Eco-emotions as the planetary boundaries: framing human emotional and planetary health in the global environmental crisis.

Journal

The Lancet. Planetary health
ISSN: 2542-5196
Titre abrégé: Lancet Planet Health
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101704339

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Apr 2024
Historique:
medline: 18 4 2024
pubmed: 18 4 2024
entrez: 18 4 2024
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Affective processes play an important role in physical and mental health and in adaptation responses to the global environmental crisis. Eco-emotions-emotions that are substantially associated with the environment and anthropogenic changes happening within it-are complex and culturally varied. Despite the disproportionate impact of the global environmental crisis on low-income and middle-income countries, most psychological research to date has been conducted in high-income countries and has focused on climate change and negative climate emotions (eg, climate anxiety). The absence of diverse, globally representative evidence about emotions associated with the global environmental crisis beyond climate change hinders evidence-based action on psychological adaptation and the development of contextually and culturally appropriate coping strategies toward the wider range of negative anthropogenic effects. To account for this wider range of anthropogenic effects, we previously introduced an eco-emotions framework built on the planetary boundaries concept. We aimed to apply this framework to the current research on eco-emotional responses to identify remaining gaps that hinder evidence-based action. We conducted a literature review of peer-reviewed studies assessing core affect (ie, emotional valence and arousal) and emotions with emphasis on study populations from low-income and middle-income countries and on the eight non-climate change planetary boundaries (biodiversity loss, freshwater use, ocean acidification, chemical pollution, air pollution, land system change, ozone depletion, and nitrogen and phosphorus perturbation). We searched Web of Science from database inception to Oct 31, 2023, for observational empirical studies of adults, using planetary boundary-specific (eg, freshwater use) or wider, newer, or overarching emotional concept (eg, solastalgia, environmental change) search terms. In contrast to previous climate emotions work, our preliminary results of 135 peer reviewed studies identified a significant body of literature beyond climate change concerning emotional responses to the planetary boundaries of biodiversity loss, freshwater scarcity, and chemical pollution as well as emerging evidence of emotional responses to the other five planetary boundaries. We found that the spectrum of eco-emotional responses ranged from being specific to a single planetary boundary to encompassing all planetary boundaries. Our findings underscore the importance of and urgent need for more holistic and diverse psychological intervention strategies targeting the wider range of anthropogenic effects during the rapidly intensifying global environmental crisis. Emmett Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources; McGee and Levorsen Research Grant Program; and Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society at Stanford University.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Affective processes play an important role in physical and mental health and in adaptation responses to the global environmental crisis. Eco-emotions-emotions that are substantially associated with the environment and anthropogenic changes happening within it-are complex and culturally varied. Despite the disproportionate impact of the global environmental crisis on low-income and middle-income countries, most psychological research to date has been conducted in high-income countries and has focused on climate change and negative climate emotions (eg, climate anxiety). The absence of diverse, globally representative evidence about emotions associated with the global environmental crisis beyond climate change hinders evidence-based action on psychological adaptation and the development of contextually and culturally appropriate coping strategies toward the wider range of negative anthropogenic effects. To account for this wider range of anthropogenic effects, we previously introduced an eco-emotions framework built on the planetary boundaries concept. We aimed to apply this framework to the current research on eco-emotional responses to identify remaining gaps that hinder evidence-based action.
METHODS METHODS
We conducted a literature review of peer-reviewed studies assessing core affect (ie, emotional valence and arousal) and emotions with emphasis on study populations from low-income and middle-income countries and on the eight non-climate change planetary boundaries (biodiversity loss, freshwater use, ocean acidification, chemical pollution, air pollution, land system change, ozone depletion, and nitrogen and phosphorus perturbation). We searched Web of Science from database inception to Oct 31, 2023, for observational empirical studies of adults, using planetary boundary-specific (eg, freshwater use) or wider, newer, or overarching emotional concept (eg, solastalgia, environmental change) search terms.
FINDINGS RESULTS
In contrast to previous climate emotions work, our preliminary results of 135 peer reviewed studies identified a significant body of literature beyond climate change concerning emotional responses to the planetary boundaries of biodiversity loss, freshwater scarcity, and chemical pollution as well as emerging evidence of emotional responses to the other five planetary boundaries.
INTERPRETATION CONCLUSIONS
We found that the spectrum of eco-emotional responses ranged from being specific to a single planetary boundary to encompassing all planetary boundaries. Our findings underscore the importance of and urgent need for more holistic and diverse psychological intervention strategies targeting the wider range of anthropogenic effects during the rapidly intensifying global environmental crisis.
FUNDING BACKGROUND
Emmett Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources; McGee and Levorsen Research Grant Program; and Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society at Stanford University.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00066-4 PMID: 38632904
pubmed: 38632904
pii: S2542-5196(24)00066-4
doi: 10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00066-4
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

S1

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests.

Auteurs

Anaïs Voşki (A)

Emmett Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources, Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA. Electronic address: avoski@stanford.edu.

Gabrielle Wong-Parodi (G)

Emmett Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources, Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; Earth System Science, Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; Environmental Social Sciences, Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Nicole M Ardoin (NM)

Emmett Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources, Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; Environmental Social Sciences, Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA; Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Classifications MeSH