know. And holding that in a way that is supportive and containing for others, but also recognizing I'm in the crisis too. And I don't have the solutions. I have offerings of things that have worked for me and others that they can try, but it's also a gentle walk, because I'm not a clinician. And I'm not supposed to be giving advice. So doing that in a way that's professionally responsible around those items, but still seeing them as a kindred spirit. And understanding where they are and knowing what it feels like. And that they need to know they're not alone. And find that connection. And some ideas for coping in a peer support way is something that confronts me with those feelings of I can't take away your pain, you know. 

But it tips over into some especially dangerous territory when I get young people writing me who are clearly suicidal around the climate crisis. Then I have to be extremely careful. And I refer to my clinical colleagues in those instances on how to best direct them in what fashion. But yeah, it's a lot. I mean, it's heavy. And this is the kind of work that I know a lot of climate aware therapists have to do. It's special in the sense that you have to process your own attachment to the source of the strain that they're experiencing and communicating to you. Because this is a universal problem.

Doherty: Yeah. 

Pihkala: How does that sound to you, Thomas, as a climate therapist?

Doherty: Yeah. I'm very mindful of all this as we're talking. I mean, I just want to say, thanks, Britt. I really appreciate your work. You know, I mean, your work fills a void. It just fills a void for people. I mean the way our system works in society, therapists and mental health people aren't necessarily - they aren't, they haven't been trained to work on these kinds of societal issues. It is new. And, you know, therapists aren't trained to have podcasts or newsletters or even any of that kind of stuff or do broad public education. And so there is a natural gap in our societal system for this kind of thing. I mean, the elephant in the room, of course, is leadership in society is not doing this. 

I know, in Finland, where Panu lives, the government is actually thinking about eco anxiety and even doing programs from the top. But we at least in the United States don't have that structure, you know, at all. And so it's this void. And so people do feel like climate hostages. You know, we're kind of on a train or a boat, you know, A Titanic kind of steaming toward an iceberg. And whoever's up in the captain's chair doesn't seem to share our vision of what's going on. And so that's, yeah, it's inherently political. You know, for me, it comes down to environmental identity. That's where I go with the work is like. How does, you know, our angst is an invitation, you know, to think about ourselves in a new way. And remind ourselves about our values and who we are and our eco timeline. You know, our timeline of nature and the natural world and things like that. 

Wray: Right. 

Doherty: And it seems like what's happening, you know, with having a child. I mean, I have one daughter. She's 14. My wife and I were very mindful. My late wife. My wife died of breast cancer five years ago. So —

Wray  

Sorry. 

Doherty : You know, we had a lot of, yeah, we had a lot of, you know, we were very mindful about having a child. And, you know, Eva was born in our house. In a tub in our house in the same room that she lives in now. And she's healthy. And it's great. But yeah, we were also actively thinking about a second child. And really weighing all that sort of stuff. So I can identify with this. 

But I think, you know, one of the psychology angles of this is that we have eco emotions, like values of nature. Like you were working on biodiversity. So clearly, you have a side of you, that's a value about nature and the larger natural system. And then we have our altruistic values, right? About other people and people that we want to help and protect. And then we have our own egocentric personal values about our own self. And I think that's what happens with having a child: it bumps us. If people already have eco values and altruistic values, they're kind of okay with that. But as soon as you want to have a child, it moves you into this very personal set of values and yourself and your ego, which can be problematic, because then it's like, is this for me? Is this for the world? 

I mean it's hard to even describe, but I think you know where I'm going, right? Because if I'm selfless, what does it mean to be self full in terms of having a child and of course, that primal urge. You know, the primal urge that people feel to create a child is so - comes out of us. 

Wray: Wow. Yeah. 

Doherty: So, you know, we're moving from these big values with things outside of ourselves to things inside. So it's kind of neat.

Britt Wray: I love that way of framing it. Yeah, absolutely. I think you're right.

Pihkala: Do you want to share, Britt, some of the happenings since the child has been born? You can of course, choose the level of intimacy you want to engage with here. But especially regarding, you know, eco emotions and climate emotions. It's been, again, a sort of winding road with fluctuations. We have two children, so we know that there's so many things happening that there's sort of natural fluctuations happening also. So [do] you want to share something about?

Wray: Yeah. I mean, going through the pregnancy and birth while doing the work that I do and being keenly embedded in research around eco anxiety and other mental health impacts of climate change, gave me some insights into things I think we're going to need to be aware of for women going forward. And for young people becoming parents — well, for people becoming parents, who are, you know, awake to their ecological identity and feeling these pressures, but deciding to do it anyway. 

When you choose a path at the fork in the road, and decide, if you had been reproductively ambivalent or anxious due to what's going on, okay, I'm up for it. That doesn't mean that all the feelings just naturally weigh away, you know. You're gonna have to learn how to toggle between your awareness that there's a big part of you that still thinks this is a bad idea. And the part of you that is convicted and resolved. And so that was apparent to me in the disaster prone summer of 2021 when I'm in my third trimester. And I've just gone home to Toronto to be able to be around family after not being there for two years in the pandemic. And at this moment of bringing more family into the world and, you know, wanting to be with them. And it was this time of horrific flooding. In many cities around the world, there were unbelievable wildfires. 

Even Toronto, my hometown, which is never ever affected by wildfire smoke ever had become affected by wildfire smoke that blew in from the east. Given all the, you know, West Coast wildfires, but also there were some in Northwestern Ontario. And had given the sky this choked gray color such that the recommendations were that pregnant women shouldn't go outside. 

I mean, it was unthinkable for someone from Toronto. And there I am, inside, not going out for several days in a row fielding questions from journalists who are reading my newspaper and freaking out because the heat dome just happened. And they're asking me questions like, how do you deal with a pervading sense of existential dread? How should my readers understand how to cope with feelings that it's too late? I've looked at my children this morning in the eyes, and I've realized that they might not get to live out a full human lifetime that I previously expected for them. You know, these kinds of questions were coming in on a daily basis. 

I'm pregnant. I'm stuck inside. And I can feel my baby playing the drums on my insides. And all of that going on was just, wow. This is not how I pictured this going. Interesting. Okay, that's what it means to be working in this space. And, you know, fielding what's going on in the world around you. Especially because people -  there are these spikes I noticed in the summers when all the disasters start happening. And a lot of people who previously feel like privileged and protected and away from it all get awoken to their existential terror. And start asking understandable questions. And they're coming from a very reactive place. And there's that terror that sets in. 

And to just be — and I remember, I was going, I was at, I was in the maternal fetal clinic talking with the doctor. The news is on. There's like wildfires all over the news. I'm talking with the OBGYN. He's looking at me being like, man, I just feel so bad for all the kids that are being born today. And they're gonna have to live with this. I mean, well, isn't it just, it's awful, those poor kids. So by the way, let's take your latest test number on this thing we're here to run on. It was just like from every angle all the time, so strange.

So anyway, that's something that I just saw unfolding. And I think it's interesting for anyone else who was in my position, thinking about pregnancy that there, you know, it might be a bit rocky. And then, you know, our son actually had a very serious lung problem when he was born. And it sent us to the intensive care. And then the NICU is just such a stressful place. And so then it jolted me into oh my gosh, other existential feelings about the preciousness of life and this primal urge to make sure that our baby is okay. And going through that was incredible as well. And then learning how to have a healthy baby at home afterwards. It's just been, you know, hugely worldwidening in all the ways. 

So, yeah. I don't know. This stuff just touches the marrow. And coming back from maternity leave to then go back into eco anxiety research, it all just feels interconnected on this deeper level about why we're here. What this is about. It's about protecting life, right? It's about trying to create joyful experiences for other people and yourself along the way and reduce suffering. And it's not easy work. And yeah, so I think that there's a lot of interesting research to be done around the mental health of women in the perinatal period that I know some people are doing. As it relates to climate anxiety.

Pihkala: Yeah, it's like literally inside you. And all these conditions that you so vividly described, sort of, you can't separate yourself from it. So that's very moving. And I think you're raising up a very crucial issue, which really needs to be talked about more. And “post traumatic growth” is one framework to use for these kinds of processes. Or the Robert J. Lifton's “Survivor Mission.” I know we, all three of us, have been engaging with Lifton. I think that's what you have the chance to do now. So you have survived this long and winding road. And as you described, even though for persons of much privilege, as we all three are, it may still not be easy. Far from it. 

But coming to the last five minutes of our limited time, we'd be really interested to talk with you about the coping mechanisms a bit more. And your book highlights the role of meaning or even purpose as its existential thinking in this time. But would you like to share a bit more about what kind of things actually help you in this process?

Wray: Yeah. In terms of things that I can do alone that really helped me. That includes meditation, mindfulness practices, things to soothe the nervous system that I've learned from reading, or therapists telling me about it, as I've interviewed them for my book, for example. I certainly find the social connection piece to be the most important in terms of being able to find others to talk about the rawest emotions that you need to share. And making sure that there are mirrors in terms of those people legitimizing and validating what you're going through. And being able to bear it with you. It just relieves so much. 

And so, you know, I've done groups like the Good Grief Network. And I have a really savvy, climate aware therapist, which is fantastic. And, you know, those kinds of places, because even my best friends and people I love who know me so well, they don't necessarily feel this. You know, they're not necessarily looking into the abyss of the climate crisis professionally all day. 

And that's another thing, you know, that it rains down on everyone, potentially, but especially on those who are professionally committed to paying attention to this, right? Those formats have been able to really help me in times of, you know, when the distress becomes more significant. 

Some other fun things have been like listening to podcasts, or audio books about the cosmos. About space. About the evolution of the universe. Because it points out how insignificant this moment is. And it's just a blip in this much larger mystery that we are, you know, rocketing through space on this planet. And it's just fascinating to be able to hold the tensions between all that we don't know and then all that we do know about this moment. And that can be very easing and calming, I find. 

But then it's just, it's the simple stuff. It's hanging out with my family and having fun with my best friends and hugging my baby. And, you know, all those things that are restorative. But yeah, I think when I've been at my worst, the thing that has really rescued me has been meditation. Yeah.

Thomas Doherty: Yeah, this is great. This is really great. I think we can go a little longer today, maybe another, you know, five or 10 minutes just because we're in a really rich vein. And I do want to just bring in the listeners a little bit. People that have been listening along. 

And it is true. I mean, these disasters are no longer distant right? In the past climate change, for most people anyway, around the planet. It was a distant issue. And, you know, these disasters are landing where we live. So we have these kinds of climate singularities where the disaster and the emotional - all the impacts are happening simultaneously. It's like a, you know, a mortar round that's landing close to you in, if you're living in Ukraine. You know, it's this is coming right at me now. And that itself is a rite of passage that people are going through around the globe. They're living through these disasters or the smoke. So it's just important too that we're all going to feel these things. I've felt it, you know, here in the Northwest. Panu's, you know, everybody around the world that's listening is going to be going through. 

We're all having a rite of passage around this stuff. And the disasters are going to come and we'll be in disaster mode. And then we'll toggle back. And have a moment where we can contemplate the cosmos. And, you know, that expanding and contracting ability is really part of the long term, you know. We can't get into it here, but even the idea of perinatal women and just, you know, specialty and climate pregnancy, is a, there must be people starting to work on this substance. That that's a mission. That's one mission, you know, survivors.

Wray: There's a lab at Columbia [University] doing that now.

Thomas Doherty: Yeah. And that's a sign of the times. 

Wray: It is.

Doherty: Which is the other piece too. We all have to realize there's so many gifted people doing great work all around the world. You know, there's a lot of people working on this kind of stuff. We're not alone at all, you know. And I think that's probably, at least for me, that's been an upside of this work is I meet all kinds of great people. Like, you know, like yourself, Britt and like Panu. 

And Britt, I'm sure you've been in, you know, maybe toward the end, you know, of our talk, you know, in terms of our coping, there are moments, those moments of inspiration too. When we surrender into the struggle. And get into it. And go to the frontline. Or whatever our frontline is, we start to meet comrades, you know, and get inspired and surprised. We didn't even realize people were doing things that are really great.

Wray: Yeah. 

Doherty: I imagine you must have been inspired and surprised by some people you've come across in your, in your newsletter, and in your, in your research.

Wray: Oh, my gosh. So many. So many. Yeah. Definitely. The ways that people are making sense of showing up at this time. And making sense of coping with the intensity of their emotions. If that's their way in. Yeah. I've been very surprised. 

And it's, you know, there's a lot of attention put on young people right now. Around how exposed they are to the distress. And how it's impairing their ability to just get through the day. But there's a lot of older people who feel unheard. And who have been grieving for a long time, as they, you know, shake their head in disgust about the state of the planet that's being handed on to younger generations. And, you know, there's a lot of wisdom locked up in those elders who are awake and aware and emotionally engaged. But also strengthened through their years, you know. So I find that sometimes I get surprised by them the most.

Pihkala: Yeah. Thanks for sharing that, also. And with Thomas and guests, we've often been talking about the difficulties socially that this time and these very difficult emotions sometimes get us into. And the danger if there are sort of idealized responses in a sort of binary way. That there's only one good way and one bad way to do things in these times. And sometimes that gets into people's way, also. Between the generations I think.

Thomas Doherty: You know, climate cosmopolitanism. This idea that there's a lot of languages to learn. A lot of people to know. A lot of climate change cultures to dip into. And so I think Britt, you've - that's part of your journey too. You've become a climate world traveler, so to speak. Or climate cosmopolitan person. Talking to all these different people and tapping into all these different subcultures.

Wray: Thomas, you are great at creating new terminology on the fly. You've given us climate hostages. 

Doherty: Yeah. Yeah. 

Wray: Which was so visual and apt. Now climate cosmopolitan, I love them. Yeah.

Doherty: Yeah. Thanks. Yeah. Well, yeah. That's about new languages. New words. And new and old feelings. Right? Some of these feelings are as old as time. 

Wray: Right. 

Doherty: That we're having. And then that comes back to the whole privilege piece. Right? You know, people have been —

Wray: Yeah. 

Doherty: This is not the first time people have struggled about whether they should have a child or not. Obviously, in the history of humanity.

Wray: Goodness no.

Doherty: And so this is our particular version.

Wray: You know, and on that point, Panu, in one of our early interviews, you clarified for me so well, what was going on. When you said, you know, waking up to the climate and ecological crisis is particularly hard for citizens of industrialized nations who are living middle class lifestyles, because it makes them realize that the world is a far more tragic and fragile place than they were raised to believe it was. 

And that fragmenting can become so severe that it's an internal shattering. And there is a lack of resilience based on one's experience to date that can come with that when one is super privileged and protected for dealing for confronting those kinds of existential feelings that are terrifying. Which is very different if you're coming from, you know, a post traumatic growth scenario where you faced serious adversity before. And it was just one of those things that really landed. 

And, yes. You know, and this is also why we're noticing this particular issue being taken up frequently by, you know, middle class people. And it's obviously not the story for so many marginalized and oppressed communities. It's one more layer of difficulty on top of so much trauma. And so the ways in which language is wielded around why it's important will look different. And I've shared the - you're quoted in the intro to my book talking about this. And I think it's one of those lucid explanations that helps people see what's going on. And depending on who they are, why they are reacting or not reacting in certain ways. So. So yeah,

Pihkala: Thanks for that, Britt. Very good to hear. And this existential grief researcher Thomas Attig, has this phrasing of “relearning the world”. And that's something [that] I think applies for middle class. Or the privileged people like my background, also. So that's also been related to my personal history. And in your newsletter Gen Dread. There's a fabulous website. I warmly recommend people to go there and join. You've given very good space for a wide variety of views. And you've certainly had an aim and emphasis on giving voices to people who are not so often interviewed in these matters. And paying attention to intersectional justice issues. So that's one part of your work that I very much appreciate. And I think it's very brave - this process that you've been able to walk through. 

And now in the beginning of May, [the] Generation Dread book is coming out in print and in electronic file formats. I'm very much looking forward to reading it. And as I briefly mentioned, it has this finding purpose in the subtitle. Or extended time is also sort of running. But I was wondering, would you like, at the end of the session, [to] briefly say something about the forthcoming book? I know this is a terrible question to ask you to speak briefly of such a wide ranging book.

Wray: Thanks, Panu. Yeah, well, of course, it deals with eco anxiety from, you know, this kind of intersectional critical perspective that you've just touched on. Looking at the roles of, you know, identity and privilege and experience with adversity and climate justice topics and things like that. But also, what on a deeper, I don't use the word spiritual, but we can refer to it here. What might be going on in terms of how powerful cultures that have driven, exacerbated the climate crisis have ended up with this kind of dominating framework. And how we can try and shift as individuals within this overwhelming situation, to a mode of partnership. You know, with others and with the natural world by understanding where the severance from connectedness could have come from. 

And also looking at topics like the future of mental health care. And what's required, given the scope of psychic damage that this is causing. And that we can rightfully expect to increase in enormous ways. And how we can, you know, understand what goes on psychosocially in disaster settings. Not just when we're anxious about what we're understanding and absorbing from scientific reports. And what, you know, there's coping tips and processing for individuals and collectives. But it's also interwoven with a vulnerable memoir style. You know, exploration of what's gone on inside me as I've looked around the world and tried to understand what's going on inside other people. So, yeah, I hope that it helps people feel less alone. And more connected. And understood. And also resourced for ways of going forward with these climate anxious times.

Doherty: Yeah, I'm looking forward to it. I'm looking forward to the book. And I recommend the Gen Dread site and the newsletter. I mean, you know, this idea of we're all. I mean, we're either relearning the world or we're just learning the world. We - that's the thing. We think we know the world. As I get older, I realized I, what I thought I know, I don't really I didn't really know in this limited understanding we have. So all of the people listening, we're all learning the world together. And we think we know, you know, if we're marginalized and really oppressed, you know, we think that's the world. But that's not the only world out there. And if we're privileged, we think that's the only world and that's not the only world out there, either. You know, and so we're learning together here. So. Gosh, we're all in this together in some ways, even though we have these different stories. So thanks again.

Wray: Thank you. Yeah, it was great to chat with you both. And I'm excited that you're doing this podcast, it's an important offering. 

Doherty: And it takes time. You know, it takes time. All these connections have unfolded over some years. So listeners also realize it takes time for this to happen, so - 

Wray: It really does. 

Doherty: It doesn't happen all right away.

Wray: No. Yep, you need space and time. And actually, I think, Panu, you also chatted with me once about this. And pointed out how, in that sense, it is a justice issue too. To be able to cope well with eco anxiety you need resources. Like time and space. So that you're not just barreling through life trying to make it through your disasters. And make it to your three jobs. But you can actually process this and reorient yourself towards, you know, do the inner activism part. And connect it to external activism. And feel better about it all. So yeah, it's a doozy in that sense. It's those kinds of justice issues that pop up all the way down.

