Climate change and health equity: A research agenda for psychological science.

Abstract

Climate change poses unique and substantial threats to public health and well-being, from heat stress, flooding, and the spread of infectious disease to food and water insecurity, conflict, displacement, and direct health hazards linked to fossil fuels. These threats are especially acute for frontline communities. Addressing climate change and its unequal impacts requires psychologists to consider temporal and spatial dimensions of health, compound risks, as well as structural sources of vulnerability implicated by few other public health challenges. In this review, we consider climate change as a unique context for the study of health inequities and the roles of psychologists and health care practitioners in addressing it. We conclude by discussing the research infrastructure needed to broaden current understanding of these inequities, including new cross-disciplinary, institutional, and community partnerships, and offer six practical recommendations for advancing the psychological study of climate health equity and its societal relevance.

Staying put in an era of climate change: The geographies, legalities, and public health implications of immobility

“…It also equates adaptation and resilience with mobility, rendering those who choose to be immobile, or are immobile after initial mobility, as requiring adaptation and resilience interventions (Ayeb‐Karlsson et al, 2018). This binary locates “the problem” in human populations affected by climate change, placing them in a remain or leave double‐bind with either decision resulting in being considered as a problem—or even a “patient” if their decision is medicalized—rather than as survivors who need to be supported to minimize distress and enhance strengths and coping strategies (Pearson et al, 2023).…”

“…Biases or constraints in information processing can significantly influence risk perception and decision‐making. For example, there is often a tendency to discount future damages and harms to others in favor of present damages and harms to self and close relations, or by discounting mental harm in favor of preventing physical damage (Pearson et al, 2023). More widely, Johnson et al (2021) have pointed to the frequently contested nature of quantifying risk and how it is too often open to interpretation from competing stakeholders (Ferris, 2011; Johnson et al, 2021; Wilkinson, 2021).…”

“…Supporting community members' knowledge, capacities, and skills strengthens community resilience (Chapman & Larsson, 2019). This includes supporting problem awareness (e.g., comprehensive risk and vulnerability assessments that include community psychosocial health and well‐being), exploring potential solutions (e.g., via social learning and self‐organization to consider a range of alternatives), and enacting interventions through policies and programs that in turn further build adaptive capacity (e.g., via participatory community engagement and consent; social mobilization; community‐based planning and organization) (Árvai & Gregory, 2021; Chapman & Larsson, 2019; Pearson et al, 2023; Romsdahl, 2020). Multi‐sector, multi‐disciplinary understanding of these processes is essential for the safety and well‐being of individuals and communities (Árvai & Gregory, 2021; Chapman & Larsson, 2019; Pearson et al, 2023; Romsdahl, 2020).…”

“…This includes supporting problem awareness (e.g., comprehensive risk and vulnerability assessments that include community psychosocial health and well‐being), exploring potential solutions (e.g., via social learning and self‐organization to consider a range of alternatives), and enacting interventions through policies and programs that in turn further build adaptive capacity (e.g., via participatory community engagement and consent; social mobilization; community‐based planning and organization) (Árvai & Gregory, 2021; Chapman & Larsson, 2019; Pearson et al, 2023; Romsdahl, 2020). Multi‐sector, multi‐disciplinary understanding of these processes is essential for the safety and well‐being of individuals and communities (Árvai & Gregory, 2021; Chapman & Larsson, 2019; Pearson et al, 2023; Romsdahl, 2020). Resilient communities have the capacity for collective action and a sense of empowerment that allows them to respond creatively and flexibly to challenges through political structures and grass‐roots level organizing (Árvai & Gregory, 2021; Chapman & Larsson, 2019; Pearson et al, 2023; Romsdahl, 2020).…”

How psychologists can help achieve equity in health care—advancing innovative partnerships and models of care delivery: Introduction to the special issue.

“…Parallel to this discussion, Townsend et al (2023) within the context of mental health inequities present results from a scoping review to explore first-response models and programs that consider therapeutic interventions as alternatives to policing, including therapeutic and healing recommendations to mitigate trauma with community mental health services. Pearson et al (2023) examine the role of psychologists in addressing climate change based on temporal and spatial dimensions of health, compounded risks, structural sources of vulnerability, and fostering cross-disciplinary, institutional, and community partnerships.…”