Κλιμα

Besides informing a general audience about the historical and current development of the climate system, findings of climate science are the basis for informed adaptation and mitigation efforts and overall climate action. Given the central role of climate science in climate action, it is worth looking at aspects that are either not or only remotely included in current Western climate science and how adding alternative approaches, knowledges, and concepts could be a strategy to potentially aid more holistic climate action.

The dynamics and structure of the Earth’s climate system are studied by climate science. It examines the processes by which global, regional, and local climates are maintained and how they change over time. It employs data and theories from numerous fields, including meteorology, oceanography, physics, chemistry, etc. These inputs also inform computer models of the climate system, which are a keystone of contemporary climate research (Parker, 2018). Hence, climate science provides us with robust and detailed data and information about how the Earth’s climate evolved over thousands (and even millions) of years and how it will continue to change under current and future emissions scenarios in the Anthropocene.

One of the key principles of Western (climate) science states that “scientific evidence is objective and independent of its discoverer’s personal or social attributes“ (Howarth et al., 2020, p. 323). While science itself is objective, scientific findings are influenced by what is measured, calculated and factored into, for instance, a scenario or a model. While data is a quantitative value, the qualitative value is added by a research hypothesis or the general interpretation of data. Therefore, climate scientists and their communicators need to recognize the subjectivities, including their own, that shape how people see climate science to avoid being seen as the bearers of a single, universal truth. Instead, climate science must embrace the plurality of its interpretation by acknowledging that science is perceived differently by different audiences and adapting its messages accordingly (Howarth et al., 2020).

Besides the risk of different perceptions of scientific findings, another aspect speaks against relying on Western climate science as the representation of a single, universal truth. Several concepts and ideas are not (yet) considered in Western climate science and highlight the potential for more extensive and inclusive climate research. The following two concepts exemplify how our capacity to apply meaningful climate action could be expanded.

Climate models, such as the CMIP6 models used in the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), cover a range of perceivable scenarios and, thus, result in a range of projections depending on the data input (ECCC, 2022). However, certain approaches are not represented in climate models and scenarios. Adding alternative concepts and ways of thinking could expand the applicability of climate science information in adaptation and mitigation planning and overall climate action. The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) are the most recent scenarios utilized in the CMIP6 climate models. In the absence of climate policy, the SSPs suggest how the world might evolve over the current century under different emission scenarios and socioeconomic circumstances. Considering what information is missing from these scenarios, notably from a socioeconomic standpoint, it is evident that all SSPs assume continued economic growth and do not evaluate alternative economic pathways. Growth-critical concepts that could reduce production and consumption are not applied, which rules out the idea of a solution-based shift away from an economically growth-focused society. Hence, approaches outside the predominant neoliberal growth logic are effectively barred from climate policy and social discourse (Kuhnhenn, 2018).

Compared to Western climate science, Indigenous climate change studies show a different approach to understanding environmental changes through memories and knowledges derived from Indigenous peoples’ living heritages as societies with stories, lessons, and long histories of having to adjust to seasonal and inter-annual environmental changes and external disruptions. Colonialism and capitalism laid the groundwork for industrialization and carbon-intensive economies, which generate the drivers of anthropogenic climate change, such as widespread deforestation for commodity agriculture and the use of petrochemical technologies that rely on burning fossil fuels for energy. Anthropogenic environmental changes, such as deforestation, pollution, modification of hydrological cycles, and intensification of soil use and terraforming for specific types of farming, grazing, transportation, residential, commercial, and governmental infrastructure, significantly disrupted the lives of many Indigenous peoples shortly after the colonial invasion began several centuries ago. The natural circumstances that fostered Indigenous peoples’ cultures, health, economies, and political autonomy were disrupted due to colonial activity (Whyte, 2017).

Indigenous knowledges are systems of observing, recording, communicating, and learning about the relationships between humans, plants and animals, and ecosystems that are essential for any community to live and thrive in specific ecosystems that are subject to various disturbances. Indigenous knowledges range from how ecological information is encoded in Indigenous languages to elder and youth mentorship protocols, kin-based and spiritual relationships with plants and animals, and memories of environmental change used to draw lessons about how to adapt to similar changes in the future. Therefore, the Indigenous approach to climate change studies is structurally different from Western climate science’s data- and objectivity-driven approach. Indigenous peoples consider the renewal of their knowledge systems as a crucial method for successful adaptation planning because they believe traditional knowledges provide critical insights into navigating today’s environmental issues (Whyte, 2017).

Since Indigenous climate change studies originate from memories, knowledges, histories, and experiences of oppression that differ significantly from the approaches of non-indigenous scientists, environmentalists, and politicians who frame the current climate change discourse, Indigenous people might rightfully worry that climate scientists could rush to Indigenous communities, either on purpose or unintentionally, to claim Indigenous peoples’ knowledges to fill in gaps in Western climate science research (Whyte, 2017). Yet, the more scientists understand the importance of the practice and renewal of Indigenous knowledges for Indigenous peoples’ own purposes of preparing for climate change and protecting their ways of life, the more they will understand their responsibilities to work with Indigenous collaborators in a way that is mutually beneficial instead of exploitative (Hardison & Williams, 2013). This could pave the way for expanding the understanding of Western climate science by including Indigenous knowledges and knowledge holders without facilitating cultural appropriation.

The examples of growth-critical approaches and Indigenous climate change studies show that focusing on what can be added to Western science and tools, such as climate models, projections and scenarios, could open a path for more inclusive, just, transdisciplinary and thus holistic strategies and potentially even systemic shifts. Suppose we remain within the current framework of Western climate science instead of exploring pathways that could undoubtedly require radical ideological and practical transformations. Aren’t we limiting our scope of action by excluding alternative approaches and potential solutions that could make a significant difference in climate action? What other concepts are there? Which additional knowledges and ways of thinking can inform action and strategies and, eventually, even policies? How can additional narratives shape how we understand and think about climate change? This is not to say that Western climate science in itself is insufficient. However, the “yes, and” should be a crucial part of future research and climate action.

References

Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) (2022, January 20). CMIP6 and Shared Socio-economic Pathways overview. https://climate-scenarios.canada.ca/?page=cmip6-overview-notes

Hardison, P., & Williams, T. (2013). Culture, Law, Risk and Governance: Contexts of Traditional Knowledge in Climate Change Adaptation. Climatic Change 120(3), 531-544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-013-0850-0

Howarth, C., Parsons, L., Thew, H. (2020). Effectively communicating climate science beyond academia: Harnessing the heterogeneity of climate knowledge. One Earth, 2(4), 320-324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.04.001

Kuhnhenn, K. (2018). Economic growth in mitigation scenarios: A blind spot in climate science? Global scenarios from a growth-critical perspective. Heinrich Böll Foundation. https://www.boell.de/sites/default/files/endf2_kuhnhenn_growth_in_mitigation_scenarios.pdf

Parker, W. (2018, May 11). Climate Science. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/climate-science/

Whyte, K. (2017). Indigenous Climate Change Studies: Indigenizing Futures, Decolonizing the Anthropocene. English Language Notes 55(1-2), 153-162. https://kylewhyte.marcom.cal.msu.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2018/07/IndigenousClimateChangeStudies.pdf

