How Do You Feel About Death By Climate Change?

As we become sensitized to the increased frequency and intensity of major storms, droughts and wildfires there’s a feeling of impending doom building up. The awesome power of nature has never been more evident. What’s even more disturbing is that human beings are the catalyst, the cause of it all.

True to type, our default responses are fight, flight or freeze. These primal survival instincts cause us to variously cycle through being angry and looking to blame, feeling sad and succumbing to helplessness and despair; or withdrawing by going into outright denial.

Cape Town’s recent Day Zero crisis put a human face on what seems a distant threat; as does the current drought in the Northern Cape, as well as the KZN coastal plain storms and flooding. It’s common cause that the impacts of climate change compound the multiple social stressors that already beset the populace; and heightens pre-existing vulnerabilities (Chersich, 2018).

However, terms such as ‘climate change’ and ‘global warming’ draw attention to the global scale, rather than the personal impacts. As climate change irrevocably changes people’s lived landscapes, large numbers are likely to experience a feeling that they are losing a place that is important to them - a phenomenon called solastalgia, which is especially prevalent amongst migrants from climate disasters.

Hence, we can argue that ecological grief is a legitimate response to ecological loss. Such grief inevitably manifests in further emotional distress. The World Health Organization estimates that by 2030 depression will become our most burdensome illness; more than cancer, diabetes and respiratory diseases combined.

Estimates are that as many as 25.6% of South African employees will be diagnosed with depression over their course of employment. Only 15% to 25% will seek and receive help. Furthermore, Alexander Forbes Health Management Solutions suggests that 35% of all temporary-incapacity leave applications, from their sample of corporate clients, are due to mental and behavioural issues.

Our government spends only 5% of the health budget on mental health - but mental health costs to the economy are up to six times the cost of its treatment. Loss of earnings from depression is estimated at ZAR54,121 per adult per year; a total of R40 billion (or 2.2%) of the country’s gross domestic product.

Clearly the cost of climate change to business, as the largest employer, has become an existential threat. The risks are not just quantitative in the material sense; but also qualitative in the human context. People are still the largest expense, and therefore exposure, to any organization.

By extension, we are now collectively facing the reality that remedial action alone is no longer enough. Climate change is not going away, and will intensify. With South Africa warming at twice the global average, we have no choice but to respond pro-actively to protect our biggest resource... people.

As employers have traditionally made human capital investments in their employees for the purposes of personal effectiveness and productivity, additional support is now required concerning the impact of climate change; but also to leverage the climate adaptation opportunities that a ‘green’ economy will inevitably bring, such as the innovation horsepower amongst sustainability-savvy Millennials.

What does this all mean? Climate change is still a relatively unknown subject for most executives, let alone managers and staff. Like most organizational change it begins with education. Progressive firms will have planned and communicated quantitative strategies by now; such as securing material operational means.

The concern is that hardly any attention is being paid to the qualitative side of the problem. Most HR departments do not have a strategy to cope with the increasing impacts of climate change, let alone a policy or budget for applying resources on a proactive basis. Responses are, for the most part, reactive.

What it reflects back at us are known as the psychological barriers to climate change such as: (1) ignorance of the problem; (2) undervaluing of distant or future risks; (3) rationalizations for a variety of deviant behaviors; (4) depending on technosalvation through mechanical innovation; (5) fear of being victimized by free-riders; (6) exposure to sunk costs and stranded assets; (7) mistrust, discredence and inaction.

While the above is not a definitive list of barriers, they do begin to explain why qualitative adaptation to climate change is such a difficult problem. The human brain has not evolved much in thousands of years. At the time it reached its current physical development our ancestors were mainly concerned with their immediate band, immediate dangers, exploitable resources and the present time. Sound familiar?

None of those are naturally consistent with being concerned, in the 21st century, about global climate change; which is relatively slow, usually distant and mostly unrelated to the present welfare of ourselves and our significant others. Obviously, our ancient brain is capable of dealing with global climate change, but doing so does not come easily.

So, what are we to do? For a start, we should pay attention to what two important groups are saying, namely: Indigenous people, who stand in an unbroken 200,000 year old line of planetary custodians; and Millennials, who will inherit the climate change problem and implement solutions which suit them.

Following that, we need to raise awareness in a hurry. We cannot fix a problem unless we acknowledge it. This means sector and organization-wide climate education interventions. Climate change will eventually affect every human being on the planet, therefore all people need to be informed as a matter of urgency.

It stands to reason that THE global issue demands a global response; and devolves down to the regional, national and local level. In short, all hands are required on deck. By implication this bottom-up approach will also invert traditional hierarchies and power structures. Yet another adaptive lesson in the process.

Whenever civilization has had its back to the wall in the past, it has tended to reach back into its history for solutions. It’s likely that the core values of Indigenous Knowledge System will be foregrounded once more; such as reciprocity, humility, even-temperedness, generosity, conviviality and a deep respect for nature.

First Nation peoples prevent lying by being transparent; prevent theft by sharing what they have; prevent conflict by being inter-dependent; and prevent competition by sharing all knowledge. They identify with open-endedness and aligning with the cycles of nature; modeling flexibility, adaptability, diversity, fluidity and tolerance for ambiguity. It’s a pretty good strategy for building climate resilience.

Of course, we are a Westernized society today; replete with the conditioning and advantages that brings. The blended learning that’s going to be required for qualitative climate change adaptation, will also need to incorporate a deeper understanding of ethics to promote critical thinking.

In the final analysis, climate change is fundamentally a behavioural problem.