Pihkala: Yeah, I think you're absolutely absolutely right. And I greatly enjoyed once again, talking with you, Britt. And now the triad. And this has been very fascinating. And lots of topics that I definitely [would] like to talk more about. Like the role of spirituality. Which is close to me. And well, you know, the existential frameworks. Whether we talk about looking at the starry sky at night or the deeper issues there's plenty to discuss so I'm hoping for some  chances in the future. But now, warm thanks for finding the time to come to talk.

Wray: Thank you. And I'll close my mouth so that we don't keep going.

Doherty: Yeah. It's great. But, you know, listeners, this is what this podcast is about. Is giving an entree into people who work on this. And spend a lot of time on this. And so you can see what it's like in our world.  We're all in this together. And we're all human. So yes, this is Climate Change and Happiness. You can find us at climatechangeandhappiness.com. At our website, we have show notes. And descriptions of these episodes and more details. And various links of different books and authors and ideas that we referenced in these episodes. So please do check out the website as well. And think about sharing our message and supporting us. And all of us, all listeners and all of you too, have a good rest of your days and we'll talk to you next time. 

Wray: Bye. 

Doherty: Take care. 

Pihkala: Take care.

image credit | Sandy Millar

Climate Change and Happiness Episode 8 begins a two-part series focusing on childbearing decisions in this time of increasing climate disruption. Panu and Thomas are joined by feminist scholar Jade Sasser whose research investigates the impacts of climate change, racial injustice, and other existential threats on human reproductive decisions. Together they explore how climate change is interpreted by potential parents and grandparents of different generations and cultures. They discover how, in Jade’s words, children “symbolize and represent so many hopes, dreams, fears, anxieties, desires to make the world better.” Thomas notes how deciding whether or not to have a child is one of the most consequential decisions an adult will make in their life. He and Panu reflect on their own parenting and explore some of the complex and blended emotions that arise for people about this topic. Jade reminds us that anxiety and fear grow the more that we feel isolated, while connection with others grows the potential for hope. Along the way, Jade counters some simplistic notions about population as a driver of climate change. Join us for this thought provoking reflection. 

And, look forward to Episode 9 when Panu and Thomas have a conversation with science journalist and researcher Britt Wray who reports on how her own parenting decision-making inspired her popular Gen Dread newsletter and upcoming book. 

• Jade Sasser, Ph.D. 

• Climate anxiety in children and young people and their beliefs about government responses to climate change: a global survey, Carolyn Hickman, Elizabeth Marks & Panu Pihkala, et al. (2021)

• Panu’s recent paper Toward a Taxonomy of Climate Emotions (2022)

• Thomas speaks about Climate Change and Client Stress on the Clinical Consult Podcast. 

• Eco-reproductive Concerns in the Age of Climate Change Matthew Schneider-Mayerson and Leong Kit Ling (2020). See also. 

• Op-Ed: The complex link between population decline and a warming planet Jade Sasser (2021)

• I’m an environmental journalist, but I never write about overpopulation. Here’s why. David Roberts (2018)

Season 1, Episode 8: Children, Climate Change and a “Better World” with Guest Dr. Jade Sasser

[music: “CC&H theme music”]

Introduction voice: Welcome to Climate Change and Happiness (CC&H), an international podcast that explores the personal side of climate change. Your feelings, what the crisis means to you, and how to cope and thrive. And now, your hosts, Thomas Doherty and Panu Pihkala.

Thomas Doherty: Hello, I'm Thomas Doherty. 

Panu Pihkala: And I am Panu Pihkala. 

Doherty: And welcome to Climate Change and Happiness. This is our podcast: The show for people around the globe who are thinking deeply about the personal side of climate change, particularly their emotions. What they're feeling in their body and, you know, their feelings. How they're describing their emotions. And we go in a lot of directions here. So listeners, welcome. Take a breath. Be with us for a little bit. 

Panu and I are really honored to have Jade Sasser with us today. And she can talk about herself during our conversation. But she's coming from California at UC Riverside and does some interesting research and practice on Gender and Sexuality Studies. And we're going to see where we go here. We had a little pre-talk, and we went in a lot of really fascinating directions. So, let's just keep our breath going and realize we might go into some deep topics today. But we're also going to be thinking about what it feels like for all of us. So Panu, do you want to get us going?

Pihkala: Yes, and warmly welcome Jade. And I'm very glad that you found the time to join us. And we met earlier this autumn, in relation to this Lancet Planetary Health study on children and youth[‘s] climate emotions and beliefs. You generously commented on that in a webinar and that turned into a very interesting discussion. I know that you've been working with related issues for several years. So how do you feel about this at the moment? What's on the top of your mind?

Jade Sasser: Well, what's on the top of my mind, it's really interesting. I'm just returning home from a week in Louisiana with family to celebrate Thanksgiving. And I have a three-year-old cousin, who I spent the week with. And it was really interesting. I started thinking a lot about the interviews that I've done with people who talk about whether they want to have children in the face of climate change. How they feel about the ethics and the morals of that. And I've been steeped in those conversations for so long. But spending the week with this three-year-old child was such a joy. And I have to say, I spent the week not thinking about climate change at all. And it was wonderful. So then coming back to this discussion, it, I think, is complicating my thinking about the possible range of emotions that one can experience, while also grappling with the deep challenges of climate change.

Pihkala: Thank you for sharing that. That's very interesting. Good to hear that you had such good moments. Maybe the three year old, and I'm personally a father of two sons. They are now six and eight. So I strongly resonate with this, you know, shifts in attention and mode, I should say, you know. I often work with some quite difficult climate emotions during the work day. And then I go out to play with the boys and so on. So it's an interesting mix. And that's something related to the little bit provocative title of our podcast. Climate Change and Happiness. The sort of exploration [of] how could joy be possible amidst the very awful crisis that we are living in. And, of course, different backgrounds and social factors and justice issues have a profound impact on how we experience the crisis. And also on the emotions and feelings. And I know that this is something that you've been thinking about seriously for a long time.

Sasser: I have and the thing that's been interesting for me is I don't have children. And I primarily interview people who don't have children. And so, for me, the space that I inhabit most of the time when it comes to this set of issues is the space of ideas. Because this is not a lived experience where I'm grappling with how I feel about parenting. How I feel about being a parent or becoming a parent myself. Those are not lived experiences for me. I talk to other people for whom those are lived experiences. But there's a little bit of a remove most of the time because for me, again, these are ideas. 

However, I do want to say, I do a lot of interviews. And increasingly, I'm doing interviews with people who do have children. And who are really grappling with the feelings that come up for them around being parents when they're faced with the things that many of us are faced with. Heat waves. We had months-long heat waves here in the United States over the course of this summer and into the fall. Here in Southern California, where I live, we deal with wildfire. Wildfire has always been something that has been common to this region, but the wildfire season is getting longer and longer and longer. And for example, today, it's December 1, our temperature will reach 80 degrees [F], which is very hot even for Southern California for December. 

I returned from Louisiana to find my house smelling of wildfire smoke because there was a fire that broke out the day that I left. And it was put out and then reignited while I was across the country. So I was checking my phone to see what was going to happen with this fire and how it would impact my home. My home was fine, but really it smelled like smoke. And it still smells of smoke a little bit. And so these are the kinds of issues that people who I am interviewing are grappling with. And they're saying and really thinking through how should I feel about having a child knowing that climate change was real? I knew that before I had a child. What are the ethical and moral concerns about bringing a kid into a planet that we know is going through all of these changes? Should I feel guilty about that? Should I feel responsible for doing something that may not be good for the planet? Those kinds of issues and questions come up all the time. 

Particularly the mothers who I interview feel an added layer of guilt. I think because just in our society women's behaviors and decisions as mothers are just extra scrutinized. So motherly guilt is very, very common. Less commonly, but still really important, I would have to say is those parents that I talked to who say that their children make them feel much more motivated to actually do something about climate change. That they feel motivated to be advocates. To help educate other people to make changes in their own day to day lives. To not, you know, kind of sit back and wait for someone else to solve the problem. For them, their children are a motivator to actually create the world in the future that they would like to live in. And so I hear a really broad range of emotional experiences from the people that I interview. From grief, sadness, guilt, to intense motivation, and a desire to make a future in which their children won't come home to [a] house smelling of wildfire smoke [laughs].

Doherty: Yeah, that's really well said Jade. I mean, I think you kind of encapsulated a lot of what this podcast is about just now. All  the nuances of feelings, you know. We talk about feeling different kinds of things, that, you know, nuances. Or what researchers call granularity. Like different kinds of feelings and just emotional depth, you know. And I know Panu is big on this idea too of these mixed emotions. You know, where we have tragic realism or tragic hope. Or, you know, we have this empowerment or even standing our ground and making a statement. And even a kind of a resistance. You know, joy is an act of resistance.

And so, I just wanted to just for the listeners, just really take this in because Jade has really laid out a whole palette of things that many listeners are feeling. I know you are. I know you're feeling it. I[‘ve] felt these things. And so we have a choice. We can build our capacity, I guess I would say, to feel these different things and then eventually make our decisions. And, you know, in therapy, we talk about, you know, working from our values. Like understanding our values and making actions based on our values. 

And so, but I just want to just, again, put your hand on your chest and take a breath, because there's a lot. There is the smoke. I mean, in the Pacific Northwest, I've felt this. I've dealt with the same things: the temperature and the weather changes and the smoke. And all this sort of stuff. And so it's all happening. And the danger is people get out of their depth emotionally. And they get really frantic and really paralyzed. And so we want to keep breathing and keep chatting about this some more.

Sasser: Well, if I can say one thing. What I find, and this is my personal experience, but I've also talked this through with others and find that it's a shared experience. When I'm left to my own devices. Meaning when I'm left to my own emotional experiences and I don't communicate and share them with others. Or hear how others are feeling, the things that I tend to feel most are fear and worry and anxiety. And I think that partly stems from a perception that I'm the only person who feels this way. Or that I can't share this with others because they won't resonate. Or won't understand. Or that they'll minimize my concerns.

And what I find in my own experience, and in the experiences of people who I interview, is that there's a certain amount of relief that comes with being able to talk about these emotions. And to understand that many other people feel them too. That we are not isolated in grappling with a whole range of emotions. For me, the anxiety and fear grow the more that I feel isolated. But the opposite grows the potential for hope. The potential for optimism. Definitely the motivation. That grows the more I feel connected to other people who I know I can understand and resonate with what I'm experiencing, too.

Pihkala: Thanks for sharing that Jade. That's very profound, I think. And I've been just revising a big academic article on climate emotions and feelings. And I've been searching [for] a word for this feeling of togetherness and belonging and feeling connected to others. And I strongly resonate with what you said about that. And we've seen it in Finland too. This sort of isolation and loneliness. And sometimes people feel that they are some kind, in some way, weak, or unsuccessful if they feel the pressure. And then just, you know, basic validation by peer support can be really empowering for people.

Sasser: I think it's so important. In part because I, when I talk about my research sometimes, particularly with members of older generations, I do get the resistance. I do hear people saying: what? There are people who are thinking about not having children because of climate change? That sounds ridiculous. What - they [laughs] young people will look for any excuse to not want to have children. Or young people are too emotional anyway, for, you know. 

These kinds of — I've heard these kinds of responses that really don't take climate emotions seriously. And I find myself having to really push back against that. Because I think that there is a generational difference in the perception of the immediacy and importance of climate change. As well as the perception of how radically it will alter the earth and, you know, our future experience on it. And acknowledging, resonating with and accepting that people's emotional experiences are true and valid, I think, is really important. 

But the thing that does get older people when I put it forward. And it gets them in a very different way. It got my family this past week. We started having very different conversations after I said this. Is the point of well, there are people in older generations who would like to have grandchildren or great grandchildren. And they very well might not [have grand or great grandchildren] because of these climate emotions and the decisions that young people are making as a result of them. 

And if there is no other motivator or driver on a personal emotional level, then please let your desire to have the family that you want that includes grandchildren or beyond. Let that help you understand this in a different way. In a different emotional way. And as a result of having that conversation, one of my aunts is thinking about getting in an electric vehicle. And changing how she consumes energy on a day to day basis, because she doesn't want my nieces to decide that they never want to have children because of climate change. And it's a simple thing, but I think that personal, heart-centered experience, for some, can bring the issues home in a way that nothing else can.

Doherty: Yeah. That's really neat. And it's really timely with, you know, this recent Thanksgiving holiday and people seeing their families. Yeah. And then universality is one of the terms in therapy about this idea that I realize I'm not the only person that has these issues. So we, in terms of validation, we also — it's universal. There is a sense of universality with this kind of stuff. And then Panu, you've talked about communitas, you know. This joint feelings of togetherness and things like that. That when we do open to this stuff, and I think, you know, some of the older folks, they also have different values at play. 

I know some people. Well, I mean, we all know that, you know, questions about having children are not new. People have had questions about having children perennially for any number of reasons. People during the Cold War and a threat of nuclear war. There [were] questions about having children, I'm sure. I mean, it's before my lived experience, but I'm sure during World War II and enduring other cataclysms in the world people have. During the Depression, you know, people have had really valid questions about whether it's a good idea to bring children into the world. So I do think we forget that this is a human question. And I just wonder about some of these, you know, [if] older generations had other values at play. Family. Continuity. Whatever.

Pihkala: Yeah, yeah. That's very true. And, of course, in many countries, the studies and surveys that have been done show that among the children and youth and young adults, there is more concern and awareness, on average, than with several other age groups. That, of course, doesn't mean that they are the only age group who care deeply. 

And I know many people who, when they become grandparents, then their climate anxiety goes up. Because the issues become so real with the newborn. So it seems that both, you know, families who get the children, if they do and then the grandparents. So there are certain situations which then really bring the issue close to them. And because children are such a key thing for the human tribe, so to say, it evokes so much emotion. And so many hopes and fears involved in relation to children. So, on one hand, it's sort of logical, how difficult it is, for many people to think seriously about such a situation where a large number of young people are very seriously considering not having children because the crisis is so high. That just seems to be too much for many people.

Sasser: Yes. I would also say that childrens symbolize a range of different things. So they symbolize the future. In many instances, they symbolize hopes and possibilities for what kinds of futures we would like to have. They symbolize leaving a legacy. Some part of yourself in a future that will survive after you are no longer here. They also represent, in many ways, our values. What we find really important and what we're willing to take action on. 

So for some of those who I have spoken to and interviewed, having children, again, it really changed their motivation around taking specific actions. Whether it's to consume resources differently. To vote differently. To consider, you know, political candidate's climate positions in how they vote. It, for some, changes the conversations that they have with other parents. And they talk about environmental issues and climate issues in ways that they would not otherwise. For some, it's the opposite. They really sort of pull in. And kind of gather their emotional energy. And really kind of huddle together with family and engage less with these bigger, broader issues out in the world. 

To the point earlier that Thomas made about how people have grappled with these questions around whether, when, why, how to have children, that is a long standing set of concerns. It has affected different generations throughout history in different places for different reasons. So climate change is a threat to basic existence. It's an existential threat. It's not the first or only existential threat. Wars, world wars are certainly existential threats as well. A global pandemic is an existential threat, as we know. And then experiences that we've had here in the United States. Racism. Racial violence. These kinds of things are also existential threats for particular groups. So groups have grappled differently in different ways across time with this set of questions. 

I do know that for communities of color in the US. Particularly for African American communities. It has become much more important to have children. And to have families. And to leave a legacy. Because family and children represent the stability of a safe community that will protect you. Emotionally and socially from the harms that would come from outside of that community. So having children becomes more important in the face of existential threat. And being able to leave a positive legacy that will survive beyond you. And in part that's shaped by a religiously impacted set of values among African Americans. Which says that we have to make sure that the world is better in the future for our children and grandchildren than what it was for us. So having children. Wanting children becomes a motivation to work toward creating that better world. 

But, you know, that also has shaped inside of these broader concerns. My parents were worried about nuclear war when they were considering having me and my sister. They're children of the 50s. They grew up doing bomb drills in school. When they were in their teens, they were involved in protests, you know, against the war in Vietnam. My father's older brother, and my mother's younger brother were both drafted and they both fought in Vietnam. And their families were concerned about whether they would come back alive or not. And then, of course, you know, heading into the 70s, when I was born, this was a period of Cold War anxieties. My mother tells stories of watching the news at different times wondering if there would be a nuclear bomb dropped and thinking: should I have a baby at a time like this? [laughs] And those are very human concerns. Of course, she was concerned. I would be worried if she wasn't concerned about something like that. 

So children really do symbolize and represent so many hopes, dreams, fears, anxieties, desires to make the world better. And then also real concerns about what kind of responsibility one should take toward an innocent person who didn't choose to be here. You're choosing for them to come here. Knowing what you know about conditions that are in the world right now. So it's very complicated. Very, very complicated. And the people who I speak to in interviews are grappling with all of these very complicated emotions. For many of them underneath it all there is a desire to have children. But there are really strong questions about whether that's possible from a moral, ethical, environmental, emotional, and financial position.

Pihkala: Yeah, I love the way that you complicate these issues. I think it's absolutely crucial. And reminds me of also, Matthew Schneider-Mayerson's work. Who I guess you know. And very many different dynamics that people have in relation to these climate crisis and reproduction issues. And also then thanks for sharing insights related to people of color and the situation. I've been struck by many of the studies related to climate emotions in people of color communities in the US, for example. 

And that links to my work. 

I've been trying to emphasize that we shouldn't do binary, you know, classifications between positive and negative as regards emotions. Because, for example, moral outrage is a very important and understandable climate emotion, also. So we need the different perspectives. And thanks for broadening.

Doherty: Yeah. Yeah, we have a few more minutes. This has really, really been right on point, I think, for our podcast. And I think listeners have been really. I think certain people are really - hopefully, you're feeling spoken to. And recognized out there. I mean, one of our notes for our show is, you know, having a child is one of the most intimate and consequential decisions an adult makes in their life course. Right. So it is. We are talking about some of the biggest decisions that people will make in their lives. 

And this is all personal. It's personal to me. It's personal to Panu. It's personal to Jade. And to everyone out there. You know, personally, I remember a time when I didn't want to have children. I have one daughter, age 14. And I remember I didn't want to have children in my 20s. And I remember talking to one of my mentors about this when I was in my 20s. And him encouraging me to think more about it at the time. And I remember getting married. And, you know, deciding to have a child with my wife. My wife ended up dying of breast cancer about four years ago. Chelsea. And we were - she had wanted to have a second child. And I didn't want to have a second child for a number of reasons. And, you know, she ended up - the cancer made the decision for us, unfortunately. So that's an open, you know, that's a wound that I have in my life about what would have happened. You know, what would have happened otherwise. 

