Painful words around eco-sustainability

Apparently global media’s attention put aside climate change, due to COVID-19 pandemic, but at the same time phycological community gives us a very worrying scenario. (Mental Disorders in Paintings: Dysmorphia in Picasso’s Art)

In 1950 from the Ray Bradbury dystopian pen, Benjamin Driscoll had already found which potentiality would have had trees for human’s equilibrium. As a matter of fact, they “add colour, provide shade, drop fruit, or become a children’s playground, a whole sky universe to climb and hang from; an architecture of food and pleasure”; he realized their primary importance so he felt like a new John Appelead with a paradoxical mission: creating a new ecosystem in Mars. 

From Ray Bradbury, it was McEwan, Ballard or Atwood’s turn and we can go on further and further if we mention in addition climate fiction, a brand new literature genre based on climate changing contents. According to most book critics it’s a kind of literature that could have an influence on humans’ eco sustainable behaviors. Despite these considerable literary efforts, it seems that humans – and, above all, new generations – don’t envision a positive future: speaking of that Google timelapse about Earth day, on March 27th, was a vivid example.

Following the latest scientific researches and findings, psychological vocabulary has significantly increased: since 2017, American Psychological Association has called eco-anxiety a general and “chronic fear of environmental cataclysm that comes from observing the seemingly irrevocable impact of climate change”. To this fear APA associated psycho-physical symptoms like anxiety, stress or panic attacks and emotions like anger, depression and a sense of powerlessness; most people are also wondering about their future and plans, such as having babies. 

For this reason a recent international study has dramatically highlighted how much young people are gripped by these anxiety and worries. This study was supported by a team of climate change, clinical and environmental psychology experts and it can be read on Lancet Planetary Health journal. 10000 young people, aged 16-25, from 10 different countries, were asked about their thoughts and feelings connected to climate change: if 60% of them were worried about the future, 45% said that their daily life has been badly influenced by those types of news. Moreover, “correlations indicated that climate anxiety and distress were significantly related to perceived inadequate government response and associated feelings of betrayal.”

This fear regards the future, but it has its roots now, because it arises in home environments, or, we could say, in order to defend home environments: solastalgia, a new word coined by Glenn Albrecht, is precisely a form of distress caused by climate change and natural disasters close to home. This is a portmanteau of latin solacium (solace) and greek algia (sorrow, pain).

We could go on over and over mentioning doomer, greentrolling, greenwashing, anthropause…

Therefore what are we actually supposed to do? 

“It is no medical condition, though, it is a rational response to the state of the climate. If we label eco-axiety as an illness, climate denialists have won” said hopefully Graham Lawton from New Scientist: it is not a pathological disease or a mental illness such as panic attacks or depression, so the right response won’t be found with medical methods, because it’s a spectrum.

Possible solutions would be caring for the planet and adopting a more sustainable way of living, with a constant reduction of CO2 emissions; therefore a positive side is that a large amount of humans has more awareness of planet needs and the state of climate emergency.