Scientists and activists coined the term “ecological grief” to capture the emotional and psychological distress experienced when witnessing the plunder of nature, the depletion of vital resources, and the potential for future losses due to environmental destruction and the climate crisis.
What is ecological grief caused by environmental destruction and the climate crisis? How does it differ from other types of grief and how can it be addressed?
As forests are ablaze, exploited for profit, and countless beings lose their homes, lives, habitats, histories, and prospects, despite our efforts to resist and fight back, we find ourselves unable to alter the course of these actions, serving as an omen of a profound societal trauma.
Within the context of this societal trauma, there is a collective sense of anger and despair, leading to significant harm on both societal and individual levels, with no end in sight.
While the grieving process is conventionally associated with the intense emotional journey following the loss of a loved one, researchers and activists employ the term “ecological grief” to describe the emotions experienced when witnessing the exploitation of nature, the disappearance of resources, and potential future losses.
What is ecological grief caused by environmental destruction and the climate crisis? How does it differ from other types of grief and how can it be addressed?
Living in a world filled with wounds
One of the pioneers who eloquently expressed the emotional burden stemming from environmental changes impacting forests, meaningful landscapes, ecosystems, and living beings, leading to sorrowful losses, was the American naturalist Aldo Leopold.
In his 1949 book “A Sand County Almanac,” Leopold poignantly wrote about the emotional weight of ecological grief, stating that “One of the penalties of an ecological education is that one lives alone in a world of wounds.” He was among the numerous researchers who keenly felt the weight of the world’s troubles on their shoulders, grappling with this profound emotional burden.
Drawing inspiration from Elisabeth Kübler-Ross’s Five Stages of Grief model, Stephen W. Running adapted it in 2007 to apply to the concept of ecological grief, identifying stages such as “denial of climate change, anger, seeing potential positive aspects of climate change, depression, and acceptance.” This grieving process, according to scientists, represents a natural response to ecological losses.
Stages of Grief
Denial: In the context of ecological grief, this stage represents those individuals who choose not to believe in the scientific evidence of climate change due to fear of its consequences. It also includes those who acknowledge the scientific findings but ignore the need for urgent action, leading to further destruction of nature despite the effects of climate change.
Anger: Individuals who deny climate change may develop anger towards environmental activists. On the other hand, those who strive to create an urgent action plan regarding climate change may direct their anger towards the status quo, non-responsive government institutions, the capitalist system and actors exploiting the world’s resources for profit, people with opposing views on social media, the general lack of awareness in society, and sometimes even towards themselves.
Bargaining: When the approach to climate change is based on ‘bargaining,’ it may lead individuals to downplay the potential consequences of climate change, engage in mental distortions, and focus on the perceived positive aspects of it. A prominent feature of this stage is the tendency to try to make oneself feel better through superficial efforts, avoiding direct confrontation with loss.
Depression: This stage begins when one accepts the reality of climate change and its frightening consequences. Individuals struggling with ecological depression lose all hope for the future, believe that no solution can be found, and lack the motivation to take action. Climate scientists and environmental activists are often observed to experience this stage more intensely.
Acceptance: In the Five Stages of Grief model developed by Kübler-Ross, this stage involves calmly accepting the inevitability of death. From the perspective of ecological loss, the extinction of the human species is not an unavoidable end. Therefore, in ecological grief, this stage should be interpreted as accepting the realities of climate change and possibly using it as motivation for taking action or strengthening the will to fight in the next stage.
Ashlee Consolo, in her interview with The Guardian, highlights how she deals with ecological grief on an ideological level and draws attention to the motivational aspect of this struggle:
“The sense of helplessness is very prevalent – the feeling that the scale of our environmental crisis is so large that as individuals we can’t intervene. And I think that’s actually one of the really powerful mobilising potentials of ecological grief – it’s driving action and anger; climate marches. More and more people are coming forward to share their pain and there’s power in that – the capacity to make a sea-change in policy because ecological grief is so much now a part of the public narrative.”