J: So today we’re going to talk about why we need to talk about grief when we talk about climate change. And I’m going to talk about this with Kelleigh, a friend and classmate.
This topic came up with the last assignment that I did. I wrote a paper on precisely this topic, primarily aimed at people who experience intense emotional reactions to climate change and what’s happening right now.
However, it’s a paper and what we are trying to do here right now is actually to do what this climate communications course is all about. So we’re going to communicate about grief in the context of climate change to make this topic even more accessible.
It is mainly directed at everybody working with climate change who has experienced climate grief (without even knowing it). I believe it’s very important to understand what we feel, especially if it’s something very intense that can potentially block us or make it almost impossible to work with such an important topic as climate change.
So this is a very first short introduction to what we’re going to do. And of course, we cannot rehash the whole paper, but just as an overview, I did dive into what climate grief actually is and also showed how closely it is related to “conventional” grief in terms of bereavement and losing a loved one. The notion of climate grief is based on the work of Swiss psychiatrist Elisabeth Kübler-Ross. She defined five stages of grief that are surprisingly applicable to climate change and our perception of it and our reaction to it.
So what we’re going to do today is we’re quickly going to talk about what climate grief is. And to open with this, I would just like to give a short definition. Climate grief is also described as ecological grief because climate change effects are seen in our natural environment, so changes in our ecological environment are often the result of climate change.
We have a definition of climate grief and ecological grief by Cunsolo & Ellis from 2018. It says that it is the grief felt in relation to experienced or anticipated ecological loss of species, ecosystems and meaningful landscapes due to acute or chronic environmental change.
Climate grief is a relatively new term that has emerged over the last few years. And as I said, I think it’s very important to talk about this. So this is why I’m going to do this today with you, Kelleigh.

K: Hello. Thank you for inviting me to your very first podcast with you.

J: Yes, we’re going to unpack a little bit of it, and we’re going to expand on a few things. So what I would like to do with you today is to talk about climate denial, which, if we go back to the grieving stages I mentioned earlier, is the first one and how climate denial can show up. And then I would love to touch on two other aspects of this that are maybe a little bit hidden and not that obvious at first, which is, first of all, our understanding of our place in nature or the understanding that we are actually part of nature and that climate change is not something that happens outside of us, but to us and with us as well.
And then touch on the importance and the role of community and all of this. So let’s get started.

K: Yes. So if you don’t mind, I have a couple of questions to get us started. And I’m wondering: who is interested in this topic?

J: The easy answer would be: everybody affected by climate change. However, I’m very well aware that this is a very broad statement. What turned up during the writing process of the paper is that this primarily affects people that already work in the climate change sector, if you will, especially activists and everybody who’s dealing with this daily.
Because we do talk about a systemic, highly complex and terrifying event, and what’s happening is frightening for sure. And if you’re working with this and you’re not really processing it, there’s massive potential for not taking your emotional response to climate change seriously, for eventually not being able to do the work, and ultimately, there’s a risk for burnout.
I would say that this is important as a general topic for climate activists, climate researchers, and climate scientists because you’re dealing with this massive amount of – at first glance – really, really bad news on a daily basis.
So understanding what it does to you, understanding how you’re responding to it, and understanding that your emotional reaction to this, again, very frightening scenario is absolutely essential to develop ways forward and strategies, how to deal with it, and to come up with meaningful climate action.

K: Did you notice in your research if there was a gendered aspect or an aged aspect to it? With climate grief, is it showing up more prolifically with one gender over another or certain age groups over other age groups?

J: No. So from the existing research, there’s not really a way to tell that one gender is more affected than the other or that it’s more about age groups. However, there is a difference in how you experience it when it comes to your community’s vulnerability.
So it’s still something that is mainly felt by most vulnerable communities. Let’s say in the Arctic, for example. They’re seeing and experiencing climate change more immediately than the rest of us.
But even you and I, in Canada and Europe, experience what’s happening, right? We’re experiencing heat waves; we’re experiencing water shortages and all of that.
Community was highlighted because climate change is something that connects beyond a local scale.

So the fundamental angst climate change can induce is the same. Because we’re not just talking about, say, loving the environment, thinking it was pretty the way it was before, and now it’s changing. It’s not just the immediately felt grief that we experience but also the anticipated grief. We understand what’s happening and what will happen in the future. And this is not just the loss of species but the loss of livelihood. It’s the loss of our way of living that even though some of us may understand that this is not sustainable, it’s still something to grieve, and it’s hard to process that.

