Abstract
Climate change is driving a suite of stressors that could increase the global mental health burden. In this Perspective we consider three mental health frameworks to evaluate this burden. The pathogenic framework focuses on symptom management in the presence or absence of mental disorders. The salutogenic framework emphasizes factors related to psychological wellbeing such as personal strengths, resilience and socio-environmental resources. The third approach—the dual-continuum or ‘complete state’ framework—considers mental disorders and psychological wellbeing simultaneously. Drawing on the cross-disciplinary literature, we find that the dual-continuum framework is a practical and empirically valid approach to evaluate climate-related impacts on mental health. This is because mental disorders and reduced wellbeing, though related, are conceptually and empirically distinct, and encompass different climate-related antecedents and psychosocial endpoints. Both are necessary to evaluate the full burden of climate change.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 101675 |
| Pages (from-to) | 1318-1326 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | Nature Mental Health |
| Volume | 2 |
| Issue number | 11 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Nov 2024 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being
-
SDG 13 Climate Action
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'A dual-continuum framework to evaluate climate change impacts on mental health'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver