Researching the effects of climate change on Icelanders’ emotions

“I think there is a tendency in certain demographics in Iceland to believe that climate change is not that serious. I have some theories about why that is, but no definite answers yet,” says Ole Martin Sandberg, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Iceland, about his research project “Climate Crisis and Affect: An Investigation of Embodied Emotions and Behaviours Regarding Climate Change in Iceland”. His research focuses on the effects of climate change in Iceland as seen from a social and philosophical perspective. 

Ole Martin suggests that if people do not perceive climate change as significantly affecting them, they are less likely to support policies aimed at mitigating its impact. “I am equally interested in the effects of climate change on Icelandic nature, landscapes and biodiversity as I am in its cultural and societal impacts, as well as its influence on people’s thoughts and emotions. These issues are interconnected because how people think about climate change – how serious they perceive it to be, how anxious they feel about it, and what they believe should be done about it – is shaped by what they know or think they know about its consequences.

Emotions drive people to action

Two main factors led Ole Martin to this topic. While teaching a course a few years ago, he had students read texts on climate change written by people in different fields in the humanities and social sciences. He asked them to keep a journal on their mental development through the course, asking questions such as: “How did the texts affect them?” and “Did the texts give them a feeling of hope and empowerment or did they fill them with anxiety and despair?” “That’s when I realized how important it is for students – and for society in general – to talk about their feelings and for climate communicators to take these emotions seriously.” 

Emotions are essential for solving problems because they lead people to action. Ole Martin maintains that having scientific knowledge about climate change doesn’t necessarily mean people know what to do about it. “I think we need more than science to understand the reasons for this; it is a social, psychological and philosophical problem too. Every academic field can contribute to solving this problem, and it is essential that the various fields collaborate. In the Anthropocene, we cannot make a sharp distinction between “the social” and “the natural” – they are inextricably intertwined.

Ole Martin has also been frustrated and disappointed in the way climate change has been communicated in Iceland. Most of the identification of consequences has, for example, centred on melting glaciers and increased risk of landslides. These issues are serious enough, but they are also very local problems that we can address. I don’t think this focus really conveys the seriousness of the problem, and I believe it overlooks many potential consequences that are much more severe.

Being an island doesn’t mean Iceland is isolated

There may be two main reasons why the narrative in Iceland is so limited. Firstly, some people seem to think that because Iceland is an island it is less affected by things that happen elsewhere, but in fact the opposite is true. “As an island that imports almost everything we need, we are completely dependent on what happens in the rest of the world, and we cannot see ourselves as geographically isolated,” Ole Martin explains and continues: “It might also be due to the isolation between different academic fields. When asking a biologist or a meteorologist about the consequences of climate change, they might give one answer but when asking an economist or an expert in human rights their answer might be completely different.

Society and climate change affect each other

“I am a philosopher, and as much as I would like to, I don’t think that qualifies me to solve these problems,” Ole Martin says. “My primary research method is building connections with and between experts in different fields in the hope that it’ll make it easier for them to collaborate across disciplines. I’m hoping to learn enough about these fields by talking to experts so that I can at least show how the fields connect to each other and overlap when dealing with climate change.”

To facilitate connections between different fields of study, he has created a website, Climate Affect (climateaffect.hi.is), which will serve as a network for scientists to connect and collaborate on their projects.

More specifically, Ole Martin is working from a process-philosophical approach, a philosophical method that does not think of the world as consisting of individual and separate things. Instead, it views everything as distinct yet overlapping and interacting in dynamic processes. Process philosophy is highly relevant to science because it offers a different perspective on the topics we study, and I believe it can be helpful in understanding climate change. In process philosophy, we do not treat society, biodiversity and climate change as separate entities but rather as processes that affect each other,” he explains.

Working with experts in different fields

Ole Martin has worked extensively with experts in various fields for the past few years reflecting the diversity of his current project. He has worked closely with researchers at the Icelandic Museum of Natural History and the Icelandic Network for Biodiversity  (BIODICE) and continues to do so for this project to understand and communicate the nature and value of biodiversity.

He has also been involved with a research project at UI, called “Freedom to make sense: embodied, experiential and mindful research” which focuses on embodied thinking and understanding of human thinking, emotions and communication. “This project involves cognitive scientists, philosophers, environmental scientists and others. I am working alongside them, and we hope to foster meaningful collaboration and synergy between that project and my current research.”

Ole Martin is also working with the Sustainability Institute at the University of Iceland and with the university’s research centres in Hornafjörður and Þingeyjarsveit. “Both centres are led by environmental humanists who share my view that philosophy, art, humanities and social studies are important to understand and enact environmental change.” Furthermore, he serves as an advisor for a project led by the city of Reykjavík in partnership with UI which centres on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The city understands that effective policies require a deep understanding of cultural barriers and the factors driving people’s behaviours and attitudes. It’s exciting when academic research and ideas can also have practical use – I’m deeply committed to public outreach and sharing ideas beyond the walls of the university.”

Addressing climate change requires societal change

While the study may not yield concrete answers to Ole Martin’s questions, that is not its purpose. This type of research is more exploratory, aiming to uncover insights rather than definitive conclusions. Ole Martin has had various articles and book chapters published regarding the emotional and philosophical aspects of climate change and as mentioned before he has also worked with biologists at the Museum of Natural History. “I’ve worked with them on a paper that uses process philosophy to argue that we need to do more than counting species when we work with biodiversity and conservation,” Ole Martin says. “We need to focus on functions, interactions and ecological processes. This is particularly important in a place like Iceland, which has few species but a dynamic nature, where those species are constantly adapting to changing conditions.

Ole Martin remains cautiously optimistic about the impact of his research and hopes that it will at least make a small contribution to people’s understanding of climate change and its connection to many other issues. “I’m hoping to get people to understand that focusing on climate change is of no use while destroying ecosystems because they are connected and to accept that addressing these issues does require some societal change. We cannot solve them by just adding more technology to our society – environmental change requires certain changes in our way of life.“

He emphasizes that those changes don’t have to be for the worse or lead to decreased welfare or happiness. We simply need to move away from things that don’t provide social wellbeing anyway and focus on the true source of happiness: social connections and connecting with nature. “This is a very abstract and complex topic, and I don’t think this research project will turn society away from the destructive course it is currently on, but perhaps it can be one small piece of the puzzle.”

Interacting with the public is crucial

Ole Martin’s diverse interests have always fuelled his curiosity, ultimately guiding him toward a career in philosophy. “Sometimes I like to research quantum physics or the origin of life or the mechanisms of evolution, sometimes I get into political theory, history or art. I guess that’s why I decided to study philosophy because it allows you to dive into many different topics without necessarily becoming specialized in any of them,” he says and continues: “But I’m not a typical philosopher in that I always want to be able to see the relevance of my research to issues in the real world. I never practice so-called “pure philosophy”; I always combine abstract theory with more applied and empirical stuff. The most interesting research and theory emerge when we combine different fields and let something new emerge. 

Ole Martin thinks it is crucial to interact with the public when conducting research and emphasises that’s how he stays passionate about different subjects. “Otherwise, it doesn’t feel like there’s any point to it. We all need to get out of our offices more.”