It’s a massively multi-level emotional experience. I would say it’s more about which communities are affected in which way, but there’s no indication that it goes in the direction of one gender over another.
There are, however, a few mentions that it might be different for women because of our “natural disposition,” if you want to call it that, to nurture and take care of our environments, human or otherwise.
But there’s not much research on this yet.

K: So how are people coming to understand that they’re experiencing climate grief? It is a relatively new term, and it’s certainly not something that’s overly mainstream in discussion yet.
 
J: It’s not, that’s true. This is one of the reasons why I included those five grieving stages to point to the question: how does it make us feel? Is it something that you just put aside? And if so, why? That’s one of the questions for sure. I had a few conversations recently where people were just simply saying, you know what, we’re all going to die, and whatever we’re going to do, there’s nothing to be done about climate change. So there’s a lot to unpack in these supposed jokes because we experience this daily. And I think what’s important is to talk about climate grief, and naming and identifying it is exactly this.
The process of naming your feelings to understand what’s happening is important, so it’s not just an undefined sense of overwhelm. Overwhelm is a sign of anxiety. Anxiety can manifest as grief, and untreated grief can manifest as anxiety.
We are confronted with many frightening scenarios, but there’s still much uncertainty. And uncertainty is very difficult to deal with.
So when talking about climate grief and making this a topic to discuss is, for me at least, the attempt to get back in the driver’s seat a little bit. Like I said, it feels already half as big when you name something and know what’s happening.
That doesn’t mean that climate change is getting smaller as a threat to humanity and our natural environment. Still, it can facilitate more hopeful strategies and more sustainable strategies forward.
The moment you start to name what’s happening to you, and you can communicate this to other people, and you can actually name what’s bothering you and what’s blocking you, there is a huge potential for action, for hope.

K: So I think I hear then that part of the way through this is having language that resonates, so there is some level of understanding. So at least it provides a bit of grounding and a sense of – I use this term loosely – control that then prepares us better to deal with the reality that’s coming in front of us.
What are some of the other needs in this space that you think people might want to gravitate towards just for better mental health?

J: Well, I mentioned uncertainty earlier, and you just mentioned this sense of having more control. Susanne Moser (a climate scientist and activist) came to a point where she said one of the key pieces of climate grief is this sense of uncertainty that I mentioned before, that we don’t really know what’s going to happen and how it’s going to play out and what we can do with this.
And I have a quote from her here and she says: what’s interesting is that I’ve come to understand uncertainty as a necessary condition for hope. If you’re perfectly certain that it’s going to be hell or it’s going to be fine, you don’t need hope because you know exactly what’s going to happen.
So leaning into this uncertainty and letting go of whatever idea you have for the future is a task that we’re not very comfortable doing. However, I do think that one way to get there is to reconsider our position in nature. As I mentioned in the beginning, we still address climate change very often as happening outside of us. There is a consensus that it’s human-driven, that we are the cause, that our emissions cause this kind of climate change that’s happening right now.
However, it’s still happening outside of us in our perception.
Remembering our place in nature is something that helps me reconnect, even on a smaller scale, with the issue. And what I mean by this is the understanding that we are part of this nature. So what we’re doing right now is not just causing the climate to change and, therefore, the environment to change.
We are changing as well. And there is also the element of control that you mentioned earlier. If this is something we do, and this is something that happens to us as well because we’re not outside of nature, we’re part of it, then there is, in some way, a different sense of control that’s back there, because your actions are something you can influence.
What we know we do, we can change. Is it easy to change that? No, but that’s a different story that’s too big for us today. But I think it is essential to understand our place, understand our reach, and refocus on this.
And as the second part of this answer, I would mention that we turn more to community is extremely important in that context. I think community is essential in this. What we’re doing right now is basically a community activity.
We are talking about something – and you and I do this very often – to share what’s happening. So when you’re confronted with something as complex and as frightening as climate change, and you’re on your own, even if you just feel like you’re on your own, how could you possibly ever be empowered in a way that you feel like, I know how I’m moving forward here and what I’m going to do—talking to other people, exchanging stories, exchanging experiences, seeing that, hey, I’m not the only one who’s affected, first of all, by the effects of climate change, but also by these strong emotional responses. That I’m feeling fear that I’m feeling anxiety when I think about the future, and I don’t know what my life is going to look like in 20 to 30 years. I don’t know what it will be like for a future generation. Because if we look at projected scenarios, this is a terrifying place to be, right? So if you’re stuck there, and you’re in your head, so to speak, how could you ever get out of there?
So the moment that we get into community, that we can share these stories, that we can share experiences, first of all, the first thing that’s going to happen is a sense of I’m not alone in this. So I’m not the only one with a somewhat strong emotional reaction to something happening.

