Personal reflections on politics, psychology, and leading sustainable behavioural change
Kate Nickelchok- Dec 9, 2018
- 5 min read
In the lead up to the 2016 American Presidential Elections, I binge watched nightly news and commentaries like the newest line up of must-watch-tv. It was a mysterium tremendum et fascinans - baffling, fascinating, and terrifying. I was transfixed. Like many within my overarching political tribe (the Lefties), the GOP Primaries melted away my preconceived notions of political norms like an Edvard Munch backdrop. With each caucus and convention that swung towards Trump, came a new and more profound state of disbelief.
If I could take a snapshot of the slack-jawed faces of my friends post-election night, and graph it on to a systems map, it might perfectly illustrate what complexity scientists call incongruence.
Pay the most attention to unexpected occurrences,
advises Dr. Tim Kastelle (2018, personal communication). To paraphrase Dr. Kastelle, the moments we think, "these people are nuts,""that doesn't make sense," or"that's not how it works" it means there's something about our internal model of the world that is not aligning with what is going on externally.
In the end, it wasn't just Hillary Rodam Clinton asking"What Happened[?]"
So, in this blog post I look at my own culpability, psychology and leadership within the wider 'wicked' system.
'Wicked,' in this case, isn't another jab at the Trump Era, but a reference to design theorist Horst Rittel's concept of Wicked Problems, or systems of interconnected social, cultural, economic, and political complexity (e.g. decolonisation, climate change) for which there are no simple solutions (Conklin, 2015).
With clear incongruence between my perception and the events around me, I wonder: what if I used the wisdom of ecological thinking and complexity science to map a helicopter view of my own mind?
Taxonomy of the head and heart
To begin with, I focused on a given moment that got my heckles up. Then channelling my inner toddler, I kept asking myself 'why?' A riff on the Socratic method, or root-cause analysis (RCA) (Senge, 1994), I wanted to see how far, through a process of meditation, self-enquiry, and simply doodling, I could push myself to honestly examine the assumptions and values underlying my involvement in the system (Figure 1).
Figure 1, Why do I hate Trumpian Politicos so very much?
Looking at Figure 1, it's unsurprising that fear of loss, and perception of personal risk underlines my anger towards my political 'other.' Unsatisfied that my brainstorm just reconfirms that political tribalism exists, I look to environmental psychology theory.
Psychological and social dimensions of sustainability
This plays into Spence, Poortinga and Pidgeon's (2012) exploration of Construal Level Theory (CLT), or, how dimensions like geographic, or temporal distance links to one's ability to feel concern and act when challenged with wicked issues. Thinking about it this way shows how there are also internal incongruences between my intellectual, and behavioural responses to certain issues.
Figure 2. Bridging the empathy gap, where +/- level of concern (psychological closeness) = size of hearts.
For example, I can feel alarm and even rage towards corporate anti-environmental practices, but two days ago when my coworker gently called me out on my daily use of single-use plastics I jump to defend and diffuse."But I recycle it" I begin, "and did you know Starbucks procures the most fair trade coffee in the..." before slowly trailing off towards a guilty smile in growing awareness of my knee-jerk defensiveness and obvious attempt to save face.
In truth, my defensive love of Starbucks is part of a larger pattern of using my actual and inferred orientation to social good to justify less than great environmental action. It's like I'm trying to bargain based on in-tribe social capital (Adger, 2009). As if an ethical purchase, a good action, or a general orientation towards 'wokeness' is almost like purchasing carbon credit I can cash-in.
Hi there, I'd like to exchange my recent charitable donation for a Big Mac, hold the guilt.
Figure 3. Me exchanging social capital for consumerist guilt-relief.
Bargaining, denial, anger, depression, these are all natural human reactions to wicked problems as our brains try to dissociate with challenge to save our 'I'm a good person' identities (Kessler, 2004).
CLV outlines how human brains are wired for tribal self-interest and cognitive dissonance (Spence, Poortinga, and Pidgeon, 2012). "What individuals hear and pay attention to (or ignore) can thus be understood only within the context of both social norms and the broader political-economic environment" explains Rees (2010). As a queer, female, survivor with disabilities, there are just certain topics to which I feel unapologetically closer to.
This engagement with the incongruities is what Freire calls 'ontologial incompletness,'Bohler calls a "pedagogy of discomfort"and both writers identify as the sweet spot for self and systems change (Liston & Garrison, 2003).
Psychological theories, and systems mapping provide a way to understand, measure, and plan for denial and cognitive distance in sustainability. But their solutions to leading change feel more computational than inspirational. In contrast, leadership theories (Avolio, Walumbwa & Weber, 2009; Greenleaf, 2004; Heifetz & Laurie 2001) often don't account for the in-group tribalism generated in the leader-to-follower-exchange (Hackman & Wageman, 2007).
The danger to all individualist approaches is the hidden assumption there's universal criteria for being a 'good environmentalist' or a 'right' experience-to-empathy-to-action model we can work towards. While these investigations might help us identify our worldviews' boundaries, they don't help us transgress them. That is a labour of love.
Leading with love
Kiwi eco-preneur Te Aroha (2018, personal communication), said if we find ourselves thinking below the line (Figure 4), we rise above it with love. Or, more challengingly, if we have 'opponents' weaponizing their feelings of blame or fear from below the line towards us, we meet them in love.
Figure 4. Above and below the line thinking.
Returning to my carousel of emotions while watching the 2016 elections I know my responses are below the line. My responses are often below the line, at least initially. But how does one 'love thy enemy?'
Taking a page from liberation theology, a liberation ecology approach might:
Open our mind to the wicked problem with the analytical and practical tools of systems and psychological approaches to understand the dimensions and dismantle the norms of the issue.
Open our hearts towards a passion for learning beyond boundaries (eros) and loving kindness (agape) towards others and alternative rationalities.
Open our will through a transformation of self from the places of discomfort of incongruities, and let go of any fixed or final identities.
Not easily said or easily done. But to begin with, I can revisit that reflection on what got my heckles up and instead of meditation on my 'whys,' I could look empathetically through difference and towards love.
References
Adger, N., W. (2009). Social capital, collective action, and adaptation to climate change. Economic Geography, 79(4), 387-404. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-8287.2003.tb00220.x
Boiral, O., Cayer, M., & Baron, C. (2009). The action logics of environmental leadership: A developmental perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(4), 479-499.
Garrison, L., & Garrison, J. (2004). Teaching, learning and loving: Reclaiming passion in educational practice. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Kessler, R. (2004). Chapter 8: Grief as Gateway to Love in Teaching. In Liston Garrison & Jim Garrison (Eds.), Teaching, learning and loving: Reclaiming Passion in Educational Practice (pp.137-152). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Peet, R., & Watts, M. (2004). Liberation Ecologies. Environment, development, social movements (2nd ed.) NY, New York: Routledge.
Rees, W. E. (2010). What's blocking sustainability? Human nature, cognition, and denial. Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy, 6(2), 13-25.
Rodam Clinton, H. (2017). What Happened. NY, New York: Simon & Schuster.
Senge, P. (1994). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. NY., New York: Currency Doubleday.
Spence, A., Poortinga, W., & Pidgeon, N. (2012). The Psychological Distance of Climate Change. Risk Analysis. 32(6): 957-972.
But I often feel a carousel of sadness, guilt, anger, hope, when I engage in community social or ecojustice work.
Comments