Intergenerational perspectives on climate anxiety in Britain

Cross-cultural negotiations of environmental knowledge in children and young people’s lives have received minimal attention in children’s geographies and wider childhood scholarship, despite interests in child and youth environmental concerns and learning that predate the school strikes for climate. This viewpoint articulates an agenda for advancing research in this area in light of youth-led articulations of ‘climate crisis’, beginning with exploration of how second generation immigrants encounter, interpret and negotiate the climate crisis in everyday life. The viewpoint situates this agenda in academic and popular arguments to diversify and decolonise environmentalism amid increasingly polyvocal responses to the climate crisis.

The experiences of young people, particularly young women, in regional and rural communities and their perceptions of, and responses to, the climate crisis are under-researched. This research focuses on young people outside of urban centres. These young people are largely absent from the broader climate conversation, despite the impact of climate-related disasters in their everyday lives. Their experiences sit within the concept of rural as being deficit, disadvantaged and backward when contrasted with the experiences of urban young people and emerging calls to challenge this bias. This paper reports on a small-scale study investigating how young people who have experienced climate-related disasters in regional and rural Victoria perceive the climate crisis, the relationship between climate change and climate-related disasters, and climate action. Qualitative data was collected from interviews with young women aged 18–23 (n = 7) from six different councils/shires in rural and regional Victoria, Australia, which were impacted by bushfires in 2019–2020. The analysis is attentive to the particularities of “place”. The findings provide insight into regional and rural young people’s perceptions of the climate crisis, the connection (or otherwise) to climate-related disasters and climate action. They also reveal their perception of an urban/rural divide concerning climate action tactics and climate mitigation policy. The research highlights the social and material realities of young people’s everyday lives and feelings of stigma and fear, particularly where they perceived a conflict between climate action and the social and economic relations that shape their regional and rural communities.

Key Words: agency, ambivalence, dualism. The last decade of research on families and intergenerational relations has struggled with appropriate theoretical frames within which to understand the growing multiplicity of family relations, the societal causes of familial forms and dynamics, and the consequences for society (communities, families, and individuals) as a result of changes in family forms. The case for better theorizing is made plain with Economic Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen's observation about the problem (Sen, 1990): Members of the household (family) face two different types of problems simultaneously, one involving cooperation (adding to total availabilities) and the other conflict (dividing the total availabilities among members of the household). Social arrangements regarding who does what, who gets to consume what, and who makes decisions can be seen as responses to this combined problem of cooperation and conflict. (p. 129) Although this is a very utilitarian metaphor for explaining goes on within families, the what that gets done, consumed, and decided upon can easily be generalized beyond material goods to emotional resources. It is also apropos to reference Sen's work because he is the most recent Economic Nobel Laureate of three whose theories have directly or indirectly influenced thinking about family dynamics. Two previous Economic Nobel Laureates, Gary Becker and John Nash, have had important influences upon the sociology of family literature, the former most profoundly through his observations in the Treatise on the Family (Becker, 1981) and the latter more recently through the growing application of cooperative and noncooperative bargaining models in the economics of the family literature, which has recently influenced the work of gender and family sociologists (Bittman, England, Folbre, Sayer, & Matheson, 2001; Brines, 1994; Brines & Joyner, 1999). One might see the economists as trespassers upon the domain of sociologists and for some it is seen as so. But for these economists and their disciples, the attempt has been to desegregate analysis of family life from that of other social institutions, recognizing the importance of happens within families to the dynamics of market transactions (and vice versa). In the case of Becker, this is to take the logic of market and corporate behavior and apply it to family life. In the case of Sen, it is to add nuance and context to the bargaining model, with particular emphasis on the way poverty disrupts both the corporatist and bargaining models of family relations. This kind of attempt is also at the heart of Connidis and McMullin's theorizing about intergenerational relations. Coninidis and McMullin want to understand the coexistence of solidarity and conflict when analyzing family relations because they believe it is related to larger social processes within which families are situated. In doing so, they are explicit in their intent not to isolate family life dynamics from other social institutions and structured sets of relations and not to psychologize individual interpersonal relations. Instead, they attempt to answer the challenge posed by the economists, whose unitary and bargaining models are less than satisfactory to sociologists. Among these economists the most recent laureate himself admits to the difficulty of theorizing the dilemma (Sen, 1990), yet provides no explanation. In fact, the failures of economic theory for explaining family dynamics have forced a reexamination of the social institutions from which the theories were first derived. This in turn has created an intellectual space for sociologists and the emergence of a new subdiscipline, economic sociology. Even so, economic sociologists have been slow to reconsider how their theories apply to varying patterns of gender and family dynamics. I employ conceptual innovations from this new subdiscipline to assist Connidis and McMullin in the elaboration of their model. …

Women tend to be objects and victims of climate change impact. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) 2020 found that gender-based violence was aligned with climate and environmental crises in various developing countries. In addition, 9.9 women were affected heavily by natural disasters in Indonesia (BPS, 2017). Meanwhile, only 20% of women's leadership constitutes the entire energy sector (WEF, 2022). Another important statement from the IPCC (2022) said that women (particularly pregnant women) became highly impacted by the climate crisis. The Assessment Report on the State of Gender Equality and Climate Change in ASEAN (2022) built evidence on the importance of recognising women’s roles in climate action in ASEAN countries. In light of this background, this paper will analyse the critical complexities of ASEAN women's leadership towards climate action in order to evaluating the implementation of SDGs goal 5 and 13. To have further deep analysis, this paper will explore the case study of Balinese and Cambodian women who have best practices of climate action, locally, nationally and globally, which also enhance ASEAN countries' commitment to SDGs. Some of the best practices in Cambodia include a Renewable Energy (RE) programme that actively engages with and promotes women-led energy enterprises by implementing “The Smoke-Free Village” approach and training women as champions for gender-transformative Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR). Meanwhile, in Bali, Balinese women play an important role in climate action by establishing the Bali Women Climate Entrepreneur Project which encourages 10 start-ups to join the program and many other best practices to be explored further. As a methodology, the best practices of women leadership in both countries will be collected through literature reviews, interviews, statistics from the Balinese and Cambodia government/SDGs centres, and other relevant documents’ review. From those sources, this paper is expected to be the guide to mapping women leadership in climate action and also become a guide on how to develop effective communication for women in the ASEAN region on climate change.

