With the summer holidays approaching, many people are once again facing climate-related dilemmas. To fly or not to fly? Meat or no meat on the barbecue? Research associate Marije van Gent from Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences and the Urban Economics Group at Wageningen University and Research is doing her PhD on this 'climate ambivalence' and recently published an important academic study on the subject in the Journal of Environmental Psychology. "Climate ambivalence is not weak or hypocritical, it's part of changing your behaviour."
A man and a woman are walking with their dog to the middle of a car park. They exchange glances before both running in different directions. The dog stays put, watches the woman, then the man and then the woman again. Then he starts turning circles, not knowing which of his owners he should follow. By showing this video, research associate Marije van Gent, PhD, illustrates the concept of climate ambivalence. She received hundreds of responses to it on LinkedIn. Many people recognise themselves in the dog. They are keen to make sustainable choices, but they also want to go on holiday or eat what they feel like. In an extensive literature study, Marije van Gent explored exactly what happens when people are so ambivalent.
What is a climate ambivalence?
"In the literature, ambivalence is described as the phenomenon of experiencing positive and negative evaluations at the same time. For example, you can enjoy meat despite having concerns about the carbon emissions involved. We call it objective ambivalence when you aren't aware of the clash associated with this. Once you become aware of the conflict, we call it subjective ambivalence. Subjective ambivalence is an unpleasant feeling, there's tension."
Three quarters of the Dutch worry about the climate, but we live in a society that encourages consumption. As an individual, you are always required to make moral trade-offs in a context that works against you.
What do people do when they feel ambivalent?
"They behave just like the dog in the video. It stays put because it doesn't know what to do. The same happens when people feel ambivalent. You think, something's not right, I'm thinking two different things at the same time. You become paralysed and can't move. If you want to do something that is environmentally unfriendly and you do nothing, that's good for the climate. So you don't book air travel, for example. But for climate-friendly behaviour, that ambivalence actually works against it. If you go into a shop and you are ambivalent about a vegetarian burger, you might think: I don't know what tastes nice and is healthy. So you just buy meat again. You need to move past that point. This is the first round, so to speak."
What happens next?
"When you often have that contradictory feeling, chronic ambivalence develops. Every time you fly, you feel bad. That's an incentive to do something. You look for information or check what others do. At this stage, people are also open to being influenced. For policy makers, it's good to know that they can respond to this ambivalence about climate-unfriendly behaviour. It's less useful to try to reduce ambivalence about environmentally friendly behaviour. Policy makers would therefore be better not just offering veggie burgers but also increasing the guilt about beefburgers."
Many people feel that there's no point doing anything for the environment because as individuals they have little impact on the climate crisis.
"Yes, it's complicated. Three quarters of the Dutch worry about the climate, but we live in a society that encourages consumption. As an individual, you are always required to make a moral trade-off in a context that works against you. You can become despondent when you personally do your best for climate, yet the new government fails to put sustainability on the agenda. Moreover, our brain is not well equipped to make long-term choices. Sustainability is not your number one priority when you are in a hurry and want to buy food at the supermarket. And we don't feel acute danger from the climate crisis. Ideally, individuals should not constantly need to make that difficult choice themselves, but have a society where everything is future-proof. However, I do think we need the ambivalence of those three-quarters of the Dutch to change society as a whole."
Do you sometimes suffer from climate ambivalence yourself?
"Oh yes, I recognise the struggle. I used to travel a lot and lived abroad for a while. That curiosity about other cultures and exploring the world were a big part of my identity. I found it complicated to determine how that part of my identity related to the part of my identity that was already more aware that there is a climate crisis going on and that I too need to change. When I started my research, it bothered me that I was so ambivalent. As if I wasn't radical enough. That's also how some people react on social media, calling it weak or hypocritical. But people just aren't consistent. I think it's important to be able to say: 'I feel ambivalent about this and actually that makes me feel bad. How do I deal with that?' I think it is important to be tolerant about that. The only way to resolve your ambivalence is to allow that feeling of ambivalence and look at yourself and other people with gentleness, rather than judgment."