But, and I only share that not not to talk about myself, but just to say, this is real stuff for people. You know, it's real stuff for the listeners. And so there are, you know, expression and validation is the first step. Expressing the feelings and just having them be heard and validated. Your decisions are going to go in any number of directions, as we've talked about. And, you know, one title for this might be children and a better world, you know. And like what does a better world mean? And that is different for different people. And children's, the role of children in a better world means different things to the listeners. But yeah, so it's a real thing. Yeah and we've got a couple of minutes on are you sitting on any ideas? Jade?

Pihkala: Yeah. This is such a rich topic. That there's so many possibilities. And thanks so much for sharing that. We've, of course, spoken about that. But I think it's very important for the listeners also, to hear that. Regarding the personal side, we'll put a link to the podcast website of a video conversation between you, Jade, and Britt Wray. Climate emotion research about these perspectives. And there's luckily now good material emerging. This. Your studies and Matthew Schneider-Mayerson's stuff, and so on. So the situation is very different than it was only five years ago. So that's one sort of sign of hope in this. That we are getting more material. And that hopefully avoids people from making overly binary interpretations of that.

Sasser: Absolutely. I think that's really important. Binary kinds of ideas or perspectives just don't capture the complexity and nuance of real life. And I'm finding it is very possible to feel simultaneously motivated, hopeful, anxious, worried, confused, and many other emotions as well. And with the issue of parenting, there is no way to know ahead of time whether you are making the right decision or not. But there is no right or wrong decision universally. Those decisions as you said, Thomas, they are very personal. They are lived in the context of your own life. Your own family. Your own community. What is right for one person may not be right for another person. 

But I do want to leave with this point. There are some people in the environmental and climate community who want to harness the discussion of children through the lens of population. And who want to say, well, none of us should have children because the Earth is overpopulated. And, you know, population growth is the driver of climate change. And when we actually get into the nuances of that, the number of people on the planet is not a driver of climate change. The drivers of climate change, as we know, are about the extraction and consumption of particular kinds of resources. And people consume those resources very differently depending on who they are. Where they are in the world. How many resources they have, et cetera. So simply saying no one should have children for environmental reasons is - it's not. It's a false solution that some like to put forward. And it just doesn't map on to what's actually happening in the world. 

Just as one example, the fertility rate in the United States has been going down for 80 years, at the exact same time that our greenhouse gas emissions have been skyrocketing. So my hope is that people can sort of steer away from that kind of simplistic conversation around population and really focus on the complexity and nuance. 

Doherty: Yeah.

Pihkala: Thanks for bringing that up. And there's such a rich material here that we would need a sequel for the conversation session, also in this.

Doherty: Yeah, we'll put in our show notes. We have a nice link to an article by environmental journalist David Roberts about how he thinks as a journalist [and] he does not talk about, write about overpopulation for some of the more, you know, complex reasons Jade was talking about. So that is a topic we can follow up on. This has been a really beautiful conversation. And I really appreciate Jade your time today. And we're gonna wrap it up and get into our days. You know, we're humans and we have our lives. And Panu what are you up to after our talk?

Pihkala: Well, again, my six year old is playing with his friends. So they are gonna come in [in] something like 10 minutes. And this links with something that Jade was talking about. So regardless of what one's own position is, at least we have the possibility to rejoice of the children that are in the world. So that's the strong source of positivity for me, at least. Thank you very much, Jade.

Sasser: Thank you. I've really enjoyed it too. And after this, I'm a college professor. So I'll be spending my day reading articles. Lesson planning. And getting ready for tomorrow's online classes. 

Doherty: Yeah, well, good luck with that. And online classes is a whole 'nother episode. And yeah, and I'm gonna meet, I'm going to do my clinical work. And I'm actually doing some walking sessions outdoors today with some clients in a park. And I see some blue sky out there. And we're lucky that I tend to get lucky on some of the one day of the week that there's some clear skies is the my walking therapy day, so I'm really happy about that.

Well, listen, both of you take care of yourselves. I look forward to maybe some more conversations in the future. And listeners out there, please keep in touch with us. Climatechangeandhappiness.com. We'll be having more of these conversations and I hope you can join us. Take care everyone

Pihkala: Take care.

image credit | Garidy Sanders

When we face a challenge like global climate change, none of us is “enough.” Thomas and Panu center this episode’s conversation around naming feelings of inadequacy [in Finnish riittämättömyyden tunne: the feeling of not being enough or doing enough]. They share ways to work through this common feeling, balancing acceptance, action and rest. Panu differentiates various shades of anxiety in relation to feeling inadequate in the face of the climate crisis, including anxiety of responsibility, anxiety of freedom and anxiety of guilt. When we work toward sustainability, it’s not just an ideal or a policy. We also have to make it personal with concrete actions. Panu shares his experience at Omavaraopisto [The School of Self Sufficiency] in Finland. Thomas echoes the the importance of hands-on activities, adding “some concrete things to our very abstract worlds.” He shares the image of an upside down pyramid that he uses with his clients — a tool for restabilizing ourselves when overwhelmed and bringing our focus back to healthy daily activities — to give us energy and meaning for the long haul. Take a moment, when you can, to give some honest feedback when you notice you or someone else is being enough. 

• Hickman, Marks, Pihkala, et. al. (2021) Climate anxiety in children and young people and their beliefs about government responses to climate change: A global survey

• Omavaraopisto, The School of Self Sufficiency

• Paul Tillich, The Courage to Be

• Tara Brach & The practice of Radical Acceptance 

• Thomas’ “Upside Down” Pyramid lesson

Season 1, Episode 7: Inadequacy & Upside Down Pyramid

[music: “CC&H theme music”]

Introduction voice: Welcome to Climate Change and Happiness (CC&H), an international podcast that explores the personal side of climate change. Your feelings, what the crisis means to you, and how to cope and thrive. And now, your hosts, Thomas Doherty and Panu Pihkala.

Thomas Doherty: Well, hello. This is Thomas Doherty. 

Panu Pihkala: And I'm Panu Pihkala. 

Doherty: And welcome to Climate Change and Happiness, where we talk about… climate change and happiness. And climate change and other kinds of emotions. So, this is the show for people who are feeling and thinking deeply about climate change and how it affects them in their personal life. And in their families and communities. And their roles as citizens. And so we're back at it here. It's morning for me. It's evening for Panu. I'm getting going here on a fall morning here in the Pacific Northwest. How're you feeling today, Panu? How's life going for you?

Pihkala: Thanks for asking Thomas. It's getting [to be] late autumn in Finland. So we are approaching what we call marras. That's the title for our November: marraskuu. Which means sort of the time when everything in nature looks dead. So that is the time before the relief of the snow comes. Or at least it used to come. So, it's time to think about how to maintain one's energy. And for me, for example, the time to pick up the bright lamp. Which I have on actually also; now the sun is just setting in Helsinki. How are you doing on the West Coast, Thomas?

Doherty: You know, we're doing pretty well. I love that Finnish word for November. Marraskuu. Yeah, yeah. I was celebrating some of the fall season with my daughter. My daughter age 14. And we went — what we do here in Portland, there's a farming region right outside of Portland that you can go to to go and get pumpkins, which we celebrate. And one of our traditions for the Halloween season is getting pumpkins. And taking a hay ride. And being out and on a farm. And so we were enjoying the autumn season. And so that's I'm glad you bring that up because that is a positive piece of it. 

I do love this autumn season myself and our weather. We've had some really, as you know, crazy weather here in the Pacific Northwest recently, but we are having a fairly calm autumn season. [A] more traditional feeling one. And the leaves on the trees, the deciduous trees, have become really beautiful colors, bright reds. And so we're feeling that. And the leaves haven't fallen yet either. So we haven't gotten to that dead season that you described yet. So yeah, yeah. 

And, you know, I was thinking about our conversation. And this idea of our podcast, you know, feelings. Climate emotions. Emotions are our primal physical sensations that we have. Feelings are the language that we use to speak to our emotions, right? And that's different all over the world. Different languages, different cultures have different words for those deep, these deeper emotions. A feeling that I came to just the other day was inadequacy. Unfortunately, that was a feeling that I was feeling which, as we'll talk [about], isn't necessarily rational. I'm doing a lot of really good work and I know you are as well. But I was feeling inadequate to the task of climate change and just doing work in the world. And I don't actually remember what prompted it in particular. It was probably an interaction of my personal to do list and, you know, my family work. And then my idea of writing and my duty. I mean climate change as a huge hyper object is interacting with my sense of my personal destiny—and what I should be doing on the planet. And so it leaves me both inadequate. 

I also paradoxically felt like a “know-it-all” in a sense. That's an American term. Know-it-all. But I felt like sometimes I was trying to tell people about all the different connections with climate change. And it's partly what I do for a living. I am training counselors and I am doing this podcast. But I also felt—it wasn't so much a know-it-all. I felt the need to make these connections clear for people that weren't obviously made clear. And so that was sort of the, you know, the impulse like you and I know that people have been working on this for years. There's great ideas out there. And whenever someone invents something for the first time today as if it just happened, I say, well, that's not actually the case. People have been talking about this concept and that concept for many years. So I can be a little pedantic. But it's also this urge to name the elephant in the room in many ways. Even with justice. 

We've got a senator in the US that's holding up the climate change legislation here. And it's about the coal industry because the senator is part of the coal industry. And the coal industry in West Virginia is holding up climate legislation that could change the entire, you know, trajectory of the planet. And the media doesn't talk about this. It talks about just some senator with some fiscal policy. And they're not telling the whole story. And so I think there's also that inadequacy. Like, no we have to get all the truth out, so to speak so. But anyway, it sounds like you were also resonating with that feeling from the Finnish side.

Pihkala: Yeah, definitely. I strongly resonate with that. I actually have been putting forth in Finnish a[n] emotion word or feeling term called riittämättömyyden tunne. Now, that takes some unpacking. Tunne is the word we use in [the] Finnish language for feeling and emotion. So we don't separate them in Finnish language. And riittämättömyys, it means both not being enough and not having done enough. And that may sound like a sort of ultimate shame position, but it's actually between guilt and shame. And we use the same word riittää, for example, if you pour some water into a glass, then somebody says that’s riittävästi. That means that it's enough. So it's sort of context dependent, being enough. 

And I've noticed that many people, including myself, very easily feel this, riittämättömyyden tunne, inadequacy, because the ecological crisis and climate crisis simply challenges us in so many ways. It's very difficult to feel that you've actually done all that you should do or could do. So I think one of the actually most important emotional skills in the era of the climate crisis is the sort of learning to accept the ambivalence and limits but also trying to keep going. So it's a really tricky issue.

Doherty: Yeah, yeah. And I think it's important for listeners. I mean, I know many people listening around the world will be resonating with this. I can just guess it. If we're feeling it, we're human, other people are feeling it, too. And so you might you, as a listener might feel like I'm not even, I don't even know anything about this area. And I'm just listening in as an amateur. And I don't feel like I'm being enough. Well, even the experts don't feel like they're being enough, either. That's the nature of the hyper objectness of climate change. It's ultimately always bigger than our perception. And it's just a huge, multifaceted area, multifaceted issue. So yes, because you are working really hard. And I know you're tired, Panu, from traveling and doing all these interesting things you've been doing. So you wanna, let's flip this over a little bit and say, why? In what way have you been being enough? What have you been doing? I know, you mentioned some interesting travels and your paper in Lancet and all this stuff. What's some of these adventures you've had recently?

Pihkala: Yeah, yeah, thanks for asking, and sort of turning it around. And sort of how to be enough. And I've actually been using for the last couple of weeks this very simple anxiety-related exercise. Or it's sort of anxiety of responsibility -related exercise. But I think that that's a very fundamental part of what anxiety fundamentally is, you know. Wanting to do something in the midst of the problems. And then anxiety of freedom. Anxiety of responsibility being a major part of that. And then the possible anxiety of guilt also. So I've been writing lists, you know, to-do lists, and then very manually, just overlining things that I've been doing. That's an advice I picked [up] from some psychologists at some point. And amazingly, because we are what we are, that also helps. You sort of get a bodily signal that you've done something when you overline it. And I just noticed another tip, which I haven't done yet, but I plan to do. Which would be to sort of write down all the things one has done in a day. I don't usually do that. But that might be another trick. But [is] this one familiar for you Thomas? Have you been doing —  I'll talk about the travels more soon.

Doherty: Yeah, no, what we'd say is crossing it off the list. And, you know, there is a funny thing where I'll make a to-do list and write things I've already done just so I can cross them off. Yeah, the idea of inadequacy versus enough. But do tell me about your adventures there. I know you've been traveling. So yeah.

Pihkala: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah definitely. So because of the Lancet's “Children and young people climate anxiety and their views about government climate inaction” paper, there's been lots of speaking assignments and media issues related to that one. And one of them led me last week to the Ministry of the Environment in Finland. They're very interested about the paper. And one of these very high level experts, actually recommended me [to be invited]. He sort of shared a very emotional thing and said that when he read the results of the paper, the first gut reaction for him was that, “what could I do more?” So it really sparked again, something related to this feeling inadequate. And I know him pretty well. He's a person who sort of does what he can, reasonably thinking, and he knows that too. And after a couple of days, he was able to, of course, analyze them, the feelings that he got. But I think that's telling, you know, that people care about these states of the world and children and young people's reactions. And would like to do more. And are sort of struggling because there's only so much one can do and stay functioning. That's a real challenge among these times. 

And then the sort of other end of my adventures was a train trip, and a bus trip to a place called Valtimo, which is Northern Karelia, quite close to the Russian border. And really in the midst of forests. It actually also already snowed a bit during the weekend there. There's a group of people who have built what they call “School of Self-Sufficiency.” A couple of old farms. And they are sort of keeping on the tradition of these ancient skills related to growing food and building houses from wood and so on. So, they were also interested about environmental emotions and climate emotions. But it was a totally different crowd and space, compared to this high-tech conference room in the Ministry of the Environment in Helsinki. And then this old, farming house in Valtimo. So that was, in many ways, rewarding and nice. But I do find myself a bit tired after the travels, I have to confess.

Doherty: Yeah. Well, that's a great example of climate cosmopolitanism, right? This idea that, you know, you can move between different climate subcultures. This is a very concrete example of that. And, you know, listeners can know that. And I've done that as well. I've done [it] in my outdoor therapy background. You know, there's subcultures of outdoor therapy that are back to the land kind of approaches. And, you know, indigenous living skills and, you know, making fire by, you know, friction fire by rubbing sticks. And making arrowheads and tanning hides, and trapping animals and things like that. And so that's a very different subculture of sustainability than your academics, you know, or policy subculture. And so, it sounds like you are able to move between those yourself fairly well. So you're, you know, practicing and exhibiting climate cosmopolitanism. And you know, you're, you can, you know, “when in Rome do as the Romans do” kind of thing, you can kind of tap into this kind of thing.

Pihkala: Yeah, that's a nice way to put it, Thomas. Thanks for that. I think cosmopolitanism can happen also in the countryside or in the woods. So it's not related to the polises [a reference to the greek word, polis, meaning a city], so but —

Doherty: Yeah, exactly. It's different cultures. That's the way I think about it. It's different cultures. And then I think you're tired. And, you know, like I say, you know, despair is fatigue in disguise. And so I think when we're tired, you know, we lose that. I guess we get “adequacy fatigue,” right? You know, our ability to feel adequate, gets fatigued. Or when we're fatigued, we start to feel like we can't do enough, because our battery is low. And so, you know, everyone listening has to think about this. When your battery's low, you know, you're going to feel fatigued, and then you're more prone to despair. And then that's the signal that you need to rest and take time out from the game. To reconnect with yourself and work on the foundation of your pyramid. You know, rest, exercise, family, diet, sleep, and things like that.

Pihkala: Yeah, Thomas, I've sometimes heard you speak about sort of the pyramid metaphor. That sometimes, you know, you're sort of building the foundations and sometimes it's like, the pyramid is weighing on you. Do you want to open that metaphor for the listeners also? I thought it was rather nice.

Doherty: Yeah, it's something that I use with clients. And, you know, Panu has been able to join my therapy training groups that I'm doing right now with mental health therapists. And we were talking about that as a coping [strategy]. And I shared that with some high schoolers that I spoke to last week as well. The image is, if you imagine a large pyramid that's upside down, so its apex is pointing toward the ground. And so it's really top heavy, it's really hard to balance and we have, you know, we feel like the world's like this pyramid over the top of us. You know, we have a very small little triangle of resources, and this huge pyramid that's infinite. It just keeps going. And there's all these different issues and things we're thinking about. You know, politics and sustainability and social movements and our lives and things like that. And it's just really an overwhelmed kind of inadequate feeling in general. And one of the mental reframes is to flip that pyramid over onto its base so it's nice and stable. And then we just focus on the foundation. 

If someone I'm working with, you know, is really tired, burned out, fatigued, depleted, discouraged, you know, we say, let's get back to the foundation. You know, and everybody has similar bricks in their foundation of health. Sleep, eating good food, social relationships, their home, maybe their daily work, family, their pets, or whatever things around their home. It's a very human exercise. And then if people have unique bricks in their foundation, so they might have a certain hobby, or they might be a musician or artist, or certain daily things that they do every day. And then we try to get clear on what your foundation is. At least in theory. 

Some people have a lot of missing bricks in their foundation. Like they're not doing certain things that they want. Or they just haven't been able to manifest yet. They might want to be in a relationship, and they don't have one or something like that. So it provides some goal setting conversations as well. So it's all about this idea of personal sustainability is what I call it, you know, like, let's get sustainable in your own base of your own pyramid. And then the idea is organically, you'll have more energy and ability to reach up toward the top, which is where those issues are. And there's a number of directions there. I mean the pyramid at the top is pointed.  The upside down pyramid is infinite. It just extends, widens, and there's no end to it. But the pyramid that's on its basis actually has a point. And then we can start thinking about what are your priorities? And what, you know? And so it's just a metaphor, and I find it helps the ground people.

Pihkala: Yeah, I really like that one. And it's got many good dimensions, like the metaphor of bricks also, and resources and that type of thing. And it also reminds me of a young person I met at this old farm at the School of Self- Sufficiency, who talked about how earlier on he very often had this feeling of the pyramid. He didn't use that word, but anyway, resting on his head and shoulders and feeling very inadequate. And now during what they do there, he's often physically tired. But because he can physically touch things and do things in an embodied, holistic way, that helps him to feel adequate and feel enough. So that sort of dynamic I know is possible also in urban settings, when you do something with your hands and body. So I think that's also an important resource, which can help with grounding and getting [the] feeling that you've done something. 

