New Study Finds Women And Young People Hit Hardest By Climate Anxiety
I never quite believed climate anxiety was real until about a year ago when I spoke to a couple of young people who shared that they were unsure whether they wanted to have children in the future. Their reasoning was simple and complex to shake off: who wants to bring a child into a world of droughts, floods, and other extreme weather events linked to climate change? So, when I read about the finding of the new study published in the Journal of Global Environmental Change that such anxiety particularly impacts women and young people, it stirred my curiosity.
Whether one believes in climate anxiety or not, it's hard to deny that more and more young people are experiencing it. Climate anxiety responds to an uncertain future where climate change threatens long-term survival.
Just a few days ago, thousands of citizens from Tuvalu—a small island nation in the Pacific facing the risk of drowning due to rising sea levels—applied for a climate-linked visa ballot to move to Australia, showcasing just how real the situation is.
The reality of climate anxiety is strongly supported by academic research. The new study released this week by psychologists is not the first to report investigating the impact of climate-related anxiety. There have been many more in the past, covering many countries. For example, a survey of over 4,000 students in Germany earlier this month found that more than 40% experienced high or extreme levels of climate anxiety. Another study by Yale University found that about 64% of respondents in the US were worried about climate change. However, the new research stands out—it is the first meta-analysis, combining results from 94 studies involving 170,747 adults across 27 countries. It also underscores that women and young people are especially likely to experience climate anxiety.
These studies on climate anxiety raise a key question: What are we doing about this? The growing evidence suggests the urgent need to consider the mental health aspects of climate adaptation alongside the other dimensions. They also highlight that the mental health impacts of climate change deserve to be integrated into climate and health planning more holistically.
Why Addressing Climate Anxiety Is Essential to Climate Adaptation
Climate adaptation isn't just about helping biodiversity and ecosystems adjust to rising temperatures, protecting jobs, housing, or migration from low-lying areas. It also means offering psychological support for people suffering from climate anxiety—whether caused by economic losses, displacement, or anxiety about the future.
The American Psychological Association recommends building psychologists' capacity to help individuals cope with and adapt to climate change as a key part of its action plan for psychologists. This recommendation is critical as the number of physiologists dealing with patients who have expressed these concerns is not tiny anymore. One survey from Germany shows that 72% of psychotherapists reported having patients who raised concerns about climate change during treatment, as evidenced by a nationwide survey of 573 professionals.
Breaking The Silos Between Climate And Health
The intersection of climate and health—both physical and mental—is still underexplored. Understanding the climate-health nexus means examining how climate change affects health and how health systems can support climate action.
This integrated understanding of climate and health calls for sustainability professionals to pay closer attention to health outcomes and for health professionals to respond to the growing pressures that climate change places on healthcare systems. The US National Academy of Medicine has begun advancing this conversation. It has started convening climate and health professionals to co-develop a roadmap for transformative action toward achieving health for all at net zero emissions.
Where Do We Go From Here?