This chapter presents the research questions, approaches, and arguments of the book, asking how our everyday lives with media have changed after the smartphone. I introduce the topic of media use in everyday life as an empirical, methodological, and theoretical research interest, and argue for its continued centrality to our digital society today, accentuated by datafication. I discuss how the analytical concepts of media repertories and public connection can inform research into media use in everyday life, and what it means that our societies and user practices are becoming more digital. The main argument of the book is that digital media transform our navigation across the domains of everyday life by blurring boundaries, intensifying dilemmas, and affecting our sense of connection to communities and people around us. The chapter concludes by presenting the structure of the rest of the book, where these arguments will be substantiated in analysis of media use an ordinary day, media use in life phase transitions, and media use when ordinary life is disrupted. Citation Ytre-Arne, B. (2023), "Introduction: Media Use and Everyday Life in Digital Societies", Media Use in Digital Everyday Life, Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-80262-383-320231001 Publisher: Emerald Publishing Limited Copyright © 2023 Brita Ytre-Arne License Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This work is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this book (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode. Can you remember your first smartphone, and did it change your life? I bought my first smartphone in the early summer of 2011, right before the birth of my first child. I can safely say that life was never the same again. Although the new phone was hardly the most significant change that happened, it became part of how I reconfigured everyday life. My coincidental timing of these events might be a personal particularity, but the early 2010s, only a little more than a decade ago, was a period in which smartphones became part of everyday life for lots of people. This happened in Norway where I live, and in other countries in the Global North, soon followed by broader proliferation worldwide (Avle et al., 2020). In 2021, it was estimated that more than 90 per cent of people had smartphone access in a growing number of countries around the globe (Deloitte, 2021). ‘Smartphones changed everything’, wrote the Wall Street Journal in 2020: ‘smartphones upended every element of society during the last decade, from dating to dinner parties, travel to politics. This is just the beginning’ (Kitchen, 9.9.2020). But while all of this was happening, people lived their lives, using smartphones along with other media old and new, interwoven with what was going on in their lives, and in the world around them. This book explores the role of media in our everyday lives in digital societies, after the proliferation of smartphones and in conditions of ubiquitous connectivity. I analyze everyday media use across platforms, content types and modes of communication, taking the perspective of how we live our lives with media – how we manage plans and practicalities, keep in touch with friends and family, seek information and entertainment, work and learn, take part in shared experiences, and connect to our social lifeworlds. We might do all of this in the space of one single day, and we might experience such a day as ‘ordinary’ – just normal everyday life. But media technologies are also part of our less ordinary days, important to how we manage life-changing transitions and special events in our personal lives, and to how we relate to local communities, political processes or global events. We use media to connect to each other, and to society – throughout an ordinary day, across the life course, and in times of disruption. The smartphone is emblematic of how our everyday lives with media are changing in a digital and hyper-connected society, and as such it is essential to the topic of this book. A central question I discuss is what it means that most of us now have a smartphone to reach for, from where we are and what we are doing, to manage multiple aspects of our daily lives: A mobile, flexible device we rely on to communicate, find information, entertain and assist us, often used in combination with other media, but also a device that enables tracking and surveillance of our movements and engagements, informing feedback loops based on our personal data. How has digital media use in everyday life changed after the smartphone? To answer these questions, I draw on classic scholarship on media and communication technologies in everyday life (Baym, 2015; Silverstone, 1994), and on recent analysis of digital ambivalence and disconnection (Syvertsen, 2020). With a user perspective, I situate smartphones and other kinds of digital platforms as part of broader media repertoires (Hasebrink & Hepp, 2017), with an interest in the totality and internal relationships of any kind of media that people use and find meaningful in their everyday lives. I further understand everyday media use as central to public connection (Couldry et al., 2010), to how we orient ourselves to a world beyond our private concerns. The book provides an updated perspective on media in everyday life after digital media has become increasingly embedded and ingrained in society. A purpose for the book is to fill a gap between classic (but old) discussions on everyday media use, and recent (but sometimes narrowly focused) studies of new technologies. Our understandings of everyday media use are still shaped by theories developed before the internet, before digital and social and mobile media. This book highlights rather than discards these understandings, but moves forward in tackling dilemmas of technological transformations, and by considering recent crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. I untangle how media becomes meaningful to us in the everyday, connecting us to each other and to communities and publics. The book offers empirical, methodological and theoretical insight on media use in digital everyday life. Why Everyday Life? ‘Everyday life’ is one of those concepts that everyone understands, but which is still difficult to define. The term is not internal jargon belonging to a particular research field, but instead recognizable across a range of contexts – we might even describe it as an ‘everyday’ term. One of the early ideas behind this book was to answer the questions: ‘But what do you mean by everyday life?’ and further ‘Why do you [meaning media use researchers] go on about everyday life?’. These are good questions. Let us start with the latter: Why everyday life? More precisely, why would someone interested in media use find it important to refer to everyday life for contextualization? In media and communication studies, interest in everyday life has a long history. The idea of everyday life has been central to approaches and research interests in cultural studies (Gray, 2002; Morley, 1992), media phenomenology (Pink & Leder Mackley, 2013; Scannell, 1995) or media ethnography (Hermes, 1995; Radway, 1984). The term has been particularly central to theories of domestication (Haddon, 2016; Silverstone et al., 2021) focused on processes of gradually integrating media technologies in the home. Roger Silverstone wrote a classic volume on Television and everyday life (Silverstone, 1994), arguing that in order to move past debates on television as ‘good’ or ‘bad’ and actually understand what it is, we have to consider television as embedded in tensions and dynamics of everyday life. Shaun Moores (2000) applied everyday life as a framework for understanding the historical development of broadcast media, and Maria Bakardjieva (2005) analyzed the domestication of computers and internet technologies in everyday life. Elizabeth Bird (2003) wrote The Audience in Everyday Life to argue for the relevance of ethnographic methods to understand our media-saturated reality, while Tim Markham (2017) wrote an introductory textbook titled Media and Everyday Life to present topics and thinkers in media studies through their relevance to daily life. All of the above are books on