PhD defence: Rikke Sigmer Nielsen

Navigating the complexities of the 21st-century, characterised by pressing environmental crisis, presents great challenges across all levels of society. These environmental challenges are intricately intertwined with moral and social dimensions, impacting individuals' behaviours, thoughts, and emotions. Among the many emotions, which may arise in the context of environmental problems, guilt and shame are prominent, in this context referred to as eco-guilt and eco-shame. Whereas current research largely focuses on quantitatively studying these emotions and their correlation with pro-environmental behaviour, an in-depth understanding of how these emotions function in light of their moral and social underpinnings is lacking.

Through an interdisciplinary approach, drawing on different philosophical, sociological, and psychological insights and perspectives, this thesis aims to get an in-depth understanding of the experiences of eco-guilt and eco-shame, as well as their effects at both the individual and societal level. This overall goal is approached through three articles with each their aim.

First, an exploration of the triggers, experiences, and reactions to these emotions among people with varying degrees of environmental concern (Article I); second, an investigation into the interpersonal dynamics of eco-guilt and eco-shame through the lens of emotional reflexivity (Article II); and third, an examination of the moral potential of these emotions, both at the individual, collective, and structural level (Article III).

The two former aims are addressed through empirical studies employing interview data with 20 Danish citizens, delving into their everyday life experiences, which for some include eco-guilt and/or eco-shame. Meanwhile, the latter aim is approached through a theoretical discussion of two contrasting perspectives within environmental ethics and political philosophy, concerning whether the emotions hold a moral potential or if their introspective focus ultimately hinders more important pro-environmental structural changes.

The findings of the three articles point to the intricate complexity of eco-guilt and eco-shame, deeply embedded in many social and moral underpinnings, which not only influence the experience, but also the effects of the emotions.

Article I revealed that the environmental concern of the individuals who experience the emotions, as well as the situational conditions that trigger the emotions, are highly influential in terms of which emotion is experienced and how so. Both eco-guilt and eco-shame were to found to lead to more pro-environmental behaviours under certain conditions. However, the effects of the emotions were found to be highly complex, and eco-shame especially may result in environmentally harmful behaviours.

In article II, the emotional reflexivity revealed that underlying the experiences of eco-guilt and eco-shame are moral judgments of the value of the emotions, based on ideals about the emotions’ usefulness and authenticity. Further, people are emotionally ambivalent, as there, on the one hand, are strong emotional norms suggesting that one ‘ought’ to feel eco-guilt and eco-shame when failing to act sustainably, while also, a countering culture of resistance.

In article III, an attempt was made to nuance the discussion concerning the moral potential of eco-guilt and eco-shame. It was proposed that if individuals can transcend passive introspective reactions to the emotions, eco-guilt and eco-shame might hold a moral potential by functioning as an ethical demand to more sustainable. This demand could evoke a political pro-environmental drive, which, in combination with the ability of the emotions to socially spread and amplify, suggested that eco-guilt and eco-shame holds the potential to ignite political and social movement and increase the perceived importance of environmental problems.

By providing an in-depth understanding and discussion of the experience and effects eco-guilt and eco-shame across different individual, social, and situational conditions, this thesis sheds light on the complex nature of the emotions. Further, it underscores that the environmental context is filled with ambivalence and conflicting emotions, impacting how we find it morally and socially appropriate to feel about environmental problems.

Ultimately, the findings of this thesis challenges the dominant theoretical view of (eco-)guilt as adaptive, and (eco-)shame as maladaptive. Instead it highlights that, under certain conditions, both emotions hold a pro-environmental and moral potential, not only at the individual level, but also at the structural level.