It is not surprising that young people are at the forefront of climate anxiety—they are the ones who will face the long-term consequences of today's decisions. Here are two keyways forward:
Managing climate action is not just about managing natural or economic resources. It's also about safeguarding people's well-being. With 1.8 billion young people under 25 in the world now, climate anxiety cannot be ignored in strategies to cope with a future of living with climate change.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Teladoc Health expands in Australia with Telecare acquisition
Teladoc Health has announced the acquisition of Telecare, which provides virtual allied and specialist healthcare services in Australia. This strategic move aims to expand Teladoc Health's footprint in the Australian healthcare market, providing broader access to virtual care for individuals in the country. Telecare operates a virtual care clinic and has a network of more than 300 specialists across over 30 specialities. The company has played a significant role in reducing wait times for patients and enhancing speciality care access, particularly in underserved areas. Its services cater to appointments referred by general practitioners (GPs) and public hospitals. The acquisition aligns with the enterprise strategy of Teladoc Health to grow its international business. The company has been operating in Australia for 15 years and offers virtual health services through partnerships with hospitals and insurers. Recently, Teladoc Health introduced virtual care solutions to the hospital sector in Australia, including virtual neonatology at Mater Misericordiae University Hospital. Teladoc Health International president Carlos Nueno said: 'Teladoc Health is improving access to care globally through virtual innovation and technology. 'We believe joining forces with Telecare will help us advance our mission—especially for those in regional and remote areas—by combining our technological solutions and services to support one of the leading health markets around the world.' In 2024, Teladoc Health reported revenues exceeding $2.5bn and facilitates access to care for over 100 million individuals. It has integrated its technology across many health systems and hospitals globally. This includes Charité in Germany and the NHS in the UK. Following the acquisition, Telecare will continue to operate under its brand, led by the management team and existing founders, ensuring continuity and local expertise for the Australian market. Financial terms of the transaction have not been disclosed. "Teladoc Health expands in Australia with Telecare acquisition" was originally created and published by Hospital Management, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
E&E News
4 hours ago
- E&E News
Biden EPA official challenges legality of DOE climate report
The Biden EPA's research chief is formally requesting that the Department of Energy to correct a contrarian climate science report that is part of EPA's case for ending greenhouse gas regulation. Chris Frey, who led EPA's Office of Research and Development during the Biden administration, filed a 'request for correction' with DOE on Friday, citing 'legal and procedural irregularities' in how the report's authors were chosen and in the way they went about compiling and disseminating the assessment. Frey, who is now a professor at North Carolina State University, argued in his request for correction that the process violated four federal laws designed to ensure the integrity of federal science. Advertisement '[S]uch information is often perceived by the public and policymakers as authoritative and trustworthy,' he wrote. 'Consequently, rigorous adherence to information quality standards is not merely a bureaucratic formality but a fundamental requirement for maintaining public trust in government science and its capacity to provide objective, evidence-based guidance.'
E&E News
4 hours ago
- E&E News
Trump team readies more attacks on mainstream climate science
One author of a recent Department of Energy report that assailed established climate science said the 141-page document is only the beginning — and that the Trump administration plans to do more to undercut research that shows humanity's use of fossil fuels is warming the planet and endangering its inhabitants. Steve Koonin, one of the report's five main contributors, told POLITICO's E&E News last week that the document likely is a precursor to a sustained assault on mainstream global warming research. Under discussion are plans to hold a public debate about climate science, write a line-by-line rebuttal of the National Climate Assessment and ready a counterattack against climate scientists critical of last month's Energy Department report. A key next step, Koonin said, is to expand the Trump administration's team of climate contrarians beyond the five scientists who wrote the initial report. The document already has attracted hundreds of responses through the Federal Register, and Koonin said they need the reinforcements to push back against the criticism. Advertisement 'It can't be five against the world,' said Koonin, a former chief scientist for BP. 'We will have to enlist other scientists.' But that may be easier said than done — as there is only a small pool of credentialed researchers who back the claims of the DOE report. The document, for example, questions the link between climate change and humanity's output of carbon dioxide. And it suggests that 'CO2-induced warming might be less damaging economically than commonly believed.' The claims run counter to the findings of tens of thousands of scientists from around the world who have spent decades studying climate change. The overwhelming consensus from these researchers is that the modern world's burning of oil, gas and coal is pumping planet-warming gases such as carbon dioxide into atmosphere, creating a greenhouse effect. And with a hotter planet comes a cascade of consequences, from rising sea levels to more intense hurricanes and wildfires. Numerous researchers cited in the DOE report said their work had been cherry-picked and presented in a misleading way — and that it recycled arguments that had long been debunked. 