media with ‘everyday life’ in the title. Moreover, the term keeps popping up in journal articles on a variety of topics regarding media use: A comparative study of why people read print newspapers in the digital age refer to how different media are integrated into everyday life (Boczkowski et al., 2021), while a study of people who prefer online media at home find that digital alternatives are perceived to be better integrated into domestic everyday life (Müller, 2020). In analysis of how and why we follow news, the idea of the everyday provides a way of situating ordinary users at the centre of attention, by discussing everyday news use (Groot Kormelink & Costera Meijer, 2019) or everyday public connection (Swart et al., 2017). In debates about datafication and emergent technologies, the notion of the everyday is used to highlight human and social experiences with for instance self-tracking (Lomborg & Frandsen, 2016), smart homes (Hine, 2020) or algorithmic media (Willson, 2017). What do these different contributions have in common? They refer to everyday life to signal a position, because referencing ‘everyday life’ holds some empirical, methodological or theoretical implications. The term can be invoked to answer the ‘so what’-question: A compelling reason for why we need to study media at all is its relevance to everyday life (Silverstone, 1999). Today we can adapt this argument to why we need to study the smartphone – it is part of everyday life. Through such statements, we frame the smartphone as a technology and research topic that is recognizable and relevant to experiences and dilemmas each of us encounter. The smartphone has transformed society, but it has done so through our everyday interactions. Similarly: Why does it matter if people read international news or look at cat videos online, watch Netflix or Linear TV, listen to music on Spotify or prefer vinyl records? If you are interested in media business models or media policies, and find the choices users make a bit puzzling, you might need to look into motivations and contexts in everyday life to gain a deeper understanding of what goes on. Attention to everyday contexts can both complicate and enhance insights gained from other types of tracking and measurements of media use (Groot Kormelink & Costera Meijer, 2020). To understand new technologies, or connect critiques of these phenomena to people’s experiences, everyday life is an essential framework: It is easier to grasp the idea of ‘the Internet of Things’ (Bunz & Meikle, 2018) as having to do with whether your refrigerator needs internet connection, than through concepts such as machine learning or smart sensors. Sometimes the position signalled by referring to everyday life is explicitly normative. A key example is the debate on everyday experiences with datafication, or ‘the quantification of human life through digital information, very often for economic value’ (Mejias & Couldry, 2019). The idea of so-called ‘big data’ as more precise or valuable has been met with critical questions (Boyd & Crawford, 2012), and with concern for how audience engagement can be harvested and utilized for opaque purposes (Ytre-Arne & Das, 2020). In criticizing these developments, the notion of ‘everyday life’ is central to put the human experience of living in datafied conditions front and centre (Kennedy & Hill, 2018), or to focus on the people rather than systems (Livingstone, 2019). This interest further corresponds to feminist (D’Ignazio & Klein, 2020) and postcolonial critiques (Milan & Treré, 2019) of datafication and power. We can also signal analytical and methodological interests by referring to everyday life: The term is used to prioritize context over generalizability, and ordinary user perspectives and experiences over media professionals and institutions. This could imply attention to small acts of engagement in social media (Picone et al., 2019), and inclusion of seemingly mundane practices of media use (Hermes, 1995; Sandvik et al., 2016). An everyday life perspective is a backdrop for cross-media research (Lomborg & Mortensen, 2017; Schrøder, 2011) rather than pre-selecting which media to study based on the researchers’ preconceived notions of what matters. Qualitative researchers and ethnographers also draw on ‘everyday life’ as a term that points towards preferred methods: Talking to people about a day in the life (del Rio Carral, 2014), ‘capturing life as it is narrated’ (Kaun, 2010) with diary methods, and exploring experiences and reflections in informants’ own words. Some quantitative studies of media use also use the term (Hovden & Rosenlund, 2021) and research on everyday media repertoires can combine qualitative and quantitative approaches (Hasebrink & Hepp, 2017). I am also someone who often explain and position my key research interests through the notion of everyday life. A long-running interest in everyday life has informed my preference for qualitative and user-focused methods, in the studies I draw on in this book and in other projects. I have used the term ‘everyday life’ in the title of publications (Moe & Ytre-Arne, 2021; Ytre-Arne, 2012), and also explored how media use changes with biographical disruption to everyday routines (Ytre-Arne, 2019) or discussed audience agency in everyday encounters with digital and datafied media (Ytre-Arne & Das, 2020; Ytre-Arne & Moe, 2021a). For me, the everyday signals a perspective on why and how to study media use: it is important because it is part of daily life, it is interesting because everyday life is diverse and meaningful, and it is impossible to be done with because it changes constantly. I do not think there is any necessary contradiction between an everyday perspective versus a societal or political perspective on media use – instead, everyday life is where political dimensions of media are experienced, interpreted, and acted upon. This point runs as an undercurrent through the analyses of this book and is highlighted in the concluding chapter. What is Everyday Life? We have established that media are part of everyday life, and that research on media use is interested in everyday life. That is not to say that definitions everyday life abound in the literature referenced above, or in the field at large. Even classic contributions observe that commenting on the topic of everyday life might seem simplistic (e.g. Silverstone, 1994, p. 19). There is considerable variation in how precisely or extensively the concept is explained: Some works develop distinct philosophical understandings (e.g. Bakardijeva in Sandvik et al., 2016), or ground the term in substantial discussion of different theoretical positions (e.g. Cavalcante et al., 2017). Some authors define the term and how it connects to methodological and analytical frameworks in their studies). Others explain adjacent concepts to the everyday, such as the study mentioned above of why people still read print newspapers (Boczkowski et al., 2021), which draws on theories of ritualization, sociality and cultural contexts. Nevertheless, everyday life is theorized in disciplines from human geography (Holloway & Hubbard, 2001) to psychology (Schraube & Højholt, 2016). Some central philosophical contributions are Henri Lefebvre’s Critique of Everyday Life (1947), which formulates a Marxist-inspired argument about the importance of this sphere of human conduct in the face of capitalism and technological change, and Michel De Certeau’s The Practice of Everyday Life (1984) which emphasizes the concept of potentially subversive tactics in people’s navigation through daily life. Another key work is The Structures of the Lifeworld (Schutz & Luckmann, 1973) which formulates Alfred Schutz’ theory of the lifeworld in which everyday life is enacted, including spatial, temporal and social dimensions, and how we move through ‘zones of operation’ where people and places beyond our immediate surroundings are yet within ‘restorable reach’ to us, through the familiarity or routines in the everyday which we take for granted (1973). This understanding has been particularly important to phenomenological and sociological studies of media and technologies in everyday life. Such philosophical works on everyday life are briefly to