Research urges media to focus on impact of climate change on mental health

The media must do more to report on the impact of climate change on mental health, according to a new public health study from the University of Alberta.

Climate change negatively impacts mental health in a number of direct and indirect ways, says Breanne Aylward of the School of Public Health. Severe climate events, such as wildfires, floods and extreme heat, can trigger anxiety, depression and PTSD in some people. Even people who aren’t as directly affected by climate change, particularly young people, can experience anxiety, sometimes called “eco-anxiety,” simply from exposure to the news.

According to Aylward, media often report on climate disasters, but there is a valuable opportunity to improve reporting by also focusing on the ongoing adaptation measures that communities are implementing in response.

“We know that climate change is already having an impact on mental health. It is really important to focus on the protective factors, interventions and coping strategies that people use to reduce risk in the future.”

Aylward’s study, published in the diary Environmental Research: Healthexamined how the press in Canada and the United States covered climate and mental health in more than 1,000 articles in English and French between 2016 and 2020.

In the first year, few media outlets gave the topic much space, she says. But coverage increased in 2019, before declining again in 2020, likely due to the COVID pandemic.

And while media coverage of climate and mental health has fluctuated somewhat, there was a dramatic spike in September 2019, Aylward says. This spike was likely driven by events like the Canadian federal election in October, the Global Week for Future international climate strikes, and the United Nations Climate Action Summit.

“More news outlets were talking about mental health during climate events, but it wasn’t an ongoing conversation,” she says. “The amount of news coverage about climate mental health issues is in stark contrast to the overall coverage of climate change.”

Only about half of the articles that referenced the effects of climate change on mental health mentioned adaptations or response strategies to prevent or reduce harmful mental health outcomes, she adds. “We found that quite surprising.”

When reporting did include interventions or coping strategies, it focused primarily on “individual lifestyle or behavioral strategies.” Less frequently were institutional or government-led interventions, nature-based approaches, or technological solutions mentioned.

According to Aylward, strategies for more general ecological grief and anxiety could include setting up spaces that are accessible to community members, such as climate cafes, where people can share their emotions.

Researchers focusing on climate and mental health need to communicate their findings to the media “beyond academic publications,” she adds, while also combating misinformation.

To that end, the U of A last month launched a new research initiative called the Climate Change and Health Hub, the first of its kind in Canada. It brings together more than 30 researchers from across faculties in the health sciences, natural and applied sciences, and social sciences and humanities.

The Hub’s mission includes conducting evidence-based advocacy, communicating research findings and adaptation strategies to the public. To research in the U.S. have shown that the best way to inspire people to take action on climate change is through a health lens. Framing climate change as a public health issue, Aylward says, can engage a broader audience and emphasize that climate change also has health benefits.

As for the press itself, she recommends paying more attention to “a wide range of interventions and coping strategies” that can help the public and policymakers deal with the mental health impacts of climate change.