It’s about building these kinds of emotional networks and work networks. Whoever is working in that sector or wants to contribute something to a differently designed future can only do so in exchange with others.
And I do think that if we recognize climate grief for what it is, there’s a massive potential to put heads together and come up with good ideas in some transdisciplinary working environment.
It’s not just about the emotional support; it’s also about practical steps forward.

K: And I think this is why it’s incredibly important to know what kind of emotions are behind what’s happening. So I think I’m hearing that climate grief doesn’t get unpacked in just one community, but it shows up in different ways in our lives. It isn’t a one size fits all solution; we’re unpacking different aspects of this with different communities in our lives. So there’s a work community, a personal community, a family community, and everything has its strengths and weaknesses. Yeah, we’re just languaging it, normalizing it in different ways.

J: When I think about community in this context, it’s not necessarily like your typical local community alone, it can be for sure, but at the end of the day, it’s connection.
If you’re connected to other people and if you’re connected to your environment, you get these kinds of emotional little guides and nudges on where to go and where to look at. And I know for myself when I’m sitting here, and I have a day where I feel very overwhelmed with what the future holds and what we can do about it.
And on a very bad day, even asking myself, okay, but what do we study for? We are already way behind. Can we even catch up? And is this something where we can even have the tiniest little shred of influence in the future? And I’m sitting like this by myself, and then I pick up a zoom call, and I’m talking to you, let’s say, or to other team members.
There’s a different dynamic that comes from sharing these experiences, sharing these feelings and emotions, and sharing your fears and having input, not in terms of advice necessarily, but just from different perspectives, different knowledge, and different backgrounds that can open what feels like a very limited and very close horizon at that moment.
So I think this is why we must talk about what’s happening. And also, I mean, this is something we already discussed previously, that we have another issue here, that in our Western societies, we’re not very comfortable discussing emotional discomfort and what it might mean and how it will make us look. That’s a whole different story. But I think it’s talking about it and opening up this kind of conversation that’s also helping in this regard.

K: And it’s actually one of the reasons why I’m so thrilled that we’re unpacking this in this specific format. Within our papers. We started with an original audience, and within this assignment, we are switching. We’re taking the same idea, but we’re switching to a new audience. And this is the place where I like to play. So we’re basically chatting with the converted, and people understand that climate change is real and experience happening now. They’re fairly informed. So we’re not back at the basics.
And the issues are personal because in these societies, people are being used as fuel, and in that way, we’re burning out. So it’s continual work. It’s not a problem that has a solution. These are lifelong things that we’re going to devote our energies to.
How do we sustainably do that, knowing that grief can contribute to that burnout? And within community, it’s that place where you see you’re hurt; you have a sense of belonging, and you resonate with the conversation.
The languaging is there already, or at least you can muddle through language, and people will give you the benefit of the doubt. Emotions are normalized, and they’re welcome. And you don’t have to have the answers. You can just sit with whatever is there. To me, that is the container for community. And I bumped into it with my paper as well. Living with grief is not something you have to repress or overcome or conquer, or you ignore and live in this hopelessness.

J: You just mentioned the risk of burning out, and I think this is where this whole issue is very much directed at climate workers. If you want to call it that. Or climate activists.
We do see a tendency even in those groups and those communities that very much know about the severity of climate change and what we’re dealing with. But even there, you see a certain kind of denial at times, which is not rooted in statements that climate change isn’t real. That’s a different kind of denial, which can also be fear-based and the result of a very strong emotional reaction to everything that climate change represents. But there’s another one that’s rooted a little bit more in avoidance, and this is a strategy to survive the daily emotional toll that working with climate change has on us. What I mean by this is that even though we are as well informed as we are, we’re not doing the work as much as we should. Not based on what we know is going on. Do you know what I mean? That we know, we should do so much more. We know that much more radical action is required, yet we drink our coffee, go to work, do whatever we do, hop on the next plane and go on vacation for a week. So this is not something people do because they don’t care. This is something they do to kind of balance overwhelm.
And I think that’s just another reason why it’s important to address these things in community and avoid this kind of burnout. Because what we’re doing, in that case, is, of course, we’re pushing something away.
And I think it’s important to understand ourselves a little bit better as well.
I certainly know the feeling of, okay, now I’m studying again, working again with climate change and all that. And where do I hold myself accountable for what I’m not doing now? Because technically, we should jump and radically change everything about how we live right now, right? So even that can be comforted and met in community, I think, because then again, what’s happening is we feel overwhelmed.
This is the opposite of motivation. This is the opposite of engagement. This is just a massive feeling of guilt and something that gets us to a point where we’re not necessarily able to do the work better.

K: Well, I think, too, we need to avoid things like purity, politics, which isn’t helpful. And to understand that everything happens within systems, which are more or less out of our control, with mortgages to be paid, there’s work to be had; there’s bills to be paid, and we operate within a certain structure. That change has to happen radically, but we are tied in some way to these structures that into this sort of thing.
And I think the other thing that comes up, too, is that for those of us who might be a bit ahead of the curve when it comes to things like unpacking climate grief, at one point, we were the movable middle, so to speak, which is my original audience that my previous paper spoke to.
And you’re trying to make sense of things at that point, and you’re looking to resonate with certain values. I think people want to be responsible.
So in my first paper with that audience, I wanted to embed a multiplicity of intelligences because everybody’s on a spectrum. That spectrum isn’t always linear; it moves; it’s fluid as we try to figure our stuff out.
And so I know that I need a camp like I’ve moved through the movable middle. I’m certainly preaching to the choir at this point. I still need community. If we don’t build that community, then where’s the movable middle going to step into as they journey?
So it’s important from that perspective is what I’m seeing and hearing from what you provided. I absolutely agree. And yes, as you said, this is not a linear development. This is not a linear movement.

J: This is something that’s a systemic issue. It’s a very emergent well; the crisis, the fear, has a very emergent character to it. But I think on the plus side if you want to call it that, also the potential for action and for the way we respond to it actually also has a very emerging character to it. And I think this is what you just said as well. So this is not something where you’re stagnantly just stuck in one part of this whole spectrum. And again, I believe that talking about these things, making them normal, talking about what’s going on; I think it’s extremely important not to have these conversations necessarily be a taboo; a taboo remains a taboo and remains to be a very difficult subject as long as it’s not talked about, right? So if we put it out there and people can identify with this, there’s also something that gets moving and gets going from this because it is, again, something that forms community. I’m feeling a certain way, and I recognize suddenly, hey, this is exactly what I’ve been feeling; I just didn’t have the words to name what’s going on.
So what I like about it is what you just mentioned as well. That it’s not a linear process, it’s not something that you don’t have to jump through hoops to join some kind of community in here. It’s just a very open process.
And the more open it is and the more we are opening up. By talking about it, by making it more of a conversation piece and something people talk about.
I think it has massive potential to enable engagement, enable action, and lessen this emotional burden and this feeling that you’re up against something that is so much bigger than you or your realm of action.