referenced in studies of everyday media use, a understanding that is more or less For (1984) to discuss the role of media in daily on and a growing as as philosophical interest in everyday life as a research that media are not used in from one or from personal an example of the of media use in dynamics at that media are an part of the way the everyday is p. and points that have been up in discussions of media (Hasebrink & Hepp, and of media use as mundane but yet meaningful in everyday (Hermes, 1995; Sandvik et al., 2016). In study of early internet use at Bakardjieva provides a theoretical discussion of how and Lefebvre’s theories relate to communication technologies, the idea of a critical phenomenology to understand users as as Roger work on everyday life also Schutz’ understanding of the and further of the in a discussion of whether this lifeworld is different in conditions of (Silverstone, Silverstone debates about order and in a world of societal and new communication with an that television is we have seemingly to take for as a technology and social and as part of our everyday lives. these Silverstone emphasizes the of routines and familiarity in in the of the world at and a sense of these are the of social order and everyday life. the and for as as through the and our lives take and within those and and we to go about our or for the most the and the that to our and (Silverstone, 1994, p. In this everyday and a sense of a concept to describe of and in people’s experience of the world and sense of central to how people position in the world and to life is also a key concept in more recent theory of digital communication as when we through digital media, and in have our continued in the world 2021). discussion how of or through digital media can to the of the these theories of everyday life, some key dimensions Everyday life has to do with the of space and people and through which we make and relate to the and our position in it I draw on these dimensions to further situate media use in everyday life, how we use media for navigation across social Media Use in Everyday Life To understand media use – applied as an term for all kinds of relationships and with media and communication technologies – we need to situate media use as part of everyday life, in people’s lifeworlds. on the ideas above, of familiarity and and of spatial, social and dimensions, we can different and positions for media. I am particularly interested in how we use media to orient ourselves as we move through our everyday lives, as part of what I navigation across social What does this Everyday media use is because we do not it from – we rely on that we are regarding media use as as other aspects of everyday up in the and not you have done before – instead of the same of and the same on your smartphone. other and and media use practices are particularly essential to the of everyday life by Silverstone, Markham and are also a central concept in media and communication psychology and central to studies to grasp user over or across We everyday in and around – including media Everyday life multiple social domains – such as work and life – that are meaningful to us and that we with and that also important contexts for how we use media. There are research that of media use in different social for instance focused on life such as or experiences such as (e.g. Das, & 2020). between life such as a or a are so significant because the social domains of our everyday lives change with these events. These social domains are essential to the we find in life, the conduct of everyday life an We with social domains in – including media use and A interest I in this book is how we use media across and social for what I refer to as Everyday media use navigation across multiple social domains because an ordinary day can an of and in which we different social with different people. Everyday life can be and with to at or or but whether we have plans for or go with the some of and navigation is both and We conduct such navigation in – including media use and Digital technologies have become to this navigation – and but also and to We have established that media are part of daily and that such routines are essential to everyday life We can also discuss if and how the social domains of everyday life are or and how these processes (Couldry & Hepp, 2017; Hepp, 2020). But my main interest in this book is how our navigation across the social domains of everyday life changes with digital media – how we use digital media to connect to different social orient ourselves to what goes on and across contexts. Media use is essential to the navigation of everyday life, and the role of media in this navigation holds for how we experience our lives as meaningful, for how we understand and situate ourselves in the How we conduct this navigation is changing with the and datafication of the media, particularly after the smartphone. Media Use in Everyday Life The theories of everyday life that are most central to media and communication studies from an of and the domestic sphere is the social that has the most dynamics and the of the home are central to analyses from discussion of who the to what when the people television also have and computers & 2016). we can as Silverstone could in classic that is a domestic It is at home. at home. at (Silverstone, 1994, p. and mobile and social media a of the established when living and for a question in internet studies of whether and how people would actually to make space for computers in their homes is more not just by and but also by and technologies. The home is still but our navigation with media and beyond the home has A broader point is that the proliferation of digital media has it more difficult to make about how to situate media in everyday life, while media might be more important than to how we across our daily lives. This also has for the analytical concepts and approaches we to study everyday media To analyze media in everyday life, it is to a particular or media and look for its and in everyday to into how the cultural role of television in people’s everyday lives. But to for the for variation in everyday media use, it is more relevant to start with people and how we live our lives, and how media matters. of the scholarship discussed in this chapter for the of less approaches to media studies – media might need to be in order to understand what it I will particularly draw on approaches to situate media use in everyday life through a user Media repertoires and public Media repertoires is a concept to the totality and meaningful between media a (Hasebrink & & Hepp, 2017). the essential insight that are a key of approaches is to focus less on experiences with The of or using and instead how these or different are to each other in the context of a everyday media media approaches which media users have a how prioritize between different and how people and the totality of their media Media research has from how to of repertoires towards growing interest in repertoires as and how are and change over & Schrøder, et al., 2021; et al., Ytre-Arne, 2019). connection is a concept that people’s to society, in a sense – how people connect to public life, or (Couldry et al., et al., 2017; Ytre-Arne & Moe, The of a public connection – as to a focus on whether people follow news or – is to more what people are interested and how follow those across but also beyond (Couldry et al., & Ytre-Arne, 2021). Media is important to public connection, but not the only means of societal and public connection can take and define public connection as ‘the shared of that to and in and political in everyday life’ (Swart et al., and that relevance and engagement are dimensions in how media becomes meaningful in everyday life. of these perspectives imply that there is answer to or why media in everyday life – it is and perspectives are up to analysis of the that have to everyday media In this book, I draw on media approaches to analyze everyday media use from the perspective of and on the public connection concept to discuss how people connect to society through everyday media A More Digital Everyday Life A different way of situating media in everyday life is to if one the other, and if which way