But it also takes much psychological work, I think. And then old theologian, philosopher, psychologist, Paul Tillich, has been important for me in that regard. This 1950s classic The Courage to Be, which has these two dimensions in it. Courage to be oneself, an individual. And courage to be part of collectives. But also then the more spiritual idea of accepting that you are accepted. I think that also from a secular point of view, that points to something very important. That it's not enough when you hear that, you know, everything, everybody's accepted, but you sort of have to be able to perform it yourself with the support of others. So that's the second level of accepting that you are accepted. That you're okay. But how does that resonate with you, Thomas?

Doherty: It resonates. You know, I think this idea of doing concrete action, like you were describing that person that was doing the living skills. There is something, you know, comforting about doing something that's concrete or with our hands. Doing some sort of project. Whether it be knitting or cooking or painting or woodworking or repairing our home or building something or doing some sort of skill. You know, music or, you know, some sort of handiwork.  You know, like blacksmithing, or something like that. 

There is obviously, you know, the sense of a flow state in terms of psychology. You know, we have a concrete cause and effect. And, you know, we can get into a flow with these kinds of things. And so I think it is a takeaway for all of us to add some concrete things to our very abstract worlds. If we're only ever dealing with abstract policy and sort of distant things, we don't get that pay off. And, I know for me when I'm working with people — that's concrete. Doing this podcast is also concrete. So I feel like, in the moment, I'm doing something. And, you know, the therapy training groups that I'm doing now, it's [a] 10-week group, you know, with mental health people. You know, that's very rewarding, because we're doing something very concrete and helping these counselors, you know, therapists learn about their own environmental identity and talk about their feelings in the way that we are doing [with this podcast]. 

And so when I'm working with people, it brings out the best in me, typically. My creativity and, you know, my not necessarily being upbeat, sometimes I work on really dark, dark topics. But even then I'm, you know, creating spaces, we've talked about holding space for others. And that holding space is a very, very concrete thing as well. So I think, yeah, I think one of the antidotes to inadequacy outside of just rest is doing some concrete things that we can sort of measure and feel.

Pihkala: Hmm. Yeah, thanks for sharing that. That's very important, I think. And it's sometimes also tricky, because if one recognizes that one's got a lot of privilege, as we Finns tend to have, then there's also the dimension of, you know, wanting and feeling like one also has to use that privilege to help the global dimension. Both the more-than-human world and then the suffering people around the globe. So that sometimes makes the questions of and feelings of inadequacy even worse. 

Just today from social media, I read from a very experienced Finnish climate reporter who was saying that she's been totally fatigued now for one and a half years. And one of the reasons has been this privilege issue of, you know, feeling the need to do so much, that's causing it. But I was very glad that she shared about it all openly, because of course, that's something related to other areas of work life, in contemporary societies, also. Structural demands can be so high. And when you combine that with ecological awareness, it can be quite heavy indeed.

Doherty: Yeah, indeed. So naming this impulse to duty that we have. You know, we have a duty. We have, in psychology terms, a “social norm.” You know, an expectation that we should be doing something based on our knowledge and our ability to take action. You know, privilege is a kind of a touchy word. But in the sense that, you know, some people, it's not like people, you know, chose their privilege. Some people are, they're in a place where they discover that they are privileged. But what that means is that you have resources and you have abilities. You have either the ability to act or resources or choice. And that leads you to a sense of obligation, you know. A sense of duty. And so, you know, that's where the action is there. And the privilege is kind of self-loathing, some of that is it gets into self loathing. That's an action as well. So I can do self loathing as an action just to cope. But it's not a good coping skill. It's really about how do I channel some of the resources that I have in a good direction. 

And again, the psychology 101 stuff, I mean, it's either egocentric values like my own personal protection and my family, or altruistic values, or biocentric values, you know, for the Earth. Earth values. And so we're going to have duties in all those directions. I have duties in those directions. Panu you do as well. We need to rest so we have the energy to get in the game and work on things like that. So yeah, we've got a few more minutes left here. Can you revisit the Finnish words that you described at the outset so we can get that more clear in people's minds?

Pihkala: Yeah. And that's been two. Of course there's Marraskuu. You know November as the death of the summer months. Then this riittämättömyyden tunne. Feeling of not being and doing enough. Feeling inadequate is the most accurate respondent meaning that I've found but it's not exactly the same either. And then there's the sort of the counter force of strength of acceptance. I've liked the stuff related to so-called “radical acceptance” that mindfulness writer Tara Brach has been putting forward, for example. Perhaps because I see so much of this riittämättömyyden tunne / inadequacy feelings among the people I meet in the environmental sectors.

Doherty: Yes. “Riittamatomuden tunne”.

Pihkala: Very nice. Thomas. You're learning your Finnish!

Doherty: Yes, yes. Yes, I'll have to get on my Duolingo for Finnish here. But yes, acceptance, radical acceptance, you know. Yes, I would, I will point out that a lot of people choke on acceptance. You know, they don't want to accept certain things. They seem to be “unacceptable.” But, you know, you could also think of it as just being open. Being open to a thing. I am open that it exists. I don't need to, you know, with some people semantically acceptance means some sort of condoning or some sort of, you know, giving permission and so. But being open, and I think that's still, in keeping with Tara Brach's idea of radical acceptance is living and being open that this thing exists. And it's with me. And it's next to me. And I'm involved with it. And I'm open to it. So, you know, from a therapeutic standpoint, just feeling open to a thing and having this little bit of a distance from it, but being present with it and open with it is also enough. You know, we typically have enough energy to do that. Like, we can be enough to be open to something. I don't have to come down on one side or the other about my feelings about it, per se. But the feeling of openness, presence, awareness. 

So there's a sustainability there. The sustainability of being open as well. Sometimes I can get to a place where that's not fatiguing and I'm just open. But that's the work as well. Well, as we go, this is another one of these feeling words to add to our vocabulary list. This feeling of not being enough or not having done enough. And I want people to be, you know, listeners to be thinking about their own feelings. And talking about them with others. And finding some safe places to think about and express these things. And we're going to keep doing that work ourselves.

Pihkala: Exactly. And also remembering the sort of counter emotion of riittämättömyyden tunne, which is then you know, feeling enough. And, you know, that doesn't mean completely full or perfect, but it's just, you know, enough. And that's after the end of the day, I think that's something that we very much need. So taking a look back at the day and you know, that's that's what it is. And from many points of view, you just have to sort of look for the new morning and also remember to feel enough.

Doherty: Yeah. Riittämättömyyden tunne. Feeling enough. You know, what I say in my practice is, you know, just imagine what you would tell [your] best friend in the same situation. So when we can't pull that out for ourselves. Typically, we would be able to do it for a friend. We'd be able to let a friend know that they are enough. And if that friend had this exact same day as us, then we can transfer that energy back toward ourselves. So what would you tell a best friend in the same situation? That's a good mental hack. That's good almost all the time. So what would you tell your family or friends? Are they being enough? Are they doing enough? Some of you might feel like some people aren't and that's another conversation. But for the people that genuinely are, we need to be able to let them know. Alright, Panu well, I think you're doing enough. And - 

Pihkala: Likewise. 

Doherty: You're welcome! Have a good evening over there and get some rest. And I look forward to chatting again soon. And listeners take care of yourselves.

image credit | Shane Rounce

In a conversation recorded during the recent COP 26 meeting, Susan Clayton, a colleague and noted social and conservation psychology researcher, joined Thomas and Panu. Together they discussed the important role that our environmental identity plays in helping us understand our values and desires about nature and addressing environmental issues. Susan talked about her role as a psychologist serving on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and the positive emotions that arise engaging with a truly international group of gifted scientists. Thomas reflected on “climate flow” — a sense of flow and shared mission that emerges when we have the opportunity to collaborate on climate issues. Panu also recognized the “climate isolation” and “climate loneliness” that can take hold when we lack a support network for talking about climate emotions. Susan also spoke about her conservation psychology work with zoos and aquariums. This episode itself serves as an example of the flow that emerges from creative dialog with others who share our interests and values, even when talking about daunting issues. We hope you can join in.

• Susan Clayton, Ph.D.

  • Clayton, Manning, Speiser & Hill (2021). Mental Health and Our Changing Climate: Impacts, Inequities, Responses. American Psychological Association and ecoAmerica.

  • The Psychological Impacts of Global Climate Change (2011) co-authored with Thomas Doherty

  • Environmental Identity 

  • Psychology of Rewilding

• Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi - Originated the concept of flow in psychology

• The Blind Men and the Elephant parable, expressed in poetic form by John Godfrey Saxe

• Carol Saunders - Conservation Psychology Pioneer

Season 1, Episode 6: Environmental Identity and “Climate Flow” with Guest Susan Clayton

[music: “CC&H theme music”]

Introduction voice: Welcome to Climate Change and Happiness (CC&H), an international podcast that explores the personal side of climate change. Your feelings, what the crisis means to you, and how to cope and thrive. And now, your hosts, Thomas Doherty and Panu Pihkala.

Thomas Doherty: Hello, I'm Thomas Doherty. 

Panu Pihkala: And I am Panu Pihkala. 

Thomas Doherty: And welcome to Climate Change and Happiness. Our podcast. This is a show for people around the globe who are feeling and thinking deeply about climate change. Particularly the personal side. How climate change affects them and their families and their communities and their emotional responses. And we have a guest today.

Susan Clayton : Hi, I'm Susan Clayton. Glad to be with you.

Doherty : And yes, we have a special guest. Susan Clayton is — some of you in the psychology world would know of Susan and the climate psychology world. But she's a big name in our worlds in terms of understanding people's connections with nature and the natural world. And Susan will talk about herself. We'll get into her work. But she's, you know, just a little preview. She comes in through this as a social psychologist. And I got the chance to meet Susan, some years ago when I was a newcomer clinician therapist trying to break into the environmental psychology group at the American Psych Association. And Susan was very kind to me, as were others to help me get into that group. And I got a chance to work with Susan directly on the taskforce that the American Psychological Association did. The first one they did around 10 or 11 years ago. And so I got a chance to work with Susan and learn from her. And I've since followed her work. And I know Panu, has more recently been spending a fair amount of at least virtual time with Susan.

Pihkala: Yeah, that is very, very correct. And warmly welcome, Susan also for, for my part. We are very, very glad to have you here. And, of course, I've been reading texts by both of you and also sometimes written together, like that one influential article. But then, during the last year, both Susan and I were taking part in this international research group about climate emotions, which produced a global survey research article about young people's emotions and beliefs about climate matters. And that's gotten us busy this  Autumn 2021. But how are you, Susan, doing, in the midst of these strange times? That climate meeting is going on. And the climate crisis is proceeding. So how are you feeling?

Clayton: Well, it's — these are interesting times, as they say. There's always something that's going on that seems relevant to, to my research and professional interests. And, you know, so that interest is, is one way to keep a positive mindset, I think. And just before saying more, I want to acknowledge that both of you have really affected my thinking about climate change. Thomas over the years, and Panu more recently. Thomas, you were the first clinical psychologist I met who was interested in this. And so it really started me to get to start to think about how people were affected by their understanding of, you know, of what was happening to the environment. And then more recently, getting to know Panu, and just the nuance you bring to thinking about the different emotions we experience when we think about climate change. So kudos to both of you. And you really helped my thinking along the way.

Doherty: Thanks. Thanks.

Pihkala: Thank you Susan. 

Doherty: Susan, well, you know, I'll have to get this and we can talk about a lot of things. But you know, environmental identity is, I think, a really big topic. I'm doing this training with mental health therapists now. And, and that's one of the big platforms of the work is helping them to understand their environmental identity and their thoughts and feelings and beliefs and values about nature. And we're using that as the basis to then put on top [of] the therapy skills, they already know. And the different therapy styles. So it's sort of like what I call an environmental identity based therapy. Or so you might say an environmental identity based cognitive therapy or whatever. So, where do you come at environmental identity these days? I mean, I know it's sort of a broad phrase, but, you know, what pieces of it are coming up for you lately?

Clayton: Yeah. So, you know, when I started thinking about environmental identity it was the idea of recognizing, based on conversations I had with people and things I heard people say, that nature was important to the way people thought about themselves. And it could really be a source of self knowledge as well as kind of self affirmation and strengths to think about how we're all part of the natural world. So I continue to think about how can we help people to have a strong environmental identity, especially as you know, we all are aware that we're in a world where it's increasingly difficult to have experiences in nature. People are more likely to live in urban areas. For one thing. Nature's becoming degraded for another thing. And, of course, most of us spend a vast amount of time with technology, which is also potentially interfering in the relationship with nature. So how in this kind of changing world, can we still find ways to, to form that connection with nature that can form a part of our environmental identity?

Pihkala: Yeah, that's most important. And we've noticed that you've been working in several parts of the world in relation to this. There's some recent research articles taking a look to the east, even further east than Finland to Russia and China. So any thoughts about that east direction.

Clayton: I have to admit that certainly, when I went when I was trained as a psychologist, it was still in the era, where we'd like to think that we were understanding general tendencies about people. And we didn't have to pay too much attention to the specifics. So I was not really very mindful about cultural differences. But the more I study, the more I realized, I don't know. And it's, it's become very clear to me that the ways in which we think about nature, as well as the ways in which we think about the relationship, our own relationships with nature, are very much culturally grounded. Probably even in a bigger differences. Thinking about a lot of indigenous peoples, and how they think about the relationship between humans and the natural world. But certainly, you know, Eastern cultures like China, and you know, slightly less far east. But still, I think, with elements of eastern, you know, Turkey or Russia. They also have different ways of thinking about nature. And it's just important in expanding my sense of what's possible, and what we take for granted.

Pihkala: Yeah, thanks for thanks for sharing that. And coming from Finland, it's, of course, very interesting, because we have such a long border with Russia and the Turkish people tend to see Finns as sort of distant relatives. So there's a special connection there. But also, even here, near the eastern edge of Europe, the social and cultural differences you mentioned, still play a role, even though there are some, some similarities. But you both come from North America. We've been talking with Thomas, about his history a bit, you know, doing river rafting, guiding and that sort of thing. But would you like Susan to share some of your own background? Did you have a strong connection to the natural world already when you were a child or young person?

Clayton: Yeah, I think I did. And not in maybe a dramatic way. I wasn't, you know, involved in environmental protests, except, you know, the kind of way an eight year old might come home and say, hey, we need to recycle. But I think perhaps what made a difference for me is that I was fortunate, even though I sort of grew up in the suburbs. Behind my home, there was a woods and a creek, and my bedroom window opened, facing the creek. So at night, I would hear the creek running, and I would hear the wind in the trees. And you know, maybe that had a powerful impact on me. I certainly spent a lot of time walking around the woods near my house. So even though I have to say my family didn't show any particular interest or connection to the environment, I think it may have become an implicit part of who I was. Those important kinds of sensory memories of nature. 

Doherty: Yeah. Yeah, I think that implicit, explicit is a really good thing to think about. And listeners, you know, you all can think about that, too. There's certain things we just pick up from where we live, and we don't think about them. We just - they've become part of who we are. And then I think part of our process, even with this podcast, is making all this stuff more explicit. And of course, we're all, you know, Global North. White, light skinned people. So we have our own perspectives on this, but I want to make sure you know, listeners, you know, there's listeners around the world in this podcast, and they're all coming from different places. And I think every place has an indigenous root. An indigenous core. And no matter where you are in the world, I mean, indigenous cultures exist now, of course, it's not, they're not just an anachronism. And we have, you know, First Nations people listening to this now. And all of us can aspire to some sort of connection with place. And then there's a lot of problems and barriers too. So just to make sure that we're not missing that important point,

Clayton: I think one of the interesting things is, at least for me, it's the ways in which we think about nature. And the ways in which we think about our own relationship with nature can be so, so implicit, that we kind of don't realize that there are alternatives. And so encountering some of these alternative ways of thinking about that relationship can just be very real revealing in terms of shedding light on your own perspectives.

Doherty: Like [an] example? What are you thinking about, Susan, when you say that?

Clayton: Well, I think just thinking about the fact that it, for example, a lot of Westerners. A lot of people in the US and maybe Western European countries, tend to think of humans and nature as very separate. And if you ask them, you know, what, what is nature or what is wilderness especially, they'll define it as well, essentially a place where you don't find people and you don't find any evidence of people. And this is even embodied in the US Wilderness Act, for example. You know, there are many other cultures in which there may be no word for wilderness. You know, that nature is something to which people are related. They feel a sense of kinship with the natural world. And yeah, so just recognizing that the case makes me think, why do I think of nature as separate from human? It gives me more insight into the limits of my own perspective.

Pihkala: Yeah, thanks for sharing all that. And that resonates with my earlier history, also, researching Environmental Theology. And of course, the role of the Judeo-Christian worldview and religion in creating some possible hierarchies and or the mixed legacy. Of course, there were more ecological elements in that tradition, also. But my students, I still did some courses on environment and religion, they are always amazed to hear that in the ancient Hebrew, the original language of the Old Testament, there is no word for nature. Literally. There are, of course, some words that are used for, for, you know, land and so on. But they didn't have a separate concept for nature. And of course, there's a profound difference already between the Greek vocabulary and worldview and the [more] ancient, a bit more hunter-gatherer-founded worldview.

Doherty: Yeah, yeah. And then we talk about Climate Cosmopolitanism. This concept of, you know, like, we got it, we have to sort of think about all these different views, even of climate change in, you know, approaches to climate change. And feelings about climate change. And strategies about it. And all that sort of stuff. So, yes, all the world. Yeah. And Susan, one of many things we could talk about is your work on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). We've got this Glasgow meeting going on. And, you know, the listeners don't get a chance often to hear from someone who's been on these kinds of committees and doing this kind of work. Do you have any anecdotes about your work? Some of these IPCC reports and things like that? 

Clayton: Yeah well I - 

Doherty: Or do you not want to not want to talk about that? It's up to you? 

Clayton: No, it's fine. I'm sure you can definitely empathize with me when I say how gratifying it is that the people are starting to pay more attention to the impacts, the human impacts of climate change. Including the impacts on mental health. So that's just been really wonderful to see to the extent that that's happening. And I will say with regard to my participation with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, there have been a couple of wonderful things about that. I mean, probably more than a couple but one is it is such an international. A very intentionally international group. Like probably both of you, I'm in a number of organizations that try to be international, but they're almost always primarily from North America and Western Europe. Whereas the IPCC really does get people from, you know, probably every country around the world. And it's a unique experience and a very valuable one to me. 

