Through Grief to Change

Ecological grief is an umbrella term that encompasses various forms of grief related to the consequences of climate change: the loss of habitats, ecologies, and biodiversity; the extinction of species; the loss of cultural practices, rites, habits, and local identities; the instability caused by forced displacement and so on. A comprehensive list of losses connected to climate change is listed in this article by W. Neil Adger and others for example. Ecological grief is experienced internally and collectively, is expressed in literature and art, and is currently an increasingly important subject of discussion in the Environmental Humanities and related fields. 

Much of the discussion around ecological grief centres on the most paralysing and pessimistic attributes of this emotion. However, framing ecological grief as an apathetic response that results in immobilism and defeatism means failing to appreciate its potential for rethinking reality in light of loss. This type of binary thinking opposes grief and hope, mourning and resisting, despair and consolation, and thus fails to acknowledge that grief is in many ways future oriented, profoundly connected to care, and harbours the radical aspiration that things may be very different from what they are (on grief as a reality-shaping force, see this article by R. Clifton Spargo). Such attributes of grief, and the ambivalence that characterises this emotion, are brilliantly captured by several literary texts that engage with the climate crisis. For instance, novels like Jenny Offill’s Weather and Jesse Greengrass’ The High House grapple with ecological grief from different temporal standpoints. In Weather, anticipatory grief disrupts the peace of a relatively stable present, while The High House focuses on post-catastrophe mourning.

What, then, should we do with our grief? First, making space for expressions of grief publicly, privately, and within the cultural sphere paves the way to accepting and coming to terms with the reality of the climate emergency without denying or underplaying its consequences and implications. Secondly, according to ecopsychologists and social scientists, grief can be harnessed to demand change and channelled into collective action, activism, and resilience (see, among others, the volume by Lesley Head). Moreover, engaging with grief serves different purposes, including: overcoming denial and repression, promoting a sense of responsibility and ecological interconnectedness (see the volume by Joshua Trey Barnett), shaping our value system, fostering a preparatory dimension and potentially mobilising action, and contributing to psychological and emotional resilience. For instance, Ashley Cunsolo suggests that ‘mourning has the capacity to be a more psychologically healthy emotion to incite political action’ and ‘enhance individual and collective resilience to loss’.

Ecological grief may feel overwhelming, but it is denial that is holding us back. Far from being the antithesis of hope, the encounter with grief might be the very first step toward meaningful change.