A “lifeline out of the <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 crisis”? An ecofeminist critique of the European Green Deal

Reconciling climate action with the need for biodiversity protection, restoration and rehabilitation.

The article reports the study interpreting conceptual metaphors relating to climate crisis from the deliberate metaphors in 84 quotations of climate action discourses of top leaders around the United Nations delivered in 2023. Applying Steen’s (2008; 2023a) Deliberate Metaphor Theory and Reijnierse et al.’s (2018) Deliberate Metaphor Identification Procedure, the study interprets 19 conceptual metaphors, in which, on the schematicity levels, six conceptual metaphors are perceived on image schemata, four on domains, and nine on frames. Among those 19 conceptual metaphors (nine quotations concurrently are perceived on two levels), the five conceptual metaphors that use metaphorical expression most frequently are CLIMATE ACTION IS A JOURNEY, CLIMATE CRISIS IS DOOMSDAY, CLIMATE CRISIS IS A DESTROYER, CLIMATE CRISIS IS A WAR and CLIMATE ACTION IS CONSTRUCTION. Those 19 conceptual metaphors share the main conceptual keys stating that the climate crisis is threatening our lives to look like a war, easy to bring human being to doomsday, requiring climate action, as performing a journey, to be proceeded continuously to scramble the power of controlling the planet and convey the ideology of the UN in the movement of protecting the environment.