And then the other thing is, you know, we were talking getting back to the idea of emotions. You know, people often think, how do you maintain optimism in the face of climate change? How do you keep from feeling anxiety and despair all the time? And the process of these hundreds of scientists who are volunteering their time to talk about climate change. And its mechanisms.  And its effects. And how we can mitigate it. And how we can adapt to it. And they're cheerful. You know, back in the day when we were able to actually meet in person, people were friendly and happy. And I think the process of working with these people who are so committed to bringing their expertise to bear on this topic is a reminder of the possibility of finding, you know, meaning and purpose and just positive experiences in talking about climate change. 

Doherty: Yeah.

Pihkala: Yeah, thanks, Susan for sharing that. That sounds like many empowering experiences together with these professionals from around the world. And sometimes in [the] media one might get, you get the image that climate scientists are only depressed these days. And, of course, it's very important that the difficult emotions of climate scientists and other researchers get enough attention. And I know that you've been involved in that, as I've been in Finland, but also to bring forth that there's much joy and laughter still among people who work passionately, for a better future. So thanks for lifting that up.

Doherty: Yeah. I think it's, you know, I've been playing around with some positive ideas. You know, I think there's a sense of momentum we get when we're actually working on a project. You know, we have a sense of movement. We're engaged in something. And that itself is really psychologically healthy. To have a sense of engagement in a project of any kind, whatever, whatever kind of project it is. And I think at these meetings, I mean, people don't realize you're around people that believe in what you believe. And validate what you feel and think. And that's so healthy, you know, to be around. It's so inspiring to be around a bunch of people. Especially really gifted people that really, you don't have to explain yourself. You're all on the same page. And I think that's huge. And something, I'm sorry. I mean, for the listeners that don't get that. And I know a lot of people in fact. Maybe most people don't get that in the world. I'm lucky enough to get pieces of that even just right now in our conversation.

So I think there's even a sense of like a flow, you know. There's this flow state, right? In psychology Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, unfortunately, just passed away. And we lost this researcher, who, you know, popularized flow. But you know, I think we can even. You know, again, this is provocative, but we can get into, like a climate flow. Where like, we're working on stuff. And we're in a flow. And we're getting feedback. And we're being supported. And so that's kind of a revolutionary idea. But I don't know, Susan, have you felt climate flow like in some of these meetings?

Clayton: Absolutely. I think, you know, the idea that we get caught up in doing something that we find meaningful. And that takes some effort, but not too much. I mean, I think that's kind of the definition of flow. That it requires your resources, but it doesn't require more from you than you can, than you have to give. So, yes, I definitely experience that. And I think recognizing the sources of satisfaction that come from, from good work, is kind of what it comes down to. I also want to, thanks, thank you, Thomas, for raising the issue of how the social context for thinking about climate change can affect our experiences of it. So as you say, a lot of people may feel that. I mean, not only do they have to deal with their own emotions, but they have to deal with maybe unsupportive friends or family members or coworkers who. Or even if they don't, they're not really unsupportive. Just the worry that they might be unsupportive, can shut down some conversations before they even get started. So the ability to talk about our worries is very important. Very satisfying

Pihkala: Yes, countering feelings of isolation and loneliness. So sort of climate isolation or climate loneliness are part of this affective spectrum very much, I think too. And you both sort of testify to the possibility of experiencing both difficult emotions and very positive empowering emotions. And I always find that very important to emphasize that both can exist. It doesn't need to be one sided. But it's for the full spectrum of different colors. But you, Susan, are known as one of the forerunners in research and thinking about eco-anxiety or climate anxiety. And I want to ask you, when did you get involved with that particular topic? Does it have a long history? Or?

Clayton: No, I think it's a fairly well, it may be as much as four or five years, but perhaps less and not more. I think it arose partly out of discussions with reporters with journalists. So I had been writing about the mental health effects of climate change. Starting with a paper with Thomas. And then other papers more recently. And people would ask me, well, is this, you know, is this mental health issue? If people are concerned about climate change, does this represent a threat to mental health? So I started to think, well, I don't know, does it? You know, let's look at it, let's do some of the research and try to find out how many people are experiencing some anxiety associated with climate change. And, what does that look like? And is it a threat to mental health? And just so I don't make that dangling, I'll maybe reassure the listeners that, no, it's not necessarily a threat. Or it's not - it doesn't indicate a problem with mental health, but it can certainly be a source of stress that does, you know, it can be one thing that impacts your mental health. Especially if you feel very strong anxiety and maybe don't have a supportive social network or a feeling of efficacy.

Pihkala: Yeah, that links in my mind to this 2011 theme number of the American Psychologist where you both wrote stuff. And the models are quite advanced, actually, I think. And Thomas has been telling that it was partly theoretical at that time, because there wasn't so much evidence about the indirect vicarious impacts of climate stress for example. But I think those have stood the test of time pretty well, many of those models. And what was then discussed, without a sort of pre-word, such [as], you know, mentioning anxiety and depression and stress [without an “eco-” or “climate”  prefix]. So now, during the last five years, we've seen the development of many special terms. People putting eco or climate before these words. And that has communicated value, but, of course, it sometimes also makes things tricky. That how many phenomena we put inside this sort of general word.

Doherty: Yeah. Like, it's the, you know, they say, the blind men and the elephant parable. You know, everybody's all: “Eco-anxiety is: ______. It's this, or it's this. And, you know, we have the cultural critique of our system and our, you know, capitalism and you know, media. And then there's the personal confessions. So I think, yeah, the listeners and media is both our friend and also kind of confuses things, because they're picking out different pieces of the elephant and each article trumpets on one side or the other. So it leaves people confused sometimes.

Pihkala: How do you, Susan, see the research field about anxiety and ecological matters these days? I know you get a lot of messages from people who are interested [in] researching.

Clayton: Yes, I think the research is really exploding or about to explode. It's partly because, you know, other people. Mental health professionals, clinical psychologists and others, have recognized that this is a thing. So there's a whole group of people who had not previously been thinking about climate change, [but] are now beginning to think about it more. And so they're recognizing this as a topic they want to learn more about. And not even mental health professionals just sort of public health professionals, I think. It has grabbed people's attention, hopefully, for good reasons that. You know, somebody said, and I can't remember where I read this. So I apologize for not giving an attribution. But you know, sometimes it's hard to - you don't know what you're feeling until somebody gives you a word. And then you realize that's the word that describes what you're feeling. So I think a lot of people thought, yes, that's exactly it. Climate anxiety, or eco-anxiety. And they're not all necessarily meaning the same thing when they use that word, but they are recognizing that it means something to them.

Doherty: Mmhmm. Yeah, they're validated. They're being validated. Their being is being validated.

Pihkala: Yeah, that's happened a lot in Finland. Ympäristöahdistus, which is the Finnish equivalent: literally, environmental anxiety. So, of course, different languages play somewhat different[ly]. That's one topic in this podcast. And the very thing you mentioned, of exploring possible names for these emotions or groups of emotions. That's of course a big task for this very podcast.

Doherty: Yes. Yes. We've got a few more minutes. I feel moved to just mention some of the other work that I know Susan for and, you know, around with animals and with other species. And I know that's been a big strand in your work. And I know through like Carol Saunders. One of our colleagues who kind of helped found conservation psychology, you know. And, you know, so just to name that there are other species out there as well that we have relationships with. And I don't know if that's something you want to say anything about, Susan. But I know that's something I associated with you as well.

Clayton: Absolutely. And, again, it was the sort of happenstance that I started doing some work in zoos. Gosh, probably almost 15 years ago now. Partly inspired by Carol Saunders, who happened to come up to me at an APA conference and introduce herself. And the zoo was significant to me as a place where a lot of people encounter nature. So even people who live in very urban environments are able to encounter nature. And, of course, zoos are not - they're not wild. They're not wilderness. They're, you know, arguably, they're not natural. They're managed by humans. And yet, for a lot of people, it was an important place to encounter those other species and to think about the natural world. So I'm still fascinated by that idea that people and parents will deliberately take their children to the zoo in order to expose them to some of the natural world. So it's not something that's just happening accidentally. But it's a choice that parents are making to say that nature is important to me and I want my child to have some exposure to it. 

So thinking more about how those encounters can happen, about how people are defining what is nature. What counts as nature. What should it look like. And how that might affect the ways in which we take care of natural landscapes. These are just, these are just fascinating questions to me that reflect on what it means to be human. Because we define ourselves as humans in part in terms of what we're not. So how does how we think about what it means to be human affect how we think about what it means to be natural?

Pihkala: Yeah, thanks a lot for sharing that. And this interface or boundaries. However porous they may be between humans and [the] more-than-human world. That's a very crucial topic. And the recent rise in post-humanistic research has brought many of these themes into the fore. Sometimes, you know, slightly difficult language, but the subject matter is very, very important. And I just noticed that you've been writing also about the psychology of rewilding. So that's one now on my reading list.

Clayton: Yeah, I have a lot more questions than answers about it at this point. But one of the things I find fascinating, and maybe Thomas this will have some meaning to you, is that I've heard people talk about rewilding. How we need to rewire ourselves in a sort of a psychodynamic kind of sense. So I think it's an interesting metaphor, to the extent it's a metaphor that people are using.

Doherty: Yeah, I think it depends on people's culture and what's meaningful for them. But you know, our feelings are wild. So we want to be open to all of them, the hard ones and the positive ones. And, yeah, we'll have to make a point of doing a talk on wilding and rewilding in one of our episodes. I think that's a really juicy topic for people. But just suffice to say, you know, that, you know, these zoos are conservation organizations. And they're linked back to actual environments in places where people are trying to save and preserve species in their natural habitats as well. So it's a whole system. That's one thing I learned from that work was that it isn't just a menagerie of animals. It's a whole worldwide system of conservation that these zoos are just, you know, piece of. But yeah, we're coming to the end of our time. This has been a really great chat. We could always go more. And, you know, as our adventures go on, Susan, maybe we can have you come back again some time. The story is not over yet. Obviously. With all the stuff that we're doing. So I want to thank you very much, Susan, for your time today.

Clayton: Yeah, it's a pleasure. Thanks for the conversation. It's always nice to touch base and to throw these ideas around with both of you.

Pihkala: Yeah, warm thanks from Helsinki also. I really admire the width of your interest and research. So this was very, very fascinating and all the best for these many fields.

Doherty: Well, thanks. On our website, we'll try to put some good links to Susan's work. And you all listening, take care of yourself. But we covered a lot of ground in our episode today about nature. And feelings. And our identities. And even this idea of support and flow. So hopefully this planted, we planted some seeds for you all. So you all take care.

image credit | Vonecia Carswell

In this episode, Thomas and Panu talk about connections and meaning-making—looking at climate feelings through the lens of synergy. They are constantly surprised at the positive energy they discover as they meet and collaborate with others around the world—such as during Panu’s work on the recent Lancet global youth study—and the validation they gain from learning about those who made similar discoveries in the past. In order to navigate this time in history with its dark ecology of overlapping crises, from climate to COVID to armed conflict, we need to open toward shared energy, efforts, and resources that sustain us. In a timely lesson, Thomas describes how to go on a “media diet”—engaging  with media intentionally rather than in an impulsive and uncontrolled way—one tool for centering yourself and broadening engagement with your local place. He reminds listeners that ultimately their life is the most important news. Through positive synergies we can find meaning in the time we are given. Join us!

• The See Change Institute

  • New Report: Climate Change & Youth Mental Health

• Marks, Hickman, Pihkala, et al (2021) Young People's Voices on Climate Anxiety, Government Betrayal and Moral Injury: A Global Phenomenon

• Amy Lykins, University of New England Australia:  Distress, depression and drug use: young people fear for their future after the bushfires 

• Chernobyl disaster

  • Fallout in Finland 

• Carl Jung, Synchronicity

• Weltschmerz

• What Would Thoreau Think of Our 24-Hour News Cycle?

• Shierry Weber Nicholson The Love of Nature at the End of the World 

• Paul Hawken Blessed Unrest 

• The Standard

• J.R.R Tolkien, “all we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us” 

Season 1, Episode 5: Synergy = Energy

[music: “CC&H theme music”]

Introduction voice: Welcome to Climate Change and Happiness (CC&H), an international podcast that explores the personal side of climate change. Your feelings, what the crisis means to you, and how to cope and thrive. And now, your hosts, Thomas Doherty and Panu Pihkala.

Thomas Doherty: Hello, I am Thomas Doherty …

Panu Pihkala: And I am Panu Pihkala.

Doherty: And welcome to Climate Change and Happiness, our podcast. A show for people around the globe who are thinking deeply about the personal side of climate change, particularly their feelings about climate change. Their emotions about climate change. How it’s affecting them personally. How it affects their actions in the world. And we are welcoming all of you listeners to be with us and as Panu and I talk about these things for ourselves personally and in our professional work. 

Panu, today I’m really struck with this concept. In one of our recent episodes we talked about holding space and today I’m struck with this idea of synergy. Of things happening that are related. I mean you and I have been having a synergy in what you’re doing in Finland and what I’m doing here in the US. A brief example, I was speaking to Beth Karlin and Larissa Dooley at the See Change Institute here in the US. Beth is a colleague of mine, a psychologist, and they’re doing behavioral change work here in the community. And they were approached to do a study on youth in California, particularly Black Indigenous and People of Color - BIPOC youth, around climate anxiety and they had reached out to me and we were chatting. I referenced the big study, the Lancet study, that you’ve been involved in. 

Just this morning I got a reviewer invitation to review a journal article on someone doing, you know, psychological support groups for young people, students dealing with climate change distress, you know, in classes, in environmental studies classes. Listeners who have taken environmental studies or conservation science classes know that doom and gloom really comes into those classrooms and it can be really tough. And so, you know, there’s this positive synergy of us working together. I was able to connect Beth with Amy Lykens in Australia who’s doing research on young people in Australia around the fires in Australia and the wildfires and also research in Fiji and the Pacific Islands. 

So there’s a community of us doing things. And there’s a positive synergy. And that’s just one thing that people might come across when they’re working on climate change. There’s negative synergies, and we’ll get to those too, but there’s positive ones too. Or just there are synergies and we can put away that labeling of them. 

Where does that - how does that hit for you in terms of this, any synergies or what you’re experiencing in your work? 

Pihkala: That’s a very interesting concept. In the Finnish language, we have many original words, but, you know, synergy with a synergia. So that’s a very literal anglicism just picking it up. Of course synergy itself comes very closely from more ancient languages than English and I do experience it a lot in my work, luckily. Of course there are also times when it seems hard to find. I’m thinking, for example, in those early years when I started to focus heavily on eco-anxiety research in 2015 and 2016. And everybody thought I was really strange to change research topics to that one, but lately and during the last three years there’s definitely been great synergy going around. And that gives you energy. You know, literally syn-ergiaa, energy, so it’s a global thing and I think it’s very important that we keep matters open and flowing. 

Another thing that instantly comes to my mind is the way that in the universities, unfortunately, competition culture has grown even more intense in the 2000s. And many people blame roughly neoliberalism for it. Of course it’s easy to blame neoliberalism for everything, but there’s something there. And that’s of course something that I really detest and dislike, but I’ve rather tried always to be open to various synergies and not to be picky about sharing some ideas and research and so on.

Doherty:  Yeah, yeah, so yes synergy, you know, I’m glad you made the connection with energy which I wasn’t obviously making, but it is, it is shared energy right? And, you know, that’s what we need, that’s what all of us need to survive right now is shared energy and shared direction, because that is mutually advantageous. I’m looking at the dictionary, you know, mutually advantageous conjunction or compatibility of distinct participants, you know, and so resources and efforts. So we need shared efforts, shared resources. We all need to be careful about those aspects of our life that tend to limit sharing. Limit cooperation. And there’s unfortunately a long list of those kinds of things including the kind of competition and scarcity mentality that comes, you know, in some of these kinds of capitalist, neoliberal kind of situations, you know. The fights are so bitter because the stakes are so small, you know, as they say in academia people are fighting for their funding. And that’s a piece, so I know some of you all are thinking about that. 

But yeah synergy—and some of it it’s coincidence and it just happens to be. I—listeners might know, you know, I do my own counseling and therapy work as a psychologist and I see clients. And I’ve been getting more—in the old days I would say, you know, true eco-therapy clients or true clients that were coming in specifically because of the environment, nature, climate change were relatively rare, say like ten years ago. I mean they were out there and people would find me, but most people would come into the actual counseling because of a much more proximal thing like they lost their job or a relationship break up or they were depressed or anxious or had difficulties parenting. All the life, the catastrophes, the daily catastrophes of life that we cope with, you know, that’s what really brings people in for, to seek that help. But now it’s changed and people are coming in specifically because of climate and issues. 

And I happened to have two people come in. New folks to me that, one after the other, independently, both had connections with the Chernobyl radiation—the nuclear accident in Chernobyl. One person was Austrian and relocated to the US. And another person had, was also in the US, but they had been born in Belarus and had come to the US when they were younger. And both of them cited Chernobyl as an instigating factor in their environmental identity and their sense of themselves and nature because they both had childhood experiences of being afraid of the radiation. As someone growing up in the US, I don’t know anything about that. I know about it just intellectually that I know that problem happened. But they spoke to the actual, you know, experience of that. And, you know, that was an interesting coincidence as well and it brought into mind, you know, how we get primed for different, you know, when we talk about eco-anxiety and things, you know, people have, are primed. So there’s these different, different kinds of synergies. 

Pihkala: Yeah, that’s very interesting, Thomas. And actually living in Finland, the place where I grew up got some fallout from Chernobyl because of the direction of the wind it came to Finland. Not even nearly as bad as in Belarus, for example, but still there’s been a long-standing discussion about the effects of the radiation. And in some areas still if you pick up mushrooms, you should boil them one extra time because they have still deposited radiation from Chernobyl, so that’s sort of close to me. 

And that brings me to another aspect of synergy. Or close to it as a word is synchronicity. This old concept of two things happening roughly at the same time or in some connection with each other so that for the person there is a meaning born in relation to that connection. I think it comes from Jungian psychology. I don’t know if it has even roots. It may have, but once I was thinking about radiation and, you know, as a research theme so-called nuclear anxiety and eco-anxiety, that’s been one of the things I’ve been thinking about. And then I turned on the radio and it started with a news item about radiation and going back to the history with Chernobyl and so on. So that’s a real synchronicity which happened something like five years ago. I’m now reminded of it. And of course many of these things people can say they are just coincidences and so on, but still they are part of numerous people’s lives in complex ways.

Doherty: Yeah, so it’s a meaning, you know, so we’re all making meaning about these connections. And we live in systems, we’re embedded in systems and there’s things that are happening. So yeah so I think, you know, for everyone who’s listening, just kind of sitting, taking a moment and just thinking about yourself and feeling in the moment. Again, taking a breath and saying okay here I am. I’m embedded in all the systems of my life. And there are potential synergies that are happening. There are these bad memories. And dangers. And technological disasters that poison our lands and it's something that we have to live with. And, you know, we are making meaning by how things come to us, you know. So it’s something to be aware of. 

One synergy that can be problematic is synergy of the media. Taking in media, imagery and social media and the news and being, you know, like a news junkie, as we might say in the United States, you know. That floods us with all kinds of disparate information and factoids and ads and headlines and things like that. Which can create all kinds of synergies. Some of which are really overwhelming, you know. And it overwhelms our nervous system if we take in too much, you know. If you take in too much disparate, troubling information that you don’t have any direct connection to or control over, it’s just a perfect recipe for a sense of global anxiety and global angst.

Pihkala: Exactly.

Doherty: Weltschmerz as we say. And so, there’s a synergy. Now, if I’m more mindful of what I’m taking in and directing my attention toward news or research or things that are interesting and helpful to me, then there could obviously be a positive synergy. And we can all get on that positive synergy of finding things that are really fascinating and inspiring.

Pihkala: Yeah.

Doherty: So, again, yeah.

Pihkala: I’ve heard and read from you, Thomas, at quite an early point during the 2010s this advice to limit one’s climate [media] diet. And, of course, now both in relation to COVID-19 media coverage and eco-anxiety and climate anxiety. That advice has become more widespread. But I link you with one of the early advice givings of that and I strongly resonate with this energy also in the news cycles. And there’s some conscious design, I think, especially of the American news culture that tends to suck one in and, you know, even causing some addiction and so on. It can take strength of will. That’s another thing that we might discuss more some time this old idea of strength of will. And social support can help a lot in that of course. But that’s something that I personally do also. I don’t actually usually read the news in the morning. I start my mornings more gently and do some research and reading and only then check out the news. Of course I’m in a sort of privileged position that there’s no instant threats coming my way, but many people in the world are sharing that same position. It’s not obligatory to immerse yourself right after you have woken up to the news cycle.

Doherty: Yeah. I would second that. Speaking as a clinical psychologist and a doctor I would second that very much. That prescription of not immersing yourself. No, it’s—it can be really toxic. And some people can surf that wave for a while, but I think eventually you’ll be inundated by it and it becomes an addiction. It becomes an addicting kind of situation. And, yeah, we don’t really have control of the medium. It’s a machine that’s much more powerful than us. And I don’t think, you know, our frail human psyche and our senses can get overwhelmed.

Pihkala:  Yeah. I very strongly resonate with that. Thanks for underscoring that. And in the workshops and lectures that I am giving as part of what I do, I’ve, in an increasing manner, met people who are very compassionate and passionate about environmental concerns and who have trouble facing the news or staying in touch with the news. And, of course, there I’m trying from my part to share that advice for them. And sometimes people have creative solutions like one person who had sort of given the responsibility of following the news to her husband who was more okay with that. So, then the husband sort of distilled the news in a not so striking imagery fashion so that it was easier to take in. So, there’s some creativity around this but I, that’s a problem in Finland I would say too.

Doherty: Yeah. And I think teaming up, teaming up can be helpful. That example has kind of a quaint Victorian kind of flavor to it. So some of our listeners might rankle against having someone, you know, distill the news. A male, distill the news for them. But I think it’s really more about the teamwork. And the synergy. And taking the time, you know.

We should probably just spend a moment on this since we’re here at this topic. The idea of a news, what is a news fast or, like you say, a climate diet, you know. It is really about just in the same way that we would think about how we would become reflective about any other aspects of our diets, like what kind of foods that we eat. I might want to be more conscious of what kinds of foods I eat. How much sugar do I consume? Or coffee. Or caffeine. Or alcohol. Or dairy products. Or bread. Or anything like that. And we might eliminate certain things from our diet just to become aware of their effects on us. And it’s a short-term project to see what makes us healthy. 

And so, that’s something to keep in mind when you’re doing a news fast. Like if you decided to not listen to the news for a day or a week. Sometimes that will happen naturally if you’re traveling or if someone is doing some kind of outdoor adventure where they’re away from, you know, from phones and the internet. But, you know, again it’s an activity to help you be healthier. And it’s an experiment. And it’s a systematic activity. 

Because the first sort of voice that comes up in a lot of people’s heads is well I don’t want to be uninformed. I don’t want to be uninformed. Or somehow it’s unethical for me to, you know, let go of the news. But that’s not really the case. And if you try it, as I’m sure you’ve known Panu, I actually feel more informed, you know, when I break from the news for a few days. I’m much more informed about my life. What’s going on around me. What other people are saying. And I actually know that I will hear important events that are happening in the world through my social interactions. And so I am not, I am in fact, I feel more informed. A sense of integrity. A sense of stability, you know. So there’s a lot of ways to think about this. But you’re not burying your head in the sand. You’re actually, in some ways, burying your head in the sand when you’re just immersed in news all the time.

Pihkala: Yeah. I think that’s very well said, Thomas. And was it Henry David Thoreau who said what’s so new about news anyway? From a sort of classical humanist position, we sort of know that there’s both joy and sorrow going on. And reading Shakespeare or the Old Testaments sort of gives the basic idea. Of course one needs also to follow it but it’s not obligatory to stay there all the time. 

And a sort of second advice that I usually try to give is related to what I’ve been calling binocular vision or skill of seeing two levels. Binocular vision comes from Bion. This pioneering psychotherapist. I’ve been using it in the sort of media literacy sense that focusing your eyes and senses both on the good and the bad and realizing that the news flow is geared towards the bad and threatening. For some good reasons and for some bad reasons, you know. Like trying to get more viewers and readers by showing graphic imagery of violence that’s usually not necessary in an ethical sense, for example. But so this skill of seeing two levels is something that some Finnish psychologists have picked up in their recommendations related to eco-anxiety also. So, and that there’s some commonality of the problem in more strong forms of eco-anxiety where it can easily feel that there’s nothing good happening in the world and it’s just all going down down down.

Doherty: Yes. Binocular vision. Wilfred Bion. A British psychotherapist. Shierry Weber Nicholsen in The Love of Nature at the End of the World—that’s one of my all time favorite books—she talks about that binocular vision in the therapeutic realm as well. And, again, it’s people that are counselors or therapists who know that we have binocular vision. We both hold our own thoughts and feelings within the interaction and then we’re sitting with the other person’s thoughts or feelings as well. And so that kind of observer self is a very important piece of a lot of modern, you know, therapies as well. Acceptance Commitment Therapy and things like that is having that binocular vision. 

So yeah, you know, like you say Thoreau. I mean I think he said, you know, what, he wants to know “what was never old.” Is what he says I believe, right? He wants to know what was never old. And he’s railing against the telegraph in 1848, you know. It’s the telegraph and everybody suddenly realizing they have to know what’s news and what’s happened in Europe and things like that. So yeah, these issues on media are not new. Like a lot of the issues where we’re talking about are not new at all. But another thing I say is, you know, we are the news. So like we make our own news. So my life is the news. So when I am not looking at the media that means I am focusing on my own. So I challenge clients to be the news. You know, you’re the news. Don’t look out, don’t look to other places for the news. You’re the news. Your life is the news. Your family. Your children. Your work. Your community. That’s the news for you. And I think that’s another way of thinking about it to get out of this corporate, capitalist kind of thing. You know, you can own the news. Make your own news, so to speak

Pihkala:  That’s fascinating. That’s fascinating. And that news is new every morning so there’s also that sort of, you know, everyday at it’s time I’m reminded of that with this emphasis on focusing on what’s close by and most important. And I do think this links with the synergy, also. And that’s part of this skill of seeing two levels is realizing how many people there are actually all over the world who are making all kinds of efforts to build better communities and better societies and to protect the environment and build more holistic relationships with the more than human world and so on. 

Paul Hawken has this book Blessed Unrest which is one attempt to bring out how ridiculous a number of environmental NGOs there are, for example. And that requires a certain focus. We don’t usually come across that information. Luckily, of course, there’s been the rise of solutions journalism and journalism which brings out also the good news. In Finland we have a Facebook group called good news about sustainability. Where a bunch of people have committed to share also the many good news because otherwise it might be missing from the news cycle. But the idea that there’s a lot of synergy around and there’s a lot of people who are actually doing a lot of things and trying. So that is very comforting for me at least often.

Doherty: Yeah. Yeah, there is a lot, you know, that speaks to more how do we direct our search light into the news and be more selective. A couple of other practical things, you know. Analog news is different than electronic news. So reading the newspaper which I know is an older concept for people and sometimes it's even hard to get a good newspaper. But, you know, reading paper news is a different experience to our nervous system than a web news. And so, it's a great experiment to try. 

Take a well-known, any well-known reputable paper I’ll just name, well reputable is questionable depending on what our listeners think about the news. But just say a seemingly known paper like The New York Times. Now it’s one thing to get on the New York Times website and drill down into all those stories, but could often leave us drained and exhausted and, you know, confused. But if I sit down with a paper and look through it, the information comes at me at a different pace and I see more of an ecology of different things going on in different aspects of the world. And there’s a pacing there. I’m not being force fed electronically into my nervous system the information. I’m taking it in and reflecting on it in real time. So, there’s different ways to take in, to take in information. 

I was in another form of synergy. I was approached by a person named Chris Pallatroni who’s an entrepreneur. He’s working on an app that helps people share advice about life that they think is important about their life so others can hear it. And he’s got an idea for this kind of app. And he’s trying to reach out to certain influencer type people that might want to contribute like personal advice. Something that they do personally in their life that works for them and he’s, you know. So we chatted about that a little bit. And, you know, it’s a provocative question, you know. What do you personally do that you think is helpful and makes you a better person, you know? And so that’s a great question for our listeners and for all of us to think about. 

You know, one of my news practices that I do, I have a couple of things daily. I say “No news before noon.” That’s one of my rules, personally. So I try not to look at any news, particularly any online news, before 12:00pm. So my, you know, and that works pretty well for me and I’ve learned to sort of buffer my intake of the news. So first thing in the morning I devote to other things, again, myself. And then after noon, you know, I’m free to start surfing the web, you know. But that’s just a personal rule that I have, no news before noon, you know. And I say “No irony before nine”  is another one. 9:00am. So like in the morning I try not to, even if I’m listening to music or I’m doing other things I try not to get ironic and sarcastic and sardonic. Even like the music that I’ll listen to, for example. You and I are music listeners and things like that. So I’m going to choose something that is healthy and uplifting first thing in the morning. So, no irony before nine, no news before noon. That’s just a - I’m not pushing that on anyone else, but I’m just giving an example of a habit. You know, we can develop these habits.

Pihkala: Yeah. Yeah, I strongly resonate with that and habits are difficult to change. Everybody who has some habit which they deem bad know this, but then again the good side is if you manage to construct a good habit in your life, that also sticks. And I’ve seen that happening also in my relation to news and also to some other daily practices. The COVID-19 working remotely from home thing, for example, has brought me a routine of going out everyday at about 10:00am. So that’s a sort of middle break in morning work and walking in the nearby woods and so on. So that’s a habit that took some time to form it into a routine and now it happens sort of semi automatically.

Doherty: Mhmm. Yeah. Yeah, and so yeah, and listeners we’ve all developed our COVID era habits and I know you’ve got. We’re going to be talking more about COVID-19 and your research on COVID anxiety and, you know, how it’s affected our personal lives. So that’s something to look out for coming up here in one of our future discussions. Yeah Panu, and so I think I would like to keep some of these big ideas. Like holding space. Like synergy. Some of our themes because we’ll return to these. I don’t know much about the future, but I do know there’s going to be more synergies. Both negative and positive coming up here. And all of us are going to be riding those waves. 

You know, you mentioned J.R.R. Tolkien and the idea of using the time that we have. And so I had to kind of go back to my Tolkien, Fellowship of the Ring, you know, where Frodo is talking about not, wishing some of these things had not happened in his time. And, you know, Gandolf’s character has that great line, you know, “so do all who live to see such times, but that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us,” you know. And so, yes we all wish we were seeing something else, but all we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us. And that includes our mornings, you know, how we wake up. How we greet the day. How we spend time in our community. And so, thinking in those big thoughts, you know, I think can help with some bolstering against thinking about the media and the media diet which is so trivial really in some ways compared to what’s so important in our lives.

Pihkala: That’s a great quote. That’s a great quote. 

Doherty: Yeah. Yeah. So great, so again, a synergy. Panu and I are having fun with this. And listeners, I hope you are enjoying our conversations as well. And it’s climatechangeandhappiness.com. Please reach out to us. Please let us know what you are thinking. We’re going to be doing more of these conversations and Panu I hope you have a great rest of your evening.

Pihkala: And thanks for the lovely discussion again, Thomas. Have a good day there where the sun is still shining a bit higher.

Doherty: Yes, we’re celebrating the equinox today and so that’s a beautiful time of the year. Take care. 

Pihkala: You too, take care. And thanks to the listeners. 

[music: “CC&H theme music”]

image credit | Mick Haupt

Thomas and Panu welcome Quebecois psychologist Karine St. Jean as their first guest on the podcast. Karine practices mindfulness and uses Acceptance Commitment Therapy (ACT) in her climate-focused work with clients in Montreal, Canada. In a wide ranging discussion, the three discuss the value of sitting with challenging feelings and maintaining flexibility in terms of sustainability action. Karine emphasizes the value in “meaningful faith” and finding “collective meaning”  in honoring the positive and negative emotions that come up around issues of the environment. Thomas recognizes some important works that integrate Buddhism and ecology as well as concepts like hyper-empathy that take on added meaning in the context of the climate crisis. Panu rounds out the discussion by introducing the concept of “binocular vision” as a way to hold multiple emotions in awareness as we grapple with complex 21st century dilemmas. 

• Karine St. Jean, PhD., Clinical psychologist and mindfulness facilitator at Mindspace

• Acceptance Commitment Therapy (ACT)

• Dharma Gaia: A Harvest of Essays in Buddhism and Ecology, Allan Hunt Badiner (Editor), Dalai Lama XIV (Foreword)(1990)

• World as Lover, World as Self, Joanna Macy (1991)

• Sanni Saarimäki, Finnish Psychologist

• Parable of the Sower, Octavia Butler

• Extinction Rebellion - International 

  • Elokapina - Finland 

Transcript

Season 1, Episode 4: Acceptance, Commitment and Climate with Guest Karine St. Jean

[music: “CC&H theme music”]

Introduction voice: Welcome to Climate Change and Happiness, an international podcast that explores the personal side of climate change. Your feelings, what the crisis means to you, and how to cope and thrive. And now, your hosts, Thomas Doherty and Panu Pihkala.

Thomas Doherty: Hello, I am Thomas Doherty.

Panu Pihkala: And I am Panu Pihkala. 

Doherty: And welcome to Climate Change and Happiness. The show for people around the globe who are feeling and thinking deeply about the personal side of climate change and the climate crisis. Their emotional responses and their feelings. As you know from listening, I’m a psychologist in Portland, Oregon and Panu is an emotions researcher from Helsinki, Finland. And, today, from Montreal, Canada, we have a guest.

Karine St. Jean: Hi. Really happy to be here. I’m Karine St. Jean. I’m a psychologist here in Montreal, Canada. I’ve been interested in this relationship between ourselves and the planet and all emotions that come with it for a few years now. And I’m trying to help as many people as I can to navigate these lands.

Doherty: Bonjour, Karine.

St. Jean: Bonjour. I’m French-speaking too. 

Doherty: Like Panu, je parle un peu français (I speak a little bit of French), but not enough to carry an intelligent conversation. But Karine, I know I’ve had some connection with you and I’m really proud to have you here as our guest. Our first guest on our podcast, actually. And I know you’ve been doing, as a psychologist, some interesting work in Montreal. And I just wanted to start out by asking you, you know, is this, how did this psychology and nature-climate connection start out with you? I think people are always curious about that for mental health professionals. Was it a long-standing interest? Or was it, was there a kind of trigger or an event? You know, what’s some, you know, details about how this might work out in your life?

St. Jean: It started inside. Like being worried about the state of our planet and navigating all those emotions like hopelessness, sadness, fear and struggling with conflicting values and emotions. So, it was more like a personal thing that I was juggling with and exploring. And started to talk about that with colleagues. And we started a few actions at the clinic, at work to make this whole clinic a bit more green and a bit more conscious. And somehow things kind of fell into place and I started talking about eco-anxiety. Started reading a lot about that. Reading research and at some point decided to put all those thoughts together in a book. That was my journey so far. 

And, of course, being in touch with clients who are struggling with that. Like carrying the pain and very deep questions about that: like should I continue studying? Should I have children? My children - what I’m creating for them? So, all those things that were showing up in therapy. So, learning from those clients how they were navigating these emotions and helping them create a space where they could feel heard, supported, validated in what they are feeling – and unpacking all those emotions were kind of also a really significant part of this process for me.

Pihkala: That is very, very fascinating, Karine and bienvenue (welcome). 

St. Jean: Merci (thank you).

Pihkala: Working in Finland there’s lots of similarities in what we’ve seen. I’m not a therapist, but I’ve been facilitating discussion groups together with therapists for people who feel rather strong eco-anxiety and so on. So, can you share with us a bit more about the methods you’ve been using in such encounters?

St. Jean: I would say the first thing that comes to mind is holding the space for all those emotions to be named and to be processed and to be okay with the pain and the suffering that comes with it. So in my, but also with my clients, like so they can trust that it can be held and named and explored. And also that we can make sense of that and eventually do something – whether it’s to take care of ourselves or, I should say and, take care of the planet too. The whole process is, of course, infused by my, I’ll say that’s my personal practice and my personal belief. I’m exploring mindfulness and Buddhism. So it kind of infuses a bit how I approach how we can help hold emotions, but also Acceptance and Commitment Therapy is also showing up in how I help people.

Pihkala: That’s most interesting. Thanks for sharing a bit more about those methods. And since I have a background also in religion and worldview research and practice and so on, so I’ve also been interested about mindfulness for a long time. And it’s fascinating to see also those books about eco-anxiety and related phenomena that are now coming out. Very many of them do have Buddhist influences and people utilize mindfulness. So there really seems to be something that helps people with these difficult emotions. 

Doherty: Yeah and, you know, there was a book called Dharma Gaia that came out, you know, 20, 30 years ago [1990]. That was an early collection. Joanna Macy’s work, obviously. You know, [her] World as Lover, World as Self (1991) has gotten into this kind of work.