K: There’s a phrase that I think encompasses this that resonates with me. And it’s the term right relations. And there’s a paper, Decolonizing Transformation through Right Relations, that speaks to the reality when things are just out of natural order and if people are sensing something. They don’t have the language for it; I think that term getting back to right relations has such a broad application in these places, and it’s something that I warm to, and I’m hoping get picked up.
And yeah, it gets pulled into a lot of what’s going on because we know decolonization is a big part of the work that needs to be done. And this is a transformational process. We talk about rapid transformation, but those things rarely happen unless you’re in a crisis.
And in crisis, people get hurt. We tend to avoid those situations because there are a lot of unintended consequences and unhappy endings. So if there’s some way we can do, again, I say this loosely, man-managed transitions, that awareness that comes with community, that comes with this idea that nobody gets left behind as an inclusion.
We sailed the ship, as Susanne Moser would say, and will we keep blowing wind into its sails and sending it off into more troubled waters? Are we going to do what we can to smooth the waters and ensure the opening into the harbour is wide enough for everyone?
That came from actually one of your papers in your research, despairing About Climate Crises interview. And, yes, Susanne Moser speaks really well to this topic.

J: The interview she did opens this whole subject to different perspectives. And I think it’s so enlightening to have something put out of or moved from this traditional Western academic setting into something open to other forms of knowing, Indigenous forms of knowing, just something that offers to include all the pieces that were missing before. And I think this is something we experience as well when we do experience this kind of climate grief. Because this part of us, what makes us very human, our emotions, feelings, and how we respond to the world must be included.

K: I think it’s very important to keep this conversation going and understand that piece. I think part of the bewilderment of the climate crisis is that we have been living out of right relations in Western ways for so long.
We sense something’s off, but we can’t actually name it for those reasons. We’re facing the harsh reality of now. And so, in this process, it becomes difficult to make sense of the information in front of us in both a logical and emotional way.
Because we don’t live within “nature.” We are nature. But when you live in a city, and you’re removed from it and removed from it over generations. We have, I think, an innate knowing, like blood memory and bone memory. But I don’t think we have a tactical, sensory firsthand knowing in the way that you lived amongst the trees. You absolutely knew that you were nature from day to day, moment to moment. And so, a reconciliation needs to happen on that level, too.
And one of the other researchers in your literature that I’ve really identified with is Panu Pihkala, the eco-anxiety researcher. He’s done a fair bit of work in this area. And part of the reason why I resonate is that Finland is very much boreal forest.
So I see a lot of parallels in and where he does his research to this area where I live. So, I really appreciated that paper. I think this impressed me because I was a little bit concerned at first and going, well, starting to dive into this topic that I didn’t know what I would find.

J: And there are a lot of research papers written, and they’re great and have very important information. But I’m so glad that I came across resources like the Pihkala one and the interview with Susanne Moser because they do include this different perspective, and they do include something that we would probably say is more than your traditional academic approach to something.
It’s not just based on data, on peer-reviewed facts, so to speak. And it’s completely missing this often cited required objectivity, which I think has its reason and place in research and academia, of course.
But when we want to address a systemic issue and a complex one at that, we have to show up with all of our own complexity. It’s not possible to just try and understand what’s happening with the rainfall data for the last year or the latest temperature records.

Those are all important details, but they don’t necessarily lead to a way forward that’s doable. Where there’s perspective, where there’s hope, where there’s inspiration for engagement.