In light of new data presented in the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which emphasizes the increasingly important and urgent need for a global response to the ecological and climate crisis, what role can Christian ethics, religious leaders, and people of faith play in responding to the climate challenge? While understanding scientific data on climate change is incredibly important for interpreting the “signs of the times,” most people approach everyday life in terms of the deeply held values and beliefs—the stories that orient and guide human decision-making. This article notes both the value and limits of scientific literacy, while highlighting the importance of narratives, worldviews, and religion in motivating communities to take action on climate change.

The migration phenomenon has been a fundamental aspect of human history, significantly shaping societies, cultures, and familial structures across the globe. Due to globalization, inflation, conflicts, and climate change, migration movements are increasing from and to almost most countries worldwide. Lebanon is no exception to this phenomenon, having become a hub that plays both transit and sending country roles. Migration plays a crucial role in shaping family dynamics and relationships, as it influences the economic stability and emotional bonds within families, particularly from the perspective of Lebanese women affected by labor migration. Lebanon's labor migration significantly affects family structure within Lebanese society, particularly for females left behind (spouses and daughters). This thesis examines the psychological, economic, and social effects of labor migration on Lebanese families, focusing on the experiences of spouses and daughters. It explores how migration influences family dynamics, communication, gender roles, and children's development. The research highlights the use of technology in maintaining relationships, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on long-distance family ties, and the resilience differences between generations. Analyzed through thematic analysis and theories like Family Systems, Adaptation, and Psychological Adjustment, the study aims to deepen understanding of migration's impact on Lebanese families and enhance their resilience.

This conclusion summarizes key insights from the former chapters, and highlights political dimensions of media use in digital everyday life. I particularly underline how our more digital everyday lives intensify communicative dilemmas, in which individuals in everyday settings negotiate with societal norms and power structures through their uses of media technologies. I also discuss how everyday media use connects us to different societal spheres and issues, also pointing to global challenges such as the pandemic and the climate crisis, arguing that everyday media use is key to our understandings of society. I discuss how to analyze this in media use research, emphasizing attention to processes of change and disruption.

The study aims to evaluate the life experiences, psychosocial challenges, and emotional burdens of climate activists, the guardians of the planet, related to the climate crisis, using a phenomenological approach. This research was conducted in November 2023, utilizing an inductive qualitative framework. In-depth individual interviews were undertaken with 21 climate activists living in diverse regions of Türkiye through the WhatsApp mobile application. The research adhered to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) checklist. Data analysis, three themes, and seven sub-themes were identified: climate crisis awareness and motives for becoming an activist (experiences, people involved, and personal attributes); the effects of being a climate activist on mental health (emotional burdens and coping with emotional burdens); and actions taken to reduce carbon footprints in addressing the climate crisis (social and behavioral). Our study highlighted the challenges and coping mechanisms encountered by climate activists in their efforts to combat the climate crisis and revealed that these activists undergo psychosocial challenges and emotional burdens as a result of their engagement in this struggle. Certain activists struggle to manage their psychosocial challenges and consequently seek psychological assistance. Psychosocial support programs should be established for activists experiencing distress over climate change.

