Why well-being matters for climate action
The relationship between well-being and pro-active climate action/behaviour.
Remember the floods in Pakistan where nearly a third of a country was under water? Or those in Bangladesh which completely submerged the towns and districts? Recall the extreme heatwave in India with temperatures soaring to 50 degrees C, or the one in Italy leading to the worst drought seen in seven decades? All this happened just in the last few years or so and led to devastating consequences for not only those living in such conditions (for whom the scale of impact was catastrophic), but the wider economy heavily reliant on goods and services in a globalised world.
Around the same time, major climate policies were rolled back in the US, deforestation in Brazil surged and coal plants were given the green light in UK. Cop 26 and 27 were largely ‘considered failures and promises were mostly made on paper without clear actionable steps, legislation or financial incentives’.
But why? While there are several complex reasons for this that are rooted in socio-economics — I think of it as a desire of decisions makers, to focus on short-term happiness over long-term gain, which irving Fisher describes as intertemporal choice. This phenomenon suggests that people have a preference to over-value smaller rewards available earlier rather than larger rewards at a later date, a situation referred to as ‘temporal discounting’. This has close connections with personal well-being where the tendency to make unhealthy choices can be related to people’s inability to value rewards in the longerterm. For example, we may often choose to over-eat in the shorter term, knowing about the impact of obesity in the long term but the latter makes little difference to influence our decision in the moment.
Another reason could be around thinking patterns. As humans prefer to think in a linear perspective, challenges of climate change which is a non-linear problem can fall out of grasp especially if mental and social well-being is neglected. This neglect can have direct consequences on our ability to form human connections. Such connections can broaden the perspective and community understanding of wider climate actions and thus influence our sphere of understanding further. It can impact our climate actions; due to either direct consequences/trauma of climate destruction or indirect socio-economic issues potentially brought on as a result of interlinked environmental issues (health, safety, food shortages, inflation etc) influencing behaviour. ‘Climate-relevant decisions are shaped, and often constrained, by features of the decision-making environment within which they are made by individuals, households, organizations, communities, and other groups, e.g., transportation infrastructure, dominant and alternative economic systems, available technologies, as well as local and regional climatic conditions.’
Together such constraints can limit decision makers’ climate relevance preferences/motives at every level of decision making to impact climate mitigation and adaptation and continue the cycle of reduced climate action exacerbated by people’s reduced ability to make actions based on systems.
Studies show that what we need is a ‘paradigm shift — from the linear to systems worldview’.
The good news is that we now agree that systemic problems need systemic solutions and that climate change has the ability to deeply affect the social, political and environmental conditions in which we live. We need resilient ‘food and water systems, societies and livelihoods, connections with ourselves and the natural-world’ — we know this is interdependent to the sustainable functioning of the planet and requires climate focussed, well-being framing. But before we dive into framing, it’s worth examining further why industries and government action might struggle to act in a systemic way.
Path Dependencies
Some studies have attributed ‘behavioural spillover and decision pathways also known as path dependencies’ as key influencers behind industry organisational and government (in)action i.e. stuck in their ways mindsets. This phenomenon ‘arises when initial conditions and their historical antecedents matter for eventual outcomes’. It underpins the idea of tried and tested being safest. In an evolving world with climate change and climate justice bringing new and never before seen problems at pace, this approach can limit climate action. Such pathways dependence can be around existing funding models, existing infrastructure, existing production systems, existing success indicators/measurement processes such as GDP, existing legal structures etc. These can have interlinked effects creating inertia in the direction of climate change like a fast moving river flowing following the path of least resistance. This combined with the risk of potential short term losses (if factors of production begin to get tied up in newer/cleaner technologies), can significantly impact climate action. What is needed then, atleast in the short-term, is a systems-based ‘framing’ of the complexity of climate change and a link back to the issues of accurate value-making.
‘A frame, as sociologist Erving Goffman (60, p. 16) first described it, consists of words and nonverbal interactions that help individuals negotiate meaning through the lens of existing cultural beliefs and worldviews.’
Climate Action within a Well-being Framing
‘Many health researchers and practitioners argue that framing climate change as a human health issue as well as an environmental issue has much potential to prompt transformative policy change.’ It provides a relatable, personal context to an otherwise abstract concept. Some countries, such as in Wales, the Well-being of Future Generations Act has already showcased this within legislation with others soon to follow. ‘Adopting a well-being lens means that societal goals are defined in terms of well-being outcomes (including the risks and impacts of climate change such as income, jobs, housing, environment) and are systematically reflected in decision-making across the economy.’
This sort of framing, in the short-term, could help:
- Build trust — in the same way that health professionals are perceived as trust-worthy members of society.
- Allow all to work towards a unified understanding of the complexities of climate change and their resulting influence on people’s well-being.
- Provide financial avenues that overlap with wider health determinants
- Re-shape governmental value-based frameworks across industries, fostering a collaborative environment with a unified goal, measurable in the longer term.
- Create unified measurement indicator around well-being outcomes so that trade-off’s are fairly identified
For businesses, radical over-night change can be frightening. Reframing climate change as a business concern/risk can be a first step that managers can then use to formulate roadmaps. Compromise between competing goals is part of ‘localising the frame’ and can then be re-aligned to wider climate change initiatives. Greenwashing can be mitigated by investment in impact measurement tools that avoid a sole focus on carbon.
For governments, the framing system can start to follow the ‘OECD well-being framework’ (see image) through embedding well-being indicators in policy making and evaluations that facilitates the breakdown of department silo’s. This will take a significant shift in mindset and a re-focus on newer ways of thinking and innovating.
Ultimately, the longer-term will require a re-imagination of our current day systems and processes to tackle the incredibly complex issue of climate change. This has already started to occur in discussion but requires full support to truly be adopted. If the pandemic is seen as a lessons learned, perhaps climate change can issue a similar warning on not just the devastating environmental breakdown which has been ongoing but also the cyclical chain of well-being, to be seen as not just an outcome but an active contributor to our current shocking scenario.
— — — —
Thanks for reading! If you found this interesting, please also check out my you-tube channel where I explore new climate intersections using evidence-based strategies and tools that can help us better understand ourselves and our complex environment, to ultimately build a life we love on a planet that we need.