K: Yes, and stories. And again, just to go back to my original paper, it was through the eyes of a blueberry. And that choice was made because here in the Boreal, it’s a keystone species; it’s something that everybody can relate to.
If you live here for any length of time, you know the Boreal wraps around the world, so there could be broader implications. But it explores some of these unknowns, difficulties, and disconnections through the eyes of blueberry.
And the blueberry has lived experiences that I think people here in the North can certainly relate to. And so it doesn’t become so sciencey, the facts are there, but we know facts do not change us. We need to have things that we can relate to. So it’s not just community. It’s community and stories, place-based stories. Research has been done here in the North about how gathering berries in a Northern context is a metaphor for community-based research and the psychology of place and its critical role in individual and community health.
There’s a health aspect to this, mentally and physically, and for some communities, they would add spiritually. For me, it gets into food systems, which we can tie back to grief and stories because part of who we are is the food.
And the food is determined by where we live. So we’re back to space and the grief that comes with changes. The community isn’t just human beings. It consists of places and other beings. And in that way, there’s an interconnection and relationship-building that extends beyond the human. But I don’t know that it’s something that shows up in that movable middle. I think it’s an easier conversation in the halls of the converted.

J: I absolutely agree. And I think this is a very good closing remark for now.
I know that the two of us will keep talking about it. And I hope that in continuing to talk about this, there will also be new ways of storytelling, sharing these narratives with more and more people.
And you’re right, expanding a little bit more on what community actually is. Is it human? Is it more than that? And that ties back to the understanding that we are part of nature. We’re not something separate from nature.
We will keep talking, and maybe we will do this on tape someday. But thank you very much for talking about this with me today, Kelleigh.

K: I appreciate that we have this opportunity to unpack grief and just see where our papers sort of collided or fit in with one another.
We’re doing this course together. I guess we should let everybody know that we are team number one. In this learning process, we can have two radically different papers come together in some way to the same conclusion and being able to unpack it this way interests me.
Thank you for your time and for inviting me to this space to do that.

J: Thank you, Kelleigh. This is part of what Team One does: talking about these things extensively and exploring them together. I’m glad we could do some of that today here on record. And as I said, I hope we will continue doing this for a long time. Thank you so much.

References

Attig, T. (1996). How We Grieve: Relearning the World. Oxford University Press.

Bryant, A. (2019, August 25). What is Climate Grief? Climate & Mind.

https://www.climateandmind.org/what-is-climate-grief

Clissold, R., Westoby, R., & McNamara, K. E. (2021, April 22). How to heal in

the Anthropocene. BBC Future. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210420-mental-health-healing-the-trauma-of-climate-change

Comtesse, H., Ertl, V., Hengst, S., Rosner, R., & Smid, G. E. (2021). Ecological Grief as

a Response to Environmental Change: A Mental Health Risk or Functional Response?. International journal of environmental research and public health, 18(2), 734. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18020734

Cunsolo, A. & Ellis, N. R. (2018). Ecological grief as a mental health response to climate

change-related loss. Nature Climate Change, 8, 275-281.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0092-2

Cunsolo Willox, A. (2012). Climate Change as the Work of Mourning. Ethics and

the Environment, 17(2), 137-164. https://doi.org/10.2979/ethicsenviro.17.2.137

Malakoff, D. (2021, April 12). ‘Sink into your grief.’ How one Scientist confronts

the emotional toll of climate change. Science.

https://www.science.org/content/article/sink-your-grief-how-one-scientist-confronts emotional-toll-climate-change

Mazur, L. (2019, July 22). Despair about the Climate Crisis? Read This. Earth

Island Journal.

https://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/articles/entry/despairing-about-climate-crisis/

Mika, K. & Kelman, I. (2020). Shealing: Post-disaster slow healing and later

recovery. Area, 52(3), 646-653. https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12605

Patent, V. (2022, April 22). Climate grief: Mourning for a world that might have been.

HRzone. https://www.hrzone.com/lead/change/climate-grief-mourning-for-a-world-that-might-have-been

Pihkala, P. (2020, April 3). Climate grief: How we mourn a changing planet. BBC Future.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200402-climate-grief-mourning-loss-due-to-climate-change