Reviewed by: Ireland and the Climate Crisis ed. by David Robbins, Diarmuid Torney, Pat Brereton Dr Ciara Murphy (bio) David Robbins, Diarmuid Torney, Pat Brereton (eds.), Ireland and the Climate Crisis (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020), 336 pages. We, as a global society, have known for decades that climate change is a problem. The scientific knowledge about the causes and solutions have crystalized over the years to the point where there is no doubt that the climate is changing and human activities are the main cause. Like much of the world, Ireland has failed to respond and act upon this knowledge, with former Taoiseach Leo Varadkar stating in December 2018, ‘Obviously, climate emissions and greenhouse gas areas is an area where we’re laggard and falling way behind’.1 Acknowledging all of this, the main question that remains is why have we been so slow to act on this knowledge? Focusing specifically on the Irish context this book, Ireland and the Climate Crisis, aims to answer this question. Edited by David Robbins, Diarmuid Torney, and Pat Brereton (all from the School of Communications and the School of Law and Government at Dublin City University), this book is the result of a collaboration from across the climate change sphere in Ireland. Over the space of sixteen chapters and through the contributions of nineteen additional authors, this book brings together numerous different threads weaving them into a tapestry representing a comprehensive picture of climate change in Ireland. Climate change is not purely about the science. It has deep environmental, social and cultural connotations which shape how and why we respond, or indeed, fail to respond. This book reflects this reality and focuses not only on the ‘hard science’ of climate change and how it will manifest itself here but concentrates on the often neglected ‘soft science’ research which examines the social and political realities which has brought us to this point, as well highlighting the opportunities for, and barriers to, climate action in Ireland. The book is organized into four main sections. The first section details the most up-to-date scientific knowledge on the impacts of climate change in Ireland and a history of Ireland’s policy response. This gives the context and sets the stage for the more detailed examination of the circumstances and processes leading to the current situation, considered in subsequent sections. Section two investigates the role of politics and the law more closely while section three investigates the aspects of our society, including our economy, that influence climate actions. In this section, the role of communication and media in shaping a society’s perception of climate action are also brought [End Page 130] to the fore. The final section looks in detail at how we can engage with the climate movement and act collectively to mitigate the crisis. The construction of the book can be seen as an attempted ‘integral ecology’ approach, refusing to reduce the problem or the solution to one single track. It also highlights the interdependencies and interconnections between the different aspects and climate action pathways. The frequent cross referencing between the chapters and common themes that are observed throughout the book, such as the influence of agriculture on the climate change story in Ireland, makes it obvious to the reader that the subject matter that is dealt with in the individual chapters cannot be examined in isolation. A striking example of this can be observed in section two, which opens with an examination by Sadhbh O’Neill and Edwin Alblas of the strengths and weaknesses of using litigation as a tool to ‘force’ the government to comply with its own commitments (p. 57). Implicit in the effectiveness of this tool is the strength of the legislation which underpins it, both at national and EU level (p. 73), which mirrors the ambition of the politicians and legislators responsible for drawing up these laws (p. 91). Alongside the policy gains and legislative change that might arise, the Climate Case also functioned as a focal point for the climate movement, which both supported the proceedings and were mobilized by this novel form of climate action. Additionally, the ambition of the politicians and consequently the strength of the...

Editorial: Governing the EU's climate and energy transition through the 2030 Framework

Today’s young people will be on the frontline of experiencing the worst effects of the climate crisis as they age in a world in which climate-induced disasters will be increasing in intensity and frequency unless ‘net zero’ is reached before the current deadline of 2050. The case for urgently addressing the climate crisis by 2030 has been made by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) since the Paris Agreement in 2015. Years later, and with the disappointing outcomes of the 2021 United Nations Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Conference of the Parties (COP) 26 meeting in Glasgow, Scotland and COP27 in Sharm el-Sheik, Egypt in 2022, little has changed. Politicians fill the airwaves with fine words about reaching ‘net zero’. Meanwhile, countries like India, the 3rd largest polluter do not aim to meet ‘net zero’ until 2070! Young people have limited engagement in formal policy-making locally, nationally, and globally, so their voices remain largely ignored. Practitioners, seldom engage young people in climate action. This professional disinterest in young people’s experiences of the climate crisis and aspirations for a net zero future must end. This article focuses on young people’s voices, research and action, including their involvement in COP26 activities in Glasgow. Young people, as agentic persons, can make decisions about climate change, and are well-placed to do this if given the opportunity. Social workers can support and mobilise young people in climate action and demand that climate change be included in the social work curriculum.