Yeah so, I mean, our podcast is a holding space too. So the listeners, you know, we’re holding space for our emotions and for yours as well. And then, there’s this critical tension with feeling and then action. You know, how to stay with just the feeling and with the presensing. So I’m just wondering. I just want to name that off the bat because I just think that’s an impulse. People have a hard time sitting still! And really being with these things because they’re kind of yucky. They’re yucky feelings. You know, I know that comes up in your work, Karine, and you experience it as well. What is, you know, ACT therapy - Acceptance and Commitment Therapy - is a model that I’m influenced by as well. What are some of the examples of, Karine, that you would go to when someone’s struggling with that action impulse? Is that something that you could speak to? 

St. Jean: When I think of ACT therapy, so it’s Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, two things come to mind. All those emotions are really just important information. They are yucky, but they are really important because they are telling us that something that we value or someone that we value is kind of influenced or hurt by what is going on. So, they are telling us that something is important. So, finding a space to explore these values. What’s meaningful for us. And probably, like all the listeners, probably have different values related to climate and environment and the biodiversity and social inequities and injustice. So, many of this can be brought up and named so it can help in making sense of all these yucky feelings that we tend to, you know, work very hard to run away from. Whether it’s by Netflix or whatever means we choose. So, getting in touch with those values, I think it’s a way of approaching those emotions that can be a bit less frightening first. 

And the other piece that I use that I find helpful in ACT is how do we relate with this mind that’s not always so helpful for us? Sometimes we can get lost and very fixed. And someone that I know used a nice word like “unbendable and unbreakable” views or perspectives. And they can become very narrow and they can create a lot of pain like at 3 am in the morning when I’m still worrying about whether I should have children? Or those poor koalas that have been burned. It’s not really helpful for me. Not saying that it’s true or not. It’s just not helpful. 

So, that’s the first layer. And the second layer that sometimes I will go with exploring with people, clients is: what is this that’s going on in my mind lately? Images? Words? It’s not happening right now. It may be happening somewhere, but for me right in this moment the nature of those thoughts are just words and images associated with feelings. And it’s not - I’m not saying that in a way of, you know, just thoughts are not important, but more like “oh can I relate differently with those thoughts.” And I find this could be helpful in creating a different space to approach all that is going on when we think about our poor planet. 

Doherty: hmmm.

Pihkala: That is most interesting. And a close colleague of mine in Finland, Sanni Saarimäki, who is a psychologist working with students started a sort of pioneering group in Finland for future-related anxiety among students at a technology university. So you can imagine the contradictions that people have when they become more aware of the systemic crisis and realize that partly their studies and the professions that they are aiming towards are sort of part of the problem. So it’s very complicated. 

But, she’s been using Acceptance Commitment Therapy quite a lot and we’ve had interesting discussions related to it. And I think it’s very important just as I heard you say to sort of emphasize the reality of the crisis, but then also say that, you know, working with our thoughts and with our possible rumination and so on it can also help. So, it’s not necessary to discard CBT altogether in this.

Doherty: Yeah. Yeah and there’s a tension between, you know, getting into the thoughts and trying to question them or just really just not tangling with them. Like they say [in ACT], let go of the tug of war with the thought. And so that’s interesting. I have a saying in therapy, you know, our mind is going to do what it wants to do. Both positive and negative, you know. Someone is really on a, you know, more positive, someone’s out dating and they meet someone and then suddenly have all these fantasies about all they’re going to be together with this person. And this is the right person for them. And they’re going to be living together. And so they start having, you know, “future tripping” as we call it. Where they’re just way out there. And I say, you know, “your horses are going to run so let them run, but just don’t ride them.” You know, so your thoughts are going to run, just don’t get on their back and ride them. 

I try to do that with anxiety well. You know, our anxiety is going to run. It’s on all the time. It’s a normal, natural setting. Unfortunately we live in a time, you know, where the world keeps setting off our red anxiety light constantly. All the time. So, we can let that run. So, experientially that’s hard to do. Then it’s to the, you know, in terms of climate emotions, we can also try to think about the emotions we want to be feeling. You know, that we want to cultivate. Like I’ve been playing around with this word “faith.” Faith is often one that doesn’t come up in climate discourse very much. But, you know, allegiance, fidelity to something.

St. Jean: Trust.

Doherty: Faith in our values. Yeah, you know, and how do we kind of play with that growing feelings. You know, growing the feelings we want.

Pihkala: Yeah. It’s like the FBI [US Federal Bureau of Investigation], you know. They have words behind the abbreviation. I think it’s “Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity.” Well, I’m not commenting about the actual FBI and these, but it’s a nice combination of three values and virtues. And fides, the original word linking both with faith and trust as you, Karine, said. So, does this sort of faith angle of Thomas resonate with you, Karin?

St. Jean: When you first mentioned it, it was, what came to mind is this combination of kind of trust and action that goes along with faith that for me makes faith meaningful. It’s kind of faith anchored in like real things. As opposed to some, you know, some of listeners and even me like when we talk about faith, as Thomas mentioned, it’s something more like I trust in something that I don’t know. Or that I don’t have proof of. Whereas, the faith that we seem to be talking about right now makes a lot of sense. Being anchored in an ability to also hold all the positive that’s being done right now. Like there are some good news. I mean I believe that much. And if we don’t read the IPCC report it’s easier sometimes to do. But there is hope and if we can anchor ourself in this, in faith that there’s something that can be done. And it makes sense.

But for some people it might be hard to allow themselves to have positive emotions. It can feel so wrong because they are so entangled in their own anxiety and fear. And it’s something that it’s worth cultivating, finding our own way of having faith in something that makes sense.

Pihkala: Yeah, thanks for sharing that. And I totally agree from my own experience that any kind of healthy pride or even being content is very difficult even for ardent environmental activists because of the strong possibility of ecological guilt and shame. And the situation where basically or theoretically you could always do more. So it’s very difficult when there’s no established social norms that when, have you done enough.

St. Jean: I’ve heard people being shamed by members of their group because they were daring, speaking of something that’s positive, and there can be something of that in certain groups too. So I think it's something to explore at least.

Doherty: Yeah. And I think for listeners, it’s something we all struggle with. I struggle with this. Panu. I mean, we all struggle with this too. I work with people in groups like the Sunrise Movement. They’re taking on climate change and social justice and, you know, built in inequalities. So there’s, in every direction, there are things to be upset about. And it can really be a competition to see how bad you can feel in some ways. And so it is radical to capture the truth of our feelings. Which is that they’re also positive because they’re wild as we’ve talked about before on our podcast. They’re wild. We’re going to have positive feelings.

And this whole “hyper-empathy” is another good word that I like. We’ve been talking about our different words that we like. Hyperempathy. You know, this ability to feel sensations of others really strongly, including pain. Comes out of Octavia Butler's novel Parable of the Sower. But, you know, we do have this hyper-empathy because of technology and all the things we can see and hear and learn about. And so, it does make it difficult. But, you know,  faith anchored in a real thing, you know. Like Ashlee Consolo says, “gritty hope.” It’s like hope that’s - or hope based in action. Or built hope. So I think there’s this idea we have to be - you know, the actions and emotions can work well together if we can get them in the right synch. In the right synch, but I think there’s just a lot of loss. A lot of loss and grief because our actions seem so small sometimes.

Pihkala: Do you, Karine, operate with the concept of meaning explicitly in your work? Because, of course, that’s one that’s very closely related to the subject matter we’ve been talking about.

St. Jean: I think it’s essential that we explore the meaning of what we feel. It’s, for me, a big chunk of how I can be with all those emotions. If I’m just drowning in them, it can be really, really heavy. But if I can, and I notice that too, and people even in groups like when people can find a collective meaning to their sense of grief or to their anger, it opens a door into okay, but what can I do with that? And sometimes it can be as beautifully and powerfully simple as just going out in nature and being able to feel all those positive emotions that we have to hold together because they are co-existing in that moment. Like there’s the beauty of nature, but also all the awareness of what’s going on in nature. But because we can understand all that, we can put words, we can discern and there’s a sense of yeah it makes sense.

I think it’s really, really helpful and also if I can understand what those emotions are telling me then it opens the door and what can I do? And it can be just making more individual actions, for example, reducing how much we consume. But it can also be educating people, getting invested in the community, or whatever feels right for us. But it will feel right only if we can make sense of what’s going on inside. So, I think exploring meaning is a big chunk of what’s happening when we’re navigating those emotions.

Pihkala: Yeah, I think that’s very well put. Thanks again for putting that into words. And a sort of big part of my work has been also to try to put out the argument that even amidst ambivalence, one can experience meaning. Thanks for pointing out this. I think it is quite a common experience, actually, that, for example, being outdoors there’s both joy and sadness. But if you engage with it, it’s luckily the meaningfulness can grow. So I think it’s always very sad if people often for understandable reasons stay inside and close down upon them. So that’s often a danger I think.

Doherty: And I think there’s an interesting tension between action and emotional work. I think as mental health people we, you know, our area is the mental hygiene. It’s [bringing] our most well, best self to the situation. But we are not sustainability professionals and I think we have to be careful of getting in there and making kind of, it’s kind of theater. You know, where we say “oh you know,  do something, and we don’t really know. We know mental health stuff. So I think, you know, how do we, how do mental health providers just help people to be their best self in general so they can bring their best self to these issues? You know, like I say: “We have issues and we have issues.” We have Capital I issues we want to change in the world. We have small i issues: our baggage and our insecurities and our neuroses and stuff like that. And that’s where we help people to be their best self. 

Yeah, because I just feel like with fossil fuel propaganda, it’s just drilled into people’s minds. You have to. It’s all your fault. You have to make the change. So I feel like in my work I have to stop. You know, name that. That’s a tough one though. Does that come up for you, Karine?

St. Jean: Yeah. What comes up for me a lot is this: Like there are conflicting things happening. Like there’s this I need my car to go to work. And like all society is built around using fossil fuels. And also there’s all the guilt of “I should.” And we live in Quebec, so when it’s minus 44 riding your bike for 20km might not be such a good idea. You may need your car. And this and also there’s all the weight of social norms and like all that stuff that we’re carrying. And it’s not so easy to be okay with finding our own space. And, like, I’m not a bad person because I have a car. It’s just choices that I need to make and allowing myself to navigate all the other conditions in my life. So it’s interesting how we can get caught up in fossil fuels are bad or shouldn’t use plastic. Never ever ever. But more like being a bit more flexible and finding what works for us because in the balance our mental health is also important. If I’m suffering a lot because I’m doing a guilt trip all the time, not so sure that that works. So, yeah those issues are like showing up.

Pihkala: Yeah. They can even be a sort of quest for purity in a sort of anthropological sense. And that’s one issue that would perhaps need even more attention. But, you mentioned, Karine, that, you know, one has to work with one’s own emotions when starting more explicitly to work with these themes. So, would you like to share some more about how did it go for you and your colleagues? You can of course choose the level of intimacy that you want to share here, but how was the process or the transition when you started to integrate more of these themes in your work?

St. Jean: Since it started, what we call like the ‘green squad’ at our clinic. So there was a guy that started this off and a few of us got along and since I was managing one of the clinics so we tried to implement those things. And so discussions were showing up. How do we feel about doing that? And how does that make us feel to do something for this? It was all good at the beginning and then we hit the “Okay, but the building doesn’t recycle.” What do we do? Like do we bring the recycling at home? But we’re all riding our bikes to work. How do we do that while carrying bunches of sheets?

So, it was quite interesting to together reflect on that. And then it shifted into how do we integrate that with our clients. These notions. That eco-anxiety. And it was like, for me, and I cannot speak for my colleagues, but for me there’s a sense of being heard. A sense of connection. Of sharing something that’s important. Knowing that I’m not alone. Feeling all the, you know, guilt, but also the anger, the fear, the sadness. And all the nuances. The shades of sadness, of anger. So, but knowing that there were people at work because when we talk about how we can help our clients, we talk about how we can help ourselves. So, it was helpful for me in that way. 

Doherty: Yeah. Yeah, we’ve got a few more minutes here. This is really neat. One thing that I’ve enjoyed talking with Panu about is Finland and some of the values and words and customs they have there. And how nature and the natural world is talked about. And sustainability. I’m wondering - I’m really, you know, intrigued with Quebec and Montreal. And the culture there. And the Quebecois, you know, culture there. I wonder is there any, you know, Karine do you think there’s certain strengths there or certain things that come out of that culture that’s helpful? Or in terms of nature or connection with nature? The outdoors?

St. Jean: I think there’s a strong connection to nature. And in the strong connection there’s a lot of pain too because we see all our indigenous people like getting, losing their land and their way of life. It’s a lot more complicated than this, but still there’s this sense of a deep connection with earth, nature, Mother Earth. And I remember in the last election how proud I was that Quebec was one of the provinces that put the environment at the top of the list of preoccupations. And how proud I was. And I remember when two years ago when Greta Thunberg showed up for the “Walk for the Earth,” it was like hundreds of thousands of people in the street. It was the biggest walk that ever happened. And there’s this sense of yeah, we’re not alone. Collectively, we are preoccupied by that. And it’s a good thing that we’re preoccupied. That there’s a sense of a bit of fear. I think it’s and I can see it everyday. Like people bending to pick up trash in parks or so. Yeah, I feel like it’s alive. This preoccupation that’s being channeled into action. Which brings faith and hope for me to see that. 

Doherty: Yeah.

Pihkala: Yeah. Thanks again for sharing. And I really like the way that you tie together the social and collective dimension with the individual one. I think that’s very crucial here. In different levels and contexts, the social dynamics shape so profoundly people’s experiences. And, coming from Finland, I can resonate with lot’s that you said. There are lots of good collective things happening. And also, of course, there’s clashes. And right this week the Extinction Rebellion (Elokapina in Finnish) has been holding an Autumn Rebellion in the center of Helsinki. And there’s been lots of discussion about that. And, so, can you share a bit more? Is there also sort contradiction between, for example, traditional, resource intensive use of natural resources and then the sort of new environmental consciousness that you described? Or is it proceeding rapidly? How is it in Quebec? I really don’t know.

St. Jean: Not so sure I understand the question, properly, but what came to mind is that in Canada we are like a big - we were a big producer of fossil fuels. And we’re the one wanting to build a big pipeline. And so like of course there’s a lot of contradiction. And Quebec we can feel it a little less. There’s still a lot of contradiction because some people are really into that and they’re, of course, we’re consumers. We’re contributing. There’s also a lot of things that are not going the right way here in Canada. 

Pihkala: Yeah, thanks. You understood me perfectly. It’s always a relief when one is not a native speaker when somebody understands. So one of the skills that we’ve been discussing in this podcast is something that my friend and colleague Sanni has also integrated into ACT, which is sort of skill of seeing two levels. Or “binocular vision.” So exactly this ability to focus both on the good news and the bad news and not just one of them.

Doherty: Yeah and these conversations come down to, you know, first nations people and being indigenous. So I’m glad you brought that up, Karine. And you know first-nation folks that are listening, you know, that’s something we want to honor in our conversation. Basically how do we - it comes down to everyone, you know, feeling indigenous to a place. Place consciousness. And I think underlying the other emotions and values is I think ultimately will come down to the place and being with the place. So I think as we’ll wrap up here for today. But, you know, our listeners I’d encourage you to, you know, take into consideration what we talked about, but also be out in your place and maybe put your hand on the ground somewhere and just, you know, notice where you are. Because, you know, we hurt where we care. And so, we do care about our places and it’s why we have all this empathy. And what we look at for faith. But I look forward to some more conversations coming up. Karine, thank you very much for coming out and sharing. And Panu, as always, great to chat with you.

St. Jean: Thank you very much. It was really, really nice to be here today and the conversation was pretty interesting for me, so I’m grateful for that to both of you. And hope that our listeners will find something of value there.

Pihkala: Kiitos (thank you). Very nice to meet you, Karine. Let’s continue.

St. Jean: Merci beaucoup (thank you so much).  

Doherty: Have a good day everyone. 

St. Jean: Bonne journée. Have a good day. 

[music: “CC&H theme music”]

image credit | Cosiela Borta

How do we navigate eco-anxiety as an idea and as a feeling? Is it one thing or many things? Thomas and Panu talk about eco-anxiety, or “ympäristöahdistus” in Finnish, as a primal emotion, as a feeling we can describe in various languages, as a cultural idea, and as a psychiatric diagnosis. They give a history of the concept of eco- or environmental anxiety in psychology research and in pop culture. Eco-anxiety predates concerns about the climate crisis to take in the Rachel’s Carson’s warnings in “Silent Spring” about human-made chemicals in the ecosystem and global anxiety about nuclear destruction felt during the cold war. Eco-anxiety is a practical emotion, and it can be debilitating at times. You are not alone with this. 

Links

• Speaking of Psychology Podcast: How to cope with climate anxiety, with Thomas Doherty, PsyD, and Ashlee Cunsolo, PhD

• Panu Pihkala (2020) Anxiety and the Ecological Crisis: An Analysis of Eco-Anxiety and Climate Anxiety

  • A short text about the history of eco-anxiety discourse in Finland 

  • 10 recommendations for people who experience eco-anxiety (Panu’s blog)

• Charlie Kurth (2018) The Anxious Mind

• Example of research comparing psychological exposure and physical exposure to chemical threats

• Sarah Ray’s (2020) Field Guide to Climate Change: How to Keep Your Cool on a Warming Planet

• Life Hacker Discussion of Joanna Macy’s The Work That Reconnects. 

Transcript

Season 1, Episode 3: Eco-Anxiety Demystified 

[music: “CC&H theme music”]

Introduction voice: Welcome to Climate Change and Happiness (CCH), an international podcast that explores the personal side of climate change. Your feelings, what the crisis means to you, and how to cope and thrive. And now, your hosts, Thomas Doherty and Panu Pihkala.

Thomas Doherty: Well hello, I am Thomas Doherty.

Panu Pihkala: And I am Panu Pihkala.

Doherty: And welcome to Climate Change and Happiness. This is our podcast and a show for people around the world who are interested in exploring their feelings about climate change, their emotions, their personal experience and well, today, our word of the day is a common one in our culture right now — eco-anxiety. It’s something Panu and I have talked about many times but this is an open conversation that we’re inviting the listeners to join in. As I say, [anxiety] is a fear wrapped in a cloud, anxiety is a normal and healthy emotion that we are hardwired to have. And when we have some apprehension about a potential threat we feel anxiety. And it causes us to think about what might happen and take some action. And it helps us to survive. 

So as they say in counseling, anxiety’s job is not to make you happy, it’s to keep you alive. So, we’re going to talk about eco-anxiety and some different ways that you as the listener can — well, feel about this. I know you have a lot of feelings about this, you all, and also think about it and understand it and — Panu do you want to talk a little about your history with this feeling, with this emotion and with these ideas?