'If you are a sophisticated academic — which I would put all of them in that category — you know how to basically torture the data long enough so it'll tell you what you want to hear,' said Andrew Dessler, a climate scientist at Texas A&M University who is leading an academic response to the DOE report. But Koonin, a senior fellow at the conservative Hoover Institution, said that kind of pushback was expected — and in fact plays into a long-running plan to conduct a 'red team vs. blue team' exercise for climate science. The term is a nod to a type of military planning that uses adversarial reviews to identify potential weaknesses. The report is, in effect, the red team's opening move and Koonin said the criticism will start to make up a blue-team response. 'What we do is a more accurate depiction of climate science for the general public,' he said. Koonin was preparing a similar effort during the first Trump administration, but it was blocked by White House aides preparing for the 2020 election. At that time, Trump had personally considered a televised prime-time climate debate. Energy Secretary Chris Wright, who recruited Koonin and the other four researchers to write the DOE report, told CNN last week that he wants to 'update' the National Climate Assessment but did not provide any details. He also endorsed the idea of climate debates. 'We'll probably have public events here in D.C. this fall,' Wright said. 'We want to have an honest dialogue with the American people about climate change.' Koonin said he expects to carefully scrutinize and challenge every paragraph of the National Climate Assessment, a long-running report mandated by Congress that identifies the threats that global warming poses to the United States. Judith Curry, one of the other five authors of the DOE report, said she wants a debate — but also wants the chance to recast the National Climate Assessment and other government science reports by emphasizing uncertainty. She envisions a release of a new report infused with disagreements and disputes. 'A public debate is one approach, but I would like to see a broadening of the tent for the 'official' assessments to include disagreement, debate, uncertainty,' she wrote in an email. Curry is a former climatologist at the Georgia Institute of Technology. In addition to Curry and Koonin, the report's five authors include Canadian environmental economist Ross McKitrick, as well as John Christy and Roy Spencer, atmospheric scientists at the University of Alabama, Huntsville. A DOE spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. 2014: Red team, blue team If there is a climate debate, Koonin said he wants to structure it much like a 2014 event at New York University that pitted a team of climate scientists against some of the DOE report authors, including Curry and Christy. It was a daylong effort organized by Koonin, in which the two teams presented their case to a panel of distinguished physicists from the American Physical Society. For the upcoming debate he now envisions, Koonin said both sides would exchange research notes and talking points ahead of time. 'Healthy debate, challenge response is just the way you do science, and that has been sorely absent from this business for far too long,' Koonin said. 'If you can show that it's wrong, we'll change it.' Exaggerating uncertainty in science while downplaying broad-based findings long has been a strategy of conservative groups and lawmakers opposed to fossil fuel regulations, scientists say. The current Trump administration has made it a priority to slash climate regulations and boost U.S. production of fossil fuels. Ben Santer, a climate scientist who worked at DOE for 30 years before retiring in 2021, participated in Koonin's 2014 debate at New York University — and he remembers it differently. He said the red team failed to make a compelling case to the panel of physicists, who ultimately rejected their argument and did not issue a statement that questioned climate science findings. The red team has refused to acknowledge any weakness to their arguments, which have long been rejected by the vast majority of climate scientists, he said. After the debate, Koonin resigned from the effort he organized and soon after dismissed the field of climate science in the conservative Wall Street Journal editorial page for being 'not yet mature enough to usefully answer the difficult and important questions being asked of it,' Santer noted. In response, Koonin acknowledged that he resigned but disputed the notion that the red team 'lost' and said a transcript of the event shows a strong response by the red team. Santer also pointed out that debate — and the weighing of disparate hypotheses — long has been an essential part of science. He said the scientific community for years has accounted for the arguments of Koonin's team. 'The notion that they have not been part of the community and have not had the opportunity to convince others of the correctness of their arguments is just plain wrong,' Santer said. 'The bottom line is, they haven't succeeded in defending the arguments that they now present in the DOE report.' The report is not a genuine effort to gain a new understanding, he said, but rather 'provide political cover for rescinding the endangerment finding.' The report was released the same day the Trump administration announced it was trying to overturn the finding, which gives EPA the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Santer said the claims by Koonin and Energy Secretary Wright that the small group of fringe researchers had been silenced by the larger scientific community were not true. Their arguments have been explored and debunked already, he said, by years of good science. 'These are questions,' he said, 'that we've been adjudicating for decades in thousands of peer-reviewed publications.' This story also appears in Energywire.
