‘A psychologist can now serve the entire world’

How did you become interested in psychology's role in tackling climate change?

I am a developmental psychologist by training, a community psychologist by conviction, and a peace psychologist in practice. I have always been interested in social policy and public health. Over the years, I came to see myself as a public scholar. Many of the issues I was interested were in the public interest and yet had been untouched or sorely neglected.

For instance, personal debt was everywhere but nobody was studying the psychosocial consequences of personal debt. In fact I believe the only book on the topic is still Social and Psychological Dimensions of Personal Debt and the Debt Industry, which I edited with Carl Walker and published with Palgrave Macmillan in 2015.

Most of my ground-breaking work has focused on burning and neglected issues. Again, I found myself addressing a burning issue: climate change is an extremely urgent matter for the entire planet and psychologists are not focusing as much as they should on it.

Could you tell me more about the role you see for psychologists in that?

Climate change is unique in that it influences everyone across the world and it comes with an urgency. By tackling climate change, a psychologist can now serve the entire world, not just a single client, a couple, or an organization. This may not be the role that they heard about during their training, but the opportunity is upon them.

First, psychologists need to help people understand that the status quo is unsustainable. What is considered the 'good life' – big cars, big homes, consumerism and so on – is a dead end, literally. If people stick to the status quo, climate collapse is inevitable.

Second, the problem is overwhelmingly the result of extractive and exploitative capitalist economies and the injustices they have produced. This is a systemic matter and cannot be addressed by changing 'consumer behaviour', i.e., by focusing on individuals. Those who have the most not only contribute more to climate change, but also are able to better protect themselves from its consequences. Psychologists, therefore, need to focus on building solidarity – both within societies and across the world.

That requires a shift in thinking. It is far more effective to focus on climate justice than to focus on how individuals can cope with the effects of climate change. Psychologists have to focus more on prevention – a key principle in public health.

Is there anything you've uncovered in your work that might surprise someone not familiar with this area of research?

One of the surprises was the reluctance in mainstream psychology to focus on primary prevention and 'big' issues. Environmental decline (or destruction) is not new. The reasons are obvious but big root causes are less likely to be addressed. In psychology, I have found very little that connects environmental decline to well-being. Mainstream psychologists have chosen to focus on tertiary prevention: addressing the problem after it emerges, seeking to reduce its impact by eliminating or reducing disability and minimising suffering.

Today, militarism is one of the leading causes of climate change. If you look it up now, the sources you will find on the internet will unanimously tell you that the U.S. military is the world's largest institutional user of petrol and as a result, the single largest institutional producer of greenhouse gases. Militarism is not a natural process: it is a totally preventable plague. Now, after the invasion of Ukraine, there is a rush to increase military spending and to even produce more nuclear weapons. Instead of focusing on peace and stopping militarism, governments are deciding to speed up climate change and increase the likelihood of total nuclear annihilation. No individual-level solution can help this. We need to stop this madness.

What most needs to change in this area?

The psychological literature on climate change has expanded over the last decade. The initial emphasis on decision-making and human behavior has quickly shifted toward how climate change influences psychological well-being. Recent psychological studies almost exclusively focus on how climate change may influence psychological well-being. Psychologists have to stop focusing dealing with the consequences. The focus has to shift from suffering to preventing the causes of suffering. 

What do you hope people take away from your talk?

I'd hope that they recognise that psychology is at a crossroads. Climate change is here with us and we are experiencing its impact on a daily basis. It influences everyone across the world. By seriously tackling climate change, we have an unusual role but a splendid opportunity.

A key lesson to learn from the Covid-19 pandemic is that nuclear weapons, massive armies, prisons or border walls do not make humans more secure. (See also my contribution to the American Psychological Association's 'How 2020 changed us'). None of these can protect us from climate change. If psychologists want to make a difference, they should start thinking about defending the entire planet, prevention and sustainability. Today, our survival is at stake.