Pihkala: Yeah definitely, ympäristöahdistus, that’s eco-anxiety in Finnish. Literally that would be environment anxiety so ympäristö = environment, ahdistus = anxiety. The words are again important here because anxiety is such a loaded term. For some people, it brings into mind more intense anxiety and then for some, like you Thomas, there’s the recognition of the fundamental practical dimension in anxiety and in the Finnish language, my native language, the way we use ahdistus — anxiety, is not very pathologizing. Of course, people in healthcare in Finland might have a connotation heavily geared towards intense anxiety or even anxiety disorders, but common people also use it as a very — something is “anxieting you” and so that means that something is troubling you in a general sense.  And that’s probably one of the reasons why so many Finns have resonated with the concept of eco-anxiety and climate anxiety and those have been big parts of my work here. 

But originally I came across this area around 2009 or 10. Of course, implicitly I had encountered it even before but explicitly then in cooperation with environmental educators especially my colleague and friend Essi [Aarnio-Linnanvuori] who is also a scholar of environmental education. We started organizing sessions for people where they could encounter some of these difficult emotions and those related to many issues including biodiversity loss, and in Finland what’s happening with the forests was a major thing. So, it started for me as a general anxiety / distress, worry-related thing not especially related to climate and that’s been influencing my work also later — but how about you Thomas? What’s your history with eco-anxiety? 

Doherty: Yeah, thanks Panu. Yeah there is history to eco-anxiety and so I think that’s a great way to get into this a little bit too, it’s not a new idea. I mean the feeling of anxiety is a primal, you know, primordial feeling. I think certainly all mammals can feel anxiety in some form and sentient beings of various kinds can probably feel some sorts of existential anxiety in terms of threats to their life, and we as humans have, you know, existential anxiety in terms of threats to meaning and how we make sense of things too. 

And I’ve been tracking this for … too many years now, it goes back to my time with the American Psychology Association Climate Task Force about 10, 12 years ago and you know really exploring what we were calling then “environmental anxiety” and it’s important to realize that this idea of eco-anxiety is not — didn’t specifically even start with climate change. You know, by my reckoning the first mention of the term eco-anxiety in the media as we know it now was around 2004 [2007] and it was really about, you know, concerns about chemicals in the natural environment and chemicals in our systems — endocrine disruptors and various chemicals and things like that. That’s the article that I saw that was looking at that, so this is a long standing concern that people have. 

Really to understand eco-anxiety in that sense you’d need to go back to, say, Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring in the 1960s. That’s a real harbinger of this idea of eco-anxiety, so you know “eco” meaning ecological and ecological threats. You know Roszak had a great quote in his book The Voice of the Earth from the early 90’s and talking about this prefix eco being affixed to many words like eco-politics and eco-philosophy and even eco-terrorism but he said this quote “this tiny neologistic flag flies above our language like a storm warning meant to signal our belated concern for the fate of the planet. It’s often awkward connection with words from many sources, politics, economics, the arts (and therapy of course) reveals our growing realization of how many aspects of our life that concern will have to embrace.” 

So you know this neologistic storm flag that was flying in the 90s, you know, was the harbinger of what we’re feeling here, today in 2021. And you know I’ve got a book here on my desk from Alan Watts The Wisdom of Insecurity: A Message for an Age of Anxiety right and that was written in 1951, right so here we have to think about the nuclear, the Cold War, and the fear of nuclear threat so that’s another variation on eco-anxiety so people have been feeling, you know, over many eras I think we could do some archeological thinking on many eras and times people have had some sort of sense of threats in the larger systems. And so, again —

Pihkala: Exactly.

Doherty: So, I think that’s a good place to help ground ourselves. We’re not alone. This is not new, but we have our versions of it and then how does that play out in your books and research Panu?

Pihkala: Yeah, I’ve always found the historical dimension also very important. Part of that is related to my own history of doing a dissertation related to historical forms of Christian ecological theology, especially the first half of the 20th century and there definitely was distress related to ecological concerns already during that time, sometimes local or regional like during the Dust Bowl, for example. And then in a growing manner, related also to global conditions, so I think Rachel Carson is a prime example here. Even though the concept of eco-anxiety is not mentioned, that doesn’t mean that the substance matter wouldn't be there. So I think that’s very important to note and in the early 1970s, lots of people had this. And since I’ve been working with the subject, many people who were alive then and very concerned have resonated now with the concept of eco-anxiety, it just wasn’t conceptualized that way in the early 70s, for example. 

But for me, it went so that in 2014/2015 I started focusing heavily on eco-anxiety research. It was very new back then in Finland. It was quite a lonely, lonely road but very, very interesting also, and partly I was home taking care of the kids during that time so it was sort of a special time. And I wrote a monograph in Finnish about eco-anxiety and hope which came out in October 2017 and that became quite well-known in Finland. Finland is after all a relatively small country, so if some of the major newspapers cover a book you do, then the information spreads. And many people started to resonate with the concept in its Finnish form and, as I mentioned in the beginning, the pathologizing aspect wasn’t as severe in the Finnish language as it has been in other places. 

And then one year after, in autumn 2018, when there was serious heatwaves in Northern Europe and the new IPCC report came out and Greta Thunberg and others started these school strikes, for example, the level of climate awareness grew rapidly and with that there was also a renewed interest in my eco-anxiety book and work. So it sort of started to fly a second time one year after it was published. 

But a big part of academic work has been, sort of theoretical foundations for thinking about these issues and that’s also of course one place where I was drawing on stuff that you Thomas have been doing with others like Susan Clayton and many of these ecopsychology people — Roszak is one and several others. So, one of the aims of that work is to avoid the pathologizing dimension also in other languages and to underscore that fundamentally eco-anxiety is so called “practical anxiety”, using a concept developed by Charlie Kurth, a anxiety philosopher whose book The Anxious Mind is very helpful in this regard. But of course it can become very intense and people often need support for it. And that’s why I think that Thomas, also in your daily work the subject matter comes up pretty frequently.

Doherty:  Yeah, it does and this has been, you know, as I joke sometimes in a dark way the future or the present has caught up with me in terms of my, you know, you say lonely road working on some of these issues. And so any of you all listening who have been working on this or thinking about this for a long time, you know, for 10, 20, 30, 40 years. It is a lonely road in the sense of being open to these kinds of circumstances. There’s a lot of directions to go with this conversation, you know, “we hurt where we care” as the saying goes. You know the people listening that have environmental values or altruistic values or you know concern about the planet or other species or feel a sense of interbeing, you know, that they are a part of nature, part of the web of life are particularly — I share some of those beliefs and feelings and sort of knowings and that leaves us vulnerable, you know, to this kind of anxiety and also just pure education and awareness leaves us vulnerable to these kinds of anxieties. 

You know, again back in 2008 when I was working on that climate task force and I plunged into the disaster research you know it was interesting to learn about the early writing on environmental anxiety, a lot of it came around chemical — people living around chemical plants and things like that — and you know what they found was that people — if you were living in close relation to a chemical plant you were more likely to have anxiety or physiological symptoms concerned about the chemicals if you could see that plant. So there was a visual piece there even if someone was living closer to it they would have less symptoms if they couldn’t see it. So what we can see affects us and so we do have a mind that’s actively working to, you know, to see these threats — so the more we see, the more we understand, then the more we’re vulnerable. 

And you know to bring it up to the present day, you know why climate change is really you know channeling this eco-anxiety is because you know 10, 20 years ago when you’d think about climate change it was all kind of an abstract, distant — a distant kind of problem maybe for another part of the world — particularly for people in the Global North — Oh yeah, this is going to happen maybe in the future, things like that. So there was seen the direct impacts of disaster that we all can understand. But then there was the indirect impacts of climate refugees and ripple effects and geopolitical, you know, conflicts around, you know, climate and drought and things like that and then the — what I was really working on — was the emotional impacts, the weight, the emotional weight of sitting with all this — this stuff even if we’re not personally, you know, in harm's way. 

But, you know, those categories of impacts have now started to come to be what I call a “singularity” where the disasters are coming to where we live now and the disasters and the ripple effects and the emotional things are all happening in the same place and time and that’s what’s happening for us. It’s happening for me, for you Panu, for listeners around the world and so that, that singularity is really amping up you know this anxiety and it’s beyond — we have to understand, anxiety is about a potential threat, but fear is about a real threat that we can see, so anxiety is getting more — you know, for some people it’s not, the feeling isn’t anxious it’s fear or something like that and so we, we can get into these kinds of things but again remembering that anxiety is hardwired into us in a healthy way, evolutionary way we have both a propensity to, you know, affiliate with nature and to love nature and to understand nature. But we also have - we’re wired to be concerned about threats because we’re mammals. 

So again embracing this, celebrating eco-anxiety to a certain extent is really important. You know I think of books like The Uninhabitable Earth by David Wallace Wells and things like that, these really scary, scary stories are also prompting people to take action. I know I just saw some research that you know natural disasters — disasters of various kinds, like heat waves and droughts, they’re, you know, that the amount of actual deaths are going down even as the disasters are increasing and we saw that with the European, European heatwaves over the successive heat waves they’ve had over the last decade or so. People - systems are, we’re getting better systems you know to deal with the problem, so again as the problems ramp up, our responses are also ramping up so we have to, kind of, keep that in mind as well. 

Pihkala: Yeah that’s one, one thing that brings comfort and the concept of eco-fear has been suggested also. And it would be, in my mind, also important to realize that there is that fear component also. And worry, of course, worry is also a big word which can mean many things. It can be sort of constructive caring — you know, you have worrying about your kids who are out on the town, for example, and much of that is constructive. Then if it controls your life in the sense of negative rumination, that’s of course problematic, but I think the same kind of dynamic applies for many of these threat-related emotions and feelings: that we really need a certain amount of them to protect ourselves and our dear ones. So they have this life serving function as you, Thomas, so well said and that’s very important to keep in mind. 

One of the problems with climate anxiety is that because it’s related to so many things. Overall, we have this eco-social crisis, and then climate change is related to all of the ways of production and consumption and mobility and so on, and that means that the possible triggers and stimuli, the list is sort of endless. So coming back to what you said Thomas about seeing the plant and then getting more anxiety, that’s one of the problems with climate anxiety is because you can see signs of it basically everywhere. And I remember those times when my climate anxiety was higher. I, for example, got anxiety by seeing these major construction sites in Helsinki because they are not done as climate friendly as they should be, and anyway the whole society has big problems with climate issues. Just to mention one personal example.

Doherty: Yeah, yeah. This is — we’ve got about — we’ve got some time left in our talk and I think for our listeners I want to go in a couple directions, I mean, I want to come back to that practical, that practical piece and some takeaways. You know I think one helpful thing as two people who have really spent a lot of time in this area, is how to navigate eco-anxiety because it’s in the media a lot, it’s being written about and it is, like you say Panu, it’s very personal. But then you’re talking about these big systems so I think when you as a listener, when you’re seeing discussions of ecoanxiety you’re seeing it typically talked about in one of two ways.

One is the broad, cultural, people are talking about this on a broad cultural level and you know often as a critique of society and our system or capitalism or things like that and so we’ve got this - similar to the writing about nuclear war, you know, it's a societal problem. So we’ve got this idea of climate change as a hyperobject you know, Timothy Morton, philosophers — it’s this big thing. So we’ve got philosophers coming in, we’ve got psychoanalytic thinkers, therapists talking about denial and repression. You know we’ve got legal scholars, you know, and the legal scholars they see eco-anxiety as a form of “self governance” right, and self protection in the absence of care by the state. So we can see that people's forms of eco-anxiety are ways to take care of themselves because their leadership is not, so it's a form of governance in a way. So there’s really a lot of interesting ways to think about eco-anxiety and climate anxiety — you know Sarah Ray has A Field Guide to Climate Anxiety, so have various environmental educators have been talking about climate anxiety, eco-anxiety because they’re seeing it in their classrooms, with their students and things like that. 

So again, it gets back to this “climate cosmopolitanism” idea that we talk about that there’s many different languages — you’ll see many different languages around eco-anxiety and so it is a bit of a blind man and elephant problem like everybody's sort of seeing it from their piece, so it can be fragmented. And then there’s the personal, there’s … the personal in a lot of the writings on eco-anxiety that comes across as a kind of a personal confession. People confess their eco-anxiety because it's somehow, you know, still a little bit stigmatized to talk about this sort of stuff and that gets into the personal mental health, you know, as we were joking earlier, we, Panu and I, are parents and you know we’re privileged in our way, but we also are humans and have a life and I’m doing this early in the morning and Panu is late in the evening in Finland and I rush to get my 14 year old daughter off to her school and getting her with her lunch and all the special things she needs for her spirit week at school and then I come to this podcast and we talk about these global existential issues and so, we, and so that’s what happens, we’re in our lives, our daily lives and then we’re carrying the weight of the world and that’s are all personal experience of being planetary citizens now. 

It’s a beautiful thing, Panu I think, it’s a real honor that we have this ability to understand and know — at least us, those of us who have the ability to be educated and have access to technology and things like that. But it does cause — it can cause diagnosable problems, you know, as a therapist I see this and that’s another part of the conversation.

Pihkala: Yeah, yeah definitely there’s a lot to unpack here and this sort of fact that we have our daily lives to take care of, that’s on one hand a complication to encountering many sorts of difficult feelings, and on the other hand it can be a resource of course also many times. You are sort of grounded also in other issues, so the dynamics are manifold here. And one part of my work in Finland has been to advise various institutions who have become more interested to help people to cope better with eco-anxiety.

To serve those needs and workshop needs I did a short text in 2018 “10 Recommendations for People with Eco-Anxiety.” The first three ones that I mentioned was, one, “don’t feel weak or unsuccessful if you experience eco-anxiety”. The second one was to “appreciate and respect your eco-anxiety”. So echoing some of the things you said, Thomas. And third, “you’re not alone, don’t remain alone”. And back then, and in many places today, there may be feelings of isolation and loneliness, and that’s one of the reasons why we are doing this podcast of course. So to manifest that you’re not alone: there’s a great company.

Doherty: Yes indeed. Well said, Panu and you know from the clinical psychology perspective the other piece of the — this dialogue is around the medical and the psychiatric and the psychological and is eco-anxiety a disorder? And all these other things that people talk about. Most people don’t understand that, you know, how the disorder system works and the diagnosis book — you don’t need to have a special context for a disorder. Anxiety can be around any number of issues in life or depression or trauma, so we don’t need a particular “drought depression” or “wildfire distress disorder,” but we can certainly have depression or traumatic stress around these kinds of things and so we can certainly have, again we have — it’s levels for people as you think about this yourself, the listeners, there’s a normal level. 

Anxiety is a normal part of our emotional repertoire and so if you feel anxious about climate change, well, join the club, we all do and it’s a big issue. And then some people have trouble managing their anxiety. Some people are more vulnerable to anxiety in general and they tend to ruminate and worry and, or have you know their body all keyed up and have difficulty sleeping and you know that can happen around climate and eco-anxiety for sure. It could get to the point of being like what we call an adjustment disorder, where people are struggling to adjust to a stressor. And then some of us might have a full-fledged depression or anxiety diagnosis because that’s just our situation. You know it's not a stigma or pathology. 

And so finding our place in this is really important you know and again this is contested because some of you want to make sure that we medicalize this social issue. They don’t want to medicalize and say, oh this is just a personal psychiatric problem; this is a social problem; this is a structural problem; this is a political problem, so people fight. Some people are fighting against that diagnosis in a right way because they don’t want it to be — they don’t want it to be reduced or reductionistic. Right? But we don’t want to reduce eco-anxiety in any way. We don’t want to reduce it to just a social problem or just a psychiatric problem. It’s all of the above. 

It’s a hyperobject, right, so it’s multiple things. And we can have issues and issues. So like I can have a psychological issue and issues with society at the same time, right? That’s my therapeutic work with clients. That's where I would go - what are the issues you want to work on and what are your personal issues and how do we get in sync with that — and it’s — that’s just something we all have to do and I have to do as well. Yeah. Anything else, Panu? We’re going to wrap this up in a moment. You know and, again, this whole podcast is - we’re coming at this from different directions you know. We did a talk on inadequacy, the feeling of inadequacy. I’m actually looking forward to a talk on cynicism and celebrating cynicism because I can be a very cynical person myself, so there’s a lot of directions here.

Pihkala: Yes, yes there is definitely and a theme that has been sort of implicitly mentioned here is the ability to counter the negativity bias, and we’ll return to that one I think several in times in our talks. And I might close for my part by reading the last recommendation of this old text of mine from 2018. “Accept the ‘seasons of the mind’ and practice the skill of seeing on two levels. No one will ever be perfect, just like in the natural world the human mind also has seasons. Sometimes you just have to accept and live through a period of dark, melancholy while waiting for the spring.

Difficult emotions are also part of life. Seeing on two levels means regularly focusing on both difficulties and good things. A paralyzing bout of eco-anxiety can often hide the many signs of hope that exist in the world. Remembering the good things and being grateful allows us to cope better.” Now that’s almost paraphrasing Joanna Macy, so respect for Joanna, another pioneer also.

Doherty: Yes, yeah and again the emotional work as you say for some of us is really going deep into the despair to really sit with that and be able to express that in a safe way. And others of us want to build … build bricks of positivity so we want to start with positive emotions and build - so a “broaden and build” kind of positive approach. So each, each of us are going to have our own way in dealing with these troubling emotions in general and I know just in terms of counseling and therapy, you know anxiety again it's a - what I say with clients is you need to “close the loop” on anxiety. So anxiety is a signal, it's like a warning flag and then we go and explore what the issue is as best as we can and then we take some action, that closes the loop in our mind. It activates our entire mind and ourselves and we do something with our hands so we have to try to close the loop with your eco-anxiety either by taking some action of some sort. It could be making a list, it could be reading, it could be doing research, it could be talking to someone, but that closing the loop can get it out of the rumination and the worry and into the world and into action, and then we can come back around again. But think of it as a series of loops. 

I think it is helpful because if we’re just ruminating and sitting in our own stew of worry and fear and the cloud it’s – there’s ultimately, there’s a point of diminishing returns there, where we’re just becoming internalized in it and it disempowers us. So, I know this is easier said than done, but small actions make a difference  – “so small things often.” 

But listeners, thank you so much for joining us. This is Climate Change and Happiness. You can find us at climatechangeandhappiness.com. Please send us your thoughts and questions and we will be talking about more things. All climate, all emotions, all the time. Panu, take care of yourself and have a great evening.

Pihkala: You too, Thomas, have a good day and thanks to all the listeners.

[music: “CC&H theme music”]